If he has anything he wants to say, he can write it the fuck down. But he won't and there's a reason for that.

Intelligence-sharing from countries once, and still sort of nominally, our allies has been curtailed because no one can trust that information shared with us won't make its way to other countries that do not wish them well. That trust will take decades to rebuild if in fact it can be, and by that time, the world will be a very different place.

The current administration is in the grip of religious fanatics with delusional, apocalyptic views of the world, as is much of the political party they come from. Nobody sensible trusts people like that, nor should they. It will take a generation to remove these people from political power, and it's far from clear that a majority of the electorate even wants to.

Meanwhile, the US is gutting the science and education infrastructure that was rightly the envy of the world and making itself hostile to immigrants from nearly the entire world, when being a draw to the best and brightest served it so well for so long. Again, damage being done in a matter of years will take decades to recover from.

It's not time to pack it in but it is time to recognize that America does not now and will in all likelihood never again hold the place in the world it did from 1945 to 2017. The America that most adults alive now grew up in is gone and the one their children and grandchildren will inhabit will likely be much diminished.

Didn't have to happen but that's where we are and we brought it on ourselves.

"Use of the document structuring conventions... allows PostScript language programs to communicate their document structure and printing requirements to document managers in a way that does not affect the PostScript language page description"

The idea being that those document managers did not themselves have to be PostScript interpreters in order to do useful things with PostScript documents given to them. Much simpler.

For example, a page imposition program, which extracts pages from a document and places them effectively on a much larger sheet, arranged in the way they need to be for printing 8- or 16- or 32-up on a commercial printing press, can operate strictly on the basis of the DSC comments.

To it, each page of PostScript is essentially an opaque blob that it does not need to interpret or understand in the least. It is just a chunk of text between %%BeginPage and %%EndPage comments.

This is tremendously useful. A smaller scale of two-up printing is explicitly mentioned as an example on p. 9 of the spec.

Oh I doubt that! The quality of the lies may deteriorate but he ain't ever gonna run out.

OK, I shop at Amazon, am a Prime member, all that stuff, but their web site is horrible. Just pathetic.

I appreciate that they are huge and sell a pretty much incomprehensible number of things, and that what it takes behind the scenes to make it all happen is hugely complex and very impressive on its own terms, but still: the web site is horrible.

Ehhh... not exactly. With nothing but the smallest FreeBSD installer image, you can, if you include just one optional package, have a system that is capable of entirely recompiling itself.

You might say "who cares?" and that's fine. But it is "complete" in a sense that no linux system I know of is. I admit that I don't know what it would take to install from, say, almalinux-10.0-x86_64-minimal.iso, and end up with a system capable of recompiling itself, but I expect it would be a whole lot more work than that. Could be wrong.

No, no, no! Here on Hacker News, it is apparently forbidden to criticize the dead because "they can't defend themselves." It's seen as somewhere between "cowardly" and "uncouth."

This policy seems to mainly apply, for some weird reason I suspect I would prefer not to know about, to the recently-departed Dilbert guy. But I'm sure his fans would stick up for Kant also!

Why does he think he's entitled to do this? I get that his intentions are more or less good but don't see that as much excuse. What did he expect them to say? "Oh thank you wise and wonderful full-time Linux Platform Engineer"?

I appreciate that the web site in question seems to have absolutely pathetic security practices. Good reason not to do business with them. Not a good reason to do something that, in many jurisdictions at least, sounds like it constitutes a crime.

There are other parts of your scheme that are also spectacularly bad ideas, but let's just deal with this one for now.

This is a spectacularly bad idea.

I pull into my driveway, press a button on a $15 remote, and the garage door is opened by a thing that is worth about $200. Nothing "smart" about it, and hard to see how being "smart" would improve it.

I get that some people seem to like the idea, but I have just never really understood the appeal of "smart home" stuff. I mean, "for the low, low price of several thousand dollars, we can make it so you don't have to flip light switches anymore!" is just really not an appealing offer. Flipping light switches is not a problem.

As far as I know (admittedly not far), Christians in the UK are about one-third Church of England, one-third non-denominational, one-fifth Catholic, and the rest other. I think most of the growth in non-denominational Christian churches in the UK has taken place in my lifetime.

There is a particular part of the UK where, in fairly recent decades, I think self-identifying as "Protestant," as quite specifically opposed to "Catholic," was not at all odd, to use your word. Not sure of the extent to which that's still the case.