I'm not the parent poster, but here's a ref claiming that Gorilla Glass is indeed both cheaper and far weaker than sapphire.

Scotty used an Apple Macintosh to enter the formula.

What struck me watching it was that
(a) My watch already had a transparent alumina crystal - sapphire.
(b) No real Scotsman would say aluminum, but aluminium.

I never said that civilized countries are permitted to kill its own citizens. You're reading things I never wrote, drawing erroneous conclusions.

If the electorate of a country vote for a government that kills its own citizens, like the US does, that is up to them. That doesn't make it less barbaric, but at least they have the jurisdiction and the will of the people.
Most civilized Western countries have long since abandoned a revenge based justice system and capital punishment.

What countries don't have is jurisdiction outside its own border. Two countries tend to disregard this on a permanent basis.

In civilized countries, children enjoy special protection, and the right to vote is inalienable, so there are no felons who cannot vote.
Quite unlike here in the US, where voter disenfranchisement is rampant and children are tried as if they were adults.

It's high time for 'Tis of Thee to join the 21st century and abandon her barbaric tribal practices and join modern Western civilization.

Through first hand experience, I can verify the abundance of Venus Mons.

It should be the other way around. A country should only be permitted to kill its own citizens, not citizens of other countries.
The former is acceptable, given the citizens in question are part of the electorate who sanctioned the laws and government, giving them powers over their lives.
The latter is an act of war and trespasses on the sovereignty of other countries and its citizens.

When did drug smuggling become a capital crime?
And when did suspicion (probable or not) of capital crime put aside the requirement for due process?

And maths and strategy. You're left with a score and need to get to zero with the last dart hitting a double, so you need to not only know what combinations will get you there, but also which ones will do the least amount of damage if you miss, and redo your strategy if you miss or a dart blocks your strike zone.
It's as much in your head as it is in your aim, arm and hand.

Do you have one example of a compiler that actually does that?

gcc for example, might unroll the loop, but not revert the look to use a more efficient comparison. A quick test with icc (older version, I admit) doesn't do it either.
Which compilers do you refer to that do this?

Ir's slashdot's wonderful messaging system that eats less-than signs even when they're not part of tags.

They're unrelated - X/Y/Zmodem share a heritage,but kermit is unrelated. However, it seems obvious that X/Y/Zmodem was attempting to provide the file transfer capabilities of kermit, making it simpler to both install and use. BBSes embraced it, and X/Y/Zmodem had its days of glory. Nowadays, kermit has overtaken Zmodem and Ymodem-g, so it has possibly gone full circle.

They don't need to be on the internet - they may be running back-end or internal systems. But if front-end systems or internal PC or midrange systems communicate with them using openssl, the versions have to be compatible. You can't just upgrade one end of the connection, at least not without extra testing.
Or, it might be a system that has to be accessible and visible to just a small part of the internal userbase, and you protect it from internal hacking.
So legacy systems sometimes need software upgrades too.

Indeed, and you might want to take it even one step further, and test for --i = 0.

There's also the fact that there are plenty of older archiitecture CPUs out there, being deployed even today, especially in the embedded world where product lifecycles are really long, and switching to a new architecture can mean dozen of man-years of work.
Do you want your water company and cable provider to install new meters every two years to keep up with the latest technology? Guess who would pay for that!
In critical infrastructure it becomes even more important to support old hardware. Would you feel safer in a plane running hardware/software that has shown itself to work, or one with bleeding edge computers that crashes as often as a typical desktop?

Optimization isn't bad. But you have to know what you're doing, and why. High level developers relying on magic abstractions layers need not apply. Their strengths lie elsewhere.

Not necessarily - if they used their own allocation routines (which it appears they did), it could have an API allowing use after free until a new allocation occurred. If so, the bug would be replacing the memory allocation routines without also rewriting the parts that depended on the old functionality.
And before someone going on a rant saying that that's a brain dead thing to do, it's something that pretty much every compiler does when using the stack. The stack pointer isn't going to change until you change it. So if using a private stack for memory allocation, this is perfectly fine. It's a different API to what's common, but different doesn't mean wrong. It just means that those who use it have to understand it and not make erroneous assumptions.