So the original developer writes crap code (whether as a result of burn-out and exhaustion, or just that is the level of talent they have), and the fault for that code almost making it into the kernel is a lack of review, without any responsibility on the coder?
And then, once the issue has been identified and the process criticised, the people who gave that person the ability to post such crap code are more focussed on being upset about the criticism than they are about addressing the code and quality issues or the lack of a review process?

Is this just crap management, or a sign of what can happen to a high-profile complex open source project when the system owner does not publicly chew out the people around them when they either screw up themselves or when they allow others to screw up?
tl;dr: Would this have happened if someone with authority took the Linus Torvalds approach, publicly shaming the teams responsible, ruffling a few feathers and bruising egos in the process?

Except that the US does not own those doses.
The US may have paid AstraZeneca for x million doses (or more likely, promised payment at some point in the future, as that is how pharma contracts work, but the details will be in the contact, not in the realm of public assumption) for delivery once US regulatory approval has been obtained, but they have not paid for those specific doses.
The US may even have included wording in the contract of sale that they get priority/first refusal on doses produced in US/based factories, and that is probably the point of contention here - AZ will be saying that the US gets priority on the drug batches that roll off the production line from the day regulatory approval is given, while the US Government will be arguing that they get priority/first refusal on all batches up to the contracted number of doses produced in the factory.
Effectively, the US Government position is "this is ours, until or unless we decide we do not need/want it". I can see both perspectives, but if it goes to a court to decide whose interpretation of the contract is correct, it will go to a US court meaning the US Government has home field advantage.
Given that AZ has problems with the contracts signed in Europe as well, it looks as though AZ's legal department is going to have a few vacancies in the next few months, as the contracts they write for their customers to sign are open to broad interpretation.

Outside of the major towns and cities, you can drive for an entire day and all you will see are trees, sky and the occasional herd of Elk. To some people in Sweden, "popping down to the shop" entails a 300 mile round trip, and your nearest neighbour might be an hour away, during which time you might drive past a couple of other properties that are only occupied during the summer.
In fact, it is not that unusual to have to take a coolbox and an icebox plugged into your car's battery with you when you go shopping, because the milk/butter/frozen food might not make the journey home.

To be hoonest, I would not piss on Apple or their leadership if they were on fire. However, in this case Tim Cook has a point, and as much as I dislike Apple and their approach to products and customers I am just as antipathetic toward Facebook and the slimy turd running that shit show.
Sure, there are other newer/smaller social media companies who seem to be trying to be so bad they make Facebook look good, but still none of them make me feel unclean and in desperate need of a shower the way I do whenever I see, basically, anything that Zuck has had a hand in.

The three issues that exacerbate the health situation in my clients (mostly in the US, but also some in other parts of the world) are:
1. The people are lazy. They do not want to make any changes to their lifestyle or the way they live. They want a pill to make their symptoms go away so that they do not have to stop with their current rhythm.
2. Pharmaceutical companies have discovered that there is more money to be made from managing the symptoms of people's conditions (meaning you have to take their medications for life or at least an extended period of time), than in solving the underlying issue (they might still get you on the hook for a short course of medication). They would rather make a $1 per pill profit on a pill you need to take 2-3 times a day for the rest of your life than a $100 profit on a pill you need to take 2-3 times a day for a month. Blame the Harvard MBAs for this one...
3. As several people have already pointed out, Special Interest/Lobbyist/Marketing groups pushing the agenda for their specific niche of clients make sure that the message their product is good/healthy/will not kill you at the expense of others or a dissenting scientific opinion. The most obvious one was the tobacco lobby, much more money has been put into controlling the message around different foods than people realize. The science to counter those arguments is out there, but often buried under a pile of studies from bought-and-paid-for scientists happy to put their names to conclusions that benefit nobody but the organisation that paid for the study.

Google's UI/UX design has been plain bad for years, particularly for Gmail and Google Docs, with the excuse that "what do you expect for free stuff?" being used to justify it.
But when Google made the paid GSuite versions available, with exactly the same UI/UX schema, and added apps alongside Docs to make it a more fully featured Office package, it stepped into the arena alongside Microsoft Office (and more recently Office 365), plus a bunch of other productivity and workflow apps that have competing features.
A lot of my clients, who previously had migrated from Microsoft to Google because they wanted to get away from a proprietary and closed product (granted, some of them probably also jumped purely to save money) found that Google might have designed something that in functionally equivalent to what they were using before, but that the UI/UX features caused quite the hit to productivity as users fought against the system. As a result, many elected to migrate back to Microsoft Office 365 or on to a range of other options, even in situations where that ended up costing them quite a bit extra in licence fees.
A lot of Google's older products (Classic Sites, I am looking at you especially) were developed as private coding learning examples or proof-of-concept ideas and did not need decent UIs to begin with, but somehow failed to get those better UIs when Google product managers looked at the solutions and decided to open them to customers. But as the competition made stuff look nice, usable and efficient, Google seems to have been left behind. Maybe Apple need to buy them...

