Wasn't that after many nights of violence? After a federal courthouse had been under attack from left wing mobs. All I remember is left wing violence that somehow through misinformation got labeled as "peaceful protests". When was the last time you saw right wing militias initiate the same amount of unrest and destruction that we have seen over the last couple of months from the left?

Does it matter who has more, why does it need to be suppressed? Again with the cries for censorship and suppression of "misinformation" spoken like a true Fascist. And can you prove your statement that there is more on the right? Or is that just your subjective feeling?

In what way is Trump a fascist? I hear this thrown around often but I have never really heard the motivation behind it.

Fascism (/fæzm/) is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism[1][2] characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism)

I never felt Trump was taking the country in that direction, if anything he was for market economy and reduced taxes, thus less resources for the government to grow larger. I also have not seen any forcible suppression of opposition.

I might have missed things, so please enlighten me with examples of how Trump somehow was leading USA towards Fascism.

Personally I feel more Fascistic tendencies from the left then I do from Trump. Just ask yourself what side seems more eager to suppress "misinformation"?

I see the current development and outcry of "misinformation" as a very dangerous path to go down.

Do we really want corporation that only have their own interests and profit margins in mind to be the arbiter or truth?

And in specific Youtube is not and have not ever been a reliable source of truthful information. Any nutjob can put up videos there and claim whatever he or she likes. When did viewers stop thinking for themselves and not seek multiple sources of fact? Has the younger generation been so shielded in their lives that they can't handle hearing opposing information or things that might not be true without crying out for censorship.

Free speech is at the core of a democracy or anything trying to resemble democracy, this means hearing misinformation and viewpoints that you don't like. Have schools completely missed this in their education? If you start down the censorship route, sooner or later it is you who is going to get censored. And before you know it the only accepted "truth" is the ruling elites "truth", anything else will be labeled "misinformation".

Ask yourself what world you want to live in in the future. One that values freedom om speech or one that labels anything uncomfortable as "misinformation"

The "science shouldn't stand in the way" quote was taken out of context. And means the complete opposite of what you think it means in the context it was said.

It was Kayleigh McEnany who said it and given the context it meant that the current scientific understanding of the dangers vs benefits of opening schools says that it is the best course of action and the available science is not standing in the way for doing so.

Taking anything out of context can make you think it means the opposite of what was said. Especially given that English is an ambiguous language and that humans are not perfect when saying things.

This is what I have been saying all along. A lottery is easily gamed by just flooding the system with a huge number of applications. For an off-shore company that is no problem.

Can't we stop the hysteria around nudity? I would not consider just a nude picture to be porn.

And can't we stop the hysteria around sex while we are at it? People like sex, teenagers will start experimenting when they get sexually mature. I can not see any safer form of sex then sending pictures. No risk for STD, no risk for pregnancies, no need to leave your home even.

The hysteria should be about adults that use their position of power to fool/force inexperienced and naive kids and young teens to have sex with them.

So the only thing this proves is that humans are not monogamous. The thing the hacker should think of is if this prostitution is better than having two consenting people having an affair and bring some extra spice into their life.

These hackers are dumb trying to impose their moral judgement on people that just want to feel some excitement in line with our nature. The sooner we give up our pretentious believes in the Holywood romance, the sooner we can get healthy long term relationships.

As a member of the Finish bureaucrat association I am against this.

This suggestion will put many state employed bureaucrats and administrators out of work.

And at the same time my friends in the government tells me we will loose track of what people are doing with their spare time if they don't have to come to us to discuss why they need money.

Therefore I am strongly against this.

Agreed,

I started using a password manager when I realized that their job is to secure passwords. So they are most likely better at it then I ever will be. Even if I have my password file in the the cloud for continence. I sill use two factor authentication and a long strong master password. I have learned to not think that I know everything there is to know about everything. In this case password security. In essence I did my risk analysis and realized that a password manager is the only way I can have a low risk with high convenience. And the risk is low enough that is it is worth the convenience.

I hate them as well

Who the **** is going to share a summary of a story on slslashdot when you can share the sorry itself.

Also an advise, many slashdot readers are programmers, we despise anything that occupies screen space for no reason, we are used to parse screens mostly full of text.

Du you want inspiration for a design language that appeals to us? Then i offer you this advise, free of charge even: take a look at emacs, vi, or the Linux command prompt.

Having a higher number of applicants then available slots should be a good thing, it should let you choose the best of these applicants, like all universities does. This lottery thing is just absurd, it makes to easy to get in lowly payed workers. So why not take a free market approach to this. In its simplest form, just rank all applications based on the salary (s), then pick the top places. You could also multiply it with education/experience (e) and maybe some industry specific weight (i) to make the competition even for fields where the prevailing wages are lower.

