> Your position is just another that has yet to catch on to the fact of asymptomatic transmission. > Just take the time to read one.

This isn't my position, its from virologists. And I'll thank you to not presume I don't already know of those sources. Those aren't relating to aerosols in the air for 3 hours.

Listen to practicing virologists on the matter not me: http://www.microbe.tv/twiv/twiv-592/

And as a note, I'm really resisting not getting pissed off at your comment which seems to presume I'm too dumb to know about asymptomatic transmission.

Perhaps you could, I don't know link to some bioarxiv sources or actual information rather than alluding to things. My comment was exclusively in regards to the virus surviving in aerosol form for 3 hours. Its a contrived environment where that can happen. Transmission in the air isn't what I am discounting. Capiche?

Actually forget about it. I'm just going to stop commenting entirely on this matter.

> I believe this 100% to be true.

Based on what evidence exactly?

> Considering that under certain conditions the virus can stay in the air for up to 3 hours, masks definitely are helpful.

Those conditions being using a Goldberg Drum designed to keep aerosols that can't stay airborne for as long as possible? If yes then yeah sure this virus can survive in the air for 3 hours, but that isn't normal reality. It can't stay aloft that long, it will hit a surface.

Goldberg Drum: https://academic.oup.com/aje/article-abstract/68/1/85/188529...

You really only need the mask if you're going out and symptomatic. Even then, as noted, leave the masks for the people that are encountering sick people daily. They need them way more than you do walking around buying groceries.

There's nothing more permanent than a temporary solution.

> It seems more like an indictment of the speaker than of the rest of society.

It most certainly is, I have Christian friends that have used that exact line asking me how I can have morals as an atheist without the threat of a higher diety. As if being nice for the sake of just being nice is an impossible concept. Or in this case that only money would inspire me to do work. As we know from studies, money isn't the only incentive for innovation. In fact at a certain point, ~75k it tends to become less of an incentive.

> They are not smart. Just stop telling yourself this about those people and stop respecting them. Stop it.

They can be smart, they can also lack empathy and be smart. Both can be true at the same time. Intelligence isn't an indicator of empathy.

What would be tasteful in a conference announcement about the conference? They mentioned it just fine.

It is now yep! 32GiB was the prior max.

No, from the farmers I grew up with. They hated Democrats for wanting to remove those specific subsidies because it was good for the environment. But to do it it means you have to have land be otherwise "unproductive".

So they get rather angry at being forced to farm every acre of land knowing it will spite themselves later. Its a bit more complex than anyone makes it out to be. But easier to just call farmers dumb and that they vote against their interests. Which is ultimately self defeating and ignores the realities of modern farming and the history of how we got here.

> That may be true, but Democrats will at least be more ostensibly receptive of the issue. Bernie Sanders makes it an explicit point on his campaign website. I'm guessing other candidates have as well.

As someone that grew up in a pure Red state for decades and grew up on a farm/ranch, there is zero chance of them voting Democrats for the reasons you think they should.

Want to know at least one reason why? Know those farm "subsidies" democrats love to hate? Also known as: the government pays for farmers to keep fields fallow so we don't get another dust bowl. Farmers like those subsidies, they're a good thing. City people hate them, think they're a bad thing "we spend taxes for farm states". Yes I'm overgeneralizing but i've real work to do today so I can't get super complex.

Get to know a few farmers and understand that your perspective on Democrats is highly skewed on their policies towards places with population centers. You can argue Republicans are worse in as many ways as you want, but until you understand why none of those ways matter to farmers, you'll forever lack an understanding of why things are the way they are.

> It also incorporates concepts that, while not being the most "accessible", are patterns the vast majority of users have become familiar with and can navigate without explanation.

Does that include ios/macos/windows users?

Option A is the best imo, I worked on many sql db's that the rule was to fit it into ram. Option c will bite you in the ass eventually. The kernel and your other processes need some space to malloc, and you dont want to page in/out.

Having 4/16TiB servers or "memory db servers" as I thought of them solved a lot of problems outright. Still need huge i/o but less of it depending on your workload.

> In my team, we're doing a "check-in/out" inside each meeting where we take turns by answering "With what emotion you're entering/exiting this meeting?".

That sounds horrible and almost cult like by my view. I would be looking for the proverbial door if I were in a team that wanted me to contribute this way in front of everyone.

Just talk to people, if they're quiet talk to them. Pick up on context, treat them like humans not machines that can just have their handle pulled to reveal their internal state.

Or their lawyers are extremely good at getting employment contracts drawn up. Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by paranoid lawyers that got the c levels ears.

> I think you are just agreeing with what I said.

Pretty much yep! I think we both agree asking for gui support is likely to get shot down by most maintainers. And not for any reason than its a big ask.

> GUI is a huge separate feature request and not "criticism" per say.

I've seen a lot of people even on HN complain about cli only things. I'm not sure everyone would agree its a feature request.

> And yet Apple is totally fine with benefiting from the open source work of others...

And? Every other person benefits the same with the code contributed under the licenses in play. I fail to see the issue. With llvm for example they seem to be upstreaming a lot of their xcode backend stuff as they get time. So that statement of many copyleft proponents that only copyleft encourages upstreaming rings hollow to me.

Hell go talk to people from Redhat about custom gcc forks that target chips that aren't upstreamed to gcc. Just because you're using gcc and modifying it doesn't mean you'll actually be contributing the code if its all internal.