Perhaps > 10% of the pop. making this decision has negative consequences but un-aggregated individuals do not make a difference.
Right. My argument isn't that government should necessarily mandate vaccines, but that it is within the scope of public safety to do so under certain circumstances.
Arguing about "proprietary software" as a development model is nonsensical. I think you're confusing commercial ("cathedral") vs. volunteer ("bazaar") development models, and free vs. proprietary licensing.
Lots of free software is developed by volunteers, and as a result, lots of free software is "unfinished". If you're going to use statistical models to show that free software licensing has an impact on product quality, you first need to adjust for that fact. Drawing conclusions about licensing schemes using data about development models is just bad science.
I suspect the vaccine is a good idea (it's still pretty new and we've seen new drugs withdrawn), but the government has no business mandating it's use.
What about this?
Although no vaccine offers 100% protection, the spread of disease from person to person is much higher in those who remain unvaccinated. Virologists have found that when a certain percentage of a population is vaccinated, the spread of the disease is effectively stopped. This critical percentage depends on the disease and the vaccine, but 90% is not uncommon.
No, you are seeing the development process never end. Just try and count the number of projects, even highly popular projects, that are still stuck in pre-1.0 state because the developers can not be bothered to set a specific goal and work to polish the product up for release, but instead just want to do the fun work of adding new things forever.
Gee, volunteers mostly only do the things that are fun? I'm shocked!
If you're unhappy with the software, then pay someone to adapt it to your needs. If lots of people are unhappy with the software, then they can pool their resources to pay someone to adapt it to their needs. At least that's feasible with free software.
No kidding. I wonder if the IRS would be interested in that "Makarand" fellow.
Not if you're trying to prove a point ...
on
AACS Device Key Found
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
If you're trying to demonstrate that DRM is futile waste of energy, it's in your best interests to release as early as possible.
Releasing an exploit a couple of years after the technology is first released gives people the impression that the DRM was "good" for those two years. On the other hand, releasing the exploit a week later drives home the point that the copy-protection racket is selling nothing but snake oil.
Also, cracking DRM is all about revealing secrets; how could you expect the hackers to agree to some kind of "code of silence" when it comes to their work?
Since when is it "bad" that vulnerabilities are being discovered? The "Bad Month" happened when the vulnerabilities were created, not when they were found.
Let's look at this list. (Disclaimer: I have never used Windows Vista.)
Adobe Systems Inc.'s entire line of graphics and multimedia software I don't know about this one, but I wouldn't be surprised if it had something to do with stuff like the Netopsystems FEAD Optimizer.
Symantec Corp.'s security products The software that's notorious for digging its claws into the depths of your operating system? Gee, I'm so surprised that it doesn't work the same as it does on XP.
the Mozilla Foundation's open-source Firefox Web browser Firefox uses XUL for widgets, so it probably doesn't behave like a native app.
Skype Ltd.'s free voice-over-IP software Skype contains a bunch of weird anti-reverse-engineering code. I'm not surprised if it doesn't work perfectly without changes.
OpenOffice.org It doesn't support open standards like Microsoft OpenXML. *snark*
I don't care if it's a banana republic. Slashdot editors should know better than to use the racial slur, "chimps" to refer to people of Iranian nationality!
In any case, is anyone else surprised that uranium enrichment facilities can be used to hunt food?
If you forcibly remove an essential package, thus hosing your system, you can still recover by using a live CD distro.
ESR complained that rpm isn't statically linked. On Debian, dpkg and apt-get aren't statically-linked either. Neither is bash. Also, some packages' pre/post-installation scripts require Perl, as well as dozens of other shell commands, none of which are statically linked. I doubt the situation is any different on Ubuntu.
I can find lots of things to complain about Fedora (for example,/etc/sysconfig/net* is a huge nasty hack compared to Debian/Ubuntu's ifupdown mechanism), but "rpm isn't statically linked" isn't one of them.
In fact I do fault Debian for being the same way, but only because they take it too far. IceWeasel is the prime example.
WTF? Do you realize that Iceweasel was created because the Mozilla foundation decided to discontinue Debian's permission to use the Firefox trademark for modified versions of Firefox? Do you realize that Debian needs to make those modifications in order to get Firefox to run on all 13 of the architectures it supports?
There are plenty of reasons to criticize the Debian project, but if you think the Firefox/Iceweasel fiasco is Debian's fault, it's very likely that you have no idea what you're talking about.
