My apologies. After looking more closely, it's not a parking site. But there's no link to the actual data, just the main page of the site that supposedly collected the statistics.

The central claim of the summary is completely unsourced. If you click on the link in the article that purports to backup the claim of a 10% market share (which sounds outlandish to me, but not impossible), you get a pretty run of the mill domain name parking page. So, there's no way of examining the claim or questioning the methods. This doesn't belong on the front page.

One way of finding out if your references are bad is to ... CALL THEM AND FIND OUT! Ta-da! Seriously, any HR department that's badmouthing former employees when an unknown person calls in requesting information is just asking for trouble. Give it to them.

I don't buy the line that open source is "better because everyone is checking for bugs" line, but the bottom line point from my perspective is that the openness of a specification does not, in fact, make it easier to intrude upon an implementation of that spec. A completely valid argument -- and possibly a persuasive one as well, if the boss is smart - involves the comparison of an open and strong encryption algorithm vs and weak but closed one. This is where wars are won. If security through obscurity can't keep wartime governments in power, it probably doesn't do much.

Given how painfully bad the characterizations in the extant footage are, I can't imagine more minutes of "fleshing out secondary characters" would make it any better. The movie is amazing for its cinematographic innovations, not for its plot or characters. If the restored footage only offers the latter, it will be primarily of academic interest (and I say that as an academic).