ddrescue works better IMHO. It logs the errors it encounters and then tries to split them up into smaller pieces. Plus, since it is logging, you can restart it. That means you can try on multiple machines, some of which might have more luck at reading the problem sectors.
There is a wrapper for dd_rescue that uses it's log, but it is simpler to use the single ddrescue program.
I like to use ddrescue, not to be confused with dd_rescue - which is not as powerful. Note that if you use Debian, they have the names alllllllllll sorts of screwed up - search for gddrescue. Same with Ubuntu.
Because of their long use in the United States, the U.S. Congress passed a law in 1938 declaring that homeopathic remedies are to be regulated by the FDA in the same manner as nonprescription, over-the-counter (OTC) drugs, which means that they can be purchased without a physician's prescription. Today, although conventional prescription drugs and new OTC drugs must undergo thorough testing and review by the FDA for safety and effectiveness before they can be sold, this requirement does not apply to homeopathic remedies.
Even so, they do exert whatever control they are allowed over dietary supplements and homeopathic products. The internet is full of angry homeopathic victims who blame the FDA for pulling their favorite water or sugar pill.
As for the chiropractic profession, the FDA simply has no jurisdiction. Reiki and Scientology are religions.
I'd personally love to see all medical claims on products under the jurisdiction of the FDA, but I live in a superstitious society.
The USPS has been pretty much self-sufficient for the last 30 years. Taxes have nothing to do with the postal service, and your combative tone is not making me feel like you are someone who can participate in any kind of real discussion.
If you want to tone down the demonizing a bit, I'll be happy to discuss the relative merits of propping up the USPS with taxpayer funds just so it can maintain Saturday delivery and a gigantic pension fund.
That is, when is a fetus a baby, a human, a living person?
You don't have to have a set day or threshold. You can have a continuous, gradual transition from zygote to baby. You can make different rules as the fetus progresses along that line.
are we to decide when life begins?
As opposed to who? People are the only ones who can write laws.
If we are to decide when life begins then we also have the "ability" through law to decide when it should end
Capital punishment. War.
God is the creator of all human life
Not everyone agrees on this, and even when they do they can't agree no which God, nor on what He wants.
Are you telling me there is no human there?
Of course not. I'm telling you that an unfinished human is there. It is not an egg, it is not a baby. It is a fetus - still developing. It is different from a baby and also different from a sperm and egg.
A person should be allowed to do whatever they want to themselves.
So long as it does not endanger public health, I think I agree. A person with a communicable disease needs to have it treated appropriately.
I also think that it is important for the FDA to regulate commercial speech. A company should not be able to make claims about a drug that have not been proven. If someone wants to sell tablets of something-dioxide, fine. If they want to sell something-dioxide and make claims that it cures cancer - not fine.
People who are brain dead are at the complete mercy of their guardian. They can be starved to death under current law. A simplification, but there's your answer.
So we have to draw an arbitrary line (or more) on when a half-baked "cake" can legally be considered "cake" or "precake". Wherever you choose to draw it, It'll be a stupid arbitrary line, but given the numbers of people who want the right to abort it'll be even stupider to not draw a line somewhere.
I completely agree - though it could also be a whole pile of imaginary lines. You could have one line for use of abortion as birth control, another line for people who need to cull fetuses in a fertility treatment, another line for people who's body for whatever reason didn't self-abort a chromosomal abnormality, another line for when the mother's life is at risk, and so on. The key is to recognize that the line is arbitrary, and that different people will have different ideas as to where it should be.
Better to wait till Society is ready to deal with it.
It wasn't so long ago that we had legal slavery and legal ethnic cleansing in the US. I have no doubt that when/if AI comes to be reality we will have a similar "dark period", but I don't think that is a good reason to hold back our technology. After all, what is worse - to invent something and then subject it to a great evil for some period of time, or to never invent it at all so that it cannot exist?
Just because an issue is polarized doesn't mean that one side isn't correct. If I am certain that 2+2 equals 6, and you are certain that it equals 4, does that mean that we should be "moderate" and agree that 2 + 2 actually equals 5?
I'm not talking about issues such as mathematics, where there is clearly only one right answer. I'm talking about issues involving morality and other human endeavors, where all the rules are just made up anyway. It's hard for me to understand how anyone but an extremist would think that the issue of abortion can have a "correct" answer.
I'm not going to bash Netflix, but I will say that it's been a while since I've seen the complete destruction of a very well-regarded name brand.
Maybe the IBM PC?
Can you imagine Coca-Cola changing their name? McDonalds? Apple? Why work so hard to build name recognition for a service and then toss it in the garbage?
Yes, both sides grossly misrepresent the state of the current system to score political points. You probably shouldn't believe anything that a politician has to say without checking the "facts" yourself.
That said, the FDA is a wonder of the modern world.
Could this have anything to do with dodging anti-science policies of the American far right?
No, because the stem cells that Manning received were not fetal - they were stomach cells.
I'm not certain, but I think the reason that procedure has not been approved in the US is that it has not passed the FDA criteria for efficacy. And, in fact, it appears to have not worked for Manning - he had another neck surgery after the treatment.
Slashdot Mirror
Denatured alcohol will work fine too if you're just using it as a solvent
I find that it leaves residue. Buying "Everclear" at the liquor store gives better results. YMMV. :)
ddrescue works better IMHO. It logs the errors it encounters and then tries to split them up into smaller pieces. Plus, since it is logging, you can restart it. That means you can try on multiple machines, some of which might have more luck at reading the problem sectors.
There is a wrapper for dd_rescue that uses it's log, but it is simpler to use the single ddrescue program.
Holy crap, you have over a thousand VHS tapes to convert???
