He's onto something. It's not that simple. Cost is a factor, and more importantly, the effort to conceal that cost is a factor, and the effort to conceal where the money goes (and sometimes where it comes from), are factors.

Devolution.

Not necessarily stoned but mutatious.

It is of course a parody, based on song lyrics.

The software never had difficulty-value. What was difficult, and what had to be amortized in order to make it acceptable, was the professional-services investment required to make the software locally useful.

AI appears to promise a resurgence of homebrew. But will the auditors like it any better than they liked old-school homebrew?

Modi's only concern is party patronage. He is against anything that would introduce any factor other than BJP/RSS affiliation into hiring decisions. Any such statement from him must be interpreted in that light.

Oh, come on. It's not written in runes? (Which reminds me: APL might map onto some of these use cases.)

The thing about a lot of monarchical powers in the UK is that the monarch gets to keep them, provided of course that they only ever use them as prescribed by the government. As to what happens otherwise, well, Charles III won't want to emulate Charles I.

(I'm kind of amazed he chose that name, tbh; it's not particularly uncommon for British monarchs to rename themselves on taking the throne, and it has... baggage.)

While Charles I was a disaster, Charles II is remembered as a patron of the arts and sciences. He restored the British navy, which went on to be the foundation of the Empire.

His personal life was rather too colorful, but a lot of people seem to think positively of that.

I doubt he's anybody's favorite monarch, but his well-respected mother seems to have thought the name was OK.

Official statements have been released that clearly state the King was not informed prior to the arrest.

I can't for one minute imagine no one asked "if one were to suspect a member of royal family of [...] and arrested them, what would the King say?"

The answer is obvious. The King would have no choice but to say what he has in fact said (i.e. that the ordinary process of the law must be followed).

And there's one thing we've learnt recently is that royals do not lie

I think there is a lot more of this story to play out ...

Still seems to be lots more to play out.

Example - Why all the supposed "...rich and powerful names ...." being seemingly protected ?

What do they have to hide ?

The Police don’t need the King’s permission to arrest members of the royal family.

You're going to get a call from someone who owns a trademark.

Immigration is nowhere near the top of the list of things that fray the social contract, erode trust, and build resentment. Corruption, particularly in the administration of "justice", is vastly more important.

Immigration has a "target" that is easy to get angry at. Corruption also has an "other", but that other is usually physically and even values-wise not that different from one's own tribe

>And a man's foes shall be they of his own household