In which I argue that Source Available Modifiable Software still respects end users.

Someone is wrong on the Internet; he said that all code is technical debt, and I refute that.

Daniel Stenberg compared his C programming against the average, so I thought I would do the same.

Two people wrote posts about developing programming languages for a decade. I did too, so I wrote one of my own.

The CRA may kill Open Source. But what if I told you that there is a way to not only save FOSS, but fund it, while still improving cybersecurity, would you believe me?

Our digital world is now made of chains. You made them. And you can break them. For the sake of our future, you must.

There is controversy on the NIST's post-quantum selections, and I have some thoughts.

Someone was wrong on the Internet about correctness vs performance, and I decided to vent.

In this third post in an ad-hoc series, I talk about why preparing for the future is critical to the survival of software.

Compiler authors claim that the possibility of UB is a license to kill. They are wrong. They are not James Bond.