Is it not already illegal to call out a SWAT team for spurious reasons? It's dangerous for the object of the prank and it means the SWAT team is unavailable for real call outs.

That's just poor design on the application designers part. It should be obvious that, even if the customer hasn't moved, shipping addresses aren't necessarily the same as the office address.

I think that's unlikely. If it were true, it would be able to support transactions and more granular than table locking because BerkeleyDB does.

They didn't provide a fact, they expressed an opinion. It's an irrelevant opinion given that other database servers also have had vulnerabilities.

Not even that. You can't do generalised virtual hosting with SSL.

The host header is just a header like any other so the server can't figure out which certificate to use to set up the encryption layer. It is possible to do it in a restricted set of circumstances with a wild card certificate that matches all of the virtual hosts.

GP means he fled from the jurisdiction of British authorities. He had been arrested in the UK and was on bail in the UK. By fleeing to the Ecuadorian embassy, he violated his bail conditions in the UK.

Incidentally, by violating his bail conditions, he cost some of his supporters around £100k. He's not a nice man, in fact I think he is probably a rapist. That's the most logical explanation for why he skipped bail.

Hosepipe attached to a car exhaust and fed back into the car. Sit in it with the engine running.

Given the political importance of Christianity in pre-enlightenment Europe where being the wrong ind of Christian was literally a matter of life and death, any Bible published before the 18th century can be expected to be politically slanted. The KJV certainly fits into that category but since it was an English Bible for the English form of Christianity, we can be sure it was politically slanted in the right direction - all other versions of Christianity being corrupt papist nonsense or something like that.

The trouble is that version control is fast becoming a monoculture. Soon git will be the only version control solution in town and it's a bit shit really. It's popular mainly because Linus Torvalds wrote it, not because it's actually technically a good program.

It is often unethical to do a placebo controlled trial because the people taking the placebo are effectively condemned to death.

The only thing homeopathy prevents is the marks spending their money on things that actually do something.

So we have somebody who thinks you need a gun in case of the government and somebody who doesn't. I think the one who thinks he needs to be armed is the one who is frightened of the government.

Not while it still suffers from the fragile base class problem.

I think the parent was assuming that x, y, z could be function calls with side effects.

x is modified twice in the expression without a sequence point. There are two ways code could be generated:

Set a temp variable to the value of x
Increment x
Assign the temp variable to x

or

Assign x to x
Increment x.

Both are legal. Actually, since the behaviour is formally "undefined behaviour", the compiler is free to generate code to do anything or nothing.

To be fair, the one liner didn't do any error checking either.