R=s*e*i

Then pick the 65k with highest ranking. If you try and push in a lot of underpaid workers that will later go back to outsourcing centers, they would just be culled.

I agree with that an IDE should be used as a productivity enhancer. But only after you have understood what it means to compile and how it all fits together.

Personally I use Emacs for most C/C++ development and Eclipse for Java (with emacs key-bindings)

However I have seen occasions where the support given by an IDE makes an organization get away with a rather smelly code base. Where the IDE becomes more of artificial life support then a true productivity enhancer. This is what I see as the greatest risk of an IDE, that you can get away with bad code for far longer then if you did not use an IDE. Which will cause you to hit the inevitable complexity wall much later and with more severe consequences.

While when using non or less helpful IDEs (like emacs or vi) you have to structure you code much better to keep it maintainable and understandable. You will hit the complexity wall sooner, which will make it more natural to refactor and rework code that has become too complex at a point where it is not very costly to do so. In my opinion you will get more intimate with your code and build system, which gives you a better understanding of what really is going on.

Personally I would not trust a programmer that can not use a text editor and a command line to build at least simple applications.

One point that constantly comes up in these cases is the traumatization of the kid. This is always postulated as an immutable fact.

If you are talking about pedophiles in the terms of attracted to pre-pubecent childs the argument might have some validity, however I still have not seen any credible research on this (Not saying there is not, just I have not yet read any myself). But why should not a 13 year old kid be capable of deciding over his/her own body and actions. Rape is of course always traumatic and this is not what I am talking about. If it is a pleasurable and voluntary experience, why would this be a traumatic event? Perhaps from peer pressure or regret, but who has not done things that you regret? When you are a teenager you do stupid things, that is part of growing up and learning what you like and do not like. Why is sex such an infected issue? Done right and with respect it is a nice experience for both parts.

I am of the opinion that it is the society that actually makes it a traumatizing experience. Imagine you are 13, and for some reason you have sex with an adult whom you happen to like, one thing leads to the next.. (And I guess I would be now guilty in terms of the proposed law) Now you have done something you found to be nice and pleasurable, at the same time you hear that what you did was wrong and disgusting. Of course if will be traumatizing to hear that you are a freak who likes disgusting things and suddenly you have taken a hard blow to your self esteem.

I know that if I got to have sex with my 25 something hot teacher when I was 13 I would not have regretted anything (except maybe poor performance).

Now don’t read this as a case for pedophilia, I am just trying to argue that there is no immutable truth that sex will traumatize you before the age of consent. Which for some "strange" reason is not constant all over the world, 13 in Spain, 15 in Sweden, and 18 in USA. Does this mean that the Spanish teenagers are among the smartest (most mature) in the world? Or that many people in Spain have traumatic memories from their early teen years?

Honestly, I'd slap you right back for stating such an obvious lack of understanding of C.
Naturally a function modifying the contents would have arguments like (int* arg) and non modifying (const int* arg) or to be real safe (const int* const arg)

as for the specifics
a) no its not.
b) no it doesn't. Passing larger data structures by value is bad performance vise.

Now this goes for C. For C++ I could somewhat agree with you since I can use call by reference.

1. I guess it should be obvious why command lines needs to be processed. If there is some special processing then a comment is needed, it the function does what it says, I see no need for comments.

2. This is hopefully documented so even a user can read it. "--help" is a common way of doing this. Then this information can be found in the function itself or by running the program.

3. Should be easy do find from the function interface and how it is used in the code. Also reading the code of the function will help out a lot.

4. Stated in the code of the function.

5. Stated in the code of the function.

6. Combine answer 2 and 4

7. Hopefully no, but yes if it does it needs documentation.

8. Normal in C (Hopefully no modification of the arguments is done, if modifications are done: Comment!) In C++ this would be documented in the function interface f(const type& foo) or f(type& foo). First case tells me no modification is done second that I should expect the value to be modified, in the first case your compiler will check that your design rule of not modifying the argument is followed. Writing the same in a comment will sooner or later be broken and the comment being wrong can cause more headache then trying to understand code.

However documentation about architecture giving an overview of the application and explanations as to why and what each module do is important.

My rule of thumb is if functions do what you think they do no comments are really needed. Comment unexpected behavior or portions of code that are complicated (hopefully for a good reason)

Now if you would write an API where you don't expect programmer to have access to the source code. Documentation and not comments (they can be the same thing but not always the case) is needed.

In my opinion comments that are wrong is more detrimental then no comments.