Protein that destroys HIV discovered

You mean the same one that google uses for, amongst other things, to measure authority?

I am fine with kicking the old system into oblivion. I am not fine with doing so before suggesting a new system however. I simply do not see how, in this chaotic internet where everyone has an opinion and is able to communicate it to the entire world, we can differentiate between objective solid stuff, and mere speculation.

If we are for freedom, then lets us have such freedom. Let us not frown at wikileaks if they publish deep and damaging secrets, let us not be defensive when our own content is concerned and copied, let us so too resist any attempts of the real law, say the law of defamation to apply to the internet, let us be cool with bittorrent and the way it distributes freely our content.

If that is the internet we wish, then fine, let us be the pioneers and disrupt all older notions.

If the above is extreme however, then let us be impartial and judge where the line ought to be not from a selfish perspective, not from an emotional or ideological perspective, but from a rational, detached, without favour or fear perspective.

That is the choice of our generation, but I submit, we can have only one of them. We can not be hypocrites when our own interests are concerned and guard them ferociously, yet fight to undermine the interests of others.

On your first point. I was a student and during that time I had access to all the papers I needed, sufficient papers to get the top grades.

Second, I do not know what profession you are in, computer science is very different from medicine. To start with, the latter requires actual physical stuff, you know, people you can experiment with, or monkeys, and substances, like bleach, and an actual physical space, rather than simply a computer and some time.

I understand that my opinion is in the minority. I understand too that most of you bright smart angels are trying to find loopholes in my reasoning or arguments. I am not however pleased at all with having the entire people of reason and intelligence set against like leaches.

This is a discussion. Not of an adversarial kind, but of a collaborative nature, where people of reason and intelligence try to arrive at a conclusion, rather than win one over. If I gather this wrong, then that is my bad. My intention however was to suggest as to how things taking in consideration practical matters, matters of principle, matters of a complex nature and combined by my own self, derives at simply copying a journal article and putting it on your web page to be no different than my buying the application you sell and putting it on my web page for free for all others to use as they please.

If reason is dead in this place and what counts is the "I am right", then that is fine.

Long Live Liberty of Choice.

I went to a crappy (but huge) state university and they did indeed subscribe to ALL of the journals. My family has a good number of academics and this seems to be the case at any large university, regardless of quality.

This is only one article, amongst thousands of which we do not care of. We do not care of them because they have nothing to do with the field we have chosen to focus on, be that computer science, medicine, history, physics, law, or artificial intelligence. I would rather the money goes into research, than to provide some randomer with the pleasure of reading something they hardly can understand anyway.

I did not read the peer reviewed journal, I do not care to read it, I know little about medicine besides what I was taught in school. The terminology used is different, one word contains entire concepts, there is an entirely different way of thinking in that field, and frankly, it adds no value to me personally. If it did and I could afford it, I would buy it. £30 is what one spends on a Saturday night!

Now if we wished to live in a paranoid world where we do not trust the experts in their field and wish to validate everything our self, then that is a personal choice of perspective.

One can well choose to spend his entire life to learn of every field in this earth. Most people, if not the vast majority of people, if not 99% of people, sooner or later, focus on one field, and perhaps focus further on that field, especially if such field is medicine, or computer science, or law. That is how we work, that is the best system we have found of operating.

I personally do not see anything wrong with the way the system currently works, not wrong in such a way as to justify throwing it out entirely. If you are a doctor, you subscribe, if you are not, then buy the one article you want to read, if you do not want to buy it, then you do not need it.

If you can build something for $100, yet the same thing they used costed $250,000 to build, ok let us even say for good measure it costed $25,000 and the rest was inflated, compared to $100 it must be a well awesome product, way superior than what you could build, ten times, 25 times, and if we are to trust the actual figure, 250 times better than what you could built.

The point of the article is most probably that it is the latest technology anyway. I mean, it is fine to look out for these flaws, but something much grater happened there, they actually discovered something. If all we get from comments is flaws flaws and the opposite down voted, then this community simply is not working.

I would not like to see this community as a place where I can validate or discredit the thoughts I already hold. I am only 22 and wish much to grow. In those areas where I might not provisionally want to grow, I write a diary, it is a fine way to speculate about the knowledge one has in his own space.

Perhaps this is desire speaking more than reason, but in this place more than other I have found people who are of my intellectual level, who are inquisitive, naturally curious to learn about such matters, such as to use the easy example, what matter is made of.

So when I suggested, what is wrong with people who engage in orgy sex being protected from HIV, I was not making a point of the kind which seems that people might make, that is of the intention to suggest that it is fine to have orgy sex. I am not fine neither however with orphan kids in Africa being held somehow as angels for whom we must all fight, and ignore the reality which lurks in our street. Sex should be free for all. I do not see how that can possibly be a frowned upon proposition. I do not see why we should be free to put on a hierarchical scale the position that children would occupy with that of sex orgies. I do not see either on a purely theoretical, philosophical, rational or logical manner why such children should attract our sympathy more than the 18 year old naive girl or boy who simply made a mistake. Are we all the sudden putting life on a hierarchical scale?

But of course with all the mighty brains that might lurk these pages, such matters deserve no consideration. Down voting is much easier, than inquiring, counter arguing, suggesting alternative views. It is simply easier to censor dissenting views which one hardly understands than put one self in that child like curious position of wishing to learn such as asking well why must it not be like this, well why do you think so.

I personally know my opinions, I know my thoughts, I know my reasoning and perception. That is not why I frequent these pages. I come here to learn of other's rational reasoning, to learn of the way others rationally perceive things, to be in that cutting edge, where reason and logic reigns supreme, where emotions is not taken in consideration, where one discusses rather than asserts their authority, where the community discusses in the free spirit of reason.

We have a great thing here. It currently is outside of the mainstream eyes, yet influences the "opinion makers" for the opinion makers are people of our intelligence. Yet, this is becoming a community of assertions, a community where are found those fallacies men of intelligence know to guard, such as marketers cheating the system, in uniform, each of them starting their title with Why is this so, not quite asking, instead, following it with their opinions, opinions which I have to guard against calling them bluff due to their physical presence in the community. Their vocal and crowd reputation might be free to set the agenda and culture, and challenge us to keep it so free, keep it so unguarded, argue against any cultural impositions.

I have used this net thing since Google was born. There is often birth and death. PG foresaw this day, and this day is here. A great shame and loss for in these pages the mighty and brilliant are contained. yet the might of PG could not withstand the fortunes of nature, or maybe, just maybe, PG made grave mistakes, for man is chaotic, and if man wishes reason, man devises a system, a system which is utterly lacking in these pages, where irrationality most certainly must rain supreme, unless rational men act to tame it.