It's in Proverbs 11:20

The C++ developers are an abomination to the Lord,
But the Rustaceans in their Rust-based OSes are His delight.

Let's not rule out Æ

Isn't it Mac OS X 14? I.e., Mac OS 10.14?

After reading the article (and others), I think this is giving him too much credit.

He was the BBC studio controller at the time and pushed to have the matches broadcast in colour. The BBC ignored him for years and then suddenly changed their minds without reason, and in 1967 they ordered David Attenborough to do the next Wimbledon in colour.

However, the colour of the ball wasn't changed. Balls remained white even while being broadcast in colour.

Yellow balls had actually already been used since the 19th century, but not consistently, and not at Wimbledon. After a few years of tennis matches being broadcast in colour, the ITF (without David Attenborough's involvement) conducted a study and found that flourescent yellow balls were easiest for viewers to watch, and so they started being used at Wimbledon starting in 1972.

To the best of my knowledge, this "drives from the same batch fail at around the same time" folk wisdom has never been demonstrated in statistical studies. But, I mean, mixing drive models is certainly not going to do any harm.

Educator here. This is called "discovery learning". (The alternative to discovery learning, "direct instruction", would be if someone had told OP about these permissions before OP got themselves into a pickle)

When discovery learning is successful, it leads to better learning outcomes. Compared to direct instruction, you learn the material more deeply and will have better recall of the material, often for the rest of your life. The downsides to discovery learning are that it's very time-consuming, very frustrating, and many students will just fail (give up) before learning is completed.

Consider yourself one of the lucky ones, OP.

The last chip was manufactured 3.5 years ago and the last serious user was probably several years before that. Obviously no one's running Itanium with modern hardware.

But just because the hardware isn't modern, doesn't mean the software can't be modern. Tonnes of people run the most recent Linux kernels on 15 year-old laptops, so why not 10 year-old servers? Itanium is only for the hobbyists these days, but so what? Hobbyists have done a good job of ensuring modern Linux can run on 40 year-old 68k. Itanium can theoretically be done, too. It's just a question of whether the hobbyist community has enough of the right people that can actually maintain it.

Nobody is going to move a dotfile as a breaking change in any established software

We have oodles of counterexamples to this. GIMP did it, Blender did it, DOSBox did it, Libreoffice did it, Skype did it, Wireshark did it, ad nauseum. It's not really as big a deal as you make it to be (or a big deal at all). You have a transitional period where you look for config files in both locations, and mark the old location as obsolete.

Because we already know how quantum encryption works.

It's like how we proved the Halting Problem was undecideable long before the first computer was ever built.

Out of curiosity, were you born roughly in the early 1990s? I asked because I could have written very much the same stuff as you, except shifted back 10 years. By the year 2000, in my view, the Internet was already locked down and was a completely shitty version of what I felt "the real Internet" was like. Technology in the late 1980s and early 1990s was (from my view) hopeful and optimistic, constantly getting better (computers doubling in speed and memory and getting cheaper every year), and by the early 2000s, it was just shitty AIM and MSN Messenger and Windows-only KaZaA garbage with MySpace and shitty centralization like that. MySpace completely shit all over the early web rings.

I've come to realize that it's always been shitty. That's my conclusion after going on a nostalgia trip and watching old Computer Chronicles shows and reading old computer articles from my golden age, now through adult glasses. I just didn't understand all the politics and power manoeuvres at the time because I was a stupid kid who just saw cool things. Look at all the cool and exciting and great stuff that was happening in the late 1980s and early 1990s that I thought was so wonderful, and realize that it was mostly just shitty attempts by shitty power-hungry companies trying to lock down something cooler that had happened earlier.

The difference in the early days I think is that companies wanted to control us and make our lives as terrible as possible. They just couldn't because computers weren't powerful enough yet.

chess.com has cute profile pictures for its bots. Bullying "Martin" is just scientifically more fun than bullying "Stockfish Level 1".

He's not completely wrong in the powermod=landed gentry analogy. People have been (weakly) protesting and trying (not very successfully) to leave over the powermod situation for years, and it's true that the powermods aren't friends of ours.

But he seems to be suggesting that the protests are just the actions of the powermods, as if other users (and smaller mods) aren't also leaving. I think he's going to be disappointed when he discovers that the peasantry are also upset. They just don't have has his ear because he's so removed from them, so all he hears are the powermods.