Nonsense. All significant accidents have happened in old (in some cases, 3 "generations" old) technology plants, and sometimes human error was a major component.
When it comes to failures in complex, potentially deadly systems like nuclear plants, "human error" isn't ever a factor. If the system relies on a human to act a certain way without a failsafe then it is just bad design, pure and simple. This book explains it well.
Zarniwoop pulled some notes out of a pocket.
"Now," he said, "you do rule the Universe, do you?"
"How can I tell?" said the man.
Zarniwoop ticked off a note on the paper.
"How long have you been doing this?"
"Ah," said the man, "this is a question about the past, is it?"
Zarniwoop looked at him in puzzlement. This wasn't exactly what he had been expecting.
"Yes," he said.
"How can I tell," said the man, "that the past isn't a fiction designed to account for the discrepancy between my immediate physical sensations and my state of mind?"
The end. No tracking, "evercookies" etc. Even blocks google tracking via google-analytics.
I hope Phoronix tanks, and soon. I prefer my articles in an essay format.
Yep, there's a reason why I pay a LWN subscription.
But in the WikiLeaks scenario, what is "the damage"? If any one journalist is "compromised" (say, publishes the password in a book), all the cables go public unredacted. This is true whether they are all sharing the same password or not.
No, and that is the whole point. If they publish the password in a book, then they themselves must also publish their copy of the archive - or the password is useless. So if one organisation publishes their file, and then another publishes their password, there is no issue.
Do you think it's wrong to have a rifle in the house? My very point is that back when I grew up, ALMOST EVERYONE had one. Do you see what they did there?
You can still have a rifle in the house. It just can't be semi-automatic. This means that the guy who wants to do target practice or shoot roos can do so, but the guy who wants to easily kill as many people as possible in a short period of time has some difficulties.
How is that a bad thing?
There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one works.