It's more entertaining than the original! No cat torturing, for one.

That kind of thinking got us stuck with COBOL ;-)

War is dumb, but giving bullies free reign is dumber.

Yes, Iran and Vietnam were probably mistakes, but nobody said conflicts are easy nor clear.

> There is no exception here. Teachers are to teach what is in the published curriculum

If the curriculum limits answers to certain questions for religious reasons than it's in violation of the separation clause.

> It can be a matter of health,

I'm sure the evil GOP will try to twist their argument into being about health or the like, but underlying it's religion trying to camouflage itself, like how Intelligent Design tried to disguise creationism as science. It's bearing False Witness and thus should be punished via an elevator to Hell. Jesus can read GOP's evil minds.

There is increasing pressure on companies to take responsibility for their software products. This includes preasure to move towards memory safe languages. This exercise is about getting C++ of the governments naughty lists, so that people can continue to use C++ without extra regulatory overhead and too much risk to the company.

Rust is just a working example of a language with similar performance to C++, whise approach could be copied. The committee opted to not do that and go for something that does not make the language memory safe at all, but that catches enough bugs to be close enough (they hope).

We'll see whether that is implementable, practical and enough to satisfy regulators.

I have hunted my fair share of core dumps in Qt code. Each one is a memory safety fail... it is, just like the rest of C++ not memory safe.

I find it funny that so many C++ devs seem to think using smart pointers means you are memory safe. It does not, there is so much more needed... check what the "safe C++" proposal set out to change, that's what you need tomdo to make C++ memory safe using the approach rust took. It includes fun stuff like new reference semantics, destructive moves and a new standard library.

> but the fascists got the trains running on time...

They actually lied about that, jailing reporters who criticized timing.

> School teachers don't have a 1st Amendment right in the classroom, just as I didn't have a 1st Amendment right while in my US Army uniform.

Apples and oranges. In the military one has to learn to STFU or the enemy can hear where you are. A teacher simply describing what LGBTQ+ concepts are shouldn't be an exception to the 1st. There's no logical reason other than religious offense, which then has the church sticking its peanut butter in secular chocolate.

> How do we resolve this [restroom & shower issues]?

There are ways to compromise, but that's a longer topic.

> If the teachers want to express their beliefs

That's NOT what I proposed.

> While in the classroom the teachers should be expected to follow the state specified curriculum or expect to be fired.

It's realistic to answer a simple question from a child, even if it offends religious troglodytes.

Dems need to learn how to take the W quietly instead of rubbing it into R's faces.

Dems didn't campaign on LGBTQ+, GOP did! Dems barely mentioned it during the campaign. GOP knows how to mouth wedge issues loud and wide, it's how we ended up with Moutholini.

how numerous friends of his became Trump supporters due to the LGBTQ discussions happening in their children's schools... just not popular and it was a major reason that dickbag was re-elected. Even if it seems like the correct moral decision, the unpopularity of it led to a far worse situation.

GOP successfully spooked parents with LGBTQ+ bullshit. They cherry-picked a few bad apples and painted it as common-place. Plus, school content is controlled at the state level, not national, and was thus moot for the election.*

Stupidficial gimmicks worked on US's gullible population, just like 1930's Germany; Don pulled Jedi Clown Tricks. The parents ALSO need more education in critical thinking. Stupidity snowballs. Maybe America is just too dumb to hold a democracy, as too many want a theocracy. Perhaps we can negotiate an amiable split before they drag blue states into their cave.

* An exception may be firing or jailing teachers for merely mentioning LGBTQ+ in the classroom, which should be protected under 1st Amendment and separation clause, but the GOP SCOTUS seems overly bribed by rich evangelicals handing out grift-wrapped RV's. The idea that a non-transgender student will become transgendered by mere mention is dumber than rocks. Idiots!

I'm not saying cloud is necessarily riskier than on-premises*, but cloud failures can easily make headlines due to the scope, and such could set the likes of MS into a financial tailspin. While that is perhaps a good thing, they'll hurt a lot of customers in desperation for cash during their spiral to Hell.

* The average org didn't manage on-premises well either.

If you are transgender then you pretty much need to avoid red states, as frothy evangelicals would be happy to hang you or lock you in a "correctional facility". And they are growing ever more medieval.

That's the secret to the Chinese government's success - they give a shit about the citizens

Good one. Most leaders, including Xi, don't have a flying fuck about their citizens and one should never assume they do. They care about personal glory and power. If helping citizens HAPPENS to help them reach their personal goals, that's great, but it doesn't always align.

Ranting about Teams is our best social gathering.

The Clippy Army. Clippernators?