While I only code as a hobby, I started with TRS-80's running BASIC (yeah I was the guy hogging the computers on demo at the Radio Shack near you!), did an official BASIC course at my high school before PC's went mainstream. Then I got into ASM, COBOL, Pascal and C, all self taught. After that I got a life.
But if you think about it languages are just different ways of doing exactly the same thing. If you know how what your code is doing to the machine, then you can program in any language - it's just a case of learning the new syntax. Unfortunately too many people think a language is like some arcane spell where the words have to be said just right or the Computer God gets angry.
and how many young people were betrayed by their institutions and communities at the very start of their programming careers.
That knowledge of Pascal will last you a lifetime son.
If you really care about the checksumming then switch to SAS/FC and use the Data Integrity Field. ZFS fixes something that has already been fixed years before it even came into existence. It offers better protection from silent corruption than ZFS does as well, because with ZFS you have no guarantee that what you send to the disk is what actually gets written, DIF mitigates against that.
See recent James Bond filming of Spectre on the River Thames. Large numbers of people saw the filming and footage was taken, some of which was no doubted posted on YouTube and elsewhere. There is nothing the relevant movie studio can do about that.
You where saying?
Losing data goes with the territory if you're going to use RAID 0.
In particular, RAID 0 combines disks with no redundancy. It's JUST about capacity and speed, striping the data across several drives on several controllers, so it comes at you faster when you read it and gets shoved out faster when you write it. RAID 0 doesn't even have a parity disk to allow you to recover from failure of one drive or loss of one sector.
That means the failure rate is WORSE than that of an individual disk. If any of the combined disks fails, the total array fails.
(Of course it's still worse if a software bug injects additional failures. B-b But don't assume, because "there's a RAID 0 corruption bug", that there is ANY problem with the similarly-named, but utterly distinct, higher-level RAID configurations which are directed toward reliability, rather than ONLY raw speed and capacity.)
Remember when they stopped arresting prostitutes and targeted the John's ?
Yes that put a stop to prostitution all right. Er wait, what? What do you mean there's still prostitution?
It's one thing to try to come up with solutions. It's another to come up with solutions that actually work.
I call bullshit on that. If you are going to produce a DVD/BlueRay then you can turn the very same content into something suitable for Netflix for something close to zero cost. In fact I am sure that Netflix would happily employ someone to do the work for you using DVD's and BlueRays as the source material.
Given that almost all (we are talking like 99.99%+) new content ends up on DVD this is a facetious argument. Huge swathes of older content is also on DVD/BlueRay as well.
will mean that certain critical vulnerabilities may not be discovered in time, or not reported.
Which, if you think about it, works in Big Brother's favor. Again.
It also violates special and general relativity as well.
"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."