Are they saying that the M1-powered Apple outperforms 98% of the laptop MODELS sold over that period, or are they saying that it outperforms 98% of the laptops sold...
There is a slogan here in Sweden (the home of Volvo, where most families own at leasr 1 Volvo), that the most popular car by sales every year is Ahlgrens Bilar (Ahlgrens Cars) - small sweets/soft candies (similar to gummy bears) in the shape of cars. You get about 150 of them in a bag, and of course there are a lot of bags of Ahlgrens Bilar sold in Sweden every year. So they sell probably 100's of times more of those than Volvo could ever hope to. But if you are talking actual cars for driving on the roads, Volvo are by far the most popular here.
With the example of Ahlgrens Bilar in mind, what are Apple counting here.. have they found a study that defines IOT devices and Raspberry Pi's as "laptops", and saying that because they are sold in the millions while laptops ship 10's of thousands, and because the M1 is more powerful than the CPUs in IOT/Pi's, that they are more powerful that 98% ?

I have a (perhaps paranoid) distrust of everything Oracle, ever since the late 90's and early noughties, when I worked as a pre-sales technician for an Oracle reseller, and saw the clusterfuck that their direct sales team made of just about every customer's licence pool - basically, padding requirements and over-selling licences that were either completely not needed or financially inappropriate for the client, but which increased the profit margin for the sales team.
Their ERP solutions were also a nightmare, but not much more so than Siebel, SAP and others. But again, the goal seemed to be to screw every last cent out of the client, regardless of modules' relevance to the client project.
The shenanigans with, well, everything opern source or potentially open source has also soured me on Oracle. Oh, and their databases are crap for just about every implementation I have ever built...
So I would rather trust a politician during election season than an Oracle product. Having said that, while none of the btrfs-specific features are on my "filesystems absolutely must have this" list, quite a few of them are very nice to have. But I do feel as though my btrfs partitions are the most vulnerable. It feels like one of those ridiculously powerful ethanol-fuelled funny car drag racers (just without the blazingly fast acceleration and speed) - something that not many people use, not something you should use for your "daily driver" car, and liable to explode in a ball of flame* at any moment, but still exciting to play with and possibly a once-in-a-lifetime experience (because if it does blow up, your best chance of survival might be reincarnation).
* Granted, ethanol fires do not look that spectacular, but if you are in one it is as warm as, or warmer than, an ordinary gasoline fire, but people wonder why you are rolling around on the floor as if you are on fire...

When a DMCA violation is posted, the reporting party has to provide a URL to the allegedly infringing material and, as far as I know, a timestamp to locate the specific spot in a file.
If Twitch are saying they cannot assist the poster in identifying the allegedly infringing material, when the report includes that information, then the only possible reasons that I can see are that Twitch are lazy/incompetent, or that they don't have enough staff or bots on hand to manage DMCA claims in the "timely" fashion mandated by the DMCA.
But given that this is an Amazon company, things like this that do not generate revenue typically get staffed by an intern, a hamster or a gerbil, and the remains of last week's pizza.

When I first came to Stockholm years ago, I was told that the 3 topics you could not have a civil discussion about in the office were politics, religion, and either money or which of the 3 local football teams you support (the discussion of whether it was money or football that could not be discussed was itself a lively argument, but when I suggested that makes it 4 things you could not discuss, I got "the look" that said I was being ridiculous).
Coming from a somewhat more private country (UK), the exclusion of sex was a bit surprising to me and when I mentioned this, I got "the look" again and was asked why on earth there should be a problem discussing sex (or as my new colleagues put it, "who did what with whom, where and for how long, last night").

Now, it seems as though there are more topics you cannot discuss than there are ones you can do, and we are apparently still much more open to discussions than American offices, according to the ex-pats who I work with, who find the openness about things to be quite an eye-opener.
But I have worked with Republicans who had a problem with Democrats, and Democrats that had a problem with Republicans, and people of both stripes who had a problem with people who would not say which way they leaned or indicated they had no interest in politics.

