[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Response to "Position Statement to the Dunc-Tanc "experiment""

On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 03:21:10PM +0200, Thibaut VARENE wrote:
> Sorry for the wording but it's way more than I can take:
> On 10/27/06, Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote:
> [...]
> >> - How is the success of this "experiment" measured? (For the release as
> >>   well as for the entire project)
> >
> >An "experiment" is successful as long as it provides useful information.
> What the **** is this definition of "successful"??!
First, foul language is not necessary.  Second, it is the academic
definition.  See, an experiment is performed to confirm or dispel a
hypothesis.  If it does either, and you can explain way or draw some
other useful conclusion from it, then it is a success.

> It's so stupid I wonder whether you're playing smarts thinking you're
> addressing idiots in your reply, and you believe you can get away with
> it; or if you're actually mentally deficient, which I'd rather hope
> not.
> Both makes me wanna puke. I'm reaching the conclusion that electing
> you as DPL was the worst "experiment" Debian has ever gotten itself
> into. This opinion being based solely on your sayings and acts about
> this "experiment", as I don't know you, and don't care anymore about
> what you've done before (good or bad).
> Indeed, do you actually /think/ about what you write on public
> mailing-lists, and keep in mind that even when you're not posting as
> "leader@debian.org", you're actually the DPL in charge anyway? Or is
> the whole concept of "leadership" and the accompanying
> responsibilities totally unknown to you?
> Understanding that "successful" has nothing to do with "useful" is
> probably within the reach of a 10-year-old kid... I guess the vast
> majority of d-d-a readers can spot the difference as well!
> Here's an example of "successful" experiment based on such metrics:
> fatal human experimentation of new drugs (the patient dies, but at
> least the scientists/doctors can collect useful data. I doubt they'd
> call it a "successful experiment" though). There are many more
> examples but I'd rather avoid falling under Godwin's Law (though,
> according to the rule, it would probably end the thread).
Actually, what you describe is a successful experiment.  In fact, the
Nazis did such things with humans.  Now, such things are not ethical.
But then, the discussion is not about whether the experiment is
considered ethical, but rather the discussion is about which conditions
would make the experiment a success.



Roberto C. Sanchez

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: