And it has been asked before, can we mark it as a dupe? (Does that still exist?)
https://slashdot.org/poll/3224...

I think it would be interesting to look into the poll archives - they go way back to 1999 - and ask the same question now and link back to the original poll. Some answers may need to be changed but I think it would be interesting to see how tech, culture, etc has evolved (both in the poll results and the comments).

Oh wow, a goatse reference. That brings back memories, not all good ones though. However I feel that /. had much more significance and impact then.

US federal law does not apply in Australia. There is more in this world than the USA. You should visit it sometime if you have the chance, the (financial) means and your boss is generous enough to grant you a 2(!) weeks vacation because you put in all those extra work hours (not required but actually they are) and no vacation the last few years.
In the meantime we in Western Europe enjoy our yearly 3 weeks summer holiday (legally required in a lot of countries, or at least the choice must be given to the employee).

It still might have to do with cost, as around holidays the cost of the ingredients go up as well. That stick of butter you buy at the beginning of December might cost you 5-10% more in the week before Christmas. Other ingredients may have even higher cost increases (think strawberries, although I don't understand why someone on the northern hemisphere would want those in the middle of winter).

I agree, I was checking the cost out and its € 11.99 a month or € 17.99 for a family subscription. If they'd slash that in half I'd subscribe without a second thought, and I think a lot of people with me. Same goes for Spotify, Netflix, the account sharing on those platforms is simply because it's too costly for people to be subscribed to several services. A lot of people rotate their subscriptions because of this as well. I don't mind missing out, so I'm subscribed to a few services but those are all production services and/or a gateway to several services.

Youtube differs in that they're not only gateway to production services, but also for user generated content.

As true as this may be, I wish it wasn't. Because running a desktop is different from running a server.

Try convincing a dev that he can't just do this or install that in an enterprise environment, like he is used to on his vm or desktop.

I've seen too much stuff break or be incompliant with security policies: wrecking authentication methods, not understanding sudo, installing unnecessary packages (the tutorial said I needed to install iptables, nevermind that the distro is using UFW), installing out-of-date packages by pinning an already ancient java version, keeping up-to-date with patches/releases or just plain installing a DHCP server (OK, those are thrown off the network pretty quickly). And if you try to reason with them or explain why they shouldn't do this they get their manager involved just to get their way. And often a security exception is drafted and approved with a little help from said management.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind working with someone who wants to do stuff right and I'll do everything to help him or her getting to a compliant install. But usually they'll just tell us off and only come to us after they built everything and won't budge because of the endless commitment / sunk cost fallacy.

That's also solved in most countries, where there is a broader political spectrum than 2.1 (I'm being gracious with the .1 for the minor parties in the US).

Moreover, anyone with real submarine (engineering) experience would have "slowed innovation" because of "criticisms", that, in the real world, could have prevented this loss.

He didn't say the problem is developers. The biggest is business; I have never seem an occasion where a security issue raised to a a manager or in a development wasn't downplayed or completely ignored. Security is hard and costly and most customers will prefer features over security. And security is difficult to assess anyway.

Just like every other trivial issue it will blown up until it is a major crisis.

AI learns from the (news) sources it is fed. It sees a lot of coverage of violence in the news. It may "reach the conclusion" (I use this very liberally) that for a society to function, it needs to have this violence. So it may create situations in which a violent response by a human is triggered or it may influence a human to start a shooting. AI may not be deadly directly but it can certainly be influencial to violence.

I do not understand that you think that everyone having a new car made for them does not harm the environment. About 30% of an ICE car's pollution is from the manufacture and 50% of an EV. If you run an ICE on ethanol it means that the ICE car does far less damage to the environment. The cost to the environment will not be favourable even if we continued to use fossil fuels but the cost to the environment is not good with EVs due to their short lifespan yet ICE last much longer. We can agree that it is time to progress from fossil fuels even though we will argue about the extent of the problem but EVs are just another dead end technology. VW, Audi etc. are going with ethanol, hardly niche if you get out, whereas Toyota believe the future is hydrogen (water as exhaust). You are entitled to your opinion but my point is that it is just an opinion and the experts do not agree on the best way forward.

OK, now which do you think is better for the environment? A) Everyone buying a new electric car B) People converting their current car to ethanol - Why are we being forced to buy a new car when it will do far more harm than good?

> You can go visit Chernobyl right now. Yes but there are many areas which you are not allowed to go near. The idea of people living near is deceptive. They can tell which areas are relatively safe and there are people there but a mile down the road you would not be able to dig a foot deep hole and live to see your next birthday because the ground is simply a covering over a highly irradiated subsoil which must not be disturbed or the wind would spread the radiation.

Although current nuclear is the most expensive when you consider the total cost from start to finish the average person only considers the cost of a running nuclear plant producing his watt of electricity and that blinkered view sees nuclear as cheap, just like the electric car is great whilst it bumbles down the road but the total cost is horrific. Wind is not perfect but it is better but the short lifespan and pollution (massive grp structure with a short lifespan) is an issue.