If you are hiring a developer your chances of finding one who is not incompetent is vanishingly small. The correct approach is to train them to be competent, and set standards. This should begin with requiring the bug tracker to be emptied out (or decreasing bug count, if the total number is currently overwhelmingly large), and there are plenty of online and in-person resources for training developers to learn how to write secure code.

Security vulnerabilities happen in every language. Anyone who thinks the language will make them safe is an idiot. What I mean is, you are an idiot, cmseagle 1195671.

The problem as I see it is coming up with good standards. We do have standards in some places, for example, SOX requires changing passwords every three months as best practices. But that is probably not actually best practice, so the wrong thing was codified.

How do we get the right things codified is the question.

My take was that he could have stopped it if he wanted to, but the bureaucratic machine was already in motion, and he would have had to put some effort into stopping it. I'm glad we didn't bomb Kyoto but maybe Xi will.

Wow, I hate both sides.

I use Linux specifically because of the license. Linux succeeded because of the license. If Ubuntu wants to change what made Linux successful then the obvious thing to do is to change to not using Ubuntu.

Yes that is what it is supposed to do. You opened a pipe to a file destructively, it did what you asked. Don't ask for that if you don't want it. Once you do that the original file is gone. Either append with >> or write to a temp file next time.

This guy claims that the crime reports just got routed to a different department. Probably not reliable, but neither is an opinion page in NYT

It was easy. I asked, "ChatGPT, are there any security bugs in this code?"

My code is now proven secure, get with the program.

This. Most companies don't follow best practices when it comes to good code (for example, they have a bug tracker that is always growing, never empty). They don't try to write secure code, they don't have trainings in secure code, they don't penalize insecure code (although they should in a lot of cases). That is why most corporate programmers can't write secure code.

History shows that incompetent developers cannot write safe code. There are examples of programmers writing safe code.

People who make excuses for unsafe code are usually crappy developers, and that is what I think of you. You're a crappy developer if you can code at all.

They aren't brittle. I've looked at them. The code is fine, but it uses an older style that is annoying to newbies.

If I were going to rewrite something in Rust, I would look at Firefox, not Coreutils which I would consider a waste of time.

So you're saying your family is made up of liars? Neato.

You get hard for corporal punishment. Hard man. Soft brain.

You, sir, are mentally incompetent.

It broke specifically because it was overloaded, much like your pathetic little brain. Please seek help.

Capitalism thrives on hypocrisy, it's just the thing to keep the masses of idiots stupiding along at their jobs so the wealthy can buy their 47th yacht. Texas literally has a vested interest in non-solar power (specifically oil and gas — they produce around a quarter of our natgas) so they need to keep advertising it so they can sell it, but they're not actually stupid so they also are doing solar and wind. Solar's easier to deploy without hassles because bumpkins can't see it from their pickups, plus Texas is prime sun country, so it's more solar than wind.

Of course, we have a name for people who are not stupid, and sell people a product which they know will destroy them because it allows them to live a life close to kings, and it is evil.

You forgot about derivative works.

The definition is pretty fuzzy and varies for different types of media but the general standard is recognizable elements were reproduced.

No court has yet quite taken that up that I know of but you don't need to reproduce a work in full to have a derivative work which could be a copyright violation.