I think "-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview" is entirely valid in this case.

"Drunk History" disproves both A and B.
Comedy Central again indirectly provides better information than the channels dedicated to providing information.

Regardless, it should be pretty obvious that survival of the Anaconda is a secondary concern.

If by "formerly" you mean "long gone".

I don't remember seeing one on the net, but I've stopped doing COBOL about 5 years ago.

Besides, the language is besides the point. It's the mentality of the developers.

Basically do every good thing you were taught but practically never do, like checking every possible error, validating every input, keep-it-simple, etc. Then add mature procedures, methodologies and tooling. If you're doing ingenious things in your code, you're probably making it harder to maintain. Code should look like it doesn't solve any problem at all; it should look like any idiot could have made it.

This research used open source from Github as a base.

I used to be a COBOL, PL/1 and Java programmer within a single 80.000+-employee company for over a decade, so I have some insight in the quality aspects of both languages.

If you compare the quality of COBOL code on Github it's generally very low, because most of it is small, half-finished projects made for fun.
In a professional environment, COBOL quality is generally very high; much higher than Java code.

None of this has anything to do with the language, rather the Java was running on a desktop, where 99.9% uptime and a projected maintenance lifespan of ~10 years was good enough. The COBOL was running on a mainframe where 99.995% was the bare minimum uptime and there were no projected lifespans; it should be maintained forever.

Heck, even aging PL/1 code on a mainframe is typically of much higher quality than modern Java code on a desktop.

The language is completely irrelevant. If NASA made their in-flight software using Brainfuck, it would probably be rated as an incredibly stable and secure language as well.

They may end up in a sort of limbo, with nobody left to actually sue for copyright infringement.
If nobody can sue, it's effectively public domain.

In particular links that compare the same resolution.
The two videos in TFA went from 480p30 to 720p60 and quite frankly... I didn't see much difference apart from the resolution.

If you posted it several years ago and isn't still highly popular, chances are it'll be in the back of the queue.
If it's not at all popular, chances are it's not even in the queue at all.
Why waste system resources on old videos nobody watches?

+5 Funny, +5 Informative, +5 Insightful and +5 Flamebait.
Thanks, I won't have to read the rest of the comments now.

There's a very large road between "Broken like in the days of 95 or 98" and "Not broken".
They're meandering closer every other version, but not nearly there yet.

What does this even mean?

Every single government thing involving any money at all is an income redistribution plan.

Corporate tax benefits are income redistribution plans.
Military spending budgets are income redistribution plans.
Spectrum auctions are income redistribution plans.

This particular income redistribution plan is only different in that income is redistributed to the poor instead of the rich.

I guess if you could set up your own repository, this could be a useful tool for enterprises.

A blanket hatred to somebody based on believes is irrational; such blanket hatred would itself be a believe.
That does not mean that a dislike, or perhaps even hatred, of any individual religion is irrational.
History tells us that eventually, all religions will end: None of the earlier religions are still being practiced.
Assuming there are common reasons earlier religions have ended, these reasons also apply to the world's current religions.