Yeah, that's fair. But, I really do like the addons, and most of the time, the browser features.
So, I suspect if this addon got abandoned, I'd probably just put up with australis or whatever the flavour of the day at that point had become.
Yeah, unsurprising that restarting Firefox had no effect. Stuttering seems to be pulseaudio thrashing wildly in its buffers. I've had it happen with our game too. Can also leave application windows hanging as they wait for audio closes.
It is possible that just pulseaudio -k might have been enough without the restart, even.
Welp, then downgrade or whatever can be an option if-when that happens. For now, I'd prefer using the addon over dropping back that far.
Hell, there's always ESR to drag that window out even further if indeed the addon gets abandoned.
But given how many people (me included) are annoyed with Australis, I expect the addon will have a reasonable shelf life.
Haven't noticed that personally. Have you tried killing off pulseaudio? I occasionally get weirdass audio problems with pulse that get fixed by that.
I guess a full on logging out and logging back in might do the trick too.
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/...
CSS3 variables I think has been getting the most attention.
Banning cars could save more lives - Does that mean we should ban cars?
What effects would that have on the economic productivity of the country ? In turn, how much poverty will that create ? How many extra people will die as a result of not affording medical care ?
And this is a simple utilitarian exercise where you compare lives lost with lives lost. What about more complex dilemmas (see title of post) ? Should a nation never send troops in any conflict and accept any onerous terms the adversary imposes, for the sake of preserving all lives ? Should we ban all individual choice and responsibility, ban all sugary drinks, impose a state-controlled healthy diet ?
The notion that "lives can be saved" is not and cannot be used as the sole deciding argument on a societal issue. We are free individuals, we associate in a community seeking to improve our perceived welfare - one cannot treat the welfare as a goal in itself segregated from what we as individuals want.
what makes a lawyer so special that he can talk to the cops? Are lawyers vaccinated against cop-tricks or something?
Anything dumb your lawyer says can't be used against you (since he cannot be witness against his client) or against himself (since he's not the suspect). A really really dumb lawyer can be charged with conspiracy and end up next to the defendant but it's exceptionally rare and the burden of proof is monumental (mafia lawyers involved in the same operation with their client).
You, on the other hand, are already a suspect, the tiniest slip ('I didn't like him, but I did not kill him !') can send you to the gauntlet ('Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the defendant despised the victim - by his own official testimony'). The greatest trick your lawyer has is that he isn't you.
Talking to the police while suspected of a crime is like performing brain surgery on yourself.
he was acting in self defense to prevent an idiot driving while on a cell phone from causing an accident
"The signal is bad around these parts... let's switch to message chat !"
This is a prime example of why we have societies, laws and regulations - in this case those designed to stop mobile phone usage. Going for an individual solution quickly devolves into mayhem: thousands of bystanders affected, emergency calls interrupted, and probably not a single accident prevented.
More importantly, is this something fundamental to how gram-negative bacteria develop, or is it simply the current solution evolution has produced ? It would be nice to develop biotechnology that takes evolution into account and is ready to predict a few moves ahead and minimize the probability of a helpful mutation.
It seems to me that from a computer security point of view, the human biological computer has low entropy keys and we are dealing with a massively parallel adversary that tries trillions of keys every second (billions of people infected with thousands of strains of bacteria). Meanwhile, our current "cyber defenses" (drugs) are rather crude pattern match filters that look for things like <script>, SELECT *, and other static characteristics of what we consider to flag an attacker. Luckily, biology has endowed us with a key switch defense algorithm that ensures a "rooted" system does not compromise the whole network; unluckily, the mechanism will also take unrecoverable systems offline.
Yeah, the actual argument used against this kind of GMO use is that it would cost the same to treat the root cause of the problem by teaching people to grow a wider range of crops and the importance of a balanced diet.
The "root cause" of malnutrition is societal dysfunction. We have more than enough food, energy, water, fertilizers or the potential to obtain them in every country on earth, enough to feed the world ten times over. Every person on earth prefers a balanced and diverse diet, if it's a available. When people starve or go sick it's because they are trapped in a low productivity economy, caused by corruption, war, mismanagement of public resources and usually enabled or instigated by some western power friendly to the local chieftain.
This is techie myopia at it's finest, from the "give laptops to the poor" or "internet balloons" to "vaccines via mosquitoes". We know how to make the internet work and we know how to deliver vaccines: just like we do it in the rich countries. Poor people don't need technical solutions designed to work in anarchy, they need societal reform and functional public services. While the intention behind these schemes is laudable, we should not believe for a moment they are more than bandaids in lieu of peace, democracy and working governments.
Why would any employer refuse to hire obese workers as long as they can pull their own weight, so to speak ? They are trying to make obesity a valid form of disablement so obese workers have increased protection and MORE rights compared to their regular weight peers.
Yet, the vast majority of obese people have perfectly working thyroids. This is not about recognizing that some medical conditions can derail your metabolism, which I believe no one is arguing, and should be covered by existing disability laws.
This is about treating all obese people, the vast majority of which are so because of their own choices, as disabled. Inability to control your own actions becomes a valid form of disability. It's a slippery slope because it legitimizes self harm and forces society to take responsibility. If obesity is a form of disability, so is tobacco or gaming dependence. And if treating obesity is not about making people eat less, then clearly treating dependence is not about smoking or gambling, we as a society should hold together and provide comfort: smoking places and breaks, subsidies for food when all the person's paycheck is lost in the casino, job protection when the addiction interferes with work performance, free medical coverage for resulting problems etc.
BTW, I write the above as a 220 pound man, who use to be as large as 260 pounds, and knows full well how hard it is for an obese person to control her appetite and weigh. But I fully understand it's MY body and MY choices, I'm fat because I love food, it's one of the great pleasures of my life and I wouldn't dream to blame nature or society for my fate.
the vast majority of plants *do not eat*, yet they gain non-water mass. Humans aren't a closed system.
The stupidity enclosed in the post above has increased my intracranial pressure to the point of spontaneous detonation.
Actually, the US is twice as efficient at GDP/ton of GHG, about the same as Canada, Australia, and Finland.
That's because a whole lot of that 15 trillion GDP is produced on Wall Street, Redmond and Hollywood - non tangible goods. As the GP said, per inhabitant USA produce far far more CO2 than China, and a CO2 tax would absolutely cripple US manufacturing and exports.
Without life, Biology itself would be impossible.
