Oh, shit... she's one of those Fourth Wave feminists. No wonder she thinks she can get away with this kind of bullshit.

Suspected by idiots... important distinction.

Sad, but true: organic food . . . will be the purview of the rich.

Nonsense! Buying organic food from overpriced chain stores may be the purview of the rich, but that's for suckers. One of the great advantages of organic farming, which this "comprehensive analysis" entirely misses, is that it has the potential to put ordinary people back in control of their food supply. Even if a person doesn't have enough land or time to grow all of their own food, they can still significantly supplement what they buy. It's not just about nutrition; it's about economic security.

We've known for a long time that organic farming won't produce the same yields in the same area with the same amount of labor. If all industrial farmers, and only industrial farmers, were to suddenly convert to organic production, lots of people would starve. This is not news. But it's also not what the organic farming movement advocates.

How long before GCC can target the DCPU-16?

The argument that probability failed us overlooks the fact that, although the Fukushima reactor was totally destroyed, the entire nuclear incident wasn't that big a deal. Compared to Chernobyl, it was nothing. Compared to the other damage caused by the tsunami, it was nothing. The real lesson here is that, thanks to design improvements since Chernobyl, a reactor can fail catastrophically and still not cause significant harm. I'm willing to bet that the ecological damage and human suffering caused by this worst-case scenario was significantly less than the damage caused by generating the power that the reactor generated over its lifetime via other means. And newer reactors are even better: less likely to fail, and less likely to cause significant damage if they do.

I really like Areca Backup. It has a fairly straightforward GUI and you can easily back up groups of files to different backup locations or media. If you run a differential or incremental backup, the GUI presents a "logical view" of that backup against the last full backup or series of backups. Now, if only I could find some easy way to tag and organize 20,000 mp3s...

I'm a developer working on a personal project. I will not use any GPL code because I don't want to release all my code. So I'm only using code that's under the Apache or similar licenses. And since that's what I'm getting, that's what I'll give back. I'm not willing to release all of my code, but I'm willing to release some of it. In fact, I'm happy to because I want to show it off. So I'll put it in a library and release it under the Apache license. Maybe some other developer will find it useful, and the cycle will continue. Why should I care if a commercial developer uses my code to make a profit? I won't have lost anything if they do. I don't write code with the expectation of in-kind "payment" under the terms of the GPL. I write code because I enjoy it. If your reason for licensing code under the GPL is an expectation of getting something back, then I'd say you've got a gambling problem.

In one of Heinlein's books, a character has himself cloned with one major change: his Y chromosome is replaced with another copy of his own X. This results in two cloned "daughters". Of course, the offspring of the original male organism and the female clone would be as inbred as a creature can be. Plus it would express any recessive traits on the X chromosome. I wonder if the offspring could be kept alive for enough generations to produce diversity through mutation... and whether it would be monstrously cruel to do so.

Isn't this basically the same effect that creates the L1 point?

...but only in the same sense that the Broken Window Fallacy creates them.