> Things where a little bit different back then, don't you think? Do you believe nothing that's happened in the last 70 years (most notably nuclear weapons) changes this scenario at all?
The majority of the Cold War happened while both sides' superpowers had nukes.
In other words: nukes didn't change this scenario; they helped create it.
> Things where a little bit different back then, don't you think? Do you believe nothing that's happened in the last 70 years (most notably nuclear weapons) changes this scenario at all?
Guide? No. Inspire and/or remind? Why not.
To be fair, however, the PKD book that spawned that show, contained factual errors due to information that was declassified only after the book was written. Turns out, even if the US had been neutral in WW2, it's fairly certain the remaining Allies would have won regardless; and furthermore, in such a case it is possible the Soviets might've been so thoroughly weakened by the Japanese, that the former wouldn't have emerged as a superpower nor as the other side of the Cold War.
(And while we're on the topic of conjectures about counterfactual US neutrality: it is possible that US neutrality in WW1 would have averted the creation of the Nazi empire and WW2 with it.)
(Presuming that you are using the word "atheism" correctly here, and didn't actually mean to say "agnosticism"...)
I may be an atheist, but I'm not going to pretend that it isn't its own philosophy.
Of course, in the eyes of most technical personnel, atheism is much simpler than any religious philosophy.
But, at the end of the day: atheism, mythologies and religions are all sets of answers to the same set of otherwise-unanswered questions that humanity beholds.
I'll grant it's possible that there might actually exist enough evidence in the world today to conclusively answer your question in the negative-and-opposite ... but if someone actually published such a study it would probably have made the news in a big enough way that I'd have heard of it.
I'm saying that the patches he has reviewed may have been given more attention-to-detail by submitters and lieutenants because of his personality, in which case by being nicer he would lend his time to be abused to a greater degree. Note that I said "more patches that are broken/semi-broken/subtly-broken", not "more patches overall".
Convey to us reasonable people, reading it at a distance as 3rd-parties?
Absolutely.
...
Convey to the intended recipient, with his inevitable personal/emotional/etc. attachments to the topic, in such a way that it takes the intended effect?
A pending question-of-fact, and one that can only be answered very indirectly and in the long run.
Heck, if the answer really is "no", then it's possible we may never know! (until the NSA pwns us all, or at least pwns the subset of us who didn't kowtow to whoever the central socio-econo-political authority of that era will be)
That's one person of many. And it's not a question of aesthetics of the message in the short term, but of the quality of the overall results in the long term and the effort needed to achieve them.
Hopefully this won't happen, but it's entirely possible that this change will result in Linus finding himself with a much greater number of broken, half-broken and/or subtly-broken PRs to review than ever before, increasing the chances of something like https://lwn.net/Articles/57135/ succeeding.
And having a kernel backdoor ship worldwide is way worse than having a few recalcitrant kernel developers be exposed to - oh no! - coarse language. Results > the "fee fees".
The inherent limitations of human memory likely made that person assume you use a single password everywhere. Your response makes me assume that you memorize a unique password for every account.
You do you; but personally, I would rather memorize timeless things like facts and theorems - or at least ephemeral-yet-important things like deadlines, decisions, names+faces, etc. - than memorize a ton of meaningless blobs of entropy.
> I'd say, "what you should do" is to organize with others and enforce boundaries on those who are in the "bubble" of not giving a (meaningful) fuck of continued organized existence of the human race.
Dumb question here: why should I give a fuck about literally anything that happens after I die?
Why is the .NET integration a feature rather than an antifeature? Don't null and subclassing tend to poke holes in F#'s type system's ability to detect mistakes? And would it not be better to compile to native code than to require the Mono VM or whatnot?
Oh, it is a bad thing, very much so. The more efficiently we can maintain the U.S. Navy, the bigger we can keep it, and the less likely it is that some smaller nation will threaten the balance-of-power by pulling a competitively-sized navy out of their butts.
I don't get paid by-the-hour to drive; I get paid to arrive on-time. So commuting in my opinion (like IT in MBAs' opinion) is purely a (time-)cost center. And from that POV the average driver is indeed absolutely terrible. Ever since I started working in the software industry, I don't think I've ever taken the wheel of my car and driven it somewhere, without getting angry at another driver along the way.
Granted, different drivers can be terrible in different ways.
Some of them do stupid mutually-harmful BS like pulling out right front of me with minimal margin and no intent to travel at even half the speed-limit.
Others think that because they have an 8-cylinder engine and a traditional automatic transmission, that they should rule the streets - which they can and do, but that doesn't make me any less angry at them when they e.g. pass me at a 20mph relative-speed on the same side into which I was signalling to change because I was behind a schoolbus.