In the US the tax payer subsidizes almost all drug research. Between 2010 and 2019 the NIH spent $184 Billion on all but 2 drugs approved by the FDA.

It worked out to about $1.5 Billion for each R&D product with a novel target and about $600 mill for each R&D product with multiple targets.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10148199/

Or

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama-health-forum/fullarticle/2804378

The cost to develop each drug is between about $1 and $2.5 Billion

I’m not sure how much is subsidized outside of NIH but I’d imagine other countries are doing the same.

Why should companies own the whole IP or perhaps why should they have any ownership if most of the funding is from the public?

Dual boot with Windows is terrible because of how fastboot messes with the drive partitions. If you want to dual boot you will have to turn off Windows fastboot.

It’s already illegal in some form. Via piracy of the works and regurgitating protected data.

The issue is mega Corp with many rich investors vs everyone else. If this were some university student their life would probably be ruined like with what happened to Aaron Swartz.

The US justice system is different for different people.

Yeah and a couple of things:

Malware has directly passed through as networks multiple times and neither the server of ads nor the ad network were able to be held responsible for it.

Right now it is common for ads to show apps that look like something popular but deploy malware. Nobody is taking responsibility for any of it. Ad networks aren’t well policed.

It is irresponsible for a user not to block ads IMO but I also get to decide what packets of data traverse my network just like any other person or company. As a consumer I do not have to be responsible or care if a business model succeeds or not.

Sure but Red Hat is a US company and Canonical is not, while Mint is basically just a bunch of volinteers. I assume Canonical does not have the same legal vulnerabilities as Red Hat does and certainly doesn’t have the same export control and IP restrictions.

At the heart of it though even if Red Hat didn’t exist in the Fedora Project anymore, you’d have to convince them to drop one of their top tenants. You could try right now by submitting a proposal to include Nvidia drivers or various codecs or you could just use one of the Fedora Remixes that already do.

Fedora itself doesn’t really aim for market share, to sell itself as a commercial product and it’s really all about the people that make up the Fedora Project and what they want. Sure Red Hat holds a lot of sway and provide a lot of resources but there hasn’t been a fork and major migration either. So in that way some Fedora contributors that and run RPMFusion is a good enough compromise for the Fedora Project as a whole.

Though who is the source of these problems to begin with? I’d say codec/patent owners and Nvidia itself are the source to the problems caused by their unwillingness to support FOSS.

In particular Nvidia has had criticism for years over this and still haven’t really changed. Even their drivers aren’t great in Linux even if you don’t account for the proprietary part. They have the resources and the ability to change everything without hurting their company, yet they do not. You could argue Linux market share is why but Nvidia makes enough profit to barely scratch the bottom line to just support Linux similarly to AMD. They certainly support slicing vGPUs for hypervisors in Linux, provided you pay for the privilege, so it isn’t like this is a technical challenge but it is obviously a pure business objective for them. You can and I guess do respect it but that’s on you not anyone else.

Different person here but I’ve been using Fedora for many, many years. This discussion comes up all the time and though RPMFusion is a checkbox in the software store GUI people obviously would like to have Nvidia proprietary drivers and proprietary codecs as an easy install like from a button click on install.

The problem is that Fedora has had a FOSS only core value since the beginning and I’m sure a big part of that is to keep Redhat out of legal troubles but it also resonates with a lot of the actual Fedora volunteers (those folks on the SIGs that do all the work).

I don’t think it’ll change anytime soon. Normally the response to this is “then new users will go elsewhere” or “If Linux wants to (something number of users or something market share)”. The thing is the Fedora project doesn’t ‘care’ about that and why should they?

Just do in what I do. Don’t join meetings most of the time. That way when you do it is noteworthy to the meeting stakeholder.

Yeah sure my manglers through the years try to have ‘the talk’ but after awhile of training them via sheer apathy they shut the fuck up.

I solve complex problems, get my tasks done, I’m independent and I stay busy because I’ll get bored. Most meetings could just be an email. There’s no real collaboration except managers or scrum masters asking what your blockers are but not actually doing anything about it. If I think the meeting will be a waste of my time I just don’t show up.

