I think they just mean it won't naturally degrade over time, like other physical storage media might. Obviously if you really wanted it bad enough, you could physically destroy the data.
If the surface is a gold alloy, you don't really need to want it "bad enough" at all. Gold is a soft metal and unless you treat it with care, scratches will be common.
yet 99% of people break that speed limit regularly. We all know speed limit laws are less about public safety, and more about generating revenue for the state, at least in the US anyway.
and 99.x% of people aren't engaging in sharing child porn anyway, it's the 0.1% of motivated criminals that will share encrypted files anyway, no matter what the law is. They will find ways around the law, they always do.
This is a thinly veiled excuse to take basic human rights away from people.
I'm curious where you get your information about speeding, because it kind of seems made up.
Speeding is tied to one third of traffic fatalities the last 20 years (https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/speeding), so of course speed limits are put in place in an attempt to increase safety on the road. There are plenty of arguments to be made about the best way to enforce speed limits, or ways to discourage aggressive driving (such as speeding), but there is little doubt that speeding is dangerous.
"Speed related" is another one of those examples where the government lies with statistics to sell some safety FUD while failing to address the root cause of the problem.
Countries such as Germany have much lower traffic fatalities than the USA but they can operate vehicles at much higher speeds. Speed isn't the problem... uneducated drivers, poor vehicle maintenance, poor road quality, etc are the problem. But all those things would upset the masses who think they are entitled to operate a vehicle for 50 years after 2 months of training and a 15 minute test, so (in the USA) we get the lowest common denominator and roadways that are engineered to handle vehicles at 80+MPH are stuck with 55MPH speed limits.
>Speed isn't the problem... uneducated drivers, poor vehicle maintenance, poor road quality, etc are the problem.
Speed isn't the problem, neither are any of the others you mentioned. They all add to the problem of traffic fatalities though.
They did a study in Germany and were able to halve traffic fatalities by adding a speed limit of 130kph on one Autobahn section, measured over 3 years.[1]
Sure you can improve road conditions and driver education, but a multi-pronged approach including speed limits is sensible.
> We all know speed limit laws are less about public safety, and more about generating revenue for the state, at least in the US anyway.
That's absolutely not true. Sure, some stretches are just to generate revenue, but that you're not allowed to go 200km/h through a city is not for revenue generation. It's also not given by common sense - the fact that you need to set the limit 20 lower than what's save should be plenty of evidence.
Adopting the language is generally seen as a sign of in-group self-identification. The use-mention distinction is warranted. If skipped, one shouldn't be surprised if one is mistaken for espousing the views so stated.
so what? People generally make all sorts of assumptions. They are not necessarily correct through. You pointing it out feels like you're trying to bully him into making an admission of guilt or lack there-of of wrong-think. I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt.
Whether or not he agrees with the viewpoint he's paraphrasing is of no importance to me. I want to understand the point of view of people who think that way, in their own words. I have no interest in him filtering and watering it down to make it more palatable to you.
The point is, there is generally nothing to object to in the GPL unless you are specifically to constrain what consumers of your code candy do with it.
If it is "pollution" to you, that means it is an inconvenience and an obstacle to you executing your goals. The GPL has not been built to frustrate anyone except those who impinge on the fundamental set of Software freedoms. Part of that is the ability to have access to the source code of any tools you are reliant on.
So no, it isn't just assumptions. If you're frustrated by GPL, then either you're pissed because it thwarts your designs to create a captive userbase, or you're part of the legal/exec team trying to see if you can get away with the same. So which is it?
I'm a late enough arrival that I experienced the world with few other options than closed source programs and toolchains, and I'm not about to go chasing back after it. In fact, I'd be happy to see GPL go down in flames because we all finally came to our senses and ceased this IP nonsense in it's entirety to begin with.
True, but it doesn’t help the person who has is making this assumption to have an accurate view of the world. They are still wrong even as they smugly blame the person they have misunderstood for not communicating less ambiguously.
Actually most studies agree with my experience. You can cherry pick some that don't but ultimately if people have the perception that X dog makes a good fighting dog, they train them to become a fighting dog therefore skewing the stats. It doesn't matter what dog you start with, you can make a golden retriever a viscous killing machine if you're abusive or encourage violent behavior, which is also abuse.
Well, sure, but if your goal was to create a vicious killing machine, would you be indifferent to the breed of the dog? Pits aren't good fighting jobs simply because people perceive them to be.
