Hopefully never, because "don't fuck with nature" is a self-defeating position for a human being to hold. We have flourished as a species because of our ability and motivation to manipulate nature to improve our conditions. Vaccines and antibiotics come to mind. Hell, we'll probably be extinct within the next 1000 years unless we learn more about how to better "fuck with nature".
Isn't it a little forward to assume that all "GM potatoes" are harmful, just because some genetic modifications result in plants that are mildly poisonous? Wouldn't it depend on the specific modifications?
Not that a little caution isn't in order. We shouldn't necessarily just blindly assume that every modification to some edible plant will also be perfectly safe to eat, and I'm aware that there are also potential problems with reducing genetic diversity in our food supply on a large scale, but a study showing that particular genetic modifications are harmful is not reason to abandon all genetic engineering in food; It's a reason to find out why those particular modifications create harmful substances.
Where's LINUS TORVALDS saying that Linux will be GPL3?
Linus' blessing is neither sufficient nor necessary for any fork of Linux, GPL3 or otherwise. It's not sufficient, because the vast majority of code in Linux is not "Copyright (c) Linus Torvalds". It's not necessary, because the only permission anyone needs is that which has already been granted by the individual copyright holders, as stated in the comments of the individual files.
Linus Torvalds doesn't have any special legal status with respect to Linux. He holds the "Linux(TM)" trademark, and he currently maintains the tree that is arguably the most popular among Linux kernel developers, but that's about it. He himself has said as much on numerousoccasions.
You shouldn't be asking "how can I use technology to teach the children?". You should be asking "How can I teach the children?". If technology helps you with your primary goal, great, but it's a means to an end.
Before you people start screaming, "what do they expect us to do about cosmic rays??//?/?" Think. This isn't about "debunking" global warming, nor is it about fearmongering about it. It's about building more accurate climate models.
Slashdot Mirror
You obviously don't work in the insurance business.
Excellent! I guess we can keep using a 32-bit time_t after all!
Hopefully never, because "don't fuck with nature" is a self-defeating position for a human being to hold. We have flourished as a species because of our ability and motivation to manipulate nature to improve our conditions. Vaccines and antibiotics come to mind. Hell, we'll probably be extinct within the next 1000 years unless we learn more about how to better "fuck with nature".
Isn't it a little forward to assume that all "GM potatoes" are harmful, just because some genetic modifications result in plants that are mildly poisonous? Wouldn't it depend on the specific modifications?
Not that a little caution isn't in order. We shouldn't necessarily just blindly assume that every modification to some edible plant will also be perfectly safe to eat, and I'm aware that there are also potential problems with reducing genetic diversity in our food supply on a large scale, but a study showing that particular genetic modifications are harmful is not reason to abandon all genetic engineering in food; It's a reason to find out why those particular modifications create harmful substances.
I've never understood it. Since when is freedom communist?
Linus' blessing is neither sufficient nor necessary for any fork of Linux, GPL3 or otherwise. It's not sufficient, because the vast majority of code in Linux is not "Copyright (c) Linus Torvalds". It's not necessary, because the only permission anyone needs is that which has already been granted by the individual copyright holders, as stated in the comments of the individual files.
Linus Torvalds doesn't have any special legal status with respect to Linux. He holds the "Linux(TM)" trademark, and he currently maintains the tree that is arguably the most popular among Linux kernel developers, but that's about it. He himself has said as much on numerous occasions.
Oh! Well then. Since you repeated yourself, you MUST be right. My mistake.
It's not because he's black, but because he can't afford blank paper, so he has to write in the margins of paper that has already been used.
YEAH! Or like spending money to make money... oh wait.
Ever? Why don't you do a little research, rather than repeating the same meme you've heard someone else say?
Groklaw is a front for IBM USA, but IBM Russia is front for Groklaw!
Can you issue subpoenas once the discovery process is over?
You have failed peer review.
... I get "You must log in to view other pages."
Something tells me Citizendium isn't going to replace Wikipedia anytime soon.
You shouldn't be asking "how can I use technology to teach the children?". You should be asking "How can I teach the children?". If technology helps you with your primary goal, great, but it's a means to an end.
It's not worth getting a lawyer if everyone tells you "not a fscking chance!".
... battery!
This article is about FSFE, which is independent of the FSF.
I don't know about Europe, but Canada's Copyright Act has a concept of "moral rights".
It doesn't cancel out any electromagnetic interference---just additive interference.
Symmetric? I doubt it. Sounds more like NUMA.
Immersive 3D p*rn MMOs!
"Global warming" is the net effect on the planet's surface, taken as a whole. "Climate change" describes the local effects of global warming.
Before you people start screaming, "what do they expect us to do about cosmic rays??//?/?" Think. This isn't about "debunking" global warming, nor is it about fearmongering about it. It's about building more accurate climate models.
Move along.
... says the AC.