Flatpak doesn’t come with more libraries to interact with other flatpaks. It comes with libraries that the application’s flatpak you’re downloading requires. However, when installing the flatpak those libraries do not get installed if they are already on the system.

So widget-flatpak needs lib-a and lib-b. You’re system already has lib-b that flatpak is using for as another flatpak.

You install widget-flatpak. lib-a gets installed but lib-b does not because you already have it.

I know that. That still misses the point. The point of the law is to clarify that on digital storefronts that you make purchases for licensed digital goods, that you can’t imply to the consumer that they actually own those goods. It doesn’t matter if there is an offline installer. It doesn’t matter if you can ‘keep your installers forever’.

It doesn’t really matter because it doesn’t change the point that people think they own digital goods when they don’t. GOG may have a more consumer friendly system in place but it doesn’t change what has happened with people’s music, movies, shows, games and music in games at these digital storefronts, where people have clicked “Buy X” and later on, it’s no longer in their libraries anymore. This has happened even when the business still exists and is still providing digital goods.

Right, if you download the offline installers, then they can’t stop you from doing whatever you’re going to do with it but you don’t own them. Legally, you can’t sell them, transfer them to someone else, etc.

There are other sections that make the lack of ownership by you clear and that you still have to abide by the publisher’s/developer’s licensing agreements but Section 10 states the situation outright:

Section 10 of the GOG user agreement says:

GOG content is owned by its developers/publishers and licensed by us.

It should because their use agreement makes it clear that you don’t own the games but are licensing them. That’s pretty much why they had to clarify what they said I’d imagine. IMO, proving the point of the law, really.

So, for ventilators, I’d definitely prefer a DIY repair attempt and rolling the dice instead of having a ventilator that doesn’t work, especially when you absolutely need them but don’t have them.

You might as well criticize someone that uses a mirror in spite of blind people existing.

The Elder Scrolls 6: Skyrim 2

I don’t want to keep replying to this but in response to your ‘this is from a .mil site specifically …’ I linked to the DOD’s actual gov website.

This article is relevant for NAVPERS 18068F because the Navy has all of this annoying traditions, like referring to ‘-’ as Tack like they are pretending to be a flagman from 1835 on a ship and refer to a snackbar as a gedunk and blah blah blah.

But they still have a military rank. Sure, if you ask someone enlisted person what their ‘rate’ is they are going to respond with “PO1” if they are a Petty Officer First Class but if you have a CAC ID, under RANK it is going to say PO1 with the USN’s seal in the top-right. Because it is their military rank. The USN can call it a rate as well and traditionally it can be known as a rate in the USN but it is still a military rank. It will even say that on your ID card if you have one or have had one. As I recall, this is also true for the old green ID cards.

OK, let me just break this down for you. Rates are a job in the Navy. For example, in that wikipedia article, a Fireman recruit is a rate – their job. Their rank would be a Seaman Recruit. Their paygrade would be an E-1.

In your example, a Constructionman would be an E-3. Constructionman would be their rate. Their rank would be Seaman.

You can see this better at https://www.defense.gov/Resources/Insignia/

They don’t list rates, because there’s many, many, many different jobs in the different branches. The Navy is odd in that they usually refer to each other by rates, not ranks. In every other branch, people usually refer to each other by rank and not their MOS/AFSC/Whatever. It would be weird in the USAF for example to refer to some Airman First Class as 2A33C or whatever.

You can see this further explained at https://www.military.com/navy/enlisted-rates.html where they list the rates and talk about them but then they list the ranks and talk about them. They are tied together by paygrade.

And once again, in the US Navy, an enlisted person can literally not have a rate and be called Unrated until they are assigned a rate. Usually this happens to very junior enlisted.

They have pay grades, rank and rates in the Navy, though there are actually also unrated enlisted that get all assigned all the crappiest jobs until they get assigned a rate.

A CMDCM, so an E9. No Congressional approval is needed to bust down an E8 though.

In the navytimes article, they said some of the Cheif’s Mess installed a bunch of wired ‘repeaters’ all over the ship (probably wireless access points and not repeaters though).