The amount of available programming labor has increased in the market, thus the value of programming labor has decreased. This is no different than if a vein of platinum was discovered, causing the value of platinum to decrease.

Value is not inherent, it is relative.Value is defined by the buyer. If I have a chair that I made by hand that I'm trying to sell, it doesn't matter what I think it's worth. The potential buyer is the one who will ultimately decide its value. Similarly, it doesn't matter what Number6.2 thinks his labor is worth; all that matters is what the potential employer thinks he is worth. Right now the price he is asking for his labor is higher than the value perceived by employers, so if he wants to sell his labor then he needs to lower the asking price (or become a better salesman).

P.S. This is all coming from a low-salaried programmer.

...but it's profoundly ignorant to claim that had he not made it, no one else in the entire world would have.

By that logic, we should never give anyone credit for any innovation, ever. After all, if they didn't do it then someone else would have done it instead, right?

Linus stepped up to the plate before anyone else did. It doesn't make a bit of difference what anyone else might have done -- what matters is that Linus did it.

Apparently you haven't been studying Pastafarian gospel enough. The NUMBER ONE item on the list of the Eight "I'd Really Rather You Didn'ts":

I'd really rather you didn't act like a sanctimonious holier-than-thou BEEP when describing my noodly goodness. If some people don't believe in me, that's okay. Really, I'm not that vain. Besides, this isn't about them so don't change the subject.

How about in a place similar to where the military stores its nuclear warheads? We seem to be quite capable of protecting those things against environment impact, "terror attacks", and human failure. And if someone steals an ICBM, it's going to be a hell of a lot worse than if they stole some radioactive waste.

Phoronix released a followup article today. A driver supports X video acceleration, but no VAAPI yet. Like you said, these cards seem to be aimed at gamers, but with the prevalence of HD video content these days, I'd be surprised if VAAPI wasn't a high priority for this driver.

It's not about where the information comes from, it's about ensuring the defendant's right to examine the evidence against him. This is a critical part of due process, and if a juror brings outside information into the courtroom and bases their decision on it, the defendant will never have the chance to examine that information and respond to it.

Now, before you say, "But in this case, all the juror wanted was a definition of a word!", let me propose a hypothetical situation for you. Imagine that you are on trial for rape, and one of the jurors prints out the Wikipedia article on rape. It just so happens that the revision they've printed out contains an edit by some wacko that says "Any time a person has sex and then regrets it later, then the other person raped them." Now you have a juror circulating that bogus definition of rape around the other jurors, and you never get to know about it, so you never have the chance to tell the jury, "Whoa whoa, that isn't a legally accurate statement, and here's why." If the jurors had been forced to request such information from the judge, then even if the judge was stupid enough to print out a wikipedia article to define rape (which (s)he wouldn't), at least the defendant would know about it and could challenge it or bring it up to the jury.

Jesus, did you just read his first sentence and then stop? Here, let me repeat the GP's key point for you:

What the fuck does pregnancy have to do with this? asukasoryu's point was that if you cum in a girl without a condom, Kleenex can be used to clean up the mess. That's it.

No, he was implying that if you cum inside a girl with no condom, there is a mess afterwards to clean up. And, for some girls, he is right. With some girls it doesn't all stay inside after you're done.

Re-reading the OP's post, I think I misunderstood his point. I thought he was talking about legally getting away with defending himself, not actually protecting himself with a firearm. I was mistaken. I bow my head in shame.

In both of those stories, the intruder who was killed had discharged a firearm first. Granted, the parent didn't specify that in his list, but it was there in spirit. His point was that you can't even shoot someone who's breaking into your home, let alone attaching a tracking device to your car, as long as they don't attack you directly.

You make it sound like security is just some on/off switch that they forgot to turn on before making the code publicly viewable. That's not how it works. There will always be security improvements to be made to anything, and even... *gasp*... bugs. Especially in a pre-alpha. (If you don't believe me, then show me a major piece of software that's never had a security patch released).

I mean, christ, the code isn't done! They were just making it viewable it to the public so they could get suggestions for improvement. You know, open source and stuff?

No one called it sacrilege, they called it dishonest, because those actions are considered to be theft. And yes, even if your employer is very, VERY mean to you, stealing things from him/her is still theft. It may or may not be justified, but there is no way to argue that it is not theft.

Also, the survey didn't ask people if they would steal a couple boxes of pens from an employer that treated them like shit, cut their pay, bullied them into long hours, and fired them. Rather, the survey asked if people would steal office supplies and/or data from a job that they were leaving. That's all.

In short, stop dramatizing the argument and stick with the facts.

Every time an article comes up involving child pornography I know I'm going to be pissed off by the time I'm done reading the comments. And I was right. Each time I read someone's story like yours (a friend having his life ruined by these laws), part of me dies.

If I had one wish, it would be that every one of these "think of the children!" fuckers gets a microchip implanted in them. The instant that chip detects the person is sexually aroused by a guy/girl under the age of 18, they are immediately convicted as sex offenders and sent to prison for life. That's the only way we can REALLY protect the children, right?