Which, incidentally, is why taking a selfie with it exactly misses the point.
Perhaps for you, but selfies are proof you've been somewhere. That's why I call them evidence photos. For the people in question collecting this evidence may have been the point. Just like the souvenirs that tourists and pilgrims have been taking home for thousands of years.
Yes, it has nothing at all to do with the instability in Iraq caused by a pointless war there. War apologist much?
Because there can never be an event that has multiple contributing factors? There always has to be exactly one straw that breaks the camel's back?
The majority of people feel that DST is a bad idea and want it to stop.
I know some people don't like it, but a majority? I really doubt it. Citation?
I'm sorry, but I don't have the intellect to see why replying to the allegation 'this spy agency is spying way too much' with 'yawn, we knew this', or 'spy agencies spy, what did you expect?' is a valuable contribution to the discussion. I'm willing to entertain the possibility that it is just a gaseous burp from an underbelly rather than intentional muddying of the discussion, but a helpful reply? Sorry, no, I don't see it.
Regarding facts, if you think the news item under discussion is in some way factually incorrect, feel free to contribute a correction. And no, the worn-out arguments are not equally divided between both sides of the discussion. There is a constant flow of new revelations about the spy agencies overstepping reasonable bounds, and that is exactly what is so disturbing.
Of course this is what spy agencies do, nobody disputes this. The point is that they are overdoing it, and that is dangerous.
And there is always a platoon of commenters that use the same worn-out arguments to muddy the discussion. Personally I'm not convinced these people are professionals rather than amateurs, but the distracting effect is there all the same.
Penetrating air-gapped machines is old hat now.
Some vaguely plausible demos at a few conventions is not 'old hat'.
C is like a powerful table saw. Don't practice safety and know what you are doing and you lose a limb. Powerful but not all should play with one.
Table saws have safety features that are not perfect but at least make it less likely to lose a limb. One could easily define a subset of C that also would make it far less accident-prone. Converting existing code to this subset would be painful but healthy.
You can call that same function from within most other languages even without realizing you're doing it.
It may be true that the vulnerable functions are called from other languages as well, but that does not necessarily mean these languages are also vulnerable. They may do sufficient memory management and/or parameter sanitation to avoid the vulnerability.
Exactly what are you angry about? The article under discussion is from Kaperski researchers who are describing a relation they discovered between two different strains of malware. One of the strains of malware happened to be mentioned in a der Spiegel article about a recent Snowden revelation, but that is it.
So be precise: who is claiming something based on an unproven document? What is it that they are claiming? Where do they do that?
"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."
