A recent of example I had that made me dislike systemd was a prototype RHEL7 system here that has ZFS-on-Linux support installed on it.

When you boot it up, there's around a 50/50 chance whether the ZFS filesystems will be mounted after boot. This is an inconsistency that, as a long time sysadmin, REALLY BOTHERS ME.

Yes, I realize the root cause. ZFS has some dependency that is not starting before it. The dependency has to be declared in the appropriate service. However, with systemd we introduce the concept of "just because it came up correctly on this boot doesn't mean it will on the next one."

And that is supremely frustrating. What if it weren't 50/50? What if the likelyhood it didn't come up was 1/100? Suddenly a routine reboot becomes a debugging mission, and I reboot again and it works. "Eh, must have been a transient problem." No it wasn't.

With classic init you were fairly sure that the system's state was the same on every boot. Now it's a gamble. Good luck with that! This is why we're sticking with RHEL6 for the moment on production systems.

iOS won't attempt to join a Wi-FI network until you enter your passcode. Seems like a good protection against this would be to have a passcode and control panel enabled from the lock screen.

Phone boots up after crashing; DON'T unlock it, just swipe up the control center, turn off Wifi, then unlock.

I'm driving a Chevy Traverse SUV as a rental while my car is in the shop, and the handling is crap, it's a pain to move and park and I can't wait to get rid of it and get my car back!

It's mind blowing that these lumbering beasts are so popular. Give me a nimble sporty car any day!

This actually sounds like a great idea. Whitelist all the executables on your system. Then, if something tries to execute that's not whitelisted, throw up a dialog explaining what's going on. This would catch sneaky attempts to execute trojans in a lot of cases.

One downside is it probably wouldn't work with interpreted languages, and those can be fairly powerful. But it's a start.

A lot of CEOs (a good example was Steve Jobs) will take token small salaries because most of their income is from their ownership in the company.

If he's pulling down $5 million a year from company stock dividends, is giving up a $1 million salary that big a deal?

Yet. :(

This is kind of equivalent to hiring a locksmith, then noticing that he copied one of your keys and it's on his personal keychain.

There is no reason to ever trust this locksmith again. Some institutions, like certificate authorities and locksmiths, are sacred. The whole POINT of their existence is to be an entity you can trust to keep things secure. If they are irresponsible and let this happen, then there's no reason to trust them.

Ever again.

This is a wonderful why to treat someone you've likely worked with for years, and would put in a good word for you should you be looking for a job in the future.

Seriously? He's resigning willingly. He's not being fired. Don't be an asshole.

He's leaving willingly. Why be an asshole? It's not like he's being fired.

See my other post "Don't be an asshole". If someone wanted to wreck the house, they'd do it without a resignation letter.

I've known many people who have tendered resignation letters and are then immediately ostracized by the company, security follows them around everywhere, they're asked to leave the building immediately, etc....

Don't do that. If this person wanted to cause damage, he would do so without announcing his resignation. Take some precautions, but don't treat him like an outsider. He's still an employee during his notice period; treat him like one.

Remember, he's leaving somewhere where he spent a good 1/3rd of his life. Change is not easy, and paranoid asshole-ish behavior makes it 100x as hard. Plus, you want him to be an ally to your company in the future, and not a potential enemy.

With hypoxia (lack of oxygen), you just fall asleep and, if continued long enough, die painlessly.

Hypoxia is easy to implement, just replace the air in the room with 100% nitrogen. There will be no suffocation reflex, since that requires carbon dioxide. It is a completely painless way to die.

The Macintosh TV was a road apple. It only had one expansion slot that had the TV capture card in it. It was slow for its time. You couldn't even watch TV in a window; it had to be full screen. There was no way to record video.

If they had made it more capable, they might have sold more. But it was cheaper to buy a faster Mac and put a cheap TV next to it, than to buy the Macintosh TV. I know; I was there.

You can get pretty much any size and style of TV from a number of different vendors in a wide price range to fit any need whatsoever. You can even buy a projector if you want to turn your entire wall into a TV.

All that Apple needs to make is a little box that plugs into the HDMI port on that TV. That's IT. Once that's done, when you turn on the TV you get the "Apple experience" and full access to their ecosystem of TV shows, movies, and music.

The reason Apple hasn't made a TV is it's not a product segment where they can really make a difference. It would be equivalent to Apple making a power strip.

>complaint that some Kyocera phone features that come from its use of the Android operating system infringe Microsoft's patents.

Wouldn't that mean Microsoft should be going after Google, and not Kyocera? Google produces the software, after all.

>the leading Java-based client

If you mean the client I think you do, that has been crap for many years.

Transmission is the way to go these days.