It's fast enough for now, so investing more time in making it faster would just be spinning wheels.
I haven't done detailed profiling, but the geoip lookup is pretty fast. I think more time is spent picking IPs to return (weighted from a list of sometimes thousands of IPs) and likely more time than that is in the underlying DNS library (which hopefully will get better over time without me doing anything!).
Both the Perl and the Go versions are optimized more for developer time, correctness and robustness over raw performance. I only have so much time to work on it and lots of you depend on it working, so I think those are appropriate trade-offs.
If it was a full-time job more than a hobby maybe it'd make sense to do the work in C instead of Go (but probably not).
It's easy : chromium (http://www.chromium.org/) is the open source project. It's licence is open source and can be found at http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome/trunk/src/LICENSE?revi... it looks like a "BSD with attribution" licence.
Chrome (google.com/chrome) is the "closed-source" distribution to loads of platforms (includes a few closed source components. E.g. it can play .mp3 files). It's got a standard closed source licence.
There are other distributions, for example "fedora" chromium, that doesn't have any codec support. There are versions that are not release-engineered (ie. nightly builds, but still released by some distro), ...
If that is true, then in a multicultural or multi-religion group no rights exist at all after time passes. Because in such a group the only possible rights would be lowest-common-denominator, which would decrease if new groups are added to the whole. The more different or antagonistic the new group, the more it has to decrease individual rights.
If that is true, then in a multicultural or multi-religion group no rights exist at all after time passes.
Well... kind of, yeah. In real life, most multicultural regions have codes of "rights and freedoms" designed as workable compromises between the moral philosophies of the various cultures living there. Once such a code exists, it will usually be amended rather than scrapped, and new arrivals made to conform somewhat (because it has become a shared culture), but that is, in fact, how it works.
(death toll from that fire, explosions around it and people locking themselves in their homes, then getting enveloped by the smoke, was over 200. It was not the only oil disaster during the earthquake)
The fun thing about this argument, is that it's pro-nuclear. Nuclear fission reactors are the only thing on this planet that reduce radioactive emissions. By quite a bit even.
Of course, after that reduction, we massively concentrate what is left and then store that absurd concentration in a really small spot, where "nothing can ever go wrong".
The problem with radioactivity is not nuclear power, it's the idiotic way we do nuclear disposal.
We should do what coal power plants do : simply process it into building materials. 10x thinner than background levels and just use it for anything and everything.
There are plenty of places on this planet where natural radioactivity levels are more dangerous than inside a modern nuclear reactor (Ramsar in Iran being the canonical example). A city built straight on top of radioactive rock, 200-500 times normal background radiation levels (like a constant dental scan, a little more than you'd get swimming in the primary coolant circuit of a nuclear reactor, 3 meters from an active fission reaction, without any separation between you and the reaction other than the water that sustains the reaction), yet you will not find a single trace of a nuclear power plant. And yes, they have a history of higher cancer rates (though not nearly as high as our radiation disease models predict they should be).
What about members of that culture living in America ? Is it racism to "point out the spade" ? It is beyond obvious that this hateful islamic culture is not going to stay contained, whatever Americans' thoughts on the issue.
It is painful to see that the only "moderate" reaction is a few tweets. Everybody seems to be too afraid of these backward muslim morons to point out that they are backward islamic morons.
I'd love to live in a world where live and let live works, but that's not this world. Islam started with massacring Jews, atheists and Christians by the thousands, and the only advancement since has been increasing numbers.
And please keep in mind that 10th century Egypt was >95% Christian, when evaluating their "tolerance" (and frankly a reading of either Egyptian or Spanish archives from during the relevant periods easily reveals that muslims were not, at all, tolerant during those periods).
We're defending the rights of the oppressed minority against the Jews, and that oppressed minority that unites under the party "conquest" ? Seriously ?
If this is your name, how the hell would you defend the idea that palestinians are just trying to live independantly ?
You might want to google "mughal" and read through the first few links. If you're into comparing death tolls.
If not, why don't you scientifically get yourself the factual answer to a few simple questions:
-> what is the difference between islam and sharia ?
-> does allah literally says women are half a man's worth ?
-> does islam allow slavery ?
-> does islam allow a slave owner to kill slaves on a whim ?
-> does islam allow forcible rape of slaves ?
-> starting at what age ?
>If not, why don't you scientifically get yourself the factual answer to a few simple questions:
And what makes you think that I don't know the factual answers already?
>-> what is the difference between islam and sharia ?
Sharia is the law of islam. Which doesn't mean much in practice, since a muslim does not always follow it. More importantly, sharia is not enforced as state law in most muslim countries. So, no, the two are not one of the same. Not to mention that there are several interpretations of it.
>* -> does allah literally says women are half a man's worth ?*
Does it matter? You can find equally stupid things in the Bible (not to mention in present day Bible Belt).
What do you personally know about how women are treated in a REAL marriage in a muslim country, not what their holy book says, or what you can see in some stories perpetuated in western media? How many muslim friends do you have? Have you lived in an muslim country?
Between educated muslims or muslim living in modern cities, I see hard working people, going through the same shit that us in the West do, and with more or less the same kind of relationships. I also see their kids going to school (male AND female). I cannot speak about muslims living in remote rural areas, backwaters, or the desert, because I have not witnessed them. That said, I doubt they'd be very different from people in any other remote rural or backwater area. Wasn't it like 50 years ago that blacks couldn't ride in front of the bus in the South, or stay in certain hotels? Wasn't it like 50 years ago that Turing was punished for being gay?
Why do we insist that poor people living in huts and tin houses in the middle of Africa or Asia must follow the exactly state of advancement that we only recently achieved, despite us having a far greater head-start?
-> does islam allow slavery ?
Does the bible does it? Because the slavery of several million blacks in the US was done by Christians. And the same for the slavery and extermination of 40 million indian tribes living in the South and North US. And the appartheid thing? White christian guys there too.
Even more so, it was the "civilised", western nations, like England, Holland, Belgium, France and such that enslaved billions of people in the colonial era, with some continuing even now, if now with outright colonies, then with protectorates, appointed political friends and political pressure.
-> does islam allow a slave owner to kill slaves on a whim ? -> does islam allow forcible rape of slaves ? -> starting at what age ?
It doesn't matter what islam says. It matters what an islamic community does. Slave raping and killing slaves was prevalent in the US South, and they were supposedly devout Christians. Even one of the founding fathers has had children with one of his female slaves, which, taking into account that he was their owner and had the power, can only be considered as products of rape.
Even if you do geo lookup on a per /24 basis, surely that doesn't detract that badly ?