I never said there wasn't.

Correct. In this case, she's female and she's gay. It's a PR stunt that hurts equal opportunity for every woman to prove herself to her peers.

Revolving door politics is the foundation of the ruling class, the true elites, the true 1%. It's probably the largest discriminator of all

Well, these days, it's the lefties who poison the well of every issue with race and sex to justify passing laws that legislate privilege; a defacto segregation policy on attributes that aren't supposed to matter. I suppose the neo right still has their equivalent in their religious fundie population, but they're not exactly in ascendancy like they were during bush 2.0 (and no, that doesn't mean they're not still a threat to the liberty of people like her).

The best way to deal with and keep irrelevant attributes out of the decision making process is not to fan their flames every time a decision is made. All it does is polarize decision makers when the goal is objectivity, leaving only relevant attributes on the table. This makes affirmative action the worst form of organizational bigotry in force today. Without that, this new cto would stand (or fall) on her own merits instead of shut down (or raised up beyond reproach) due to her sex or orientation.

The feminist bias of the slashdot summary comes in where the relevant achievements and backgrounds of her male predecessors are downplayed and made to look like they weren't qualified, while hers are placed on a pedestal, whether they're relevant or not. Surprisingly, though, the bloomberg link appears quite neutral, almost like a real news article.

just your county? that employee is a canary. you should feel bad for the whole country.

At some point, you'll have to break that high level language down to opcodes the cpu can understand, that means breaking high level logic down to many simple steps, which is what procedural languages are for. You can force the programmer to write these steps one at a time in assembly, 'script' the generation of assembly in C, or have a runtime and/or VM do it at a cost of speed and footprint, but there is no magical way to skip generating that list of procedures.

Nah. C just needs competent programmers who know something about how a computer works. While your attitude towards security is admirable, your attitude of "we'll just get faster computers" is the cause of all these bloated stacks we have nowadays...stacks that STILL aren't secure, and they were written with managed code languages no less!

I'd still rather own the copies outright than 'rent' them repeatedly and get low quality streams. Gmail is cheaper in dollars, yes, but not in terms of privacy or access. Google apps are also a lot less capable than ms office, and a lot less secure.

So you want to trade convenience for control.. This is a popular trend these days. If these choices become the only ones, giving up control of your data to remote hosts and providers will result in the same kinds of shit that goes on with identity fraud, from both private entities and governments.

It's the high performance stuff that I want local. I don't want to pay the exorbitant prices for hosting, storage, bandwidth, and renting of applications, esp the high performing ones, which will use more of everything. If it becomes SOP, the ASPs and ISPs will jack up the rates knowing people will have no choice. Also, the laws of physics will make this laggy as hell. The low performance stuff is mundane, but I still would not want that stored on a remote host.

Yup. It's proponents don't.

so what are you saying? libertarians demand ideological purity and 'progressives' and neocons do not? This society could use some libertarianism to counter the steady march towards statism that's been happening.

No, that's not the libertarian dream. Try again.

*while the *former* does not, sorry.

I would argue that 'a' windows machine is less useful than 'your' windows machine because the latter offers you full rights while the latter does not.

In this era of egregious NSA and government offenses towards our liberty, we really shouldn't have such enthusiasm for doing all our computing remotely on some fortune 500's remote machines. You can almost guarantee that such hosting companies will be compromised by NSLs.

I'd rather keep my data as private as possible, running my own copies of software on my own local hardware.

Right. It was a dream before we realized how much we'd be nickeled and dimed once the providers know we can't get what we need locally.. then it became a nightmare. It's amazing how quickly people forget.

1. The argument isn't against coherency. It's against the specific solution for specific reasons.

2+3+4. init should only be concerned with (re)starting, stopping, and monitoring processes. The cgroups feature fits here, too, and is one of the few interesting things about systemd. The rest of the services and such should be handled by specific daemons. The binary logs should be optional as most people do not need them and prefer the flexibility of coreutils/grep and friends.

5. KISS is not automatically out of date. KISS systems have a high reliability rating for a good reason: they are easily understood which keeps admin and developer mistakes down. The catch is flexibility, yes, but, again, init should not become super-busybox. Most systems still run on metal, btw, and that's not going to change until software runs on vacuum. That 'cloud' shit is the specific use case, and if systemd is meant for that, then fine, but it shouldn't be the default. As far as difficulty goes, all monolithic blobs like systemd do is hide it, making it harder to fix when something goes wrong.

Just because someone is 'reactionary' doesn't mean he's wrong, and threats about the relevance of skillsets aren't justifications for changing.