Actually there are quite a few laws like this around Europe, although a lot of them are more focused on ensuring that if a product is marketed as being a genuine or traditional product, it retains the original recipe or is made in the traditional geographical area. One example would be champagne - only sparkling white wine produced in the Champagne region can be labelled as champagne. Sparkling white wines produced in other regions can use other names, but they cannot be labelled as champagne.
The most similar case to this "Irish bread" issue is that Sweden had a case quite a while ago where their "Falukorv" sausages, a very traditional sausage in the mining area around the city of Falun, were reclassified as a "cereal" because the percentage of meat in the recipe had declined so far, and been replaced with grains and breadcrumbs, that it no longer met the definition of what passed for a sausage under law. That meant higher taxes unless the manufacturers adjusted their recipe.

In my experience when coding, what you need lon a team is a couple of people who will sit back, tap on the keyboard, and at some point throw out fantastic, readable and well-documented code, plus 1 or 2 people who can dive in when the sh!t hits the fan to bash out a proof of concept for that surprise board meeting in 30 minutes or who can hack together a temporary workaround for a critical issue that has just taken down your entire environmen (that code can then be refactored later into a more maintainable form, when everyones' stress level goes down from 110%).
If you have someone that seems to be a brilliant coder interviewing, but who freezes during that whiteboard problem solving session, you know they may not be the bet for that hacker position, but they may be the one you want writing the code that gets commited as your stable release.
Besides, everyone has an off day and a potential brainfart at the wrong moment, and it often happens when you put a coder in a meeting room with several people, in front of a whiteboard and with a marker in hand. If they were so comfortable in that type of situation that they can skate on through, you might want them for a sales/pre-sales technical consulting role instead, who then preps a mockup and framework code.

So, the startups who do not really need the money are being lambasted for taking the money that the government and the Payment Protection Program rules say they are entitled to, instead of being magnanimous and thinking "well, we are entitled to the money according to the rules, but other companies who are also entitled would need it more, so we will not take it".
Sounds to me like the company did what they should (take any and all resources they are told they have a right to), and that the problem is with the poorly thought-out parameters used in the Payment Protection Program that define what criteria are required for a company to be allowed a disbursement from the program.

#tl;dr, blame the government for writing crap rules, not the companies taking advantage of the wording of the rules.

I am not going to go into the incompetent crap that comes out of some online course providers - that is its own can of crap that we do not need stinking the house with at the moment.

The existing course/education providers that governments generally have a handle on are the bricks-and-mortar colleges and universities. However, these are not necessarily the best online course providers. Granted, for a complete multi-year college or degree-level education they make a lot more sense than just buying a Pluralsight, StackSkills or LinkedIn Learning subscription and telling the student to go study. But at this point, would the goal really be to pay for a multi-year full time course? Or is the better option a wider, blended, multi-disciplinary training program that delivers a broad range of competency in many areas useful for modern business?
Oh who am I kidding... the goal here is to make it look like politicians in gubbmint have a clue and a plan for taking us forward. We're screwed!

One major drawback of classroom courses is that schedules have to be synchronised - the students have to be where the teacher is, when the teacher is there. Plus in order to support the economic cost of the building the classroom is in, teacher salary and support costs, etc., there is a significant cost to the educational institution that needs to be recovered in the form of tuition fees, and a lot of those classroom courses are only delivered during the day. So the students cannot work during the day, meaning that the cost of education needs to be carried by other parties - parents, large loans or government.

Online courses do away with the need for a dedicated classroom and building. The teacher can work from a home office and record their material at their convenience. Students watch/listen and review at their convenience, thus decoupling the two and removing the need for time and location synchronisation. The only point where synchronisation is needed is for Q & A sessions (Facebook groups or similar, a Discord channel, etc), and the teacher then becomes more of a personal tutor to a college/university student.
All of this points to lower cost, and an ability for the student to fit studying in around a job. Granted, getting a job and doing said job during the coronavirus outbreak is not viable so perhaps some short-term help would be appropriate.
But a mechanism for that already exists within most college/university structures - student loans. Giving the students loans tied to online course participation and completion would be much easier to implement than for the government to reach out to online course providers and negotiate reductions for the specific students in that government's country, and removes the need for the provider to get complex and track which students get which prices based on which government program and discount they qualify for. Much simpler... or am I missing something?

"If the issue occurs, the driver will notice because their car has suddenly stopped" ...the first time they notice the problem is when the car has stopped already?
In every car I have driven, stopping is preceded by decelleration, which takes a finite amount of time. If the driver is so zoned out that they don't notice themselves suddenly pressed into their seatbelt and the strain on their neck as they avoid (hopefully) faceplanting into the steering wheel, then I would recommend that the car navigates to the side of the road, comes to a stop, and activates the driver-side ejector seat.