The response of the postgresql folks was something like "how about we finish porting it from lisp, first?"
Hah!
Why do tech. people give things wacky names? Things that are rusty get thrown away. On the other hand, if they wanted a wacky name, why didn't they go all the way and call the Rust language "Feces"? Okay then, how about "Vomit"?
But hey! Why voluntarily restrict technology names to only 1 alphabet? "LaTeX" LaTeX uses Greek letters, also, and requires two paragraphs in the Wikipedia
article to explain the name.
Google, Apple, and Facebook and their customers will keep increasing the abuse, apparently. Abusing other people is personally damaging, but the managers of those companies apparently don't have the social understanding to realize that.
Quotes, with minor modifications to make comments more readable, and some text in bold:
"Systemd is a poor idea, poorly implemented, in a project that's poorly managed."
"... sure is wilfully, deliberately, and very gratuitously, incompatible with everyone else.... That means a big boon in control for Red Hat.
"I doubt Poettering himself understands his role in this, seeing his grasp of architecture, code quality, and so on, so that makes him a 'useful idiot'. He sure does have the personality to pull it off, though. Incompetent arrogance does go a long way, with the right backing."
Systemd, and the poor way it has been presented, had been damaging to Red Hat's reputation ("Dead Hat"). Why did Red Hat management allow that? Is it because Red Hat makes money providing consulting services, and wants Linux configuration to be difficult so that the company will make more money?
Quote from below, edited: "Radio in the 1940s, TV in the 60s, D&D in the 80s... There has never been a shortage of parents who didn't understand new technology and needed a scapegoat to blame their bad parenting on."
The story to which you linked, WashPost Is Richly Rewarded for False News About Russia Threat While Public Is Deceived, criticizes the Washington Post for apparently incorrect stories about Russian destructiveness toward the United States. It seems that the full truth isn't known, because The Intercept discovered more about Russian involvement yesterday.
Is it possible for any government in the U.S. to make any law, no matter how confusing, and not care about whether someone may make a mistake, or whether they may not know the law?
You didn't understand the point. Google could make a very public announcement that would have the effect of helping people understand that cell service providers are being abusive. Google could, for example, make public the restrictions and modifications of each provider. At present it is very difficult to get that information.
"...past 3 years has made steps towards fixing..."
That doesn't fix the bad publicity.
If I were the CEO of Google, I would offer free, or almost free, Android updates to all cell service providers, very publicly. Any providers who didn't accept updates would then take that responsibility on themselves, publicly.
"It is then the carriers responsibility to get that sorted out..."
The problem for Google is that abuse by the carriers damages Google's reputation. Most people don't understand all the issues.
Companies should have enough control over their products that they can prevent their products from being used as an instrument of abuse by other companies.
Android malware causes Google and Android phone manufacturers and phone service providers to make more money. Most people don't have the time or technical ability to deal with issues, so they buy new phones.
Google arranged that Android cannot reliably be updated to its latest version. That pro-malware destructiveness is profitable.
Google needs better management. The company is rapidly getting a bad reputation, partly also because of tracking internet users. Why should Google know if I visit my bank account?
Slashdot Mirror
Quick! Download the latest CCleaner, Recuva, and Defraggler versions before craziness happens:
Ccleaner Portable
Defraggler Portable
Recuva Portable
CCleaner was originally named Crap Cleaner, another example of programmers not choosing sensible names.
$15 per limb at time of birth, $60. Spiders have 8 legs, so they pay $120.
You can buy a Keep Oregon Weird bumper sticker.
I agree! "C" is a letter, not a name for a computer language. Yuck.
Worse!!! C++ is a name spelled with a math symbol.
Then there is the D language.
Hah!
Why do tech. people give things wacky names? Things that are rusty get thrown away. On the other hand, if they wanted a wacky name, why didn't they go all the way and call the Rust language "Feces"? Okay then, how about "Vomit"?
"Lisp" is a speech impediment.
"Gimp" is a person who limps or is lame.
But hey! Why voluntarily restrict technology names to only 1 alphabet? "LaTeX" LaTeX uses Greek letters, also, and requires two paragraphs in the Wikipedia article to explain the name.
Facebook Blocker Firefox add-on.
Google, Apple, and Facebook and their customers will keep increasing the abuse, apparently. Abusing other people is personally damaging, but the managers of those companies apparently don't have the social understanding to realize that.
Facebook Blocker for Firefox and Pale Moon browsers.
Quotes, with minor modifications to make comments more readable, and some text in bold:
... That means a big boon in control for Red Hat.
"Systemd is a poor idea, poorly implemented, in a project that's poorly managed."
"... sure is wilfully, deliberately, and very gratuitously, incompatible with everyone else.
"I doubt Poettering himself understands his role in this, seeing his grasp of architecture, code quality, and so on, so that makes him a 'useful idiot'. He sure does have the personality to pull it off, though. Incompetent arrogance does go a long way, with the right backing."
