You wrote some pretty poor daemons. Since you can't be bothered to use the syslog facility, my suggestion is that you start opening files without calling truncate on them after.

Nonsense. The Affordable care act for example is intended to do the opposite. Its a flawed semi-done piece of legislation, but that's because the Republicans have done nothing but obstruct as usual.

What's broken is this. The initt system assumes:

1) All the subsystems boot quickly 2) None of them need to communicate back and forth about status in complex ways 3) The list isn't too long

There exists lots of users for which one or more of those 3 assumptions are false. If you don't assume those 3 then you would design boot differently.

Take a look at things like OpenRC. It manages a lot of that kind of stuff really really well. I'd much rather have it than systemd.

When I was a junior network engineer, I sometimes had to work on (what we now consider ancient) technology such as ATM, Frame Relay and ISDN. I even had my share of IPX/SPX. Back in those days, the experienced network engineers with 20+ years of experience despised Ethernet while complaining about those junior folks who knew nothing about the established technologies. As it turned out, all of them are out of a job now. Bottom line is, when it comes to technology progress, roots are pretty much irrelevant. I don't care if something has been done like this for 1000 years. If we can find a better way to do it, let's do it. The question should be whether or not systemd is progress, or an unnecessary burden. History is irrelevant in this case.

I have and they remain not as bad as snookering the country into a war based on fabricated evidence. Even some of the R's supporters have come to realize that.

Except that if Comcast gets caught doing that, they'll be slapped as common carriers before they can take their next breath. Now, that doesn't mean you're wrong. It just means there is incentive to not play too dirty (purposeful degradation)

I'm not all that fond of either one, but sitting out here in 3rd party territory, the Ds seem to be less packed with idiots and crooks.

I agree municipalities should, in general, have the right to install utilities, broadband included. But I also like the idea of state control more than federal control, as it typically promotes more models that can be compared. In the case of municipal broadband, there are a range of successes and failures, including some big money losers. If State money is being used, then the States need to be able to determine the rules. If you don't want State level control, then let the local municipalities & citizens pay for the broadband utility build if they want, but they should also pay the debt if they fail and not ask for a State or Federal bail out.

Free marketism. It's a fundamentalist religion.

that will include a chapter on how to select the most throwable chair.