It's hard to find people willing to be shot at who actually take the job to protect and serve the public. So these jagoffs are filling the gap.

Actually it isn't that hard. It's called the military. People are willing to go into places much rougher than the typical American city for far less pay. Put the cops on the same pay rate as GIs, and it will actually be easier to get cops than it will be to get soldiers. Why? Because it'd be the same deal as the military except you can drive home each night.

And get new ones. What's so difficult about that?

Union. Unions that funded the campaigns of anybody who might be able to do that. Unions that negotiated the rules that say you can't do that, with the guy they funded sitting on the other side of the table. In short, corruption through-and-through, stinking to high heaven. The only real fix may be to for a citizens militia to seize the apparatus of power, and that's not something into which we should go lightly. In short yet again, the same causes that lead to the first revolution, and to various civil disturbances. The biggest of these was the Civil War, but there have been many other smaller ones. You may or may not have been taught about them by your teachers, who belong to similar unions.

What an opportunity to give the unnecessary ad hominem back. The key-word was "experiment". The point is not that this is how software development be, but that teaching people to think first, then design correctly, then implement is the proper approach instead of the "tinkerer" one where you write down what comes to mind and then tinker with it until the compiler is happy.

That, exactly, is how all these errors that the compiler doesn't catch happen.

The experiment is not about avoiding compiler errors. If you thought it was, you didn't understand it one bit.

That's your choice, your freedom and your right. Nothing wrong with that, and I'm okay with it.

But if you forcefully remove that choice, that freedom and that right from others - forcing them to follow your choice by making the lectures unavailable - that's where you are overstepping your freedoms and treading on mine, and I'm absolutely not okay with it.

If you don't want to watch his lectures, just don't watch them. Don't force them off the face of the net.

I think you should definitely get a live pet now.

It's unreliable as is all genetic/breeding/inheritance research by Nazis, due to heavy political agenda heavily biasing the results.

OTOH research on malnutrition and hypothermia has been a solid basis of much of contemporary research. And rocket science. USA would have never won the race to the Moon without nazi rocket science.

So, had the guy been conducting gender studies, yes, this would invalidate their believability. But physics courses?

No, you subcitizen! Since last year we have always been at war with Eastasia!

When I looked that up, it said undefined. Is that what you wanted to say? I was kind of thinking it'd be a symbol for a bomb or a mushroom cloud or something.

How does it handle dynamic sites? If the answer is "not at all" as with previous projects of this kind, it's dead on arrival.

Most of the web is dynamic today, and almost all of the interesting sites are. How many of us would be reading /. if it didn't have comments and moderation?

There were ads on TPB? Fuck, now I can't even turn off ABE to check it out.

This. I can't remember the last time I downloaded music from a torrent site. It's more convenient these days to buy it on iTunes, and prices are fair.

When the same can be said for movies, and the MPAA stops this staggered release bullshit, I'll start buying movies again the same way I bought a lot of DVDs back when that was the most convenient way to get movies.

Which world is that you live in? Religion still carries much more credit than its performance record justifies. The pope is invited to parliaments and international diplomacy as if he was somehow especially smart or important. Even the Dalai Lama is given special respect for purely religious reasons. Churches enjoy special priviledges in many countries, with tax exemption being just the tip of the iceberg.

The simple fact is that the human brain and psychology has evolved little from tribal society and we believe or disbelieve a lot of things not due to facts or evidence, but due to group pressure, conformity, tales, authority as well as shortcuts in thinking, heuristical approaches and so on. Religion is just one example of that, superstition also still exists even though religion has already tried to root it out for a thousand years.

Which is why you should learn to write code that compiles and works correctly on the first try. We know how to do it, computer science wasn't invented yesterday. But thanks to dot-com and startup craze and the desire to churn out pseudo-programmers fast, fast, fast, programming isn't taught correctly.

If you want army style, I suggest this experiment: Teach students to code in a simple text editor and a special compiler that gives them one chance at compiling the program. If the compile fails, it deletes the code and they can start from scratch.

Only if you hire monkeys to do your programming for you.

This is a very famous article about how to do programming right. Note their error count. Compare it to pretty much everything else on the market.

But programming this way isn't sexy, or macho or whatever else you want to call it. It's real work.

It depends on the environment. If other people are good and willing to defend their values, the bad guys will be in trouble. But if they manage to convince the majority to be either lethargic or even respect them, then the good people are the dumb losers.

And we are in that situation. Wake up, man! We admire rich people simply because they are rich, not for the ways they became so. We increasingly believe the war-talk of neo-con propaganda that unemployed people just need to be forced more strongly to want to work, and that benefits need to be cut because the poor are parasites. There was no blood in the streets when our governments bailed out the finance sector with so much money that it's hard to visualize while at the same time cutting budgets in education, health care and practically everything else.

You forget that the unethical (actually, "differently ethical" is correct here, because they believe themselves to be ethical, I'm sure) people also have long-term strategies. And they're winning.

Are they still in business? If so, your rant is meaningless.

I thought it was a Hawaiian fish.