To be fair we are bombing ISIS territories and various Arab nations (via drones) and killing a crapload of non-military forces.

I'm not going to defend the drone strikes, but I will point out that every one is absolutely an attempt to strike some military target, the question is what percentage they get wrong...

There is no chance that taking over a coffee shop is going to be a strike at a military target.

If you're a religious fanatic in the Middle East and want to kill Christians you become a terrorist. ...

Or, you can join ISIS (the army killing and/or enslaving/raping everyone including Christians).

So there's an equal choice to be had, yet some are choosing to capture and harm non-military forces - those people doing so have been wholly Muslim.

When there's a dark layer of soil on top of sand it's usually a macrobiotic crust, that has taken a few hundred years to do its thing - that is what they crushed as they walked. There's not much worse you can do as far as lasting ecological damage except for sawing down trees a few hundred years old...

They did also harm the aesthetics of the lines themselves.

It also sends a really clear message: "This behavior will not be tolerated."

The video has nothing to do with his behavior. Having it online benefitted others far more than himself.

The message it does send is that they are so afraid of controversy they are willing to hurt anyone rather than endure it.

The only thing removing these lectures does is make it harder for others to learn physics without attending school in person.

I would argue removing the videos does far more harm than he ever did, when you consider there aggregate effect on humanity.

What problem will be solved RIGHT NOW by passing strict regulations for ISP's to abide by?

None? They why pass a regulation to fight terrors not yet real, and increase costs?

From what I can tell, they seem to accept none of that

That's pretty much bullshit since Uber pays for extra insurance for drivers, and screens them which means obviously Uber has some liability they are guarding against.

Where I live, to be a cab you need a commercial drivers license

Which is just a note that you have given the state extra money, of no actual value to anyone. Uber drivers have that though, just not UberX.

proper insurance

Which Uber provides.

regular vehicle inspections

UberX also makes sure you have a vehicle in good shape before you can drive

a tax license

Well THAT should stop the raping!

and are legally required to have a camera installed in your car.

Uber drivers are all tracked by GPS continuously and if they are smart have a camera in the car or voice recording app also. It's not magic.

Basically you've done no research and don't know what the hell you are talking about, but don't let that stop you from complaining.

I mentioned that once before, and was roundly shouted down... By people who noted that Uber in fact DOES do background checks.

They may have had a failing in this case, but it's the exception rather than a rule and a problem with the division in India, not generally.

If you don't like being shouted down perhaps do some research before speaking?

In the USA and Canada, the Sinclair ZX Spectrum did not exist.

In the U.S. I had a Timex-Sinclair 2068, which was basically the Spectrum but with some improvements.

It was a lot nicer to use and program for than the Timex-Sinclair 1000 (ZX-81), really a pretty solid machine and nice to program for.

It absolutely was a classic in every sense that the C64 was, just for a smaller group of people.

I agree that is some companies - I worked on things like that also.

But there are many, many smaller companies that need programmers where life is nothing like that. The great thing is that a competent programmer really can choose the kind of life that fits them best - some people actually fit in and like the environment you describe, but you can escape if not.

I posted what I did because I want younger developers to ponder the freedom they have and take advantage of it while it exists, and to really take themselves in a direction they want to go.

That's the really hard part though - getting an idea of where you want to go, and sometimes sitting at company for a while until you work that out makes sense.

If Apple had moved to a whitespace-active language I seriously would have switched to Android development.

Not even joking. I have used a lot of languages professionally and for fun, but I could not get past that aspect of Python and I can't see why such an insane design flaw would be any more tolerable in Nimrod.

It has so many dangers in terms of correctness and overlooked bugs...

There was one other language that bugged me in... Fortran... but at least there is only affected what was a comment, it didn't oversee control flow.

You are playing the ignorant doofus, seemingly you are not a programmer or you would realize the truth of what I say...

I'll let you have the last response so we can all laugh at you further, honestly you aren't worth any more time replying to.

pretty much presumes that you are an executive-level employee who sets his/her own hours

All coders do in reality, and there are enough job options you can control the flexibility you desire.

You just need to take advantage of the power you have.

Note that although many executives have power to "set hours" they also generally work a LOT of overtime too. I really see them as being similar to coders, more than most people realize.

in Apple's case, particularly

That is exactly backwards.

Apple needed to go forward with a new language, but no other language offers the kind of interoperability that Swift does, nor would any existing language designers have been willing to bend to make that happen.

In Apple's case they designed a modern language that you can use to the fullest, while at the same time having easy bridging to Objective-C so that developers (including Apple's developers!!) can chose a transition timeline that makes sense for what they are doing.

I know that increased productivity should in theory make life better for everybody, in practice wealth has been increasingly concentrated over the last few decades.

Having been to Africa and other really poor parts of the world, what you think of as "concentrated" looks like quality of living spread remarkably well over first world countries. So what if some people have an absurd amount of money?

In fact if you think about it, the stuff most people enjoy day to day, you aren't going to have a much better experience if you are rich. If you want an awesome laptop you can easily afford the same laptop a billionaire would use. If you want an iPhone you can max it out on a minimal salary.

You can have decent shelter, good food and a good life without a ton of money in most first world countries, in large part thanks to extensive infrastructure and rule of law. That looks pretty far from a model where all death is truly isolated and the well off are living in castles while you shovel pig shit and die of plague.