You don't know where the trojan is hiding. Even non-executable files are potential vectors if the author knows how to trigger a bug in your viewer. Unless you have an intrusion detection system with checksums of known clean files, then nuking it from orbit is the only way to be sure.
For one reason or another, the pot smoking community seems to get all defensive and denies all allegations backed by science almost as fiercely as denial of global warming or evolution.
We don't deny that there are adverse effects. We deny that the adverse effects are sufficient enough to justify imprisioning people. Life is full of risks, and the fun parts even more so. A country that allows people to ride motorcycles for recreation has no place telling us Cannabis is too unsafe for recreation.
Yes, this is blindingly obvious. In all three examples above, the original author had no intention of contributing to a shared commons.
Then they shouldn't use a Creative Commons license. The question isn't whether those clauses are useful or not. They are just not appropriate for what should be a free community resource.
Perhaps the silliest thing of all about this is the belief that people can somehow be prevented from using NC or ND licenses.
Nobody wants to prevent anyone from using such terms. It should just be made clear that using these terms isn't doing anyone any favors but the author. That's why they shouldn't be part of Creative Commons.
If it could be demonstrated scientifically that the traits we're selecting against were actually harmful, sure. I'm very much in favor of genocide of the mHtt form of Huntingtin, for instance.
Fortunately we can do this through screening, and not murder. Although, I wouldn't be opposed to the murder of those with mHtt if they tried to pass on their defective allele. There's nothing that could justify knowingly inflicting that fate on a child.
The latter is better than the former because it's hard to predict outcomes, especially for decisions with long-range ramifications...too many variables involved.
Trying, and sometimes failing, to predict what outcome will be favorable is still better than ignoring the question entirely, which is what people of faith do.
If you follow right principles, you're more likely to get a positive outcome in the long run;
Only through a circular definition of "right principles". You can't know whether they are the right principles until you apply them and see if they bear fruit. Which means you're actually being consequential.
So the questions really is from what source do you derive your principles?
Practicality, and basic arguments of symmetry. e.g. the golden rule is a perfectly secular more. Wheaton's law is a great one too.
Why is he quoted so often? It's like he's some Jesus/Buddha/Mohammed/Hubbard. It's kind of bizarre. He was just a scientist, although a very good one. His accomplishments were in physics, not metaphysics, not morality.
Just a scientist? That makes him better than some sort of Jesus/Buddha//Mohammed/Hubbard. Anyone with a keen logical mind will make greater accomplishements in metaphysics and morality than any peddler of fairy tales.
The key to true morality isn't "what would Jesus do", but "what makes sense and actually works to produce favorable outcomes". By that standard, you cannot do better than a scientist.
I would love to uninstall Java. But what would I replace UGENE and ImageJ with? It seems like any free, cross platform, GUI, scientific software is written in Java.
I think you've drunk the war monger kool-aid. Didn't you learn your lesson with Iraq? Our government will blatantly lie to create the appearance of a threat in order to justify a war of aggression. Don't be afraid of Iran, be afraid of the war mongers in the US government.
Around here the crosswalk buttons are at least hooked up and responsive. I will get a walk signal if and only if I press the button, otherwise the traffic lights change but the don't walk signal stays lit. I do still doubt that they affect the timing of the lights, but they are connected to something.
Let's use Microsoft's language to see if we can justify other instances of spying:
"We donâ(TM)t use this hole in the girl's lockerroom wall to identify, contact or target advertising to our users and we donâ(TM)t share it with third parties."
Slashdot Mirror
You don't know where the trojan is hiding. Even non-executable files are potential vectors if the author knows how to trigger a bug in your viewer. Unless you have an intrusion detection system with checksums of known clean files, then nuking it from orbit is the only way to be sure.
There are a couple of striking things: the percentage of males jumps markedly as the regularity of cannabis use goes up
Holy crap, smoking pot turns females into males!
For one reason or another, the pot smoking community seems to get all defensive and denies all allegations backed by science almost as fiercely as denial of global warming or evolution.
