That kind of depends on the stylesheets, pre-compiler style enforcement routines, and the fact that a shit-ton of corporate code is often improved incrementally by multiple authors.

'course, there's still the comments that you could use, but who does that?

That's what "git blame" is for...

/me ducks and runs like hell...

Naive is a version of untrustworthy. Ask your Nigerian Banker.

So what you're saying is that there is old hardware that will only work if you make your system insecure. OK.

FWIW, I don't consider any system that allows remote sessions to be secure. Period. So you need to isolate such systems. (This isn't an argument that you shouldn't run such systems. Just that you should take precautions.)

As an aside, I think that allowing compressed files to be expanded with the execute bit set is also a security hazard...just one that's probably worth the cost. In most circumstances. (And hazard isn't the same as hole. Not quite.)

You are making the assumption that they didn't intend this result. Or at least that they weren't aware that this would be the result. I find that quite dubious. As you say, it was obvious by inspection

OTOH, what would have been the result of disbanding the Iraqi army? You've created a bunch of people trained in violence suddenly out of work. I'm not convinced that it would have resulted in a better situation, though clearly it would be a different situation. And long term occupation would also have tremendous probabilities for disaster.

The real mistake was deciding to invade. After that I don't think there was a decent exit strategy...not if you are counting human cost. But this *must* have been obvious ahead of time, so clearly that wasn't their consideration. Who benefited? Who expected to benefit? How? It strikes me as a clearly political decision with only political gains.

True, there also needs to be a maximum length of any given law which includes in the length all other laws cited by reference.

I also think there needs to be a reasonable test for intelligibility. It's not right that everyone should understand every law, that's an impossibily high bar, but an average high school senior should. And at minimum should be able to. I can't think of a simple way of phrasing that test though that isn't of the form "Take a bunch of average high school seniors and have them write an essay about what the law means, and what it means is the intersection of what they claim it means", and that's also a poor idea, because it would eliminate everything...but I can't think of an objective "average understanding" evaluator.

If they can physically do that, then you have a problem. I hear even Windows comes with IPSEC, maybe you could do something about that.

Sure you can, just use an OTG Y-Cable.

Hmmm... *skims summary* I know, let's talk systemd!

I'm gonna insert my reply to an earlier comment of yours here to save me time and space, and because it's a good preface to my reply to this comment anyway:

No, these dodges should not exist.

Yes, you have this part right.

And now, my reply to this comment:

No, you have this badly wrong. If you make corporations pay their taxes, then the costs are passed down to the consumers of their products. But if you don't, then the costs are passed down to every citizen.

I think you have to give basically all of the credit to the people who do the interfaces. That's the only place where Apple ever seems to have a clear advantage, the very early G5 era aside.

Agreed - parts of downtown Portland were a huge clusterfsck for months after the first protests.

It started with somewhat of a goal - a protest against "the rich", and against a laundry list of financial predations against the masses. Then, it quickly devolved into one massive slack-fest/camp-out, with the last holdouts finally leaving months later.

No kidding... none of the mainline Linux distros use X11 anymore (that I know of), and they don't mention XOrg (X11's descendant) in TFA anywhere.

Two things:

First, that's a helluva wireless plan you've got if it costs you $200 per month per person.

Second, none of the US carriers (other than T-Mobile) will cut your rate if you bring your own phone. So in that regard, the phone really does cost you $200. Honestly, the way it's structured, you're a fool to bring your own phone since you're paying a subsidy regardless.

I was in particular referring to John Taylor Gatto, and I forget the lady who was the original secretary for the original department who wrote a great book on the corruption and nature of the original program. That people believe it accidental that all of these extreme liberals have been running the department since it's advent is remarkable in my opinion.