This is turning things around the problem wasn't Python, it was a buggy code (author assumed the output is sorted abd due to that bug wrong files were compared together). Python documentation clearly states in the documentation that order of the output of glob.glob() depends on the OS and and there are no guarantees about the order. I suppose you could argue that Python could be idiot proof and sort the output, but then why make O(n) call a O(n log n) when most of the times people don't need output sorted.

No, this is very different. Slashdot sensationalized the title. The problem was between chair and monitor. They used glob.glob() in their algorithms and assumed the result is sorted, when documentation clearly states the output depends on OS and there are no such guarantees.

I'm a bit concerned that many of those automatic driving system are not written to be real time systems. Imagine accident, because some other process (garbage collection? Grabbed all resources and the car did not react fast enough.

1) It will work on top of IP, but the way it is designed it can work without it as well. 2) Well, you miss the main reason behind this protocol. The reason for its existence is because of sites like youtube, which provide the same content for many users. Now the way it works, youtube sends the same content over and over for every single person. I could turn around your question and ask you who is paying for the bandwidth? I'm not just saying that this reduces network traffic allowing to handle higher demand, but any ISP which isn't peering (i.e. not Tier 1) is paying for access and in fact they are generally paying per amount of data received. If they have 100 people requesting the same data this reduces their cost to 100:1. So it's not like cost of youtube is brought on someone else's shoulder, but instead the cost of youtube will be simply reduced. Anyway, it is not like the ISPs wouldn't have control of what names are cached. The only one who wouldn't be happy are Tier-1 who get paid by other ISPs for their access.

I have some involvement with the mentioned network protocol (there's actually an implementation of it on http://www.ccnx.org/ and wrote few applications in it. Actually when coding something you need to reboot the way you normally think about network protocols. You need to think like the network is a giant filesystem with some limitations to listing contents. Instead of planning how headers would look like you would instead plan how your hierarchy would be designed to provide maximum advantage toward your goal. If you want to send a file over network you can go with just one name (I'm ignoring segments for simplicity), but if you want to provide something more advanced like streaming a video with ability of seeking you probably will use more than just one name. So there's no transport protocol in the same sense as we think in IP. Though I guess a naming convention would be an equivalent of it?

Did anyone wonder where the cpu will be contained? I mean, even the bluetooth headphones are relatively big because of the battery and radio needed. The teaser video implies that it would have GPU, Internet access, storage etc. I'm starting to think, that the only reasonable way this could be feasible to do today would be if it would be simply an accessory to the Android phone (perhaps using bluetooth or the WiFi direct?) What do you guys think?

There was a person claiming that he worked as a contractor. He said the security was a joke there and even people like him had access to cables.

Because it is starting from scratch, it doesn't mean it won't incorporate other features later on.

I would say that it depends on complexity, there are some programs that are simple and short you can compare them to tools. Majority of programs though are complicated and they grow. You could compare them to a house. When you built it it is fresh, everything works fine, and it has latest goodies. But with time, regulations and requirements change. Maybe you need to tear down a wall, make another room, build another floor. With time no matter how well you took care of it it shows sign of its age. You might not even be able to make some changes because regulations forbid you. For similar reason some changes might require fundamental changes and will be very expensive, so it will be more feasible to just tore it down and build a new house. I'm not sure whether you're involved in software development but if you will look at source code of some programs that were there for some time you can see how complicated they become. X11 is one of the well known for its complexity.

Isn't it illegal for them to even ask about things like age, marriage status etc? Isn't asking for facebook login/password open them for a lawsuit even if you refuse? i.e. they didn't offer you a job because you refused to give them your credentials.

I've used gentoo some time ago but process of updating gentoo is almost same as FreeBSD, emerge does job same as make world/kernel and etc-update as mergemaster. So comparing them and telling that is easier it's not really true, I would say that difficulty is actually equal in both systems.