I've seen a few people use a soft inflatable or plush collar that's more flat, and doesn't go up around the face, instead of an actual cone. That way the cat's the whiskers aren't disturbed while still preventing the cat from worsening wounds by licking. At least some cats seem to be a lot more tolerant of that style.
If you say "no, we're not pursuing this feature because it's impossible" and users have used other software that implements the feature to a reasonable degree of functionality, you're not doing yourself any favours in terms of shutting down demands. You'd be better off either not giving a reason at all, or giving reasons that are clearer to people who aren't as knowledgable.
Reasons are actually stated, they explained it is not feasible for the general case.
Once the devs have made clear they don’t plan to do exceptions (as other softwares do) then users should accept it and move on instead of keep harassing volunteers.
... except VLC implements time-based seeking which has pretty much the same requirements and is consequently not possible with literally all files either. But both are possible with 99.99% of video files you will come accross.
VLC developers are of course free to reject any feature request but if they do it by bullshitting their users (and that includes tacking on additional requirements that no user actually needs like perfect support for all formats under the sun) then they will be rightfully called out for it. Then throwing a tantrum and citing CoC violations is not going to improve things.
It's their project so ultimately they get to choose to run it into the ground but this kind of behavior is not something I want to support as a user os I will stay away from VLC which includes not making helpful bug reports and not donating.
Why is it incumbent on the developers (who know their codebase and its capabilities better than the forum posters) to explain their decision to the forum posters begging for a feature, and not only explain it, but explain the decision and the reasoning behind in such clarity and depth that the forum posters (who might not even be programmers, let alone know the code base) understand it sufficiently well to refrain from begging and insulting?
Because - and more so for the maintainers/managers of those projects - being able to communicate effectively is part of what it means to run a successful project?
That may even mean that you have to hold yourself to a higher standard than some low-effort post on the part of some casual user. Especially if you're the boss, the maintainer, the leader. And if that's asymmetric then yes it is - but to be a maintainer/manager of a project is also asymmetric. Good managers might also promote that culture more widely across all the project's contributors and so yes it may apply to all developers, too.
Not everyone that engages with your project is going to be perfect, some may even be rude. But as a representative of that project it's a skill to be able to cope with that, on behalf of the project (not you). I think one of the most underrated skills of a FOSS maintainer is a degree of fault-tolerance, to use a systems analogy.
Or, you could argue that no, it's not incumbent on a maintainer to be anything, even to be kind. But then don't expect your users to come back.
The choice not to implement it for architectural reasons is entirely up to the devs, is likely justified, and in most cases users acting entitled to support and feature additions from OSS developers who are volunteering their time is something I side against. But the devs also should be able to talk to people who aren't marinated in that same viewpoint, for their own sake if nothing else. The leap from "there exist cases where implementing this feature in a performant manner wouldn't be feasible" to "we shouldn't implement this feature even for the many cases that would support it" isn't going to be obvious to everyone.
VLC's poor performance in seeking backwards in general, not just by frame, is a big part of why it's no longer my media player of choice. Which is fine! As an OSS project there's no real reason to care about the number of users as long as enough people are involved to sustain the project, and making the developer experience pleasant is more important than making the user experience pleasant on that front. It just means it's not as good a tool for some users as others, like mpv.
Okay, how do moral hazard (as defined here), information asymmetry, and monopoly not apply to public health systems as well? Point 5 here is a little under-explained, how exactly does demand for healthcare reduce supply and why can public systems cope with that while private ones fail? And which aspects of medicine are non-excludable and non-rivalrous, aside from herd immunity? From what I can tell vaccines tend to be subsidized by the govt. in the US anyway, which doesn't require overhauling the entire healthcare system to rectify.
I'm quite pleased to live in a country with a decent public healthcare system. It does indeed have some significant benefits. It still has half the problems on your list, and more besides.
For the vast majority of files, whether those are executables, config files, or libraries, nix doesn't just put them in standard locations for Linux systems, but instead puts them in /nix/store/ with a directory derived from a hash of all its inputs and dependencies. For example, I have mpv in the nix store at /nix/store/08a907bw4csdc44408a992lnc9v2802c-mpv-0.38.0 and this has the default config, the binaries, completions, libraries, etc.
Since the directory is titled based on the hash of the various inputs that go into building the package, when I run an upgrade it's not going to overwrite the old version of mpv, but instead it's going to put the new version in the nix store as well, at a different directory. Until you collect garbage, to clear out the old versions of things you're not using any more, nothing is deleted.
So while you can add and delete entries to the nix store, each entry itself is read-only once it's been built, and thus immutable.
For managing your configuration.nix file itself you can just use whichever VCS you want, it's a text file that describes one system configuration and managing multiple versions and snapshots within that configuration file is out of scope.
For the system itself, each time you run "nixos-rebuild switch" it builds a system out of your configuration.nix, including an activation script which sets environment variables and symlinks and stops and starts services and so on, adds this new system to the grub menu, and runs the activation script. It specifically doesn't delete any of your old stuff from the nix store or grub menu, including all your older versions of packages, and your old activation scripts. So if your new system is borked you can just boot into a previous one.
As I understand it, large studies of couples where one partner has HIV with an undetectable viral load and the other does not have HIV have not recorded any cases of transmission through sexual activity. The question of whether it's "impossible" or "extremely unlikely" comes down more to philosophy than anything pragmatic at this point.
Transmission through sharing needles we have less confidence around, because illegal drug use is harder to study.
IIRC not everyone reaches an undetectable viral load through antiretroviral medication, so you do need to make sure that's the case. Pre-exposure prophylaxis and general safe sex practices like condoms can mitigate the risk for people with low-but-detectable viral load and their partners.
I grew up in the 1990s with an overwhelming fear of HIV as a teenager. It still feels incredible that the virus is now undetectable and non-transmissible with medication that’s not much of a burden in one’s daily life. A cure for AIDS was much closer than anyone imagined in 1993.
When everything seems dark and hopeless, this is one of the examples that always lifts my spirits. Humankind can achieve incredible things together.
10,000 people a year die of AIDS in the US. Not even remotely close to "winning."
I suspect a large portion of those deaths are due to poor sexual education thanks to christofascists, and people who don't get tested regularly because of poor access to family planning and reproductive health, again thanks to christofascists. All because Magical Sky God Said Abortion Bad.
That and people who lose their healthcare and can't afford the meds because this country is the only developed nation in the world which does not treat healthcare like a universal human right, because corporations want to keep using health coverage to keep workers from switching jobs more freely, because they don't want a free labor market.
Isn’t that like a third of gun deaths in the USA? Personally for me this idea of trust that it’s undetectable and therefore non jtransmissible is not a risk I would recommend anyone to take, but at the same time we have to put things into relation no?
Even these days, when cops accidently pike themselves with needles when dealing with addicts, they go to HIV center for preventative drugs. So that they, a cop who got piked exactly once, do not get HIV.
Um, no? Unlike with toilet seats, tons of people got it this way. There were even cases of hospital outbreaks due to insufficient sterilization of reusable syringes.
About 270 patients, mostly children, were nosocomially infected with HIV subtype G in seventeen hospitals in 1988–1989. The infection was mainly transmitted between children through contaminated catheters and needles, and from children to mothers through breast-feeding.