We don't deny that there are adverse effects. We deny that the adverse effects are sufficient enough to justify imprisioning people. Life is full of risks, and the fun parts even more so. A country that allows people to ride motorcycles for recreation has no place telling us Cannabis is too unsafe for recreation.
b) You didn't lose any data files - they're all on the old disk somewhere.
Just sitting there waiting to reinfect the new machine.
Sounds like you lived with some lazy people who smoke pot and got the causality confused.
What else were you expecting?
Yes, this is blindingly obvious. In all three examples above, the original author had no intention of contributing to a shared commons.
Then they shouldn't use a Creative Commons license. The question isn't whether those clauses are useful or not. They are just not appropriate for what should be a free community resource.
Perhaps the silliest thing of all about this is the belief that people can somehow be prevented from using NC or ND licenses.
Nobody wants to prevent anyone from using such terms. It should just be made clear that using these terms isn't doing anyone any favors but the author. That's why they shouldn't be part of Creative Commons.
What if it's a private school?
And also the source of all religious arguments.
And just like in the beginning, you'll be paying a couple months salary for the privilige of owning a general purpose computer.
If it could be demonstrated scientifically that the traits we're selecting against were actually harmful, sure. I'm very much in favor of genocide of the mHtt form of Huntingtin, for instance.
Fortunately we can do this through screening, and not murder. Although, I wouldn't be opposed to the murder of those with mHtt if they tried to pass on their defective allele. There's nothing that could justify knowingly inflicting that fate on a child.
The latter is better than the former because it's hard to predict outcomes, especially for decisions with long-range ramifications...too many variables involved.
Trying, and sometimes failing, to predict what outcome will be favorable is still better than ignoring the question entirely, which is what people of faith do.
If you follow right principles, you're more likely to get a positive outcome in the long run;
Only through a circular definition of "right principles". You can't know whether they are the right principles until you apply them and see if they bear fruit. Which means you're actually being consequential.
So the questions really is from what source do you derive your principles?
Practicality, and basic arguments of symmetry. e.g. the golden rule is a perfectly secular more. Wheaton's law is a great one too.
Just a scientist? That makes him better than some sort of Jesus/Buddha//Mohammed/Hubbard. Anyone with a keen logical mind will make greater accomplishements in metaphysics and morality than any peddler of fairy tales.
The key to true morality isn't "what would Jesus do", but "what makes sense and actually works to produce favorable outcomes". By that standard, you cannot do better than a scientist.
I would love to uninstall Java. But what would I replace UGENE and ImageJ with? It seems like any free, cross platform, GUI, scientific software is written in Java.
As a European you don't really have rural areas as they exist in the US.
I've never had a computing device that didn't have rounded corners. The only question is what the radius of curvature is.
Why do foreigners think it's okay to insult Americans again and again?
As an American, we deserve it.
3 megabit isn't considered broadband in developed countries.
If it means universal service provisions for broadband internet access, then yes.
What are you some kind of socialist?
I think you've drunk the war monger kool-aid. Didn't you learn your lesson with Iraq? Our government will blatantly lie to create the appearance of a threat in order to justify a war of aggression. Don't be afraid of Iran, be afraid of the war mongers in the US government.
The free market itself is a myth.
Around here the crosswalk buttons are at least hooked up and responsive. I will get a walk signal if and only if I press the button, otherwise the traffic lights change but the don't walk signal stays lit. I do still doubt that they affect the timing of the lights, but they are connected to something.
Let's use Microsoft's language to see if we can justify other instances of spying:
"We donâ(TM)t use this hole in the girl's lockerroom wall to identify, contact or target advertising to our users and we donâ(TM)t share it with third parties."
Does that work? No? Then why should it work here?
For all the great evils the CIA, Mossad and MI6 supposedly do on a daily basis, what is he doing still breathing?
Because no one wants to make a martyr out of Assange.
Because once you know what you're doing every distro is easy to install.