No and, just widgets. Anything else could happen elsewhere.

That's nonsensical. Just because it can and does also happen elsewhere doesn't make it not exist. Someone else could build widgets too. Society doesn't work if people aren't doing stuff so having people employed as of today is a benefit.

You act like people need permission to create and build.

People absolutely 100% do without a doubt need permission to have limited liability protection.

There is no bargain here, just a legal framework for people to work together for some purpose.

Absolutely false. People worked together for millennia without such frameworks in place.

It is not a gift from society; it is a protected right.

It's not a gift, it's a bargain. It's a "protected" right in as much as there is a law granting that right.

You can start a business where people would pay you for a kick in the face. Probably won't get any customers, but you can do it.

You don't really understand much about different kinds of business, do you?

You have a right to freedom of association. You have a right to make contracts.

Yes, and? You can do that just as well with and without extra protection granted to you by society.

You have a right to start almost any kind of business you want (some restrictions may apply). You have a right to use your property as you see fit. Government doesn't give you these things; it protects them.

Yes, and? You can do that just as well with and without extra protection granted to you by society.

Limited liability protection is not a natural right. Why should society give you that extraordinary gift if you give little in return?
 

Huh? Summary says explicitly "The security researcher who reported the flaw credited Anthropic's Claude Mythos Preview for the discovery" so where are you getting that the summary didn't note this?

So, re-inventing inetd/xinetd. And process-based services are old hat and slow. Event-driven is increasingly important. Which requires resident event handlers.

There are numerous other applications of ssh and other services beyond your and Poettering's 'cloudy' view of the Internet. Please stop screwing with them and dismissing them with a hand wave. Like systemds screwing around with event handling processes.

I can vote with my donations.

Two things here are both true: There is a left-wing bias on Wikipedia, and this bias is particularly bad on the articles Sanger was discussing, especially the article for Zionism, and some related articles. Sanger's actions also violated the no-canvassing policy.

There is no such word as gullible.

Yeah, and the benefit to society comes in the form of the widgets it so desperately needs.

And also the people it employs and the effect to the greater economy. All of those things are benefits to society, for which people are prepared to give the directors and shareholders some level of protection, as part of a bargain. If the factory provides less benefit, why should the people taking the profit get the same level of protection?

... Boeing will whisper a deal in the PMs ear. Offering to sell them some garbage in return for shutting down the Canadian program, cutting up the existing reactors and throwing away the blueprints.

Produce ship-sized SMRs. Problem solved.

Um you do realise that Monday Night Rehabilitation (i.e. executing people with monster trucks in a TV spectacle with the president often in attendance) was a satire based on the words people use with the current justice system, i.e. "rehabilitation" and how it actually treats people.

I have to ask did you actually think I was literally proposing taking something from idiocracy and implementing it in real life?

The purpose of a factory is not to provide jobs.

It's intended to made widgets that can then be sold at a profit.

It's not a social welfare program.

Only kinda. Let me remind you there is no natural right to limited liability companies. They exist purely (in principle) for the benefit of society.

Those three statements are policy choices, not objective facts. Capitalists like to present them as inevitable, but of course they are not; they are only presented as such because it's in capitalists' interest for people to see them that way.

Maybe they were counting on the pushback. The Feds step up and "suggest" that they turn the encryption off. Or things will go badly for them. They do, but it leaks out. Now the public is pissed. And it's getting near election time.

Are you sure there's only one? (Yeah, because you defined the problem thusly.) It's a good logical thinking puzzle, but nothing to do with the real world problem at hand.

But you haven't substantiated "the majority" other than staring into a bin and guessing about actual numbers. There's one red ball based upon your example because you put one there. You didn't define the ecosystem of real world use cases. And Poettering is even worse. Given his misunderstanding of the memory and library management of Linux utilities, I'm not believing his estimates. Even worse, his example of sshd is bizarre. Is he really suggesting that we not leave sshd running on systems that we infrequently contact? What? Am I supposed to drive across town and start it on a remote system when it's needed?

Additional context: at the time of their release, both the Neo Geo and the 3DO were considered to be unaffordable, except by the very rich.