Systemd, and the poor way it has been presented, had been damaging to Red Hat's reputation ("Dead Hat"). Why did Red Hat management allow that? Is it because Red Hat makes money providing consulting services, and wants Linux configuration to be difficult so that the company will make more money?
Microsoft Windows XP "end of life": Conflict of interest.
"The scenario described in TFA is silly. Using a computer as a firewall does not work as well as using a firewall as a firewall."
I agree, I should have said firewalls. I am hoping people will give helpful suggestions, rather than explaining how they are superior.
Argle Bargle, that was an excellent arglebargle. Made me laugh. I agree.
Morris Dancing? I found this: Bad rap for morris dancing
Quote from below, edited: "Radio in the 1940s, TV in the 60s, D&D in the 80s... There has never been a shortage of parents who didn't understand new technology and needed a scapegoat to blame their bad parenting on."
Close the N.S.A.'s Back Doors. (New York Times, Sept. 21, 2013)
NSA's own Hardware Backdoors May Still Be a "Problem from Hell". (MIT Technology Review, Oct. 8, 2013)
This 'Demonically Clever' Backdoor Hides In a Tiny Slice of a Computer Chip. (Wired.com, June 1, 2016)
Expert Says NSA Have Backdoors Built Into Intel And AMD Processors. (Eteknix, 2014)
When spyware is detected, that particular vulnerability is fixed:
Red alert! Intel patches remote execution hole that's been hidden in chips since 2010. (The Register, May 1, 2017)
Intel Active Management Technology, Intel Small Business Technology, and Intel Standard Manageability Escalation of Privilege (Intel Corporation, May 5, 2017 ) Quote: "Severity rating: Critical"
Yes, but he could have a strong opinion that might be very influential.
I'd very much like to know that, also. Anyone have an explanation for Systemd?
Is "opaque" a way for Red Hat to make more money giving support?
Linus Torvalds is sometimes unstable. He doesn't know how to deal with his conflicts. Two examples:
The Creator Of Linux Has An Attitude And A Foul Mouth, And People Are Angry At Him (Again)
Linus Torvalds in NSFW Red Hat rant.
I agree.
"Essential" is not a good name for a company. Could he have named his company "You have to have it"? Or, "All others are garbage"?
I think no news agency can be completely trusted. Sometimes they make mistakes. Sometimes they are badly managed.
Also, see this Slashdot story, published today: DOJ Charges Federal Contractor With Leaking Classified Info To Media Quote: The Intercept published a top secret NSA report Monday that alleged Russian military intelligence launched a 2016 cyberattack on a voting software company. (June 5, 2017)
The story to which you linked, WashPost Is Richly Rewarded for False News About Russia Threat While Public Is Deceived, criticizes the Washington Post for apparently incorrect stories about Russian destructiveness toward the United States. It seems that the full truth isn't known, because The Intercept discovered more about Russian involvement yesterday.
The first comment is copied from a Washington Post news story that gives links to all the stories in the timeline, from all the news agencies.
New finding: Rigol owners are engineers, obviously.
Before it was Keep Portland Weird. Now it's Keep Oregon Weird?
Is it possible for any government in the U.S. to make any law, no matter how confusing, and not care about whether someone may make a mistake, or whether they may not know the law?
To me, anyone who has a Tektronix oscilloscope on a shelf above his desk is likely to call himself an "engineer".
You didn't understand the point. Google could make a very public announcement that would have the effect of helping people understand that cell service providers are being abusive. Google could, for example, make public the restrictions and modifications of each provider. At present it is very difficult to get that information.
"...past 3 years has made steps towards fixing..."
That doesn't fix the bad publicity.
If I were the CEO of Google, I would offer free, or almost free, Android updates to all cell service providers, very publicly. Any providers who didn't accept updates would then take that responsibility on themselves, publicly.
A long time ago, a friend I respected told me, "Love the Mac, hate Apple." Apple had its own methods of abuse.
"It is then the carriers responsibility to get that sorted out..."
The problem for Google is that abuse by the carriers damages Google's reputation. Most people don't understand all the issues.
Companies should have enough control over their products that they can prevent their products from being used as an instrument of abuse by other companies.
Android malware causes Google and Android phone manufacturers and phone service providers to make more money. Most people don't have the time or technical ability to deal with issues, so they buy new phones.
Google arranged that Android cannot reliably be updated to its latest version. That pro-malware destructiveness is profitable.
Google needs better management. The company is rapidly getting a bad reputation, partly also because of tracking internet users. Why should Google know if I visit my bank account?
My opinions.
Quote: ... "Cloud" is a faster way of saying "abdicating responsibility."
The word "cloud" is used by cloud providers to encourage cloudy thinking: Dilbert cartoon.
This Dilbert cartoon shows where cloudy thinking is leading.