FWIW, the gnu ddrescue guys reccomend lzip.
I like to use ddrescue, not to be confused with dd_rescue - which is not as powerful. Note that if you use Debian, they have the names alllllllllll sorts of screwed up - search for gddrescue. Same with Ubuntu.
why does the FDA allow homeopathy, chiropractic, reiki, and Scientology?
In the case of homeopathy, it's a stupid 1930s law:
Even so, they do exert whatever control they are allowed over dietary supplements and homeopathic products. The internet is full of angry homeopathic victims who blame the FDA for pulling their favorite water or sugar pill.
As for the chiropractic profession, the FDA simply has no jurisdiction. Reiki and Scientology are religions.
I'd personally love to see all medical claims on products under the jurisdiction of the FDA, but I live in a superstitious society.
The USPS has been pretty much self-sufficient for the last 30 years. Taxes have nothing to do with the postal service, and your combative tone is not making me feel like you are someone who can participate in any kind of real discussion.
If you want to tone down the demonizing a bit, I'll be happy to discuss the relative merits of propping up the USPS with taxpayer funds just so it can maintain Saturday delivery and a gigantic pension fund.
I'd say most people call it a baby when it comes out. And then it's a slow development period all the way until death.
That is, when is a fetus a baby, a human, a living person?
You don't have to have a set day or threshold. You can have a continuous, gradual transition from zygote to baby. You can make different rules as the fetus progresses along that line.
are we to decide when life begins?
As opposed to who? People are the only ones who can write laws.
If we are to decide when life begins then we also have the "ability" through law to decide when it should end
Capital punishment. War.
God is the creator of all human life
Not everyone agrees on this, and even when they do they can't agree no which God, nor on what He wants.
Are you telling me there is no human there?
Of course not. I'm telling you that an unfinished human is there. It is not an egg, it is not a baby. It is a fetus - still developing. It is different from a baby and also different from a sperm and egg.
A person should be allowed to do whatever they want to themselves.
So long as it does not endanger public health, I think I agree. A person with a communicable disease needs to have it treated appropriately.
I also think that it is important for the FDA to regulate commercial speech. A company should not be able to make claims about a drug that have not been proven. If someone wants to sell tablets of something-dioxide, fine. If they want to sell something-dioxide and make claims that it cures cancer - not fine.
People who are brain dead are at the complete mercy of their guardian. They can be starved to death under current law. A simplification, but there's your answer.
So we have to draw an arbitrary line (or more) on when a half-baked "cake" can legally be considered "cake" or "precake". Wherever you choose to draw it, It'll be a stupid arbitrary line, but given the numbers of people who want the right to abort it'll be even stupider to not draw a line somewhere.
I completely agree - though it could also be a whole pile of imaginary lines. You could have one line for use of abortion as birth control, another line for people who need to cull fetuses in a fertility treatment, another line for people who's body for whatever reason didn't self-abort a chromosomal abnormality, another line for when the mother's life is at risk, and so on. The key is to recognize that the line is arbitrary, and that different people will have different ideas as to where it should be.
Better to wait till Society is ready to deal with it.
It wasn't so long ago that we had legal slavery and legal ethnic cleansing in the US. I have no doubt that when/if AI comes to be reality we will have a similar "dark period", but I don't think that is a good reason to hold back our technology. After all, what is worse - to invent something and then subject it to a great evil for some period of time, or to never invent it at all so that it cannot exist?
A little golf clap for making the demise of Netflix's DVD business into a partisan political issue.
What counts as extremism?
People unwilling to compromise.
Just because an issue is polarized doesn't mean that one side isn't correct. If I am certain that 2+2 equals 6, and you are certain that it equals 4, does that mean that we should be "moderate" and agree that 2 + 2 actually equals 5?
I'm not talking about issues such as mathematics, where there is clearly only one right answer. I'm talking about issues involving morality and other human endeavors, where all the rules are just made up anyway. It's hard for me to understand how anyone but an extremist would think that the issue of abortion can have a "correct" answer.
Are you telling me this isn't a living person?
Of course not. I'm telling you that it is a half-baked living person
are you suggesting that a baby doesn't have rights until out of the womb?
Whether it does or does not have rights is not important. The question is what rights SHOULD it have?
Yeah, that's a good point. I hadn't considered that they are looking to discard the disk business altogether, and this is just a step towards that.
Good insight - I hadn't thought about this as a means to exit the market.
Yeah, but at least they kept the brand name!
The context is stem cells and fetal rights?
I'm not going to bash Netflix, but I will say that it's been a while since I've seen the complete destruction of a very well-regarded name brand.
Maybe the IBM PC?
Can you imagine Coca-Cola changing their name? McDonalds? Apple? Why work so hard to build name recognition for a service and then toss it in the garbage?
But, but, duriing the health care "debate"
Yes, both sides grossly misrepresent the state of the current system to score political points. You probably shouldn't believe anything that a politician has to say without checking the "facts" yourself.
That said, the FDA is a wonder of the modern world.
I mean, if a woman had an ingrown toenail that would cause a cost to society of millions then yes, it would be forcibly removed.
No, it shouldn't.
Nice try, though.
Pretending that fetuses aren't human is silly. Pretending that fetuses are fully human is also silly. Extremism is silly.
Citation: Buddy Christ.
Could this have anything to do with dodging anti-science policies of the American far right?
No, because the stem cells that Manning received were not fetal - they were stomach cells.
I'm not certain, but I think the reason that procedure has not been approved in the US is that it has not passed the FDA criteria for efficacy. And, in fact, it appears to have not worked for Manning - he had another neck surgery after the treatment.
But it was closed from a market perspective - no one could make any changes and sell their own "clone".