It's the complete opposite, Office365 only supports OAuth with IMAP and is phasing out/has phased out Basic Auth for IMAP. Additionally more often than not organizations are actually running Microsoft Exchange under the hood -- the majority of MS Exchange servers have Basic Auth disabled for IMAP (I believe since 2017 it's been off by default).
I think the comment's referring to the very large global backlash the US is receiving right now regarding being more strict with Iran from a nuclear perspective.
I think people are more obsessed with hating all of Trump's policies rather than actually understanding the situation with Iran. I would highly doubt that if the same situation occurred today, that the US would have the same sort of support against Iran, for better or worse.
The same people opposing US imperialism now were already denouncing Stuxnet for what it is back then.
Trump has changed only one thing: he's saying aloud (and proudly) what previous presidents did behind the people's backs.
Let the US government destroy their nukes, dismantle their army. Then they can start giving lessons about peace. Iran is much less of a danger to the world than the USA are.
Bingo. Things like stuxnet are exceptions that prove the rule.
The US has been largely alone in dealing with China and the Middle East. We’ve been alone fighting the worlds autocratic regimes lately. Where we have support we’ve had to push for it.
In China? They've setup trade restrictions. No effects on freedom.
In the Middle East? They've helped bomb ISIS, but they're merely supporting local anti-ISIS militias (think YPG/FSA) who do the real work/fight.
Worth noting: just like CIA armed then chased Ben Laden, US military intervention in Syria armed many many religious conservative militias in 2011, because they were afraid of an anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist insurrection (which was and still is happening in Rojava). Many of these reactionary militias have since then joined ISIS.
Also worth noting: the US are a big supporter of Erdogan's Turkey, one of the most genocidal regimes in the region, and a key supplier to ISIS. Way more dangerous than the conservative republic of Iran, to any neutral observer.
So yeah, try to "deal with" your own country. There's plenty to fix on your side without pretending to worry about other people.
Same goes for my people (the french) who keep destroying/colonizing other countries (Libya, Mali, Guyane..) pretending they care about the population.
Truth is as much of a tyrant Qaddafi was, his violent overthrow by NATO directly caused the return of slavery for millions of black people in Libya. That's what happens when you bring guns to someone else's table to "deal with" their problems you have no idea/interest about.
The end of the article is really crazy when you look at it -- Stimson growing up w/ great-grandma who was told stories by GW as a child, advising Truman about the atomic bomb. That "one life" thing really shocks you into perspective...
In less than 200 years, we went from rioting farmers at the mercy of nature to the most powerful war-faring nation on the planet with the ability to turn a war in which other superpowers struggled. We went from the bloodiest battle numbering over a thousand dead to obliterating entire cities and hundreds of thousands of people with just two bombs.
I would've thought that as we raise the standard of life in our society, we'll inevitably create technology that will be used to become more efficient at killing, but it's actually turning out to be the opposite -- as we get better at waging war, we're developing the technology that will raise our standard of life.
To be fair, in 200 years most of the developed world went from bickering nobles and rioting peasants to a bunch of powers capable of waging megadeath war. Industrialization is like that. Honestly, the transition of the Soviet Union was even more impressive, going from an agrarian backwood to a hydrogen-bomb-wielding superpower in less than fifty years, albeit cutting some corners in the process.
I understand closing questions as duplicates from a quality POV, but SO doesn't function as a high quality forum of expert users. The plain use case and majority perception of it is as a Q&A site where you can ask questions you're confused about and get the answer; in this case, closing questions as duplicates because they share a premise with another question is purely counter-intuitive.
Let's take for example the Java Infinite Loop question from the article. The asker was an introductory user to Java who made it clear, and asked multiple questions with relation to how to make the program ask the question in an infinite loop. The duplicate marked was purely a "how to do infinite loops in java" question. While for a more comfortable software engineer this suffices since they can use the method for accomplishing the larger concept of an infinite loop in their specific use case, the user was clearly so new that the question should have been approached from a beginner's perspective, i.e. "You'll need to wrap your main question asking code in an infinite while loop like this so that it continues forever." Besides, the secondary question the user asked wasn't answered in the duplicate.
While it makes sense to mark a question that was just "How to do infinite loops in Java" at a high level as a duplicate, this more specific question also requires the answer to identify where the loop should be placed and why it should be placed there. For a site that's supposed to be about helping the community, most of its high reputation users seem to be awfully focused on removing questions, discouraging askers, and the most minor of revisions (i.e. why so many questions I see on SO have been edited by a high rep user to add a line break or the most minor of cosmetic changes).
Moreover, the actual mission they're supposed to accomplish by being a trusted member of the community goes largely unfulfilled. In most SO threads I browse now, the accepted answer is just plainly incorrect or outdated. There's no enforcement at all here, and often times it's been edited in the last couple months as just a cosmetic change instead of actually fixing the glaringly wrong issue. The correct answer usually lies further down below, ironically posted by low rep users who struggle with the incorrect answer, find a better working solution, and then post it with the pure intention of helping others who came across the issue.
An obvious example is in many JS questions nowadays. The OP asks something very simple and direct, and most of the answers either:
- solve the question using jQuery, which is usually unnecessary nowadays and adds bloat to a relatively simple task
- use some random library or module, i.e. "simple, just learn the API for this open source lib instead and use it!"
- contain a solution that doesn't work or works in a very small number of cases (i.e. with most regex questions where there are 10 competing regex answers and you've got to find the right one)
- contain a correct solution but use extremely outdated methods to get there; i.e. using a giant XMLHttpRequest with a callback instead of just using async/await and Fetch, or lacking any sort of ES6 convention (using `var` everywhere)
- contain an almost correct solution except for a few typos, but no one who has spotted the typo and has the right answer also has enough reputation to edit the answer, and so the resolution of the mistake is a buried comment
----
In my honest but probably worthless opinion, Stack Overflow is a Q&A forum with the extremely strict and overbearing rules of a high quality expert's forum, and just encourages this sort of behaviour on the platform to the point that it really just fails to serve its core purpose on many occasions.
