I wouldn't be surprised if little or nothing is declassified in the future. Given the never ending "war on terror" they can come up with excuses to redact just about everything.

I just priced it out last week for enterprise level at $10k. It's absurd to pay per processor when you get the same exact features, functionality, and support.

Microsoft currently charges about $10,000 per processor for SQL Server. They've had this pricing model for over a decade and still companies shell out the cash. Always amazes me.

What language doesn't? Blaming PHP for poorly written code is like blaming a car for having a bad driver.

I only block ads because the majority are intrusive and many sites are over saturated. If ads were all friendly I wouldn't block any of them. I think many (most?) people probably feel the same way.

I have to disagree with the Cake recommendation. I've tried many frameworks and watched presentations from some of their creators. Using Cake you'll often end up writing just as much code as if you didn't use a framework at all, which defeats one of the reasons for using a framework in the first place.

At my company we use a custom PHP framework. But if your backend is Python anyway, I recommend Django. It's especially good if your front-end is just a CMS. Even if it's much more than that, Django leaves you open to do as much custom code on top of it as necessary without getting in your way.

I can't find any examples online at the moment. They were basically political caricatures that people at the time would consider extremely offensive. Of course, to say they'd be the equivalent of "terrorism" today is very subjective, but I think if they had YouTube back then they would have been taken down :)

Ben Franklin himself spread propaganda in London that today we'd consider terrorism. You'll need to read up on attacks aimed at citizens, particularly loyalists, to understand more of what I'm talking about.

Well of course not. The definition of terrorism is to instill fear in the general population. Bombing a British military supply depot would not be terrorism. But bombing public docks and scaring loyalists was most certainly meant to intimidate the public.

Agreed. Unfortunately there are no consequences for contradicting their sworn oath. At best they could be impeached by an ethics committee, but their coworkers wouldn't do that. They could be voted out of office but citizens are more concerned about the immediate threats to their pocket books and security. Plus anyone moral and intelligent enough to run against them doesn't want to deal with the BS.

Not true. Subversives did things like blow up shipping docks to intimidate British merchants and military. Bombings and such were relatively rare because they were so hard to successfully carry out at the time, but they certainly did happen. Americans also spread propaganda in London and other cities to try to change public opinion (while I don't consider this terrorism, it falls under what we label as "terrorism" today).

He read and understood it. He's not an idiot, he just doesn't give a shit.

American revolutionaries are considered heroes today. But they were looked at as terrorists by the British at the time. It's a shame our representatives today have little knowledge or understanding of history.

My vote would be Gates was more ruthless. He absorbed and/or destroyed more small businesses than I could count. He lied in federal court. He used a monopoly to negatively manipulate markets. He would lose billions of dollars on a product just to undercut competition.

By contrast Jobs was an asshole and difficult to work with. This is an easy vote for me.

This might be the most ignorant comment I've read on the internet this week. It's wrong in so many ways I don't even know where to begin.