Recherche avancée

Sur d’autres sites (5598)

• Senior Software Engineer for Enterprise Analytics Platform

  28 janvier 2016, par Matthieu Aubry — Jobs

  We’re looking for a lead developer to work on Piwik Analytics core platform software. We have some exciting challenges to solve and need you !

  You’ll be working with both fellow employees and our open-source community. Piwik PRO staff lives in New Zealand, Europe (Poland, Germany) and in the U.S. We do the vast majority of our collaboration online.

  We are a small, flexible team, so when you come aboard, you will play an integral part in engineering. As a leader you’ll help us to prioritise work and grow our community. You’ll help to create a welcoming environment for new contributors and set an example with your development practices and communications skills. You will be working closely with our CTO to build a future for Piwik.

  Key Responsibilities

  • Strong competency coding in PHP and JavaScript.
  • Scaling existing backend system to handle ever increasing amounts of traffic and new product requirements.
  • Outstanding communication and collaboration skills.
  • Drive development and documentation of internal and external APIs (Piwik is an open platform).
  • Help make our development practices better and reduce friction from idea to deployment.
  • Mentor junior engineers and set the stage for personal growth.

  Minimum qualifications

  • 5+ years of experience in product development, security, usable interface design.
  • 5+ years experience building successful production software systems.
  • Strong competency in PHP5 and JavaScript application development.
  • Skill at writing tests and reviewing code.
  • Strong analytical skills.

  Location

  • Remote work position !
  • or you can join us in our office based in Wellington, New Zealand or in Wrocław, Poland.

  Benefits

  • Competitive salary.
  • Equity in Piwik PRO.
  • Remote work is possible.
  • Yearly meetup with the whole team abroad.
  • Be part of a successful open source company and community.
  • In our Wellington (NZ) and Wroclaw (PL) offices : snacks, coffee, nap room, Table football, Ping pong…
  • Regular events.
  • Great team of people.
  • Exciting projects.

  Learn more

  Learn more what it’s like to work on Piwik in our blog post

  About Piwik

  At Piwik and Piwik PRO we develop the leading open source web analytics platform, used by more than one million websites worldwide. Our vision is to help the world liberate their analytics data by building the best open alternative to Google Analytics.

  The Piwik platform collects, stores and processes a lot of information : hundreds of millions of data points each month. We create intuitive, simple and beautiful reports that delight our users.

  About Piwik PRO company

  At Piwik PRO we’re solving hard problems with simple solutions that make our users and customers happy. We practise agile methodology, test driven development and fast release cycles. Our backend is mostly built in modern PHP with a bit of Python. We use MySQL/MariaDB and Redis as data stores. Our frontends is built in JavaScript using AngularJS and jQuery. Our tools include Github, Travis CI, PhpStorm and Slack.

  As a Lead Software Developer for Piwik PRO, you will be writing open source code that will run on more than 200,000 servers and be used in 200+ countries and 50 languages !

  Apply online

  To apply for this position, please Apply online here. We look forward to receiving your applications !

• Moviepy not updating FFmpeg Version after FFmpeg Install ?

  31 mai 2024, par The_ Game12

  I've been toying around with MoviePy, and recently switched a project to a new computer at home to continue messing around with it. However, I tried running what I had previously written (which ran perfectly fine on the other computer) and I get this :

  


  OSError: MoviePy error: failed to read the first frame of video file ./Gameplay/minecraft-
gameplay2.mp4. That might mean that the file is corrupted. That may also mean that you are using 
a deprecated version of FFMPEG. On Ubuntu/Debian for instance the version in the repos is 
deprecated. Please update to a recent version from the website.



  


  After reading the error, I did as it instructed, and updated my FFmpeg :

  


  $ ffmpeg
ffmpeg version N-115387-g8e27bd025f-20240525 Copyright (c) 2000-2024 the FFmpeg developers
  built with gcc 13.2.0 (crosstool-NG 1.26.0.65_ecc5e41)
  configuration: --prefix=/ffbuild/prefix --pkg-config-flags=--static --pkg-config=pkg-config --cross-prefix=x86_64-ffbuild-linux-gnu- --arch=x86_64 --target-os=linux --enable-gpl --enable-version3 --disable-debug --enable-iconv --enable-libxml2 --enable-zlib --enable-libfreetype --enable-libfribidi --enable-gmp --enable-openssl --enable-fontconfig --enable-libharfbuzz --enable-libvorbis --enable-opencl --enable-libpulse --enable-libvmaf --enable-libxcb --enable-xlib --enable-amf --enable-libaom --enable-libaribb24 --enable-avisynth --enable-chromaprint --enable-libdav1d --enable-libdavs2 --enable-libdvdread --enable-libdvdnav --disable-libfdk-aac --enable-ffnvcodec --enable-cuda-llvm --enable-frei0r --enable-libgme --enable-libkvazaar --enable-libaribcaption --enable-libass --enable-libbluray --enable-libjxl --enable-libmp3lame --enable-libopus --enable-librist --enable-libssh --enable-libtheora --enable-libvpx --enable-libwebp --enable-lv2 --enable-libvpl --enable-openal --enable-libopencore-amrnb --enable-libopencore-amrwb --enable-libopenh264 --enable-libopenjpeg --enable-libopenmpt --enable-librav1e --enable-librubberband --disable-schannel --enable-sdl2 --enable-libsoxr --enable-libsrt --enable-libsvtav1 --enable-libtwolame --enable-libuavs3d --enable-libdrm --enable-vaapi --enable-libvidstab --enable-vulkan --enable-libshaderc --enable-libplacebo --enable-libx264 --enable-libx265 --enable-libxavs2 --enable-libxvid --enable-libzimg --enable-libzvbi --extra-cflags=-DLIBTWOLAME_STATIC --extra-cxxflags= --extra-libs='-ldl -lgomp' --extra-ldflags=-pthread --extra-ldexeflags=-pie --cc=x86_64-ffbuild-linux-gnu-gcc --cxx=x86_64-ffbuild-linux-gnu-g++ --ar=x86_64-ffbuild-linux-gnu-gcc-ar --ranlib=x86_64-ffbuild-linux-gnu-gcc-ranlib --nm=x86_64-ffbuild-linux-gnu-gcc-nm --extra-version=20240525
  libavutil      59. 20.100 / 59. 20.100
  libavcodec     61.  5.104 / 61.  5.104
  libavformat    61.  3.104 / 61.  3.104
  libavdevice    61.  2.100 / 61.  2.100
  libavfilter    10.  2.102 / 10.  2.102
  libswscale      8.  2.100 /  8.  2.100
  libswresample   5.  2.100 /  5.  2.100
  libpostproc    58.  2.100 / 58.  2.100
Universal media converter
usage: ffmpeg [options] [[infile options] -i infile]... {[outfile options] outfile}...


