Use a macro to do the "Is this authorized?" check. Then use that macro all over the place. Use it in main loops. Use it in obscure parts that are seldom executed. Make it so hundreds of spots need to be patched for a crack to be really successfully.

With the dongles, at least with the ones I used, you could do both positive and negative checks. You needed to go through a sequence of steps to get the dongle to respond in the affirmative. Asking for status prior to that did not interfere with anything. So you do some of the sequence, check for a negative, do some more, check for another negative, etc., eventually performing the final sequence and checking for a positive. Then you reset and start over again.

The idea is not to use it as a boundary check but as something you're continually hitting with commands and checking the responses.

I have two thoughts on this. First, do you really want to work for such a place? I know jobs are in short supply right now and any job is better than no job, but I certainly wouldn't want to work anywhere that had an issue with me having a non-conflicting side business.

Second, and more importantly, every place I've ever worked took an exceedingly dim view of people who lied on their application. More than once I've seen good employees disappear in a flash because the employer discovered they'd lied about education or job experience or past brushes with the law. Lying about your outside work will be grounds for dismissal.

In my admittedly limited experience, the subterfuge you recommend is not necessary. Just be honest about the situation. If your side projects are in an area that overlaps with your employer's business, then they have a legitimate right to refuse. If there's no overlap, then there's no legitimate reason for them to not make an accommodation.

I had a side business doing software for material handling. When a prospective employer showed me their IP/non-compete agreement we had a discussion about the situation. They had the lawyers modify the agreement to accommodate what I was doing. The result was we both understood each other's position and knew ahead of time exactly where the lines were drawn. In the end it turned out there was some conceptual overlap between the two endeavors, but this turned out to be to my employer's benefit as things I'd learned in my side business were directly applicable to my primary job. There was no conflict with customers because we were addressing completely different industries.

Dishonesty is not a good foundation for any kind of new relationship, but especially not for one with an employer.

Good point, though the scenario you suggest is already happening. We simply don't (yet) pay tax on unrealized gains due to inflation. Realized gains due entirely to inflation still get taxed even though you have zero real gain.

This is a slippery slope the government would be well-advised to avoid. The only way to make this "fair" is for reduction in wealth to be given tax credits. Stock goes up, you pay taxes on the increase. Stock goes down, you get a refund on the reduction in value.

How do you think this would have played out when the market went into free fall a few years ago?

Last I looked there were 100 Senators, with the Vice President presiding over the body and able to vote in case of a tie.

I've been writing QNX applications for over a decade. Not one of them contained a single line of assembly.

The OS is written primarily in C. There may be a few snippets of assembly here and there in the platform-specific sections. I've not exhaustively examined the source. The parts I've seen were written in C.

QNX is currently using gcc as the provided compiler, so C and C++ are readily available. Development is primarily done under Windows or Linux, cross-compiling to run on QNX. You can develop under QNX as well, but they don't have a recent version of Momentics (a QNX-customized Eclipse) that will run natively on QNX, so you're stuck with command line gdb. Under Windows or Linux you can use Momentics/Eclipse.

At 2600 feet, the atmospheric pressure at the top is about 9 kPa less than at the bottom. This difference in air pressure also keeps the air moving upward. This is one of the primary reasons they want the chimney to be so tall. The initial speculative designs called for the chimney to be almost twice as tall as this project.

What wasn't mentioned in the post here is that slightly over 50% of the respondents said they would drop to a streaming-only or DVD-only plan. So, assuming everyone does as they say they will (dubious, I know), that's $2/month less from half their customers and $10/month less from one-third of their customers. That leaves 60% more from only one-sixth of their customers. I think they're going to have some 'splainin' to do come shareholder meeting time.

As for me, inertia has kept me paying for a 3-at-a-time plan for the last five years without using it at all. This price increase got me off my behind and motivated me to finally cancel. Thanks, Netflix.

I would add a couple things to this line of thought. First, the individuals I've worked with take product safety very seriously. Our fathers and sisters and children may well be in line to use the products we develop. This is not an issue that's taken lightly.

Second, the medical device companies I've worked for take FDA oversight VERY seriously. Aside from the moral considerations, the FDA has the power to literally padlock the doors and pull your products from store/hospital shelves. If you don't satisfy the FDA that you're doing a good job, you can be out of business overnight. No business person takes something like that lightly.

Open review of medical device software would be unlikely to increase safety, yet would be guaranteed to greatly increase the cost of developing these devices as people would have to be assigned to investigate code review issues from the public, regardless of whether they were well founded. The number of trash complaints about code formatting, naming conventions, etc. would be overwhelming.

.