DMD 0.175 release

[Kristian Kilpi]

On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 03:59:34 +0200, David Medlock <noone at nowhere.com>  
wrote:
> John S. Skogtvedt wrote:
>
>> David Medlock skrev:
>>
[snip]
>
> Politicians and anti-capitalists love the theories though.  It lets them  
> pass laws to make you live the way they want you to.  Makes them feel  
> good but its mostly junk science.  The ban on DDT has killed millions of  
> mostly children in Africa, but it was too banned on junk science and  
> only after first world countries had used it successfully.

Oh, it's true that you can 'bend' almost any test cases to support your  
cause. But would it be obvious that a party (multi-million company,  
politician, etc) which sees an opportunity to make a lot of money will do  
quite much to achive that goal? For instance, they could publish results  
that support they goals. Test results of independent third parties  
(scientist that are not sponsored, or bribed even) are much more realiable  
to me. They are not actually getting or losing money when making those  
tests.

I'm not communist, and pure communism doesn't work. However, a pure  
capitalism is a bad thing also. (Both of these things, in their purest  
form, don't exist in the real world.) A company is all about making money,  
right? It'll make money in any means necessary without breaking the law.  
(It could break the law if pros are much bigger than cons and risks.) If  
the law is not strict enough or there are loop holes, companies can do  
pretty horrible things. Why? That's simple: if a company 'A' won't do it,  
then a company 'B' will. Or at least, so the company 'A' thinks, so it  
acts first, before the company 'B' can act. It's in human nature. And note  
that when the number of companies gets larger, the probability that some  
of them will act will approach 100%. So the assumption the company 'A'  
makes is justified and true even.

The history is full of examples of 'greediness'. Oil companies (lead in  
gasoline), arm companies etc (biochemical weapon factories build for  
Iran). And of course cigarette companies. They *knew* 30 year ago that  
cigarettes is harmful and will cause cancer, they just didn't publish that  
information. When the wheel was rolling, it was too late to make it stop,  
they thought. And were right. Now hundred millions are addicted to  
cigarettes, and the wheel is rolling so new young people will start  
smoking. And what's discusting, now cigarette companies are found new,  
fresh market area in the East (for instance, in China). Do the cigarette  
companies tell there the that it can kill you (if the law requires, there  
is a tiny label in the cigarette boxes)? No, the ads are directed to young  
*kids*! And why the goverments do nothing to stop that? Well, they get  
money when people buys cigarettes of course (taxes). The goverments do not  
notice (they don't want to) how much money will be spend to medical  
expences and in loss of taxes when people die before their time... (Or  
maybe they are just satisfied when many will die 5-20 years before their  
time; no need to pay pensions...) ... So, if any of you are smoking,  
please quit! :)


About DDT...
Of course, if you and your children are starving, and DDT would help, you  
would probably want to use it to say the least. But that's not the final  
solution, you have to think something else in the long run. DDT companies  
will of course sell the stuff until the end of time, and collect the  
profit. Because DDT is banned, another solutions must be invented. These  
are tough questions, though. But it's absolutely good that DDT is banned  
outside Africa, no question about it. It's clear that DDT is very harmful  
substance.


I have seen so much (truth bending and manipulating) propaganda (by  
goverments and companies), so I though to do some anti-propaganda myself.  
;)

(I didn't intend to write so much... sorry about that.)