With open-source software, a monoculture isn't that bad a thing, as the Heartbleed exploit has shown. When something bad is discovered, people jump on it immediately and come up with a fix
The reason (a reason) monoculture is still bad with open source is that we don't know when this exploit was discovered. It may have been discovered long before, by malevolent entities, who didn't reveal it because they were exploiting it.
"The durability keeps maintenance costs down, and the company provides a three-year warranty."
They must have had a lot of maintenance costs.
How many can tolerate the obvious truth, supported by thousands of studies, that average differences in intelligence across the various peoples of the world and especially races are due to genetic factors?
Because we don't know how to measure intelligence accurately enough and control for all the other factors to narrow it down to just genetics. And that's just the problem of genetics: when you start talking about race, you're grouping people together who are vastly different genetically. Race isn't a useful category for generalizing about genetics.
These observations now either fit into the theory (now that would be great) or they don't.
It's best when they don't, because that's when we learn new things.
Secure SSL
Good call.
I don't think a name whose main purpose would be to distinguish it from OpenSSL would be very useful, since not long from now OpenSSL will be forgotten, and everyone will be using LibreSSL.
By building up, you are tearing down. There's a name for it: "inflation.",
Not really, when people are capable of producing more, then there is more for everyone. It is the opposite of inflation.
To the systems programmer, users and applications serve only to provide a test load.
