> 2026-02-22 by GIMP Team

I am confused

> This interview took place on February 4th, 2017

No need to be confused, the opening paragraphs explain the discrepancy

> Unfortunately, the rest of the interviews from that event have never seen the light of day - until now!

Not really -- It invites speculation as to why they were not published for 9 years. And, are the words spoken a decade ago still valid?

They weren't published because the person who interviewed everyone is now the project maintainer, and ran out of time to do transcriptions. :)

I volunteered to help with transcription, so I was given several audio recordings and started working on them. The first "resurfaced" one was Simon Budig: https://www.gimp.org/news/2025/11/01/simon-budig-interview-w...

There's about 4 more from another event which I'll be working on between coding and other things. There's definitely some material that's a bit dated (for instance, the comment about non-destructive editing), but I think it's still interesting insight into development.

Sure, but it explains the dates. Which is all that you originality highlighted as your confusion. Perhaps you can query them directly about your other curiosities?

I think the interview is interesting regardless if some of the details within are dated or not.

HTML + CSS works great for this kind of thing. Once you get the print scope correct, you really never need to think about it again.

> too much punctuation

I thought you were joking. ... After a while, I started expecting a comma after each and every word.

The crossover waiting to happen

It is your twist and unjustifiable generalization of the author's words about the author himself:

> "aging is a synonym of cognitive decline"

compared to:

> As I near 60, I’ve come to realize I simply don’t have the same mental sharpness or stamina I used to.

The author did not say anything about anyone else.

Synoym: https://www.bennetyee.org/http_webster.cgi?isindex=synonym&m...

This is why Firefox's changes are so frustrating[1].

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43203096

The perfect opportunity to attract more market share, but instead they are shooting themselves in the foot at exactly the wrong time.

This is pure speculation, but what are the chances this change is simply an attempt to provide legal cover what they might have started doing 50 versions ago?[1]

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29082856

If that's the case they should stop doing that no give them selves the legal right to do it.

According to the tweet, Mozilla claimed

> “Does Firefox sell your personal data?”

> “Nope. Never have, never will.”

I do believe that never is a very, very clear statement (concerning every possible future) that needs no legal cover.

Ah but what you are interpreting in layman english is actually a term of art in marketing that means "this will change as soon as it becomes more profitable to do that".

1 is 2 to the power 0 ... 0b0001

shifted left once, it becomes 2 to the power 1 ... 0b0010

shifted left twice, it becomes 2 to the power 2 ... 0b0100

shifted left three times, it becomes 2 to the power 3 ... 0b1000

etc until

shifted left 136_279_841 times, it becomes 2 to the power 136_279_84 ... 0b1000...many zeros...0000

subtract 1, it becomes

0b0111...many ones...1111

One funny thing about Mersenne primes is that, as a result of what you describe, they are exactly those primes whose binary representation consists of a prime number of ones!

The smallest Mersenne prime, three, is binary 11, while the next largest is seven (111), then 31 (11111), then 127 (1111111). The next candidate, 2047 (11111111111), is not prime.

> the SSH certificates issued by the Cloudflare CA include a field called ValidPrinciples

Having implemented similar systems before, I was interested to read this post. Then I see this. Now I have to find out if that really is the field, if this was ChatGPT spellcheck, or something else entirely.

For the others: The correct naming is "principals".

Sigh. I'll get that fixed and figure out how that happened.

This was corrected to:

> ... SSH certificates issued by the Cloudflare CA include a field called valid_principals

which indicates it wasn't just the spelling of `principals`.

It depends... ssh-keygen -L displays the fields as Principals (which are set using the -n parameter) and internally a lot of the OpenSSH code talks about AuthorizedPrincipals...

> if (argc above 1)

I give up.

You're welcome!