If you have to follow a style guide to get compiling code, your language is broken. If you have to know of the existence of a one off tool to get compiling code, your language is broken. The fact that tool even needs to exist is proof of my point.

It doesn't matter how nicely the website renders it- if it was written with an indent of 3 spaces and you dump it into code with an indent of 4 or tabs, you're going to have problems.

A website is a proper means of code sharing. If your language has issues with it, your language is broken and unusable. There is no excuse for not supporting the most popular method of idea exchange in the last 20 years.

Funny- I've lost weeks of my life tracking down python indentation errors, and I've only used it sporadically. I've used C and C like languages for almost 2 decades and I've lost maybe 2-3 days of my life total on missing }. It almost never happens, and never happens with a good IDE. Whereas spacing issues happen whenever you copy paste from a website.

Guido made 1 major mistake. It actually wasn't using whitespacing- it was in not forcing a specific amount of whitespace. If the language had enforced that every indent must be exactly 4 spaces, it wouldn't be an issue. The fact that 4 spaces or 3 spaces or a tab all work is what causes it to break horribly- to the point where I will no longer ever work on a Python program again. I'll tell my boss to find someone else to do it.

The war for the US started in 1940. Even the Lend Lease Act, which started us boosting our wartime production, was a tiny portion of federal spending. Yet look at the graphs, you see unemployment went DOWN during the 1930s, before the war started.

I know it must give you warm fuzzies to completely make shit up to support your worldview. But the facts don't support you at all.

Proof and sources:

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2009/02/liar-liar-pants-on-fire/317/

http://www.uri.edu/artsci/newecn/Classes/Art/INT1/Mac/1930s/1930sAA.html

http://www.economonitor.com/danalperts2cents/2009/01/23/unhappy-days-are-near-again/

Or just look at https://www.google.com/search?q=unemployment+1930s+graph&client=firefox-a&hs=9cz&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=fflb&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=riwDUqS_CqOdyQHG24DYDw&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1536&bih=694
  where you can see dozens of nice little graphs that show unemployment dropping throughout FDRs term.

Once again- no knowledge of history.

As someone else pointed out, once answered the solution is no longer rare. In addition, its rarity/difficulty to solve only has value if for some reason I want the answer. So it still only has value because both people agree it has value, just like fiat currency.

The middle class would have to pay it for that to happen. I'm a single person who's made over 150K and never had to pay AMT. It doesn't hit the middle class at all.

And you apparently don't know dates or history. FDR became president in 1932, after the Depression started. His presidency saw unemploment decline steadily- until they tried to stop spending and balance the budget. Then it rose again until WWII ended that nonsense. Austerity fails again.

Wilson was president until 1920- 9 years before the collapse. He may have contributed, but not as much as the guys in charge of the next decade did. Hoover only became president in 1929- the year of the collapse. He made things worse by not doing any of the things needed to help, but by that time it was pretty inevitable and we didn't understand economics the way we do now. He gets too much of the blame though.

If you're going to blame the president the real blame goes to Coolidge, who was actually president for the 7 or 8 years prior to the depression (I believe 21-28, but it could have been 22, I forget when Harding died).

And he's right on Reagan if you go by the stock market. The last stock market crash before 2008 was in 1987. We also went into a recession not too long afterwards, although it wasn't as bad as the most recent by a long shot. I don't have numbers offhand to check if it was or wasn't worse than Y2K.

A big no on #2 there. The skills that a good manager needs are different from the skills a good developer needs (although there is some overlap). Management isn't the place to stick the bad devs in- you want to put the moderate devs who have more skills in that side of things than they do in development in those roles, to maximize everyone's abilities.

Believe it or not, validation testing for carriers takes a long time- months. Switch a major piece of the software and you have to restart from scratch. This device probably entered testing before 4.3 was announced.

Just fine. Its so much easier to do their own snooping when they just have to tap the lines going into one location. Not to mention they can seize the servers at will.

Not at all. My point is that the circumstances around the event need to be factored in- just because someone broke a rule doesn't mean they should be punished. It was that assertion that I was objecting to.

Should Rosa Parks have been convicted? In fact the entire concept of jury nullification rests on the idea that sometimes the law isn't right. So is the idea of an affirmative defense- for example self defense to a murder/manslaughter charge. The questions of "is the law/rule just" and "do the circumstances override the law" always need to be answered.

Not at all. Sometimes the ends do justify the means. Sometimes the good you do eclipses the bad. We can argue whether or not it does here, but to blindly state "he broke a rule, he must be punished" is childish.