> He is posing open questions, to start a discussion about
medium-to-long-term software freedom strategy. I think this is valuable, and
it's sad to see people shouting him down for his initiative.
We have a term for the kinds of things he is saying. That term is "FUD". And
no, this is not "valuable"!
He is not asking specific questions. What he is doing is suggesting vaguely
that something ominous is happening because he has an "intuition" that this
is so. The effect of this is to spread conspiracy theories, not to "start a
discussion" that is valuable.
> For example, I would have made the same assumptions as Onpon4 about
vaccinations had I not read the chapter on them in the anti-vivisection book
I didn't make assumptions about vaccinations. I'm quite familiar with the
issue. There is no evidence for any long-term adverse effects from
vaccinations recommended by your physician.
What there is evidence for is the massive amount of death caused by diseases
that can be prevented by vaccines, such as measles. To be perfectly frank,
considering the scientific evidence, it is immoral to withhold any
vaccination recommended by a physician from a child. If you prevent your
child from being vaccinated for measles, and your child dies from measles,
you killed her. Furthermore, if you prevent your child from measles, and that
causes someone else's child to be infected with measles and die from it, you
killed that child. To not vaccinate is to commit mass manslaughter of
children. There is no getting around it.
I have no intention of debating this topic. I'll just close by leaving a
couple of links to videos which will explain why it is in fact
counterproductive to debate anti-vaccers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rzxr9FeZf1g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_zqBPuPx8w
