How about if the unix app allowed only the long form option names - but allowed them to be abbreviated as long as the abbreviation was unambigous? (That's what powershell does)

That why we still code in assembler and don't use those modern touch screens. Oh wait... (lalalalalalalal! -- fingers in ears, eyes firmly closed)

Yes, there is no concept of SUID/setuid on Windows. So there's no sudo "happy go lucky".

No, PowerShell is aimed at admins who want *robust* scripts - both the ad-hoc ones they whip up as well as the ones they choose to save. String parsing is extremely brittle, and most bash shell scipters do it the insecure and brittle way because it is easier.

String parsing is often thrown off if presented with unusual characters in file names, if executed in locales where dates and numbers are both generated and parsed different, etc.

OMI is available on Linux. Read the FTFA

You're the incompetent one. There's is no "IDE in a shell". The ISE *is* the shell - much like if you did bash scripting from emacs. The difference is that the ISE will provide you with intellisense (automatic suggestions), help, syntax highlighting, snippets, multiple script panels, integrated source-level debugging (complete with breakpoints, variable inspection etc) and even a command "builder".

Most *nix shells have good documentation. PowerShell has good documentation as well. All of the cmdlets have syntax descriptions (automatically generated from metadata), description and multiple examples. In PowerShell even user-defined functions, cmdlets and script files can have the same level of documentation. Comment based help (look it up) makes it super easy to document scripts and functions. And the auto-generated syntax diagrams and parameter descriptions also work for your own script files.

PowerShells command syntax is extremely consistent. Cmdlets are *always* of the verb-noun form, and there are only about 40 or so standard "approved" verbs. Parsing of the command parameters is the responsibility of the *shell* not of the commands like in *nix shells. Hence, all commands follow the same convention with no strange outliers like e.g. dd. Parameter names are always "long" - but can be abbreviated as long as the abbreviation is unambigous.

Ah, but C also has the most beautiful hacks.

Freeman Dyson is not a climatologist, and should not be expected to understand it. He also has a strong contrarian streak, and will oppose almost any viewpoint that he perceives as a consensus. He is not a denier, he is a skeptic. But he is a skeptic of pretty much everything.

The reason why Linux eclipsed Minix is obvious, since Minix was never more than an educational tool. But why did Linux triumph over BSD? In the early 1990s, FreeBSD was considerably better, more stable, and had a more liberal license. Here are my theories:

1. FreeBSD required a hardware FPU, at a time when many computers didn't have them.
2. The AT&T lawsuit put a lot of uncertainty over BSD.
3. The user communities were very different. Linux users were very open and helpful to newbies. BSD forums were hostile to anyone that didn't already know everything.

Germany does not have single payer healthcare. They have a multi-payer system where the costs are shared by government, employer, and individual.

I once got sick on a business trip in Germany. There was a nurse screening patients. The nurse could see that I had a standard bug that was going around, and gave me some pills. I never saw a doctor. This actually seems like a good system, and using nurses to handle the obvious 90%, while doctors focus on the 10%, certainly holds down costs. But I don't think you can just "show up" and see a GP. At least that wasn't how it worked for me.

Agreed. But so far our "reforms" have focused on coverage rather than cost. If we fix the costs, then fixing the coverage will be far easier. Germany's system seemed quite good. I have also used Canada's system, and that was good too.

Well, these allegations just don't pass the common sense test. Almost any organization is going to have at least 5% annual attrition, and many organizations have far higher rates. So out of 1028 employees, about 200 would be expected to leave during the 4 year period covered. Yet they expect us to believe that the actual attrition was ZERO? Somebody is either mangling the statistics, or outright lying.

That is not how socialized medicine works. You can't just go to the doctor whenever you feel like it. Single payer healthcare reduces costs, and people with SPH are generally happier with their care, but there are tradeoffs. Long waiting lists for many ailments, and reduced patient choice, are among those tradeoffs.

Sounds good! I am all for more of Microsoft's cash being transferred to the shareholders of Salesforce.

America has one of the highest corporate tax rate in the world. That is the main reason that corporations have been leaving.

The 90% tax bracket was an personal rate, that did not apply to corporations. The corporate rate has never been much above 50%, and even that was generally in wartime.

Corporate tax rate by year

That video is about talking to the police if you are a suspect in a crime. It is not about talking to the police if you are a witness.