This article caused me to wade through my major metro area's online system to plan a trip between my new house, which is within blocks of a suburb park and ride facility, to my work, in the same town. By car this is a 10 minute trip, maybe, depending on the state of traffic lights.

At first the online system told me the trip was impossible at the time of day I specified. So I dug deep into the site and pieced together what appears to be the only possible set of routes that connects these locations without sending me to the downtown core for connections. After much digging I found that, for all practical purposes, the route is indeed impossible. It appears that, due to one key route only running in the very early morning and late rush hour, it would take me around 36 hours to commute each way.

If I took the bus all the way to the downtown core then back to work I still can't do it, because the morning bus to my work stops running before I arrive downtown.

Yeah. Not happening.

You have finally realized that your touchscreen controller actually provides a pressure strength and are able to hype it up like it's revolutionary.

Right now, Apple haven't said a word on the matter, let alone "hyped it up like it's revolutionary". There is zero confirmation from Apple, this is just a blog article based on a rumour.

You fail to understand the difference between a legal principle, such as the First Amendment, and a moral principle, such as Free Speech.

I understand it just fine. The parent commenter does not. He was talking about outlawing the flag.

The First Amendment is a legal enactment of the moral principle.

No, if the First Amendment were a legal enactment of the moral principle you describe, it wouldn't stop at restricting the government's right to curtail speech. It would compel Apple to publish this material. It does not. Ergo, the First Amendment is not a legal enactment of the principle you describe. It doesn't go anywhere near as far.

Apple's suppression of Confederate flag, and Civil War video games, and silly TV shows set in the South, is evil.

Nobody has the right to force Apple to use their resources to publish material that they don't want to publish. And Apple choosing not to publish something is not the same thing as them suppressing it. You want the confederate flag, you can get it from other places. Free speech is not about forcing somebody else to publish your crap.

This is a country founded on the idea of Free Speech.

Your country was founded on the principle that the government should not stop anybody from speaking. It wasn't founded on the principle that corporations must be compelled to distribute other people's material regardless of content. Apple are not obligated to publish this material.

Much better than outlawing their vile ideas

Nobody is outlawing anything. This is an example of a business choosing not to publish something.

They negotiated a deal with the record labels, which the record labels agreed to. That's not sleazy or thieving. If Taylor Swift doesn't like it, her dispute is with her record label that agreed to this deal.

I think you're mixing Apple Music up with Apple News.

Apple hasn't even achieved its primary stated goal of de-fragmenting the music market

Really? You criticise them for it not being a success before they've even launched the damn thing? No other company gets berated for not achieving its goals for a product pre-launch. This is just another of those bizarre articles that holds Apple to not just an unattainable standard, but a standard that doesn't even make sense.

The average iOS user buys far more apps than the average Android user.

Is that actually an important metric?

It is for people who want to sell apps.

Because the only way to support C in this supposed future where system frameworks will be written in Swift is that Objective-C will still need to be around.

That's not true. While it's possible to use Objective-C frameworks from C, in practice, nobody does this. People writing C for Apple platforms don't usually call out to Objective-C from C, they call into their C from Objective-C. Entirely replacing Objective-C with Swift won't change this - you can call into C from Swift just as you can call into C from Objective-C.

Now I think if there is ever a situation where Apple would drop support for Objective-C, I do think it's likely that they would drop support for C at the same time, but it's not because writing C for Apple platforms requires the presence of Objective-C.

The Flask debug toolbar was based on the Django debug toolbar, so I think the same functionality is available for Django. But for CLI stuff, you're probably better off just setting a breakpoint and using pdb.

More specifically: if PHP is installed on a server, it typically advertises itself in the Host: HTTP header for every outgoing request, regardless of whether it was used to serve that request or not. Most other languages do not, even if they were used to serve that request. The tools that perform these language surveys can't adequately control for this, so it leads to a phenomenally large overestimation of the usage statistics for PHP.

When you need low-cost web hosting, PHP is quite often the only choice other than Perl.

You can get a full VPS that will run any language you want for 5USD/mo these days. Low-cost hosting hasn't been an argument in favour of PHP for years (assuming standard developed nation privileges of course).

There are a lot of PHPisms I have grown accustomed to, that I would really like in [Python]. Namely, I want var_dump.

You can do far better than that. If you use a tool like the Flask debug toolbar, you can jump into an interactive debug session, running on the server, right from your browser.

the PHP code is harder to maintain long term, but it's amazing how fast you can build things that work.

Quick doesn't have to mean dirty. You can be extremely productive without creating unmaintainable crap in an ugly, badly-designed language. It's not a trade-off, you can have a better language and better productivity at the same time.

the target of wiretaps does not have to be linked to a foreign power or terrorism.

I thought the point of the NSA was that they were meant to protect domestic communications from external threats. If the target is not linked to external threats, how can it be justified?