"I strive to write "perfect" code if I have the time. It's not that hard, just double check and try to run the edge cases in your head whenever you do something complicated."

I highly doubt you can write a non-trivial C or C++ program without bugs, or really any language for that matter. I'm not talking about thousands of lines either. 100 or so should do it. The fact that you don't mention any kind of requirements spec, perhaps with the aid of some CASE tools, or at least a testing and feedback method, coupled with the fact that you think that you can do it "in your head" makes it clear that you have no idea how to develop code.

You said "registry". That was enough to freak me right the fuck out, and I am a seasoned developer.

You are assuming a mutual exclusion that doesn't exist,as well as a knowledge of the methodology used. If you apply all three, none of those workarounds work. Then, one could also do "blind metrics analysis", where different methods of analysis are used during different, and secret / unannounced windows of time.

You see, as smart as the typical developer thinks he is, it doesn't take much for someone with real skills to bury them ... deep.

two times seven is fourteen.
7477 6f20 7469 6d65 7320 7365 7665 6e20 6973 2066 6f75 7274 6565 6e2e

"Too bad you needed words to make your point about math."

Your problem seems to be that you don't understand what does and does not constitute a word, and how they relate to math.

My logic sounds flawed because you have just perfectly expemplified my point. I stated something. You perceived me to have stated something completely different, and then made the mistake of thinking your flawed perception was reality. You then projected your inadequacy onto me. I in fact said nothing even remotely close to what you repeated back.

That being said, it has already been stated quite clearly in this thread: "It's testable, it's measurable, it's repeatable, it's capable of prediction." In other words, it deals with the objective rather than the subjective. Math is a branch of science, and there are 10 types of people in the world: Those who can understand the points I have made, and those who lack the logical facilities to understand the definition of science. You clearly fall into the category 10.

I'll wait for the simulated Johhny Appleseed. Then at least there will be an actual reason to post the story on Slashdot.

Occam's Razor says no such thing. What, prey tell, is simple about the idea of one soul? How does it get distributed? Does it grow or shrink with the life and death of living being? There's nothing simple about the proposition it all. If we assume at least one soul then Occams's Razor calls for a one to one correlation of living beings and souls. Indeed, absent the assumption that there is at least one soul, Occam's Razor, if it said anything at all on the subject, would say that there are zero souls. It doesn't get any simple than that.

An apple "isn't" 1 either. So by your definition nothing is real, which actually turns out to be true. See also Maya. All science is a model. Our very perception is but a model. "essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful". Is math useful? OK, then, it's as real as it gets.

"It still is mostly a server OS ..."

Yes. I just answered a call on my Samsung S3 server a little while ago in fact. I also watched some TV on my Comcast Server Set-top box. I'm thinking you either don't know very much about Linux, or what a server is.

The question is absurd, but you totally miss the boat as to why. Employee count as a metric is much like Lines of Code. One employee may be better than 7 others taken as an aggregate, just as a single line of code may be worthless or invaluable.

This virus doesn't attack Linux at all. It attacks PHP web applications. They could run on Linux or any other OS. The brute forcing is what the botnet does once it has a foothold on the machine in question, and has nothing to do with the attack vector.

"Warzones" as defined by who? The FAA didn't include this area in the area they warned US carriers to avoid in April. Should the airlines monitor the media for reports of SAM installation sightings?

Certain parts, apparently not including the area this plane was flying over.

Who the hell said no simulation of water will quench thirst?

Well, I can't speak for Dr. Chun, but I have known for at least 25 years that computer systems are merely a modeling of humans, albeit subconsciously so. Networking is merely a model of the psychic connection that one can attune to with enough meditation. Claiming that it is a poor assumption that the mind works like a computer has it bass ackwards. Computers function like the human mind, for that is from whence they come. Also, I should point out it is called Artificial Intelligence, not Actual Intelligence.