No, it isn't relevant. That's like countering a claim that poison ivy is systemic and widespread with "But look at all the pretty flowers! There must be hundreds of pretty flowers for each poison ivy plant!"
Whether true or not, it is completely irrelevant.

Never attribute to heroism that which can adequately be described by stupidity.

I think he was just too dumbfounded by what he saw to consider running (or, smarter, sneaking away, giving that running from this cop might not lead to a good outcome).
Check his background exclamations, for example. And how he repeatedly obstructs the camera, or tilts it - it seems clear that heroic filming wasn't at the top of his mind, being struck dumb by what he saw.

But that's okay - we don't want heroes. We want the average Tom, Dick and Harriet to be themselves, and be able to be themselves.
It's the police that are supposed to be the heroes, laying down their lives for the innocent. And they not only aren't - they're at the opposite end of the scale.

Allegedly he feared having to go to jail because of outstanding alimony, and that's why he ran.
That should not warrant being shot in the back.

No matter what good things cops do, it can never justify police brutality and murder - at any ratio. The two are separate things and do not stand in perspective to each other.

500:1? If it were 5000:1 or even 50000:1 ratio of showing cops doing good deeds vs police butchers, it would still be irrelevant. It's not about perspective, it's about catching the criminal police and letting the man know that we find this unacceptable. No more.

I'm a bit worried, though. What's the safeguard against a software engineer introducing defects, getting someone else to report it, and splitting the bounty?

Or, even for old code, it may tempt someone to share proprietary code with someone outside the company, in order to find bugs and share the bounty.

So was Harrison Ford.
And the statement I replied to was that Harrison Ford was in a league above everyone else - not everyone else except those who were hot shit.

I think you underestimate Sir Alec Guinness, Peter Cushing and James Earl Jones. They were certainly top league.

I would say that good code is code that's as simple as possible for its task.

Use a password manager and you:
- Cannot access your accounts without the password manager. Like when you've had everything stolen at an airport and need to transfer some money.
- Lose access to all your passwords in one fell swoop when you lose your password manager, or move to a system where that (by then) old piece of software won't run.
- Lose all your passwords in one fell swoop to any blackhat who manages to brute force or key log your password manager.

Password managers defeat much of the security of having passwords.

Trolling much, AC?
I have written a proxy server. What are your creds?

From the Wikipedia entry on SPDY:

SPDY requires the use of SSL/TLS (with TLS extension ALPN), and does not support operation over plain TCP.

This means that (a) unless you can get the client to install the proxy server's CA, it cannot act as a man-in-the-middle on your behalf, and (b) they know who you are because of the SSL session being unique for each client - there's no mistaking your request for the request of anyone else behind the same proxy. Even more so because it re-uses a single connection. Make no mistake, this protocol was designed to thwart proxies and caching, and making the user trackable for the servers. Speed is the carrot, not the horse.

Similar for HTTP/2.0, which in large parts are based on SPDY, and written largely by the same people.

She sounds like a good driver. Your speed should vary depending on the road, traffic, visibility and other factors. It's the idiots who drive the same exact speed based on what the speed limit is that are dangerous fools.

The irony here is that Google wants https with chain-of-trust certificates, and advocate https, and without self-signed certs harder than anyone. Now it comes back to bite Google's own derriere.

The reason they want https (or SPDY or HTTP/2.0) everywhere isn't our best interest, but because you can't easily hide behind caching proxy servers, giving them better fingerprinting as well as a higher hit count on ads.

When I have to go to Google, I go to the non-redirecting http page they have hidden.
My personal privacy is worth more to me than the risk of a 3rd party listening in on my searches (other than the three letter agencies who already listen in).

Sure it is. Not at the same rate, but given two spacetime points far enough away from each other, the distance between them can increase much more than the speed of light.

The thing about expansion is that it will appear "faster" the farther apart two points are. On the proverbial balloon you blow up, two marks that are close together will move much slower apart than two marks that are far from each other. And this is a very very big balloon. The ant called Andromeda crawls towards the ant called Milky Way faster than the expansion happens, because the expansion is very small at such a short distance. But an ant that's much farther away won't ever be able to reach us, because the distances involved means a larger distance increase too. And an ant that's far enough away won't even be able to send a light signal to us, because the distance expands more than the speed of light, relative to us and it. The edge of the observable universe simply means that anything beyond it recedes faster than c. But no movement is involved, just a distance increase.