Paper Retracted After Anti-Immigrant Scientist Bans Use of His Software (sciencemag.org)
sciencehabit writes: An 11-year-old research paper describing Treefinder, a computer program used by evolutionary biologists, has been retracted after the program's developer banned its use in European countries he deemed too friendly to refugees. In September, German scientist Gangolf Jobb announced on his website that researchers in eight European countries, including Germany and the United Kingdom, were no longer allowed to use Treefinder, which builds phylogenetic trees from sequence data. The move sparked outrage among some scientists, and now, BMC Evolutionary Biology has pulled the 2004 paper describing the software because the license change 'breaches the journal's editorial policy on software availability.'
Anti-Muslim "refugee" != Anti-immigrant
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
The researcher has decided to act like a childish asshole.
The publisher has said "unfortunately, due to your stupid manifesto we can no longer carry this paper because it violates our policy".
This guy is perfectly allowed to go all crazy and issue his manifesto of "you can't use my stuff". That doesn't mean that other entities are required to keep hosting his stuff.
The publisher is following a policy, and the people who wrote the paper agree.
So, really, the only one acting immature is the childish idiot who has decided he's taking his ball and going home, and making up random rules about who can use his software.
But he can own that decision and the consequences.
This isn't two wrongs making a right, this is an idiot living with the real world consequences of being an idiot.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Treefinder has been dead for about a decade. If youre still using im surprised you have enough data from it to continue a grant proposal, but i hope you'll consider other more functional applications like PHYLIP PAUP MEGA Phylo_win ARB or DAMBE
hybridization or recombination events got you down? concaterpillar to the rescue. http://rogerlab.biochemistryan...
distance matrix analyses on nucleotide or protein sequences? seriously, get a copy of ODIN. while i couldnt get funding for a beefier desktop, i DID get compute time on our university supercomputer and ODIN absolutely screams on linux.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Starting from 1st October 2015, I do no longer permit the usage of my TREEFINDER software in the following EU countries: Germany, Austria, France, Netherlands, Belgium, Great Britain, Sweden, Denmark - the countries that together host most of the non-european immigrants. For all other countries, the old license agreement remains valid. USA has already been excluded from using Treefinder in February 2015. This is all in accordance with the license agreement stated in the TREEFINDER manual since the earliest versions, which reserves me the right to change the license agreement at any time. I can do this because Treefinder is my own property.
The reason: I am no longer willing to support with my work the political system in Europe and Germany, of which the science system is part. There is no genuine democracy, and I disagree with almost all of the policies. In particular, I disagree with immigration policy. Immigration to my country harms me, it harms my family, it harms my people. Whoever invites or welcomes immigrants to Europe and Germany is my enemy. Immigration is the huge corporations' interest, not peoples' interest. I am not against helping refugees, but they would have to be kept strictly separated from us Europeans, for some limited time only until they return home, and not being integrated here as cheap workers and additional consumers. Immigration unnecessarily defers the collapse of capitalism, its final crisis. The earlier the system crashes, the more damage can be avoided. Possibly a civil war in Europe. Not to mention the loss of our European genetic and cultural heritage.
The most egregious yet prevalent error in modern news reporting, is to conflate someone being against ILLEGAL immigration with someone being against LEGAL immigration.
How can these immigrants be ILLEGAL when the countries named allow them entry? That seems like a giant flaw in your point.
If you can't understand why someone who does not want people who are by definition criminals entering the country in large numbers, then heaven help you - because reality certainly will not and history just laughs at you.
Are the majority of people in this wave criminals? Where in the world did you get that information other than your own bias? The UN seems to disagree with you.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
http://www.treefinder.de/
Original License
License change and re-release in February 2015:
Updated Oct 2105:
Thing is, in the EU (as in, throughout the EU), the antipathy is a lot higher, and for good reason: As a general guideline, unemployment is usually a touch higher than in the US, and job growth is a touch lower (though in some countries this difference is rather dramatic), leading to a lot of antagonism.
Recently, it's grown primarily because of the actions and crimes committed by a number of these migrants, as well as the increased strain on the far-more-generous social welfare systems of these countries (which as a corollary, appears to be leading to even higher taxation).
If you think the Germans are vicious about it, you should take a gander at Nebelspalter (a Swiss parody magazine) and look up the opinions there on the subject...
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
I'm saying that by forbidding use in countries that grant asylum, the author of this program is demonstrating a stance against even legal immigration.
Yes you do- or can. It's all about efficiency and productivity though. Paying someone who produces 1000 units an hour an extra 10 dollars per hour comes out to just 1 cent difference on the per unit costs.Of course taxes add to it and it wouldn't be that simple because there would be an additional employment tax as well as social security and so on on top of that 10 dollars but you can get the point easily.
It is a lot harder however when you are providing services of some sort or when the production is lower. At 100 units per hour, the cost difference would be roughly 10 cents per unit (not considering taxes and all). So if someone could pick your tomatoes at a rate of 100 packs an hour (lets say 2 tomatoes to a pack), paying them $20 an hour would have a cost associated with 20 cents on each pack of tomatoes purchased. Paying them a minimum wage of $7.25 per hour would be 13 some cents cheaper so it isn't a huge cost increase to pay them a little more.
Where it hurts is when you can only service or produce 10 units per hour. An extra $10 dollar per hour would be $1 per unit. A typical waitress at one of these full service chain restaurants can likely handle 4 to 6 tables an hour depending on the number of people at each table. If every table leave $2 for a tip, they are earning $8 to $12 more per hour than their base salary. But as restaurants usually have it, they are not packed enough at all times of the day to enable this type of turnover so there will be several hours which the waitress/waiter would only service 1 or 2 units per hour and you would need a tip increased quite a bit to make up the difference.
For a single tomato, 20 cents a tomato vs. 8 cents doesn't seem like a lot but to someone like a Sam's Club who buys millions of tomatoes it's a huge difference. And you have to remember that picking the tomato is just one step in the process of getting it to the produce counter. If you paid everyone along with way $20 an hour, the cost of a single tomato would be much larger than it is today. The other thing about tomatoes (and produce in general) is that there's a huge amount of loss between the time they are picked and the time they are bought. I used to work in a produce department while in college. We'd sometimes throw away entire cases as soon as they came off the truck. For the remaining cases, a certain percentage wasn't fit to sell, so they would get tossed in the process of filling the display. Then a couple of times a day at least, the ones on display would be gone through and the ones started to look bad would get pulled.
It wouldn't surprise me at all that for every tomato sold, at least one is tossed and that money has to be recouped in the price of the tomatoes that actually get sold.
There's no point in having an editorial policy if you don't enforce it. The policy says the journal only allows papers on freely available software; the author submitted the article under those conditions then reneged, so he loses.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.