ok, so you are making up reasons.

You're right, and I thought about this about a half hour after making this assertion. Of course, I'll have to crack the book and learn whatever new thing displaces Rust, or whatever.

This discussion on their inclusion in Mozilla is quite revealing:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/s...

Elsewhere it's claimed that they used a FIPS HSM to generate their keys.

I did not see who their auditor was.

Did eMudhra lie?
Did the auditor lie?
Are FIPS HSM's backdoored?
Do we have another Dual_EC_DRBG situation on our hands here?

If nobody is lying we could have just seen a huge cyberwar or false flag averted. Essential crypto gear could be totally buggered still.

PS Remember when Mozilla gave CACert absolute hell for years when they were tremendously more competent?

I had the head of accounting personally come to my cubicle for a $200 expense.

Wait until you learn about Python 3.

Is there? What is the reason? Let me know, maybe we can win a Nobel together.

Sounds like job for the Blonde Crusader, able to flash her teeth and illiminate an entire stadium, prose that could knock a dead buzzard off a shit-wagon at 20 paces, construct sentences that will make Maggots orgasm where they stand. She'll be fighting for Truth, Justice, and not insignificant bribes to the Chief Bunko "artiste".

Yes, but 30-40 years ago the computing landscape in companies was much different. It hadn't extended to damn near everything the company did. This is different now so a change 30-40 years ago was minor in terms of cost to the company, now it can elicit major whining from accounting.

If Slashdot code ever gets open-sourced, I'll fix the Unicode.

You...can't even write complete sentences.

Your comment makes me think you've never used an LLM to write significant code. Why not advise to use an AGENT.mr?

Do you know how many SV companies let you log in with an empty password because no one tests negative cases? We are so broken as programmers.

It's amazing how few programmers are willing to use a profiler, even if you show them how and why. I don't know what braindead rock our profession collectively crawled out from under, but it's the rock that is allergic to simple tools to solve the problem.

It's the most popular language.

our team has broadly switched over for 90% of all code writing. all small changes, all minor updates, and all exploratory work is done via AI 100%. When we get to production deployed code, its up and down (mostly up) that AI can write solid, working code, but the more complex the task, the more important measure is who prompts the AI.

Detailed, longwinded prompts that really restrict and direct the coding task precisely seems to allow nearly no human coding to be done. But that requires our best software architects to sit down for a couple hours and really work out a precise prompt, which involves having the knowledge and skills to not just code the project end to end, but also to precisely determine what you want coded at the outset. no throwing pasta at the wall to see if it sticks.

Our junior folks struggle with this because they don't normally have a clear vision of exactly what they want coded and the final architecture until they are halfway through the task. we are obviously seeing this with efficiency as well (tokens/task completed). But they are learning quite a bit quicker.