Slashdot Mirror
The ones for fresh fruit. Leave a box of bananas in your apartment for 20 years and see what happens.
Because PostgreSQL isn't licenced under the GNU GPL.
Gee. Thanks, Dell! We users wouldn't be able to define the market on our own without your permission.
Right. My argument isn't that government should necessarily mandate vaccines, but that it is within the scope of public safety to do so under certain circumstances.
Arguing about "proprietary software" as a development model is nonsensical. I think you're confusing commercial ("cathedral") vs. volunteer ("bazaar") development models, and free vs. proprietary licensing.
Lots of free software is developed by volunteers, and as a result, lots of free software is "unfinished". If you're going to use statistical models to show that free software licensing has an impact on product quality, you first need to adjust for that fact. Drawing conclusions about licensing schemes using data about development models is just bad science.
Yes.
Are you SURE you can sucessfully work out which drive has failed and do a rebuild?Yes.
Have you tried it?Yes.
Anything else?
Why not? Choosing to remain unvaccinated hurts others.
Merck is not legally allowed to advertise it as a treatment for any cancer. It's a vaccine, not a treatment.
... because HPV vaccination prevents AIDS and pregnancy.
News flash: Not everyone who disagrees with you is a leftist moonbat.
Gee, volunteers mostly only do the things that are fun? I'm shocked!
If you're unhappy with the software, then pay someone to adapt it to your needs. If lots of people are unhappy with the software, then they can pool their resources to pay someone to adapt it to their needs. At least that's feasible with free software.
Sure, that would work, but it essentially taxes the people who are willing to pay substantially less to get mostly-working products.
No kidding. I wonder if the IRS would be interested in that "Makarand" fellow.
If you're trying to demonstrate that DRM is futile waste of energy, it's in your best interests to release as early as possible.
Releasing an exploit a couple of years after the technology is first released gives people the impression that the DRM was "good" for those two years. On the other hand, releasing the exploit a week later drives home the point that the copy-protection racket is selling nothing but snake oil.
The academics won't, but the tradespeople will.
Hardware players individually, or entire models of hardware players?
Since when is it "bad" that vulnerabilities are being discovered? The "Bad Month" happened when the vulnerabilities were created, not when they were found.
Let's look at this list. (Disclaimer: I have never used Windows Vista.)
Adobe Systems Inc.'s entire line of graphics and multimedia software I don't know about this one, but I wouldn't be surprised if it had something to do with stuff like the Netopsystems FEAD Optimizer. Symantec Corp.'s security products The software that's notorious for digging its claws into the depths of your operating system? Gee, I'm so surprised that it doesn't work the same as it does on XP. the Mozilla Foundation's open-source Firefox Web browser Firefox uses XUL for widgets, so it probably doesn't behave like a native app. Skype Ltd.'s free voice-over-IP software Skype contains a bunch of weird anti-reverse-engineering code. I'm not surprised if it doesn't work perfectly without changes. OpenOffice.org It doesn't support open standards like Microsoft OpenXML. *snark*I don't care if it's a banana republic. Slashdot editors should know better than to use the racial slur, "chimps" to refer to people of Iranian nationality!
In any case, is anyone else surprised that uranium enrichment facilities can be used to hunt food?
If you forcibly remove an essential package, thus hosing your system, you can still recover by using a live CD distro.
ESR complained that rpm isn't statically linked. On Debian, dpkg and apt-get aren't statically-linked either. Neither is bash. Also, some packages' pre/post-installation scripts require Perl, as well as dozens of other shell commands, none of which are statically linked. I doubt the situation is any different on Ubuntu.
I can find lots of things to complain about Fedora (for example, /etc/sysconfig/net* is a huge nasty hack compared to Debian/Ubuntu's ifupdown mechanism), but "rpm isn't statically linked" isn't one of them.
I dunno. Let's consider some facts:
So, according to you, the user bases of OpenBSD, Debian, and Fedora are negligible?
WTF? Do you realize that Iceweasel was created because the Mozilla foundation decided to discontinue Debian's permission to use the Firefox trademark for modified versions of Firefox? Do you realize that Debian needs to make those modifications in order to get Firefox to run on all 13 of the architectures it supports?
There are plenty of reasons to criticize the Debian project, but if you think the Firefox/Iceweasel fiasco is Debian's fault, it's very likely that you have no idea what you're talking about.