While I'm sure that Texas has totally managed to avoid the scourge of zoning laws, the California approach has its own drawbacks that are becoming apparent, especially as California is now practically speaking a one party state run by Democrats with super majorities able to pass whatever they want.

California: CEOs Rate It Worst U.S. Business Climate For 8 Years Running
Hundreds of Thousands Flee Democrat-Run California
Just How Bad is California’s Business Climate?
California, a bad bet for business - Why would new enterprises come to a state like this?
Texas v. California: The Real Facts Behind The Lone Star State's Miracle
State leaders closely watch migrating millionaires

It's not about how fast you patch, it's about how fast you can get patches to your customers. And for the OpenSSL flaw, there were devices where the patch process is "throw it away and buy a new one".

Anyhow, Microsoft is far and away the worlds leading expert at distributing security patches - no one really has more experience or such a well-tuned corporate ecosystem. MS pushed a critical security patch out to WU, and every major corporation knows just what to do, and understand the urgency, and has a well-travelled path for it. The more modern players are good at patching consumer endpoints, but haven't really addressed corporate customers.

Ask the former CEO of Mozilla how that worked out for him.

That's wrong in a couple of ways. What's legally required is that the board member put the shareholders interests above their own personal interests (fiduciary responsibility). But those interests are defined by the corporate charter, and to a large extent by the board itself. It's perfectly legal to create a publically traded corporation that sets social responsibility, or green blah blah blah, or some other such hippie nonsense above profit, and then that's what the board must pursue. You might struggle to get investors, or you might find a welcome market, but in any case it's allowed (and rarely happens).

More commonly, there's no requirement at all for the board to chase short term profit. That's where most the corporate infighting comes. Some corporations have firm 20 and 50 year growth plans, and sacrifice the short term for those plans, and sometimes those companies have a shareholder revolt because the owners lose patience and want everything monetized now. Sucks when that happens, but the downside of being a publically traded corporation is that you're ultimately controlled by your owners, and that can end up being anyone.

No, I don't. It wouldn't help if I did. Few people here are up to serious if casual fact based discussions on the matter let alone professional level ones. Fear isn't needed, only an open mind, rational thinking, and knowledge. Many of the threats are already known to various levels but people choose to ignore or disparage them because it suits their purposes, or they aren't up to a serious discussion.

I would have to credit that as yet another of Dallas' charms.

That would certainly cut down on your living expenses, and I think most Texans would appreciate the gesture.

That's fine with us. We'd just as soon you not come.

I like how you gobble up tropes fed to you by your Democratic overlords, and then accuse others of bigotry. It's cute.

That's changing though (except for Government Motors, which retains that build quality of say a Trabant). Ford has made huge strides in reliability, they're really pretty good now. And Tesla is, after all, an American car. We were too corrupt to let GM and Chrysler die, but had market forces actually done their thing, Ford and Tesla would be the surviving American brands (well, Tesla is heavily subsidized, but in a quite different way).

FTFY

How the Dallas-Fort Worth Tech Sector Has Roared Back

The notion that you can't have code without these flaws (buffer overruns, dangling pointers, etc) is just asinine. I've worked on significant codebases without any such flaws. You just have to adopt a programming style that doesn't rely on being mistake-free to avoid the issues.

Want to end the danger of buffer overruns? Stop using types where it's even possible.

Want to end the danger of dangling pointers? Managed code doesn't do anything to solve this problem, and is often the worst offender since coders often stop thinking about how memory is recycled, and well-formed objects can hang around in memory for quite some time waiting on the garbage man. So you have to write code where every time you use an object you check that it hasn't been freed, and importantly hasn't been freed and then re-used for the same object! (That happens on purpose in appliance code, where slab allocation is common.)

Heck, for embedded code I simply wouldn't use dynamic allocation at all. All objects created at boot, nothing malloced, nothing freed. Everything fixed sized and only written to with macros that ensure no overruns. I wrote code that way for 5 years - we didn't even use a stack, which is just one more thing that can overflow. That style is too costly for most work, but it's possible, and for life-safety applications it's irresponsible to cheap out.

Detroit? Deep Red? Detroit has not had a Republican mayor in 50 years. Detroit is your liberal, socialist utopia. Liberals should be flocking there to bask in their success.

Oh, I see, the only thing that counts is the gravest possible outcome that is also by far the least likely. Lesser outcomes that might kill people by the hundreds, thousand, or tens of thousands don't count? Outcomes that we could not influence that damage friends or allies due to being blinded don't count? Being put at a serious disadvantage to foreign adversaries doesn't count? It's just fine with you that Russia or China seizes territory from whatever other country they care to, and which but for proper warning might have been avoided? Iran getting nuclear weapons to put on top of the missiles they already have that are capable of reaching Europe doesn't count (despite Iranian threats against Europe)? A jihadi from Manchester returning from Syria, evading MI5 and leaving a "little something" in the tube in London doesn't count?

Yes, there is some highly purified BS being peddled here, and you're supplying it. The damage isn't "embarrassment" but rather blinded, now useless intelligence systems, and blueprints to infrastructure and practices to adversaries and enemies that they can exploit for their purposes, including avoiding detection. You don't know what you are talking about.

Your post is a tribute to misunderstanding (or trolling?) and bad moderation. There are detrimental effects from Snowden's leaks. I don't know how you think I said there wasn't.* It is entirely logical that they are spending money to repair the damage caused Snowden's leaks. The mess was caused by Snowden, and you are paying for the clean up. The US will be vulnerable for years or decades to come.

* Well, maybe I do know how you managed to achieve such a "misunderstanding" based on your sig: Fanboy .... Ron Paul.