This never happens until people are rich enough and educated enough. When they live in complete poverty is when the primal instincts reign supreme.

So you still need to build schools to fix this.

If you don't build schools, the "bad apples" will be back in less than a generation. In a society that's so fucked up, people will inevitably turn to radical ideologies that blame all their troubles on external enemies.

I don't know about US, but some other countries have noticed the pattern and revived some old designs. For example, apparently, turboprop bomber/assault aircraft are nearly perfect for "anti-insurgency" type of combat missions as seen in Iraq and Afghanistan - cheap, rugged, easy to operate, can take off and land from small and poorly maintained airstrips... and still more than capable of delivering death in droves from the sky while remaining effectively untouched.

US itself has AC-130, which, I suppose, kinda fits that role as well, even if it wasn't originally designed for it.

It may well be the case, but that's precisely why it makes sense to let private companies hash it out. If it's not just magical thinking, and they succeed, then everyone benefits from the development of the technology necessary to do it. If it is, then, well, a private company goes bankrupt.

How do you "rape" an asteroid?

If someone can set up a viable asteroid mining company in near future, I honestly don't care if they are forced to pay taxes. The benefits to be had long-term from development of the associated tech are much more important.

If you look at the reviews, they actually have several 4- and 5-star ones, but they look more canned.

They give some examples of businesses that claim to be having problems because of incorrect data Google Maps. But then one of those examples just has abysmal reviews in general (which, to their credit, they note in the article).

Well, if your definition of "build" is "cobble together using spit for glue, and some duck tape if you're lucky"...

It does include csc.exe and vbc.exe, however.

Why would regular people care specifically about having "Windows native code"?

There can be no "scientific consensus" in a society that hasn't discovered the scientific method. In those times, at best, what you had was the consensus of the "wise people".

So out of all the things you've listed, the "plum pudding" atomic model is the only one that would even qualify. But there was no consensus that it was like that. At best, it was accepted as the most reasonable model given all the evidence at the time (but, really, physicists had wildly different notions of atoms back then, and none of them were solid theories). It only took five years for more evidence to appear that proved the model was not viable.

The stairwell in Venice is submerged because Venice itself is sinking, not because sea levels rose several feet since it was built.

Save the planet, kill yourself?

Fine, but you start.

Huh? They have offline navigation from address to address. All the addresses are available offline, as well.

Borland Pascal wasn't really meaningfully simpler than Modula-2, though. It had modules (units) with separate compilation, and all kinds of low-level primitive, down to inline assembly. At some point (IIRC it was version 5.5? either way, still late 80s) it even became a full-fledged object-oriented language. In terms of what you could do with it, it was definitely comparable with C and C++ compilers available for DOS at the time, and separate compilation helped compile speeds - the short compile time of Pascal, and later Delphi, was truly legendary. They also had what was by far the best DOS IDE, with syntax highlighting, integrated debugger and help system etc. Granted, this was also true for Borland C++, but that was more expensive.

Yeah, on Unix, it never really got off the ground because C was the system language there. On DOS, it was a whole different world.