The 2002 version of the standard added object features. While not my first choice of languages, it is typically not cheaper nor safer to rewrite large amounts of working tested code. Yes, you might do better with a clean sheet of paper and a decade or so, but most IT organizations don't have that luxury.

My favorite COBOL nerdy feature died many versions of the Standard ago (MOVE CORRESPONDING). It was my favorite not because it was a terrific feature, but it was just so unique to COBOL.

Cloud computing is, as a business model, a return to mainframe timesharing services such as dominated in the original COBOL and PL/I eras. It really is not a stretch to see IBM update their zSeries environment to easily enable leveraging the COBOL code base.

Yes, you can (and more cheaply per IBM MIP) run Linux on your zSeries hardware, so you can mix and match (write new applications, or layers in newer environments) ... but there is no need to toss out dull boring functional code that just happens to be business critical.

No doubt the sufficiently intrepid IT staffer could rewrite all the COBOL in Haskell or Perl .. (or for extra credit in REXX) but would it really be an improvement? Indeed, just validating that the new code is logically equivalent to the original code for ALL input sets would be a huge investment ... never underestimate the cost (or importance) of Test and Validation.

The folks without MDs and who can't prescribe drugs are asserting that those who are, can and do are wrong and they (the nonMDs) should lead.

They might be right but it would seem to be pretty much a non-story.

Psychologists understandably have *always* held such positions. Either because that's what *their* training says or because its their economic advantage to believe so (or fundamental bias ... If they didn't feel that way they'd have trained in the other camp.

Perhaps it is retribution for the previously announced Apple intent to 'in-shore' some manufacturing (on top of the already cited government industry competitor ties).

Right, so Microsoft should embargo France.....wait ... that would be a Bad Thing? Perhaps they should carpet bomb Paris with free Windows 8 DVD's ... that would teach the French government to toy with Microsoft and it's minions....

For another viewpoint on the compatibility of science and religion see Sir Lord Rabbi Jonathan Sacks's http://www.amazon.co.uk/Great-Partnership-Jonathan-Sacks/dp/0340995246

It's quite in line with classic jewish thought (e.g. Maimonides).

http://www.amazon.com/Calendrical-Calculations-Millennium-Edward-Reingold/dp/0521777526 while it doesn't necessarily answer the question posed, people interested in computing calendars shouldn't miss this book.

I have no vested interest, it's not my name on the cover ;>

While it's true that the "sequestration" is across the board, that's by department. Each government department is a huge enterprise. Surely, a little thought from the top (and from each agency) should have been able to find the least impactful things to cut.

Instead, the President (as the CEO) spent the last two weeks running around threatening the most dire results .... instead of meeting with the people (viz. the senate and house membership and leaders) to coax a settlement.

IANAR, but it is painfully clear who bears the greater responsibility for the outcome. Sadly, it appears far more difficult for the press (oh my, isn't Michelle wonderful at the Academy Awards?) to focus on either things that count, or on whose feet need to be held to which fire.

Upon reflection, and not surprisingly, the expert has made a good point.

If due to an Advanced Persistent Threat (APT), your secret data was captured after it was decoded (as it must be to be actively used, or created, or transferred, at some point) or if the private keys are compromised (either due to torture, pressure on appropriate authorities, or captured as created (see above)) the benefit(s) of encryption are greatly reduced (even if the cryptosystem itself is very secure).

It is a bit of a chilling thought, and yes other posters have pointed to various good zones of defense, but Shamir's point is that some existing APTs in the wild have penetrated to the deepest levels.

As for the "air gap" method, as has been pointed out in other places, that's often compromised even for very secure infrastructures by people with laptops, cellphones, or compromised printers that are moved from one side of the "air gap" to the other....

It should come as no surprise to anyone that cold decreases range (it's true for most battery technologies, moreso for some than others). The obvious thing to do is to keep the car charging overnight (admittedly not always practical on a roadtrip, but for a daily commuter it's easier than heading to the gas station. I do go home nearly every night ;>).

I expect little of the NYT, so short of some lawsuit requiring them to make a retraction, I doubt there will be any significant retraction or adverse effect on the career of the "journalist".

As for driving in circles, hard to prove intent. Following {googlemaps, apple maps AND telenav} I managed to miss the fueling station at Disneyworld in the dark (none said turn right ... I guess "straight" and "right" are relative on a complex enough interchange).

The logs do prove that the journalist was a stupid driver who can't follow instructions. Unclear to me how to use them to prove intent.

Sadly, many drivers are stupid and incompetent, something to bear in mind whenever driving or designing anything for the mass market ;>