Well, we already got the paranoid, authoritarian bureaucracy over here, too. And the economy isn't doing too well either.

Fuck, the commies won.

Communism will work. As soon as man prefers working to earning money.

Care to explain why they are "not supposed to be publicly available"?

All the while ignoring the main issue. The problem isn't whether or not people copy stuff without paying. The problem is people not paying. And sorry, this won't be fixed by more stings, more domain hijacking, more rigid DRM because the only thing this accomplishes is that I get even more discouraged to buy any content. It's already bad enough since, well, there is very little content worth watching, let alone paying for it. And no, before anyone jumps to conclusions, it's not even worth wasting the bandwidth downloading it.

Not that the movie, the game, the song, the whatever was bad. Oh, far from it. There's great movies, songs, games and whatever else out there. I just cannot agree with the licensing terms. Dear copyright industry (I used to call you content industry, but let's call a spade a spade and be honest here, your business focus is copyright, not content anymore): A contract needs two parties agreeing on it. And I simply cannot agree to your conditions, while you're unwilling to offer conditions that I could agree with. In other words, no sale will take place here.

And I am by no stretch alone, or a minority. There are people who would be very willing to pay for your content.

But not at these conditions. We do not want malware on our PCs. We do not want to watch your annoying ads or "FBI warnings". Has it ever occurred to you that the ONLY people who get to watch this "copying is stealing" bullshit are exactly those that did NOT copy it? Because rest assured, the first thing stripped from whatever is to be spread is dead weight like that. It's, quite literally, a waste of bandwidth. But back on topic.

We want to pay for content. And we want to get what we pay for. Content. Nothing more, nothing less. Give us what we want and we will buy. Try to force us to jump through your hoops and beg for scraps like dogs and we'll lift our leg on you.

...as compared to all the people who never spent a dime on it and miss out on such great warnings and the unskipable information about movies that were about to be released when the DVD was new, have been out for ages by the time you watch it again and stunk badly enough that it reminded you of the time when you spent 15 bucks and 3 hours that you'll never get back to ruin your movie evening.

Yeah, I really pity those people who were too cheap to get that awesome experience.

Depends entirely on who you ask. The "proof" for his existence is flimsy at best, and recent research suggests that the stories about him are more likely a collection of various things and "miracles" that were performed by various people considered prophets by their contemporaries. It's entirely possible that there has been a crucifixion of someone by this or a similar name in the area of Jerusalem around the year 30, actually, it would be a rather odd coincidence if one could just for this regioun NOT find some indication that various people were crucified around that time. It was a rather common form of capital punishment back then. But being crucified doesn't make the story in any way special either, it's like trying to create a religion about someone who gets executed in a contemporary US prison. Has there been such a person? By far more than one! Is he something special? Well... not really.

I would even go as far as say that it's not too unlikely that there has been someone who fought with wit and charm against the Roman occupation and the complacent religious and aristocratic elite that arranged itself with the occupying force for their own gains, oppressing the population. It's very likely that such a man would gather followers, and that he would be fought by the powers that are as someone who tries to upset the "order of things".

But that doesn't make such a man a God. Was Gandhi a God?

Now you're being unfair. Slashdot just wants to be a news medium just like all the others.

More like an inverted Simon Cowell.

You watch American Idiot to hear how he berates and annihilates the idiots that dare to come on stage while having exactly zero discernible talent whatsoever.

You read the comment section of his postings to read how the commentators berate and annihilate him for daring to ... you get the idea.

Nobody has. Some of us are here for their daily two minutes hate, some are here to read the comments.

To be honest, I have no idea what the text on top is about, I just read Bennet and knew I had to hit the comment section!

DON'T YOU DARE keeping him from posting!

Not that I would miss his drivel (actually, I never read a word), but the comment section is more fun to read than the cartoon page of any newspaper there is!

The problem is not inefficient coding style. The problem is that people not knowing what they're (really) doing leads to security issues. If a person does not know WHY he is supposed to do something and just does it because he's told to do it, he does not know what to look for when trying to avoid pitfalls.

Look at the OWASP Top 10. And while I don't think too highly of them as an organization, their top10 reflect pretty well what problems I find in web apps during audits myself. Even though it looks almost unbelievable that SQL injections are STILL the leading cause of web insecurities. Despite there being a near foolproof silver bullet for this problem (parameterized queries and prepared statements, if used correctly). There is exactly NO reason why (with programmers deserving that name) this should even still be on the list. Let alone at the top spot.

Of course people use frameworks and languages that allow abstraction. Actually this can well increase security, nobody in their sane mind would write their own security libraries. And while some might now cry that OpenSSL is maybe not the best example with heartbleed and POODLE still well in our memory, you do NOT want to see the security holes the average roll-your-own security implementation has. Using libraries is a GOOD thing.

But the person using it has to know what they're doing! Just copy/pasting something off stackexchange is NOT going to end up in decent code!

Your nick makes that answer kinda surreal.

They will fight any NSA letter tooth and claw to resist handing over your data.

After all, they still want to sell it.

At first I thought it's a sarcastic comment, then I saw who made it.

Sorry. But you don't. If in every speech some politician gives he has to invoke god in some way, you do NOT have a secular government. If there is any doubt, just one look into your laws dispels it quickly.

Fundamental Christians don't need to bomb anything. They ARE already in power, why bomb away your own power structure? They can change the legal landscape of the land by simply changing laws "legally", from abortion to marriage laws, they have a power structure set up. Bombings happened back when they didn't have that, today, why bother bombing, you can install your invisible friend's laws in simpler ways.