I'm surprised the government hasn't just sent a banal request to everyone along the lines of, "you are required to disclose every known space alien who uses your service and you are prohibited from disclosing this order."
Well, less ignore mass panic and such. It's always been US government policy not to talk about these things. Canadian and UK, too, apparently. So, it being classified mighg make it a no go.
However, I found this Quora answer to give pretty good justification on national security grounds for military scenarios:
No cases where a warrant canary was removed to signal the possible receipt of an NSL have been prosecuted. Either all those warrant canaries were removed for other reasons, or prior restraint is still unconstitutional enough to keep prosecutors at bay.
At the time of posting, no security letter has been received. So it cannot violate a non-existent letter. If you assume that the letter could preclude you from removing the warrant, you just need a living canary. You post a new canary every day that you haven't received one. If it goes stale, you must have received a letter. There is no way that they can compel you to lie to the public and post a new canary after the letter.
Suppose you get an email from the boss saying, "singlow, remove the warrant canary script from cron. I just got out of a meeting with the Board, and they all agreed we need to inform the public that we've received this national security letter."
If you truly believe your argument, you wouldn't prosecute the boss even in the presence of this email. We all know anyone planning on using a warrant canary is intending to inform the public, so whether or not there's an email admitting it should be irrelevant if the action is legal. If you believe that the boss is not guilty, then you're consistent in your position.
Now, as a practical matter, you'd use an in-person meeting or telephone call or something. Or you'd at least use different wording. But the act itself would in principle still be illegal, even though there is no evidence to prosecute. And in that sense, a warrant canary could be a useful tool to allow one to get away with a crime that they consider unjust.
You have a common misconception. Antibacterial soaps don't cause bacterial resistance. Antibiotics do, but that's because antibiotics must selectively kill bacteria while inside the human body and without harming human cells.
Antibacterial doesn't really have a precise medical definition, but in practice they're dilute antiseptics. In many centuries of use, bacteria have not developed resistance to antiseptics. There's no danger of them developing resistance to these soaps either
...and even if they did, that wouldn't mean they were magically also resistant to some antibiotic.
So basically, the marketing people wanted something more than "just soap" so they used antiseptics and made up a nicer sounding word: Antibacterial. You have (and perhaps this was the intent of the marketing people) assumed this has something to do with antibiotics.
Antibacterial soaps end up in very dilute concentrations and are used dramatically more than they used to. Sure, these soaps don't use Antibiotics, but having a wide range of Antibacterial substances that continue to work and can be applied to your skin is very useful.
Remember, an autoclave or UV lamp work fine to keep stuff sterile, but they are not safe to put your hand in / under.
To quote from a review article[1]: "Antiseptics are biocides or products that destroy or inhibit the growth of microorganisms in or on living tissue". So antibiotics are a type of antiseptic.
>In many centuries of use, bacteria have not developed resistance to antiseptics. There's no danger of them developing resistance to these soaps either
This is not really true. In fact, the substance under question here, Triclosan, is a small 24-atom molecule so, in principle, there's no reason microbes couldn't develop resistance to it.
"TCS inhibits FabI, an enoyl-acyl carrier protein reductase (ENR). The FabI protein catalyzes the elongation cycle in the synthesis of fatty acids, an essential process for cell viability "[2]. Thus, one known mechanism of resistance is to alter the protein that TCS binds to:
"Mutation occurs whereby single or multiple amino acids are changed in the fabI gene, resulting in TCS-resistant FabI proteins"[2].
And it's not even just a matter of "well TCS is ineffective, so why not just leave it alone?". Triclosan is implicated in multi-drug cross resistance:
"In studies done on E. coli and P. aeruginosa, resistance to chloramphenicol and tetracycline increased 10-fold following TCS exposure"[2]. In addition, a survey of Acinetobacter baumanii (an increasingly common opportunistic pathogen found in hospital acquired infections) clinical isolates found that those that could resist low concentrations of TCS also exhibited "increased tolerance to amikacin, tetracycline, levofloxacin and imipenem."[2].
So in fact having TCS everywhere is actively harming our ability to use other effective antibiotics.
[2] Carey DE, McNamara PJ. The impact of triclosan on the spread of antibiotic resistance in the environment. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2014;5:780. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2014.00780. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4295542/
"He lives in Helsinki with his second wife Anna and daughter Maria (after whom MariaDB was named), and has a daughter My (after whom MySQL was named)[14] and a son Max (giving the name for MaxDB) from his first marriage"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Widenius
A tip that works for some: lips to say "oooo" (like an owl, or someone seeing something shiny for the first time), tongue to say "eeee". Well, worth a try.
I think you will find [y] in most Germanic languages, including German, Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, (most likely) Icelandic, and Dutch, so probably not. But it is a very "Finnish" vowel though... Hyyvää!
