I use kiskis, a program just like keepas, but older, in java and uses AES to encrypt the file.... choose a good password as master password and you are good to go!

The java allow me to run in almost any system, have the program and the encrypted db in a pendrive (where i have some basic passwords) and i also have my main password db at home. For more important passwords, i ssh to home, do a quick gpg -d password.db.gpg | less and search for the password.

This way i can access the passwords from whatever i am, i have the the passwords in a standard secure encryption and in a secure location (home and office) on different passwords db for different objectives

The problem is choice.
Users don't mind changing, but they want to revert or change thing that don't like. Ubuntu and gnome3 are 3 of the main examples where the choice is removed from you, because they "know better" and "it's too hard for normal users". This of course created rage among the "advanced" (or simply older) users, even more when most of the time the only solution is a radical change of distro/desktop environment.

What is good for one guy might not be for the next one, without a proper fallback, the "next guy" is left out in the cold

No, he can still play... just don't cheat!!
This way his DNS history will be totally safe

that is where you are wrong!

most of the net works fine without javascript... yes, you lose ads... you lose some advanced sites... but you can use the net and reach most of the main content just fine.

Most of us are scientists, engineers, developers, administrators... all technical people, who usually don't care about design, but care about usability and speed (ie: we are all lazy, want as much information as possible, as fast as possible, with the little trouble as possible)

If you are trying to fish "normal" people, by cutting out classic, slashdot will stop being a technical site

The classic design in 2014? Not too bad. The classic design in 2018? Probably not going to cut it.

why?
slashdot have the same design since 1997 and i don't people complain...
yes, the site changes, it is more dynamic, comments can be collapse, submit comments without reloading, etc but the classic design worked fine for 17 years

Want to change? fine, the classic must still be used and switched to in a easy way (i don't want to click in 3 places to change the view, every time i open slashdot on a new computer/use privacy mode/use a javascriptless browser)

show off ! :)

The idea of the beta is to check if the design idea is on the right track, instead of investing months of work on features, just to find that no one likes it and trow it all away... as you can see, the test worked, as most people didn't like the change and several things need to be corrected before adding more features.

I use dillo (a very light browser, without javascript and very basic CSS) several times to a quick net browsing and i can read slashdot classic, but not beta... just because of javascript

psst!! yes, you can resurrect classic, just don't tell anyone!!

Again, nvidia don't have the console market today, AMD have it, so if game developers will use MANTLE in the consoles, the PC market should follow.
If the performance is as claimed, game developers will for sure try to use it, specially if its supported in all systems the same (all consoles, windows, mac, linux)

Don't forget that all new consoles today are using AMD cards, so the game developers are using mantle for those, they would also can do that to PC with little change

1- i don't imagine how the video card drivers can affect a browser, can't MS blacklist that driver? does everyone have this problem?
2- why use IE?
3- why even use windows!?

call it whatever you want... CISC AND RISC? can be also small-CISC AND small-CISC and small-CISC AND small-CISC... but that start to translate to a plain RISC

If you would take out that translation layer and use all available micro-ops, you would call that CPU a RISC like, not a CISC like... Even if sometime you can only execute one operation, other times you CAN execute several operations, being further way from a CISC design and close to a RISC design.

anyway, that layer takes out performance, consume resources and really not needed if you change architecture... so going away saved money

You are also forgetting that a x86 or a amd64 is a RISC cpu with a layer od CISC hidding the RISC. That layer takes cpu space, power and resources (both designing and working). Going to a simples CPU design saves silicon wafers, increasing the number of cpu per wafers and so increasing the profit. Also, a simpler cpu saved internal resources developing the cpu.

So AMD building ARM cpus is a way to reduce costs, increase potential profit per cpu and of course, being ready and testing the market demand for ARM CPUs