holes

It's super easy to poke holes in both sides of the argument because building a car is so damn complicated whether it's an ICE or electric.

Free feel to poke holes in my theory or ask me questions about my specialness with street lights.

As you may know, programmers are notoriously bad at building anything and most applications are riddled with holes.

It has not even a fraction of the momentum of the glacier, but it can drill holes in you.

But holes are heavy because you have to reinforce the structure around them to carry structural loads.

So, my security is not very vulnerable to any remaining security holes in XP.

And btw, I'm thirty-something, university drop-out and with a couple of huge holes in my CV.

Its super easy to poke holes in other peoples business but we are also not working with all the information.

It's actually less costly, weight-wise, to build the aircraft structure without holes.

This thing is full of undefended assertions and logical holes.

I take that song and I turn it in to a bunch of holes punched in a big long reel of paper.

Fair rules don't have tailor-made loop-holes for favoured companies either.

It's like the "nerd at star trek convention" finding plot holes.

Marcus Ranum also believes that closing holes in Linux is "enumerating badness", and counts as one of the "dumbest ideas in security".

A modular construction requires "holes", right?

The Hole Argument comes in as a thought experiment where you have testers in different spacetime "holes" who are independent observers, replicating the results of a scientific experiment, the question to be answered is whether or not independent observation is a good enough criteria for evaluating a theory since the testers are epistemically blind to one another or if theories should be held to some higher standard.