C is memory safe if you program it well enough, so I guess C

I mean sure, but it theoretically stops people arguing and threatening to try and bring stuff they shouldn't really be bringing through, as being able to point at that will end a lot of arguments... Equally though, it makes a lot of sense as otherwise you'd have "ah yes this bomb isn't banned because I've switched out a molecule in the explosive for an analogue"

Counterpoint: the vote is near to 50/50 and neither of those maps look anywhere close to 50/50. Come back when you've got an alternative that looks proportional, not equally bad just the other way.

The president has always been allowed to assassinate you... They're in charge of the CIA/FBI/NSA/IRS/Other scary 3 letters who assassinate people all the time.

Making presidents immune in official actions is almost required given the sheer number of decisions they have to make and the scrutiny they're under means they're sure to break laws sometimes, plus the subjectivity of some laws (eg is making bad decisions and crashing the econony/causing infighting in the military or whatever else treason?) however in unofficial actions they should absolutely not be immune.

Nano is just as fiddly as vim and way less powerful when you actually figure out what you're doing though?

Ie a completely redundant piece of software that has no place being pre-installed anywhere

Most jobs that work with FOSS are at the most privacy violating companies unless you go to (eg.) ARM to be a compiler engineer.

Other than that, your best bet is meta, google etc. as they have the resources to pay to write code for other people.

Let's dig a very wide canal connecting the Dead Sea, Red Sea & Sea of Galilee to the Mediterranean... Maybe about 250 miles wide would do it

Damn, I didn't realise Elastigirl was real but that's such a stretch that you must be her...

That's a fair point, however it's hard to see the EU making an example when it's so in its interest not to... Chances are they'd end up getting some hard proofs in terms of legislation commiting the UK to the EU for a lengthy time period and maybe some other "commitments" which don't boil down to anything but look firm to members and citizens (as loved by governments everywhere who want to look like they're doing things while also not wanting to do those same things)

I mean if you have a car then 0.3% of your net worth is probably at least $1

If you don't want to donate $1 because you think someone else should be donating more then you're worse than them

I'm not saying you should, just that if you don't you shouldn't judge them

What's the motivation to cherrypick though?

Human drivers are bad enough that I don't think there's any doubt that autopilot puts them to shame with regards to safety, so they can either look way better and not be suspicious, or look way better and be suspicious... Sounds like an obvious choice to me