It would be nice if they had some sort of code review in place for this sort of stuff. However, this isn't a paid project, so the developers writing this are doing arguably the best they can.
So much this.
The statement was very carefully worded "'It's clear that Brendan cannot lead Mozilla in this setting." The thing is, CEOs can have their career end in a heartbeat. Bad quarter? Stupid mistake? Bam! No more jobs. They are trusted to execute; no more, no less. This compromised that. He very likely wanted to leave, not because he was coerced by any action or inaction of the company--just because staying would effectively end his career (i.e. he could win the battle but lose the war, as it were).
There are two issues here--staying at Mozilla and getting hired somewhere else. The latter would have only gotten worse the longer he stayed. The former, well, his job just got infinitely harder no matter how you slice it. The sooner he got out the spotlight, the better off he is (and Mozilla is).
Is it fair to him? No. However, fair is not in the CEOs vocabulary. It's very likely this was his decision so he could go on to salvage what he could of the rest of his life.
Interestingly, the article says that, at the request of law enforcement, they added CAPTCHA support. The article then goes on to say that this must be a deception because they used a plural, it "doesn't make sense", etc.
Actually, it makes a lot of sense. How is every IED detonated these days? Cell phone. Buy a cheap, anonymous phone, wire it up, and call it to detonate it. Wifi that wasn't resistant to automated signup would make this trivial. They could just sign up with an anonymous phone and pre-paid Visa. Then, when it's in the air, *BOOM*
It also makes a lot of sense that they don't want to talk about it. Don't want to give people ideas.
Link to Original Source
If your email's already been registered somewhere, try the "forgot your password?" link? It'll send the new password out to, duh, your email.
Likewise, you can stick on a +whatever on the end of your userID to make it into a "different" email address (and this will also help you know which websites are leaking your email.
Personally I wish we'd just man up and shoot the appropriate organisms into Venus' atmosphere to start the terraforming process.
Because breathable Earth-normal atmosphere is a lifting gas on Venus, we could make a relatively low budget colony without any terraforming. Just send a big balloon. It could ride the relatively stable upper atmospheric winds on Venus, circling the planet every 4 earth days, and be at standard pressure, so any hull breach would not result in explosive decompression.
The Internet Archive says that it subscribes to the The Oakland Archive Policy which for |requests by governments" says:
Archivists will exercise best-efforts compliance with applicable court orders Beyond that, as noted in the Library Bill of Rights, 'Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment.'
Seems like this may just have slipped past them. Let's make sure they know they need to sort it out... Surely they only removed it from the Wayback Machine, not from the archive itself.
That's actually a really good point. I wonder if there's any justification in the Policy for retroactively removing content based on current robots.txt
Not much of an archive if they delete the past because someone says it should be deleted. Even Wikipedia allows you to go back and see all changes to an article.
except for page deletion. In that case, only certain people can view the history.
Enders Game could be the best movie ever, Orson Scott Card is not getting a dime of my money.
That's true whether or not you watch the film, due to the nature of his option-only (no royalties) contract.
I chose Fly Through Space, since that option would also cover Fly.
Well, chucking a car through an airlock would make it "fly through space" but it wouldn't necessarily make it a "flying car" even should it renter Earth's or some other planet's atmosphere.
More like a rapidly disintegrating burning lump of metal.
Everything is air-droppable at least once --Schlock Mercenary
Most programming confusion I've had to combat in the workplace comes from a fundamental misunderstanding of the two most basic facts of your program:
1. Where is your program's state stored? (NOTE: 90% of the time it's "the call stack" and 90% of the time that's the wrong place to put it.)
2. Where in your code is execution happening?
Threaded program generating weirdness? It's probably because you can't answer those two questions. Distributed program a mess to debug? I bet your state is smeared all over the place. Is your code a pain to port to an evented architecture? Bet you modeled your state badly. Can't map some failure to a certain, detectable set of circumstances? I guarantee your answer starts there.
For me, the answer to understanding these problems was found in functional programming. The no-side-effects stuff causes you to make all of your state concrete and also deeply understand what the call-stack does for you (or, more often than not, *to* you). The cruel reality, though, is that applying this hard-won knowledge *doesn't* seem lie in functional programming (or, at least, not LISP, Schema, Haskell, and crew).
If you're an academic, start with Hoare's Communicating Sequential Processes (http://www.usingcsp.com/cspbook.pdf), then learn Erlang (or Go, with a heavy emphasis on GoRoutines). If you're less Ivory Tower, try to grok this blog entry (http://blog.incubaid.com/2012/03/28/the-game-of-distributed-systems-programming-which-level-are-you/), then learn Erlang (or Go, with a heavy emphasis on GoRoutines).
I was under the impression that there was a fairly simple amniotic fluid test which reveals gender. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that even if you have to resort to a genetic sample it still doesn't require DNA analysis, just a much simpler check for the existence of a Y chromosome - something that was discovered long before we even had the capacity to read the DNA itself.
However, for most cases, ultrasound is much preferred to drawing amniotic fluid (amniocentesis) due to the risk of introducing infection.