You would think a bunch of nerds would be too busy saying "ah, that is really cool" in response to learning some new amazing things the world is capable of, instead of clenching their ego in pain because something challenged what is taught in high school chemistry.
The thing is that the headline would have us think that the world just turned out to be capable of something amazing, because it would defy what was taught in high school chemistry, As in turns out, what was achieved has nothing to do with any mechanics taught in high school chemistry. So what you end up with us to groups of people. Those who discard the news value because "it doesn't do what they said it does!" and therefore refuse to be impressed, and those who understand the more advanced interpretation of temperature, and who realize that this isn't really news, and isn't that spectacular and amazing.
Oh really? From your link:
The theory of psychological pricing is controversial. Some studies show that buyers, even young children, have a very sophisticated understanding of true cost and relative value and that, to the limits of the accuracy of the test, they behave rationally. Other researchers claim that this ignores the non-rational nature of the phenomenon and that acceptance of the theory requires belief in a subconscious level of thought processes, a belief that economic models tend to deny or ignore. Research using results from modern scanner data is mixed.
No, that's saying people who are stupid, lazy or just don't care have to rely on their masters. That's the way it should be.
Preventing people who can't be bothered go move their physical asses down to a physical voting booth is an effective way to achieve the same.
Imagine a private person being able to put a fence around the city park and arrest people for tresspassing.
I kinda thought Linux guys in particular understood the difference between physical and digital goods.
A better analogy is having the gardener of the city park help you create your own garden, which is exactly identical, and you then decide to put a fence around it.
GPL is the gardener telling you in advance that he'll only help you if you never do such a thing. Not neccesarily unreasonable, but also not a no-brainer, and completely unacceptable if you planned to wall it off all along.
Why do you think you can't?
Because the nature of our sociology is a product of genetical properties, mainly intelligence?
You don't see lions going out of their way to mate with the weak and fetilize the infertile. The sociological difference between lions and humans are in no small part a product of a different genome.
At this day and age, what really defines humanity is not so much being bipedal and able to use tools. It's the fact that we've created civilization. That we're waging wars, creating art, asking grand questions about physics and philosophy, and share the answers we find with the coming generations.
Our genome was an enabler for our sociology, which is now affecting our genome.
So again, what makes you think you can seperate them?
1: No code table for op: ++post