Obviously not true, or they would not have needed legislation to start doing it.

It certainly is in the United States. You cannot go after an heir for their ancestors debts. Ever. You can sue based on property owner liability issues, based on ownership at the time, but that still has nothing to do with "inheritors" or relatives, just the current property owner.

Doesn't matter. Estate is a temporary legal construction to administer the property rights of deceased. If inheritor chooses to come into inheritance then all the assets and debts of the estate are passed along.

How so?

Not true. All kinds of debts might be inherited, only some personal debts are automatically forgiven after death (like federal student loans). Credit card debts might be passed on to the estate, depending on state. Nursing care debts are most definitely passed on, etc.

Incorrect. If you chose to come into inheritance then you also inherit its debts. Some people do that for sentimental reasons to avoid estate being auctioned, for example. Besides, estate can later be sued in civil courts, for example for contract violations or damages caused by the estate. In a famous case a dead body was sued for damages it caused.

IRS has ability to seize the funds without going to courts first if they deem that you made a mistake or committed a fraud. However, you can then contest their actions - with all the due process.

Uhm, inherited debt has always been there, from the very start of the United States. If you inherit an estate then you also inherit its debts. It's as simple as that.

And of course, you can always refuse inheritance - then all the assets escheat to the state or to other inheritors.

Nope, the only WTF here is that it can be interpreted as an ex-post facto law. However, it's not so clear because tax violations have no statute of limitation for civil penalties. The only matter that was stopping the IRS from going after long-forgotten debts was its policy.

The fact that inheritors are responsible for the civil damages, including ones from future lawsuits, is nothing new. IRS also has power to seize funds without going to courts first, nothing new here as well. It's the combination of these two that makes a technically valid but WTFy situation.

I know what you're saying, but to me if you're coding to a specification (even if he wrote it himself!) which says "if X then Y", surely you should create a test to ensure it meets the spec..?

Or okay, he didn't create the test, but perhaps someone else should have before integrating the patch. But yeah, hindsight, 20/20, etc :)

If the RFC says the request should be dropped if the length doesn't match, surely that would be a specifically required test case?

I believe the ultimate assertion from Heinlein's "Stranger in a Strange Land" was "You are God". And not just as an idea from a new perspective, but as a studied examination of the underlying spiritual lessons from all human religions.

Nope. If you're seeing anything on the Windows GUI called "OneDrive", then you must have the update released today. I'm still waiting for the update to finish installing, but it definitely has always been called "SkyDrive" except on the web site.