Non-sense! There are plenty of very well designed software packages built using defensive programming practices that still have security flaws. To claim you have already lost when using those measures is to claim that only code with years of tireless review like NASA's near flawless software is good enough.

Just because we lacked the resources to find software flaws didn't mean that there were never massive vulnerabilities just waiting to be discovered, it just means it required dedication to find them. The lack of investment in security is about to be laid bare for all to see. Those that are actually interested in making secure software now have the opportunity to get even closer to that goal. Everyone that has been doing (and continues to do) the bare minimum is about to get a lesson in the importance of investing in real security.

Good security is expensive but having bad security is about to cost a whole lot more.

The issue of daylight savings has largely been solved by shifting clocks a minute every day for sixty days. The obvious problem is that we didn't build our electronics based on the concept of variable lengths in the days. However, we could mandate that all new electronics either have a built-in calendar, have NTP capability, use celluar towers for synchronization, or not have a clock at all and at the end of a decade or two we could switch to a much healthier approach. However, it will never happen because of businesses like trains, airlines, financial markets, and international logistics rely on a synchronized timeline which means it would need to more than just a single nation that uses this scheme but the whole world.

TL;DR: it's just not lethal enough of a problem to get solved, especially when the money changers get involved.

It's been tried many times. Freenet is one example, back in the day. Onion sites on Tor. It never works, unfortunately.

The issue with their folding phone is that they came to the game late and didn't learn anything from the competition. Other companies are several generations into foldables, and have largely figured out the hinge reliability problems, and software support on the Android side is decent.

Apple has to do everything in-house, so are where Samsung was when they released the original Galaxy Fold, 7 years ago. Weak screen that breaks easily, hinge that lets crap in, and software that is half baked.

Back in the Jobs era they had problems with Macbook hinges and thermal paste.

Apple has always had issues with engineering. There have been moments of genius like back in the Apple I and ][ days, or some of the 68k Macs that had designs that made them easy to work on, but even then there were performance issues, upgrade issues, and quality issues. It got worse in the Jobs era, as he introduced such innovations as non-replacable batteries and form over function. The iPod headphone output took a few generations to get decent, and the original monochrome screens were crap even by the standards of the day.

Given that they have decades of tests and sample scripts, an LLM should be able to recreate it bug-for-bug. If a customer has an issue with an existing script, they can just throw more tokens at it until the compatibility issue is resolved.

Unfortunately there is a high probability that this will work. Things are not looking good for human developers.

Reddit is hoping that AI companies will pay them. Reddit is a major source of information for AI.

It may look bad now, but so did AI generated code at first. Now it's at the point where for a lot of businesses it's more than adequate to replace human developers. I hate to say it because I'm at risk too, but I can't argue with the results.

A guy at work recently presented a web interface that Claude built for him, for a research project. A year ago that would have been a job for someone on my team. It looks good, it works well, and Claude produced an SBOM and a security audit.

I don't know how this is going to play out, but as bad as a lot of the AI slop is, I think it's just teething problems.

Actually, Hitler wanted Franco to take Gibraltar.

Franco refused because the British would retaliate by taking the Canary Islands.

The estimate is about $1.8B per day. Which has cost consumers (not businesses) ~$100B thus far.

What motivation could they have for intentionally making themselves look incompetent?

Giving people money to spend is a Demand Side Stimulus .

A demand-side stimulus makes sense when:
1. Unemployment is high
2. Inflation is low
3. The trade balance is in surplus

None of these conditions are currently true.

A demand-side stimulus in today's economy would fuel inflation and would mostly be spent on imports.

Can you define what you mean by "hoarding"?

Rich people have most of their money in equity. That's investing, not "hoarding".