One early problem with Pascal was fragmentation: while there were various decent, proprietary, dialects that let you actually write code that did stuff, *standard* Pascal was as much use as a chocolate teapot. Standard Pascal had lousy I/o and minimal libraries. the standard didn't even specify how to open a file, whereas C always had a decent subset of the Unix API as part of the de-facto K&R standard.

Had Pascal come a few years later when the IBM PC had crushed all before it, then something like Turbo Pascal might have been far more successful. However, back when there was more than one type of PC to worry about, C's huge standard library, and it's preprocessor for fixing minor dialect issues made it unbeatable for writing portable code.

Some of us grew up with PAL, which made HD even less of a priority.

Quite frankly 720 or compressed-to-shreds 1080i isn't worth the effort c.f. PAL, and although proper 1080p from BluRay is rather more impressive, I can't say it has spoiled me for anything less - a PAL DVD on a ~40" HD screen with upsampling doesn't exactly make you want to claw your eyes out.

Don't forget the 3D Blu Ray version and free Digital Copy (download only, not compatible with iTunes, Linux or any system that our proprietary player takes a dislike to, offer expired 1 month before this disc dropped to a sane price).

I'd ask yourself (or the client):

1. Is the content regularly changing?
2. Does the client want to update and add content themselves?
3. Are they happy with a slightly generic look and structure rather than a completely bespoke interface?
4. Do they want 'blog' functionality - i.e. users can comment directly on each article?
5. Do they want a system where the bloody <ol> tag is still bloody broken? :-)

If the answer to several of those questions is "yes" and you don't already have a bulging toolkit of your own solutions, then I'd go with off-the-shelf CMS or blogging software. Alternatively, you could do a really nice front-end "sales brochure" in lovingly handcrafted HTML and then link to a CMS/Blog for news, support, customer forums etc.

Frameworks... can have uses but beware the "rapid application development" tarpit whereby you get your basic site/application working in record time and then hit a brick wall because you need to do something that the framework designer never anticipated.

The problem I'd have with VB at that level is that it is PC/Windows-only, and only available for free/cheap subject to Microsoft's licensing whims.

JavaScript?
Pros: runs on anything with a web browser - if you host the kids work on a server they can run their work on their unrooted phones, tablets, games consoles, chromebooks...; you can get jobs writing it; it goes hand-in-hand with web design skills and its relatively easy to make nice UIs in HTML; easy for kids to share their work.
Cons: it's Javascript!

I think I'd seriously look at Javascript because of that list of 'pros' - and if that is unconscionable, something like Dart or Haxe that 'compiled' to JavaScript but fixed its, er... more easily misunderstood features, set up with a web-based editor/UI that made writing and running a simple function straightforward and hid all the boilerplate.

Of course, an important part of the course, later on, would be to learn about other programming languages, compilers, libraries etc.

That said, the main thing is not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good, and not to force teenagers into something obscure or incomprehensible on the belief that if they didn't learn {insert trendy programming paradigm de jour}, or used something that didn't have a A**** freeness rating from the FSF, that they'd be scarred for life. The world will not end if they learn VB, Python or Java.

Don't worry - the tendency to see both sides of an issue is a genuine medical affliction brought on by an over-active brain. Soon they'll have an implant to help such people reduce every issue affecting the world to a simplistic false dichotomy, taking away the uncomfortable urge to try and deal with complexity.

Meanwhile, you just need to rely on willpower to suppress your skepticism when reading stories like this.

Spoiler: Gordon survives to become police commissioner, young Bruce Wayne survives and grows up to be Batman, Selena Kyle survives and becomes Catwoman; Cobblepot survives and takes to wearing a tux and top hat; several "good" characters with familiar names and hints of a "dark side" survive and turn into villains; while any character that doesn't appear in the comics probably won't survive a cliffhanger.

Well, that's true of virtually all UK shows (and they're generally better for it). I think "cancelled" is still appropriate when the creators looked set to continue but the channel pulls the plug for commercial reasons (which seems to be the case for Utopia) c.f. ones that are intentionally concluded like "Life on Mars".

Of course, with some shows its hard to tell a cliffhanger from a conclusion.

It really, really annoys me when shows end the season without resolving anything - have the makers never heard of shows getting cancelled? At least both series of Utopia resolve the main plot in the final episodes before throwing a curve-ball cliffhanger.

NB: Apparently there's talk of a US remake of Utopia. Hmm.

No, freedom of speech is freedom of speech.

What you say may be completely true of the US 1st Amendment, and somewhat true about Article 10 or the European Declaration of Human Rights, but neither of those is the be-all and end-all of the ideal of "freedom of speech".

OK, Utopia is neither based upon a comic or, technically, current (since its been cancelled*) but it does feature a fictitious comic book as a plot device and the cinematography is heavily influenced by comic book art (if you like over-saturated colour, you're in for a treat).

Not for the faint hearted or easily offended, though.

(* but it does come to a reasonably satisfying conclusion so don't let that deter).

Of the official list: only really seen two: SHIELD is OK (but it ain't Firefly, although 'the bus' looks hauntingly familiar from some angles) and Gotham is rather good (and certainly isn't like any Batman story you've seen - I just hope they keep their nerve and don't break out the tights, top-hats and make-up until the last ever episode).

Let me fix that for you using the junior dictionary:

...or a memory chip the size of a baby's fingernail. I mean, it is reassuring to have a few physical copies sitting in libraries around the world for sentimental purposes and backup in the event of the great EMP, but there's no other rational need for a paper dictionary. In modern society, if the power has been out for a week, the inability to have a properly refereed game of Scrabble is going to be the least of your worries.

...which ceased to be an issue a quarter of a century ago with the arrival of the CD-ROM. Not sure exactly when it became feasible to have the entire OED on your phone, but it certainly wasn't yesterday.

Consequently, you now need exactly 2 versions of a dictionary: the unabridged version and one abridged just enough to make it unsuitable for professional linguists (so you can make a profit from the pros). Size is not an issue for any of those and there's no reason whatsoever to take out words 'to make room for new ones'. If a word has fallen out of use, make a note to that effect: the fact that it was used is valuable information.

Hell, personally, I'd have settled with just a plaque, but if a few grams of ash has more emotional value with some people, why not? I certainly don't agree when people risk their lives to recover dead bodies, or waste valuable real estate on graveyards, but this is harmless. Plus, the inscription was purely factual.

There is something after death: the lives of everybody who didn't die that day, and their descendants. The possibility that what you did in your life might have a positive impact on your survivors, that they might even remember you or your work, is the real life after death.

Show me evidence that some valuable scientific experiment was bumped from the mission to accommodate this weight, or that a significant sum of much-needed money was diverted from elsewhere, and I'll agree with you.

Meanwhile, I Am Not A Rocket Scientist, but it seems like a no-brainer that you don't design a half-tonne space probe without holding a few grammes of capacity in reserve for contingencies. Something like the ashes could have been bumped at the very last minute with out consequence if the probe weighed in 0.01% over weight.

No, just that they had emotions and honoured their dead. In fact, you're feeding a Sky Fairy cult strawman (or rather straw Vulcan - see points #4 and #5).

You can't if you get punishment confused with consequences - but calling "punishment" "consequences" is a circular argument.

To use the cliche'd "Shouting 'fire!' in a crowded room" example: the 'consequence' is the risk of causing a dangerous stampede. Acceptable 'punishment' is what comes after you've convinced a court that the stampede actually happened, or presented compelling evidence that it was a serious risk. Unacceptable censorship is banning the discussion of combustion in a public place based on a hypothetical worst-case "stampede" scenario.