  


  And I continued getting the same error. So I looked at what version my moviepy was using, and it was still 4.X. I read somewhere that your FFmpeg version is determined on the first use, which made sense, so I uninstalled and reinstalled, to get the same error.

  


  I am honestly lost at this point, as I have the newest version of FFmpeg, but I still get this from moviepy :

  


  >>> import moviepy&#xA;>>> print(moviepy.config.FFPMEG_BINARY)&#xA;ffmpeg : /home/<username>/.local/lib/python3.9/site-packages/imageio_ffmpeg/binaries/ffmpeg-linux64-v4.2.2&#xA;</username>

  


  Any Ideas as to what I'm doing wrong ?

  


  (Note : I'm using Crostini which I believe is using an Ubuntu or Ubuntu-Like shell)

  


  Thanks :)

  


• Logic and lawyers

  22 mai 2013, par Mans — Law and liberty

  Reading about various patent litigation cases, I am struck by the frequency with which common logical fallacies such as the Appeal to Consequences are committed. We shall look at a couple of recent examples.

  In conjunction with the Federal Circuit ruling in CLS Bank v. Alice Corp., Judge Moore, joined by three others, filed a dissenting opinion wherein we find the following :

  I am concerned that the current interpretation of § 101, and in particular the abstract idea exception, is causing a free fall in the patent system. [...] And let’s be clear : if all of these claims, including the system claims, are not patent-eligible, this case is the death of hundreds of thousands of patents [...].

  A footnote adds :

  If the reasoning of Judge Lourie’s opinion were adopted, it would decimate the electronics and software industries. [...] There has never been a case which could do more damage to the patent system than this one.

  From the above, I get the impression Moore is primarily concerned with protecting the system, maintaining the status quo, less with ruling in line with the logical consequences of statute and case law. Furthermore, her argument rests on the premise that a weaker patent system would “decimate the industries,” a notion supported by little evidence, yet presented by Moore as an obvious truth. In fact, research exists suggesting that many important innovations are never actually patented. Let us also not overlook the fact that European companies do not appear to be suffering from the much weaker patent protection for software afforded there.

  Judge Moore’s reasoning can be summarised in three steps :

  1. Ruling this way could be disruptive to the patent system.
  2. The industry relies on patents.
  3. Therefore we must not rule this way.

  Not only does she commit the aforementioned logical fallacy, she does so by way of invalid arguments.

  The second example of such fallacious reasoning comes from the Supreme Court ruling in Bowman v. Monsanto :

  We have always drawn the boundaries of the exhaustion doctrine to exclude that activity [copying], so that the patentee retains an undiminished right to prohibit others from making the thing his patent protects. [...] That is because, once again, if simple copying were a protected use, a patent would plummet in value after the first sale of the first item containing the invention. The undiluted patent monopoly, it might be said, would extend not for 20 years (as the Patent Act promises), but for only one transaction. And that would result in less incentive for innovation than Congress wanted. Hence our repeated insistence that exhaustion applies only to the particular item sold, and not to reproductions.

  Here we find the same pattern repeated. The aim of the court appears to have been ensuring the continued validity of this class of patents, not reaching a logical conclusion regarding the question of infringement. Once again, we can break the reasoning down into three steps :

  1. A non-infringement ruling would weaken the patent.
  2. Weaker patents would provide less incentive for innovation.
  3. Therefore we must rule infringement.

  As in the first example, the argument presented in step two is at best questionable, and no supporting evidence is provided.

  These are, unfortunately, not the only examples of such fallacies ; one might even describe them as ubiquitous. Does a law education not include any material on logical reasoning ? Ought it not ? While we can never hope to find any kind of universal truth on which to base our laws, we should at least strive to make our system logically consistent. If we do not, notions such as fairness and justice lose their meanings.