RedHat has options for you. There is Software Collections that package multiple versions of python and ruby. The versions can be pivoted at will. Then there is Docker in RHEL7 which allows shipping of containers as apps. Not to mention Fedora is heavily supported by RedHat and offers very recent packaging of almost everything.

How is that possible? Practical TV broadcasts didn't begin until years after the January 1, 1923, cutoff for the Copyright Term Extension Act. And U.S. copyright law allows state copyright in sound recordings to continue until 2067.

Nothing plays VP8 codec in MP4 container either.

A lot of geographic areas don't have a second provider other than satellite and cellular. In most cases,* switching from a provider with a 150 GB per month cap to a provider with a 10 GB per month cap (source: exede.com) isn't a good idea. Nor is moving to a different town.

* Watch someone come up with an edge case.

Mafia owned companies are some of the best run and most customer friendly. They are in it for the long haul, not to just make a quick buck.

Any place served by American Water.

Randian Paradise Haw Haw.

That's complete horseshit (along with this article). It's like saying math is a subset of CS because nearly all maths will be calculated by CS.

Stats is orthogonal to CS. You don't need one to do the other.

Having both though can give you a skill set that's quite useful.

PPA's are similar to adding a -release package to Fedora/RedHat/CentOS. So for example, I was to add EPEL to my repos. I just click on the epel-release rpm and it installs it. I'm not so hip on the Software Center. I like to stick to core debian tools when using a .deb-base system.

Unfriendly package manager? I thought this argument is over. Yum (moving to dnf) operates in a similar way to apt-get.

We are an agile shop. We have pair programming, continuous integration, and continuous delivery to AWS. The pipeline runs RedHat. We have also have some CentOS.

Fedora is not a bone, it is a great way to know what is coming in RHEL. CentOS (which RedHat supports) is a great server distro for everyone.

CentOS is great! They have done a great service to the Linux world. Even more awesome is that RedHat now supports the project!

The tension is stability versus the latest tech. RedHat purposely moves very, very slowly. The same can be said about Debian stable. As an admin I like slow moving targets. The problem is that developers want to use the latest stuff. So what does RedHat do about this? I think they are trying to solve it in two ways. First is their Software Collections. These are packages that site outside the base OS and are easy to pivot to the newer version. This allows for multiple versions of things like Python to be installed in parallel. Very handy!

Another thing that is helping quite a bit is Docker. RedHat is big on Docker. By packaging containers as apps, this allows a developer to easily control the dependencies outside of the OS that the app is running on. This makes everyone happy! Fedora is tracking some interesting tooling with Docker (geard, os-tree).

I like that RedHat tries to solve bigger problems than just packing and releasing a distro. They are trying to make things manageable (see FreeIPA, OpenLMI, RDO, CloudForms, oVirt)

Personally, I like RedHat. I like Debian. I run Fedora on my desktop and notebook. I maintain a CI/CD pipeline on RedHat at work. I never jumped on the Ubuntu bandwagon. It seems to me that Ubuntu has made quite a few more mis-steps in their short existence than RedHat has over the years. I get the feeling that a lot of people are just dropping back to Debian, which is just fine with me!

Social engineering - not the same thing as hacking the bricking/remote wipe protocol.

Your original post didn't restrict itself to protocol attacks, even tangentially. There are no "extra points" for using one method over another.

At any rate, the law permits the user to opt-out of the technological solution, so that's the protection, not the fact that the protocol is secure (which is unknowable/unprovable). If someone is uncomfortable with it, they can disable it. Although disabling a disabling feature might be a double negative.

Privately recorded videos fall under the conditions of the ticket granting admission to said insignificant local games. If said conditions include an assignment of copyright in any privately recorded video to the league, it could produce the situation you describe. But such conditions would not apply to, say, recording your kids playing soccer at a public park because nobody owns the exclusive rights to the sport of soccer itself. A video game publisher's copyright is different because it affects your ability to broadcast game play even if you start your own league or even if the match is not associated with a league at all.

I don't know about Canada, but here in the States they have the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine that evidence from a constitutionally impermissible chain of investigation is inadmissible in court.