Him/her not being able to win the primaries. I have just realised that I do not even know if this candidate is male or female or at any other point of the spectrum, that is all Google's fault, naturally.

While I agree on the general principle that "we have a right to privacy", "private communications"... etc. unfortunately in the very long run since the industrial revolution governments over the world are doing their best to gain codified support of law to spy on their citizenry. I guess it was Zimmermann who wrote something like "during the times US constitution was written all you have to do was to walk down away from your home to avoid your talk to be overheard by somebody you do not like to hear it...". As the technology is advancing, so is the ability of governments to track us.

I am a computer professional (a rare thing in /. these days). So my ability to keep my private communications private is not something that can be taken as a reference to general public. As such I prefer general public to be aware of risks and stay away from illusion of privacy in general products. They should spend some money, time and give some thought to their own privacy instead of assuming they are safe by default, because they are not and never will be in an effort free way.

It can be "yes" as long as device producers not actively try to undermine any 3rd party security software that "I" chose to install.

Maybe I want "to think" about what my program does, its effects on storage, memory and CPU, and run optimally.

:) I had a programmer in one of my teams like that. The incident I saw him most happy was when he realised that with Django it is possible to declare a specific field of a record (that was a variable in a model for him...) as an index in the db without meddling with Postgres. Yea, I unfortunately see your point ...

Does he need to state it as so, being the principal designer?

I hate to repeat this over and over, but full-stack is not a title but a vibrator they use as a backbone support. I cannot understand why a programmer masturbates over the fact that s/he can code "the whole program"...

You do not know what the fuck you are talking about.

Although I share the feeling about Stroustrup the problem with him is not OOP but a bad implementation of OOP concepts.

I do not like to claim "I know C", since the time I have started to learn language, around 1987. But let's say I am familiar with certain applications of the language. C++ however is an abomination that made me hate OOP concepts. Java was far away from the metal for most of my use cases, so only after discovering Python, I could get comfortable with OOP.

TFA OTOH is complete and utter BS.

While I feel obliged to help Google or Facebook engineers' SexEd, I fail to see news value of this subject. Haven't you heard that Internet is a thick, long and pulsing pipe of porn?

We used to have people around here who read Apollo Assembly listings in their free time.... Now this bullshit.

I wish I did that too. This was by far one of the worst commentaries on information security...

Hell, I do not want to rant but I remember another anecdote. Last year I changed my GSM operator, because my old operator changed my plan with a lower cost higher capacity one. Nice isn't it, at the and I was their customer for 20+ years... But that made me to check prices on the market and I switched to a package, in their main competitor with one quarter of the monthly fee of my old operator. Even my business partner, switched five lines they use in their family, after seeing price I get.

Nope I haven't forget the fact that ads also generate revenue. There are two problems.
I do not want to get into long lecture type ranting, but in short, online ads are not reliable revenue streams, you need click records or some percent of the length of ad to be watched by user without backing out, thus they tend to oscillate and different than subscriber fees which is paid regularly as long as subscriber does not get irritated enough to cancel service (and ads are the greatest irritator), this is one.
And the other is with subscription type services, which by their nature very routine, your customer become accustomed to see you name on the credit card bill and do not question the amount etc.the most dangerous thing to do is to change the service, even if it is reducing cost or adding some "free gift" to the package.
For example an ISP I used to work, which was also providing a free e-mail service to customers, once added an alias domain to our primary domain, thus (marketing dreamed) they would add a new value to the service at no cost to company and at no cost to customers, for advertisement... I might be wrong, but I seem to remember we lost more than 10% users to a competitor, and leaving customers kept their "free" mail addresses, all because customers had problems while configuring alias domain to their mail clients. So we and up with serving customers, while they are paying to our competitor. It is dangerous to shake regular subscription services.

Researchers performing survey were also naive. regardless of percentage, ads would cost some subscribers to netflix and they would need to rise prices in order to compensate for the lost users, not the other way around.
I am just a (ex-)user and have never sold streaming services in a professional capacity so my observation based on my experience as a user and PPV seller to hotels, and in short netflix seems to be doomed. Content providers are entering streaming market, netflix's library (both their own productions and licensed products) is loosing attraction, and they are becoming more costly for users, either by price hikes or because of ads. I wonder what yours and other people's experience, but I had dropped my subscription some months ago, because I could not find anything to watch in their library. And yes; Their UI is terrible and was getting worst by the day. For example despite claims of being operable on all platforms, some programs was not playing on Safari, some had problems on Apple TV etc. :( Pity...