Closing one's ears to people one might disagree with is a sure way to rot as a community. It's not like the community that attends such conferences is unanimous in their views; it's not *all* technolibertarians. If you look at other presentations by such bodies at past conferences, you see that they're often quite good.

Thankless means that few people in broad society adequately respect the need for or the practices of police officers. They're underappreciated.

Police don't usually have the time, when people pull a gun on them, to carefully consider every possible option. If they can pick the least bad option, great, but if the situation is that someone pulls a gun on an on-duty cop (meaning pulls it out and begins to point it at them), I'd be very reluctant to second-guess them if the policeman shoots that person.

Police do a necessary and often thankless job at high risk to themselves. If a policeman needs to arrest you, it's best not to make them feel unsafe.

Not all of us on the left have a problem with this.

Always? If someone did manage to grab your gun and aims it at you, I think you'd prefer your gun to fail at that point.

Without consent of the Ukrainian government, such a vote would not mean anything more than, say, if my neighbourhood in Brooklyn voted to secede. The current Russian occupation of Crimea is not valid.

I'm 35. I recently left a startup where most of the people there were about 10 years earlier. The difference is a bit more than age for me - I spent most of the 10 years I had on them working for a University, but the combination of age and differences in interests were very rough - I didn't feel that I fit in, I didn't hang out with them after work, I didn't want the same things out of life, and so on. It can be rough.

A bit of contract law that would:
1) Mark these rights as unwaivable
2) Mark as unenforcable or nonactionable any part of any contract that would bar or establish consequences for asserting these rights

It'd be amazing if there were a hollywood blockbuster that theorises that doing this will make the Earth run out of rotational energy and fall into the Sun.

I like how they place an emphasis on it being small, but they require you to link the whole damned thing into your app. And of c ourse that doesn't help you write correct software, because you won't figure out if you really need -lm unless you also test your app on a more correct libc.

Lightweight and correct indeed.

Steps to a useless comment:
1) Speculate on the features of something
2) Note that that speculated feature set doesn't include something you want
3) Criticise based on your speculation

My point is that with modern VMs and JITs and partial nativisation and other systems/PL technologies, you no longer should care whether something "runs native", and that that's a distinction that is so blurred anyhow that it barely makes sense to talk about it. It may have once been important and simple, but nowadays it is neither.

(I missed part of a sentence in there ; windows apps can compile "to native" as well using WINE)

So what? Perl can compile to C too, by bundling the interpreter into your target binary. Windows apps can compile "to native" as well. Neither makes it exactly native, similarly to having your app interpreted by a native HTML5 engine is.

The most native way something can be for a platform is to be written directly for its platform, bound directly to its APIs. Anything but that gets very conceptually fuzzy. And if you're worried about this for performance reasons, you should look at the Quakelikes that have been ported to HTML5.