Besides, Widenius is Swedish speaking (just like Linus Thorvalds and about 10% of the people of Finland) and the name "My" was more or less invented by the also Swedish speaking Finnish author Tove Jansson in her books about the Moomins.
Although wikipedia claims it to be a short form of Mary or Maria, which I seriously doubt.
Anyway, Finnish has not that much to do with the name, I think that it allegedly was Tove Janssons uncle - a professor in mathematics, that suggested the name based on the mathematical symbol and Greek letter μ pronounced in Swedish. It might even be vaguely similar to how it was pronounced in ancient Greek :-)
Besides, I think that "My" in Finnish would be spelled "Myy" since just about the only simple thing with the Finnish language is that the vowel length is indicated by the number of characters.
Oh, thanks! I was led astray by people earlier in the thread mentioning Finnish and so I simply assumed Monty's first language was Finnish, which, as you point out, it isn't.
Maybe Monty should upload an .au file somewhere saying "Hello, this is Monty Widenius, and I pronounce MySQL as MySQL"!
I don't speak Finnish. But I did once hear David Axmark pronounce My's name, and to my ear it sounded like "Mih" - an "M" followed by a short vowel similar to the vowel in "bit". In other words, My's name is the same as Mitt Romney's first name, just without the "t" at the end.
You might want IPA [ɪ]. (But another comment in this thread suggested [y], a sound that English doesn't have, and which is close in several ways to English [i] in "me" or [ɪ] in "bit".)
> the MRM seems to be not limited to trying to make things better for men but also endless attacking women
?? Are you implying that feminism is limited to just helping women? Surely you're not that naive. If we were to play a game where each time you post a crazy thing an MRA has said, I have to post two crazy things feminists have said, I'll win that game. I'll win it easily. I'll win it with politicians and academics and people who have real power in our society while you'll be scouring fringe websites. And if ever I run low on important people, I still have the Tumblr feminists.
So yeah, I don't really know what point you thought you were making, unless the point was to demonstrate the totally different standard that you hold these groups to.
If you think feminism has legitimacy (and it most certainly does) it's because you're choosing to listen to the points that have merit, and disregard those that don't. It's selection bias, sure, but I do it too.
The points that have merit constitute the bulk of the message coming from people self-identifying as feminists. Sure, there's all kind of weird stuff - TERFs, separatist and even supremacist feminists etc - but they're a minority compared to the mainstream.
On the other hand, when looking at the MRA scene (again, going by self-identification of the speakers), the mainstream seems to consist of "incels", red pillers, and the like. So, as far as most people are concerned, the label is firmly associated with that sort of stuff. Consequently, suggestion to listen to "points that have merit", when they come in a binder with "MRA" on the cover, is not going to fly. If you want to be heard, you'll have to break the association by using a different label - or by finding enough like-minded vocal associates to reclaim the label (and at this point it would need to be a supermajority with a hefty margin before we can seriously start talking about this).
You might object that this is unfair, because the label is descriptive and appropriate, and all those misogynists have misappropriated it. Tough luck - descriptive labels get misappropriated all the time. For example, if you happen to be a socialist and a civic nationalist at the same time, a common sense descriptive label would be "national socialist" - but you really shouldn't be using it for obvious reasons.
I've associated feminism with "women make $0.67 for every dollar that a man makes for the same job, working the same hours" and equal gender ratio over equal opportunity.
Based on numerous conversations I've had with self-identifying feminists, I would say the primary message seems to be that a person's gender (regardless of what it is) shouldn't decide their opportunities in life. Opinions on the extent or existence of systemic societal discrimination against women tend to depend largely on individual experience
(and admittedly, on occasion, misinterpreted and badly gathered statistics) I think. And of course, there are as many versions of feminism as there are feminists because no two people are exactly alike.
Can you give some links where feminists support men? Feminists are concerned with women, the MRM is concerned with men, so the majority of their arguments will be focused on their respective gender.
The negation of "attacking women" isn't "supporting women", it's "not attacking women". Not saying anything at all about women is "not attacking women", but it's not "supporting women".
> if you're sitting on the train, or waiting in the Doctor's office, would you rather wait in VR
Other than the added privacy, I'm having trouble imagining the advantages of that. I'm reading my facebook feed, but now nobody else can see it, oh boy!
But see, I already don't care if people see. So that doesn't help me. Being immersed might actually hurt me though. Honestly, the idea of being on a train and having no idea what's going on around me is kind of terrifying.
The major benefit to me would be being able to look up from my coding to see, say, a beautiful professionally captured sunset over Half Dome instead of glancing over at a horrible painting someone bought from Bed Bath & Beyond.
https://www.amazon.com/Death-March-2nd-Edward-Yourdon/dp/013...