"To be a great programmer, you need to write code that reads like English."

That's an interesting observation, and see what I (not a coder but an interested bystander) say above about two programs I know equally well as a user -- one in Pascal (I can pretty much grok what all the code does despite zero comments), the other in C (lots of comments, but still makes my brain hurt even when I can figure it out).

From the user standpoint (I'm not a programmer, but I take an interest, and have rooted around a bit in various source codes), these are my observations:

1) When a program written in C crashes, it may do damnear anything on its way out.

When a program written in Pascal/Delphi crashes, it simply closes down and returns you to the OS.

2) I have an ancient (1990) database program I can't live without. When it was retired from the market, its owner kindly shared source with me, which happened to be in Pascal. There's not a single comment in it, but as I know the program so well, I can tell what nearly all its code does.

I can't say that of the other antique program which I still use and know very well (and have perused much of the source), but is written in C.

I doubt it's entirely coincidence, or even relative marketshare, that's given us those marvelous Obfuscated and Underhanded Code contests for C, but no such for Pascal.

You want <ecode>:

if (x<5) {
  printf("Works for me!\n");
}

If the argument is that I as a consumer have a right to not have my ISP discriminate against my choice of content providers then where in that argument is the limiting principle that prevents me from forcing the content providers to provide the content on a device of my choosing rather than theirs?

Clearly these are exactly identical situations despite the fact that in the network neutrality argument there is a third party (the ISP) interfering with my choice of content provider, while in your argument there is no ISP interfering in my choice of content provider. The total and complete lack of third-party interference in your case (which is entirely what network neutrality is about) is what makes it different.

That's also how the believers work.

Clearly it's a violation of the separation of powers. Only the judicial branch can decide reality, like the judge ruling that deepwater horizon spilled 3.19 million barrels of oil.

Dear Dimit:

Thank you for taking the time to apply to our job. Unfortunately we are not able to extend an offer of employment to you as we feel you are overqualified for this position. Thank you for your interest.

Sincerely,
HR

his next bonus will suffer resulting in him not benefiting

Unless his next quarter is a negative bonus where he has to pay his ill-gotten gains back, he gets $10000 for hitting this quarter's target and gets only $1000 next quarter. As opposed to only getting $1000 both quarters. The behavior is a no-brainer.

He could later be considered for termination if the pattern continues.

Unless he's high enough up AND his behavior drives the company into bankruptcy, then the gets a $50000 retention bonus to help ensure his leadership through these tough times.

We get the same thing at bird dog field trials from popper loads (which can travel a couple hundred yards in a good wind) -- it's kinda like being spattered by light sleet.

After the fucking the internet has gotten by the NSA during this and the previous administration, I think it'd be more appropriate if Obama was to "kibbitz" with youporn stars.

The government should be =restricted= by the Constitution, as the Founders intended: government can or must do *these few things*, and all other actions are forbidden.

Well, your hair doesn't want to be free, but it falls out all the same...

Hey, maybe they can put their money where their mouth is -- get their DNA sequenced and torrent it to the world!

What should they do with the X?

It goes in the evidence locker until the driver finishes their trial for possession.

What should they do with the machine gun?

It goes in the evidence locker until the driver finishes their trial for possession.

What should they do with the machine gun?

It goes in the evidence locker until the driver finishes their trial for possession.

What should they do with the $20,000?

It goes in the evidence locker until the driver finishes their trial for possession.

What should they do with the car?

It goes into impound until the driver finishes their trial for possession.

What's that? You can't be bothered with a court case to prove that anything illegal happened? Well, fuck you.

The "drug dog alerted on his car outside the view of the dash cam"

The drug dogs will simply be re-branded as kiddy porn dogs, and your cash will have trace amounts of 10 year old on them.

Don't worry, even if you're arrested they'll make sure it's for something entirely distinct from the reason your property is seized, like resisting arrest.