How do you think they got there?
If you perform a conversion in a statically typed language and it's wrong, you know the second you try and execute, but in a dynamically typed language you may not know there's a problem until you hit some edge case input, which is more likely to get out into production due to the subtle nature of it.
Dynamic typing doesn't mean those languages are typeless. Type errors like trying to add a string to a number still get caught at runtime. Unlike static languages, where a wrong cast can make the code compile and the program will never complain afterwards, leaving you wondering where those segfaults are coming from.
Do you have any examples of the classes of problem you believe dynamic typing avoids but static typing doesn't? You make the assertion that if you unit and integration test a dynamically typed language you capture more mistakes than you would with a statically typed language. I don't think that's ever the case, because static type makes capture of certain errors explicit in the implementation, the faults are unavoidable when you attempt execution, whilst dynamic typing relies on you stumbling across the error during execution, which means to capture it with unit tests means it's only as good as your unit tests which will rarely be as good as explicit and inherent capture of errors.
Static error checking is a shallow way to test your code, and will only catch simple syntactic errors, that usually don't even occur in a dynamic language with a less complicated syntax. Regardless of the language you're using, testing should be done at runtime. And dynamic languages with their flexibilty and high reflectivity make unit testing much easier and much more powerful.
Free speech only applies to government censorship. It doesn't mean you can say whatever you want on someone else's site.
The people who are interested in STEM and the people who like crowds have no intersection.
If chimps are found a use in science, that would do more for their survival than any preservation program. This regulation shouldn't cover chimps bred in captivity.
I have the same opinion about male hosts. I don't hate women, only women without morals.
The folks on the other end watching will be Indians working for a few dollars a day.
So why don't they show off their games instead of some whores?
They plan to sail the high-altitude winds to maintain a constant direction and velocity, forming a circle around the globe. Yes, it's quite a big project, but not physically impossible.
That's not a digital equivalent either.
After the flawed warfare analogy of the military, we now have a flawed cowboy analogy. How can these people be that shortsighted, everyone knows that the internet is like cars.
That 200 years is a conservative estimate. Advanced breeder and thorium reactors can push that figure up to the thousands, which is more than enough time to crack fusion.
It's a cylinder with sharp corners.