Medically, anything that interacts with the DNA causing it to code something it did not before has changed the DNA. You can argue whether such change is beneficial or harmful or whether spike proteins will do the job ultimately, but you cannot state that the DNA has not changed. Hence, Linus is wrong in the sense that he asserts that the DNA has not changed. Really no different than changing a line of code in a program.

Remember all those very verbose arguments about scientists suggesting you cannot prove a negative? Well, here we are, with scientists, trying to now absolve themselves of a situation that has evidence: Namely that labs WERE working with Covid-19 type viruses. The fact that they were never "officially" sequenced doesn't mean that the labs couldn't have had a leak to someone who did. Hence, in my world, if you know that there is a gallon of toxic waste in a farm field, and there is some other "toxic waste" that is similar but not identical to the toxic waste in the same farm field a mile away, it is a good bet that the two toxic wastes are somehow linked.

I'm glad this was the first comment I saw here. I think any game played where someone is shutting someone else down like this OUTSIDE of genuine plotting for physical harm of others AS A PLATFORM/collective and not "isolated individuals" who happen to be on said platform is a problem. I don't care if Hitler posted up his manifesto to the thing before a bar was raided by his supporters--I care that the platform itself is about speech and the freedom to say what one needs to say even if I, to quote Voltaire, hate what is said.

Wish granted: https://sports.yahoo.com/mlb-a...

Somewhere, when production levels for video gaming began equaling the budget for movies, the idea of having fun got tossed out the window in favor of fame, power and money. While I think such records are interesting in the sense of "hey, something like that can be done" I don't really care much beyond knowing someone once did it. Certainly, if your entire ego is based upon being awesome at some game, you will probably find at some point that either no one cares, or the game no longer matters.

When sites like reddit go corporate, that often means everything that made them good is gone.

I'm just glad to see that the House is not content to be google's bitch all day long.

I didn't realize he was fifty. That would have made him somewhere in his twenties during Deep Space Nine?

Unless they are willing to limit so-called gay pride speakers, I am not inclined to think they care much about extremism.

Indeed. Now you understand why you owe every teacher you ever learned anything from a great, huge debt.

Oh, but you did sign a social contract with me. If I released my code into the wild for free because I thought there was no market for it, and there was not at the time I released it, but there is NOW, that changes the parameters of the social contract. Whereas before what I had was not likely to be valued, now it is. Should I have never have written said code, you would never have been given the opportunity to make your "thin cent". In the way that you owe your parents your life for birthing you, you owe me for every penny you make from whatever it is you develop if my contribution is such you could not have built whatever it is without me.

Common Law does not supersede the constitution. If anything, the constitution is the document that grants when common law applies as per the 7th amendment.

I have no idea why people like this show. It sucks. It isn't even mildly enjoyable.

Bad analogy. First, an old appliance is something to be possibly "gotten rid of". Code does not get "old" in the sense that an appliance does, and when it does, nobody typically wants it. Second of all, if someone came along and says, hey, you should take that free sign down because you can get $20,000 dollars for it, guess what is likely gonna happen to that free sign? Simply put, it's only free in most cases because the market for it is uncertain. If someone is willing to pay big bucks for it, then you take the free sign off. The only instance that that is not true in is the case where you have strong beliefs about free software, which likely doesn't apply to most coders this argument is speaking of.

You made some good observations here. Creators create, and some don't care for support. I guess if the corporations PAID for the creation, and then made their money from the support (if your statements apply to the situation), the apparent contradiction would be resolved in this instance.