task_queue

If it's patented then they have nothing to lose by opening up their source.

Proprietary is code for incompetence and an excuse not to expose said incompetence.

No one wants to publish their code because it is horrifically abysmal and could open them up to further lawsuits if things go to shit.

Plausible deniability and the ability to say "it was your floor mats" beats being liable for the deaths and injuries of possibly thousands.

The idea is the start up. Part of being an ideas guy is finding a group of people to answer those kinds of questions.

Marijuana is more than just THC.

It complements asyncio. In particular, you'd probably want to use asyncio's event loop to drive your coroutines.

It is a current design trend, it will be different in a few years just as it was different a few years ago.

People have been saying this for decades, yet Linux and GNU software are everywhere.

You gain a lot: connections, contracts, insider information and special privilege if you play nice with the government.

If it's a secret program, what do they really have to lose?

I'm a 10x unicorn making 1x salary. I don't need a union.

If you're the government, it is easier to milk the relationship you have with telcos and the tech industry to get them to hand over data voluntarily/through the court than it is seek out a warrant to confiscate physical property in a suspect's possession which makes it obvious that they're being investigated.

He clicked the check box... there's nothing we can do here images entire backup anyway

Privacy implies guilt. Otherwise, you'd have nothing to hide.

"No, go to Brazil."

No one wants to lose their job or freedom if something goes wrong when you guinea pig a patient.

Centrally controlled and switched systems are ripe for censorship.

Stallman was right.

We are and have been.

If you found out your friend's spouse was cheating, you would understand if people were upset if your idea of telling them was to post their pictures, address, relationship status and credit card number on every street corner in the neighborhood.

Also, you do it to people who weren't cheating at all. You don't even know them.

Then you start buying billboards.

Should have read the PEP in full. Thanks : )

> If Ashley Madison were a website for child sex trafficking, and the names of registrants were exposed, leading to arrests, and public shaming... How would you feel?

This is still an irresponsible exposure of personal information. This is still vigilante justice.

What happens to the people whose identities were stolen and used on that site? Their lives will be ruined.

It is not the public's responsibility to judge or prosecute/persecute. Give the database to the authorities.

> I'd be very surprised if you kept the same opinion, that publicly outing those individuals, was not a fit punishment for the crime. Given that, then this entire conversation is completely subjective, and based entirely on your opinion about cheating, lying, and infidelity.

This has nothing to do with what the people were doing and everything to do with mob justice and innocent people caught in the crossfire.

Public disclosure of personal information is irresponsible and hurts everyone associated with the exposed.

How is public shaming justice? Who are you to decide who and how to punish? What's an acceptable amount of innocent people to expose as cheaters/child traffickers? What about the amount of innocent family members and friends of the exposed that will get to experience this as well?

How many of the gay men in Saudi Arabia exposed by this hack are allowed to be stoned to death before the ends do not justify the public exposure?

You wouldn't care if people who are not at all involved are implied to be coke dealers because they had their identity stolen?

Public exposure of individuals' private information is irresponsible, period.

Vigilantism is against the social contract, upholding it implies you gave up that power to the institutions that have the responsibility to judge and prosecute.

> What about the scores of people to whom cheating is a dealbreaker

What about the scores of people who have a blue car?

How are 37 million private accounts, having nothing to do with you, your concern at all?

You brushed the consequences of this vigilante justice under the rug. Those Saudi Arabians will most likely suffer severe consequences, probably death, for being exposed.

The public is not a judge, jury or executioner, no matter how good it makes you feel to play morality police.

None of this excuses an irresponsible exposure of private information.

Life will last much longer for you if you accept that people will most likely act in what they perceive to be their self-interest.

Hackers publicly exposed personal information but it is not the their fault that the personal information was publicly exposed?

I'm not sure how this follows.

You seem to be very glad society hasn't moved on from the "Name and Shame" game. The one that ends in death, violence and shame for everyone close to and including the named.

Privacy for you and me, maybe. Do you think if you have any kind of real power you will be subject to that scrutiny?

> I am against it, because it allows arbitrary Python expressions inside format strings.

I was for this PEP until your post made this reality apparent. I'll take security over convenience.

If you haven't played with Debian derived systems before, debootstrap can be esoteric. I was pointing it out as an option for someone who wants to customize their system from the ground up / the most minimal install possible (just a bunch of files spit into a directory).

You can also install a debootstrap binary for most other distros and bootstrap a Debian chroot system in less than 3min ; )

>I trust that all the smart people using debian are onto something.

The big contrast with Debian and Arch are their package maintenance policies and release cycles.

The Debian community strives for a system that works well together and is stable above all else. Software must conform to standards of quality and stability, might be modified by their maintainers to that end and will be staged through the whole experimental -> unstable -> testing lifecycle before being deemed stable. This is a big deal for systems that you rely on or that you'd like to set and forget. Having the guarantee that software Works and updates won't break the system are also important.

From my experience, Arch is much more liberal about their packaging and is closer to the Debian sid/unstable experience in that you have access to bleeding edge packages that work 95% of the time, but sometimes you need to get you hands dirty to get your system working.

The right to be forgotten flies in the face of capitalism. You cannot assume you act in perfect self-interest without total and perfect information. The first can be easy to acquire, the second harder.

The right to be forgotten impedes on total information awareness and the desire to make the perfect rational decision with your money.

This is a good thing. Total information is not perfect information because of bias and context. Someone seeking such information will process it through a biased lens and never attain perfection. In that case, the individual under the lens will lose out.

Not having to worry about != not understanding

It's a good thing projecting such an image is rarely relevant when it comes to running a successful free software project online.