and it was lovely to come home each day to a pristine floor with no kruft or dog hair on it.Then one day my dog shat on the floor while the roomba was "cleaning". You can picture what the result was.

Quite obviously the heavy elements in the chemical compounds were not created by fusing lighter elements in a lab in Mountain View. Those lying bastards, "made in the USA" my ass. More like "made in the collapse of RX J185635-3754."

RSA keypair auth, disable password auth, bruteforcers irrelevant.

Are you serious? Of course they do, they want you to buy a new phone every two years so you'll sign a new contract to get the subsidized price, thereby guaranteeing their profitability for a further two years each iteration. The manufacturers also want to be able to keep turning over more merchandise - that's the sole source of profit in the chain for them. Apple can be somewhat immune to these influences because the device is merely a gateway to iTunes and the App Store, which provide the consistent revenue. Apple would be pretty happy to know you've upgraded every phone along the line, but then they wouldn't be devastated if you didn't because you're still buying apps and music through them. But Samsung gets nothing from Google's market profits, their only hope each year is to put out The Next Big Awesome Android Phone at such a significant cost that customers will sign their contracts, carriers will subsidize the costs of the phones to keep the manufacturers providing new hotness to lure in more subsidized contract upgrades, and the whole circus will keep on running.

-2 if this guy peed on it, dude

And yet again, therein lies the rub. Can you _really_ ascertain if someone is going to attempt to hijack a plane by putting them through a scanner looking for metal and explosives, or patting them down in line? No. the only thing these scanners are screening are things, things which are just as useful when applied in line approaching the scanners as when applied inside a plane. If someone is going to hijack a plane these days, it's because they've figured out a way to socially engineer themselves into the cockpit, not because they sneaked a box knife on board.

"Window" is a graphical user environment concept, predating MS Windows by a good many years. X Windows predates Microsoft Windows by one year. Microsoft trademarking the term "Windows" forced the X Consortium to change the name to "X Window System". Pot, kettle, dark color, etc.

Snarky tax humor never gets old, does it?

Um, no. No. A million times no. Microsoft's is losing their grip on all of their endeavors, and you can smell the fear and loathing. It's a juggernaut built on the backs of broken promises and stolen dreams, with an army of giddy fanboys clamoring for their turn to be chewed up and spit out by the machine. No thank you, I'd rather spend my days contented with a decent salary that pays the bills and affords some luxury, and a career that affords me the opportunity to solve interesting problems and leaves my soul intact for myself and my family.

Maybe instead it's 11 3 bit rasters with 0,0 at the bottom left corner:

_ Z Z
_ Z _
Z Z Z
Z _ _
_ Z _
_ _ Z
Z Z Z
_ Z _
Z Z _

sort of looks like a dollar to me. meh.

Ok, your code examples are beyond wrong-headed. They're just frickin' wrong, and illustrate a very poor grasp of abstraction. What you're essentially saying is that security concerns cannot be abstracted.

They can.

Your DeletePicture(int pictureId) example could be a method of a class (let's call it PictureManager) that depends on an ISecurityContext implementation (or an IPictureDataProvider whose concrete class depends on an ISecurityContext, or any other runtime configuration that happens to be appropriate). The nice bit about that is you can abstract the security portion away, and test your class in isolation. Your example actually is indicative of one of the sources of many bugs: coupling. You're coupling the responsibility of every piece of code to security. What if someone then comes along and says, "We now have a priority to gather analytics on our API. This is just as high a priority and just as critical as security." Your way means modifying the method signatures of every method in the system. That's bad design. Go back to school, kid. You've got a lot to learn.

Or he might have been research men's facail hair fashion and misspelled 'goatees'

Holy smokes!

I had a roomba, and I was on top of the world. I had a robotic servant dutifully cleaning my floors so I didn't have to. Then my dog shit on the floor, and the roomba dutifully 'cleaned' the floor, smearing the shit all over the house and crudding up its brushes, gears, and wheels. I don't have a roomba anymore.

I'd love to see this. When they decided to get into the music player market they made a brown turd, thought of how to make the word "Tune" edgier and came up with "Zune". Maybe they can shoot themselves in the foot all over again in the phone market with another brown turd with the same awesome marketing skill. "What do we do on a phone?" "I think we talk!" "Ok, let's change the first letter and make it sound hip and edgy!" "Yeah, let's call it the Zalk!" "Oh man, I'd want to buy a Zalk!" "Oh me too!" "Watch out iPhone! The Zalk is the next new hip thing!"