Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

roy.marples.name

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 233 posts

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#61

Post by jdavis703 »

fastball wrote: post #45
pm90 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI + Government funded, free healthcare for everyone. It makes no sense that, with all the excess industrial supply that we have today, that we refuse to provide a basic minimum standard of living for all human beings.

The problem with healthcare is that "basic minimum" is wildly subjective. Healthcare is still very expensive. There are diseases (including cancer) we could easily spend millions per patient on. Pulling out all the stops you could spend 10s of millions. But we really don't have that kind of societal overabundance, not yet. So how much do you spend per patient? Are there certain diseases that you don't spend any publi…

This complexity was one of the major reasons the Affordable Care Act’s public option was eliminated. There was going to be a group of people who made these decisions. But when the public found out they were deemed as “death panels” that would get to chose who would live or die.

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#62

Post by AussieWog93 »

fastball wrote: post #45
pm90 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI + Government funded, free healthcare for everyone. It makes no sense that, with all the excess industrial supply that we have today, that we refuse to provide a basic minimum standard of living for all human beings.

The problem with healthcare is that "basic minimum" is wildly subjective. Healthcare is still very expensive. There are diseases (including cancer) we could easily spend millions per patient on. Pulling out all the stops you could spend 10s of millions. But we really don't have that kind of societal overabundance, not yet. So how much do you spend per patient? Are there certain diseases that you don't spend any publi…

The only reason it costs millions to treat cancer patients is because of medical patents allowing companies to extract profit margins of several thousand percent (or more).

In countries like Australia, where drug companies have to negotiate a fair price with a single government agency, the cost of treatment is an order of magnitude lower.

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#63

Post by _Microft »

fastball wrote: post #45
pm90 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI + Government funded, free healthcare for everyone. It makes no sense that, with all the excess industrial supply that we have today, that we refuse to provide a basic minimum standard of living for all human beings.

The problem with healthcare is that "basic minimum" is wildly subjective. Healthcare is still very expensive. There are diseases (including cancer) we could easily spend millions per patient on. Pulling out all the stops you could spend 10s of millions. But we really don't have that kind of societal overabundance, not yet. So how much do you spend per patient? Are there certain diseases that you don't spend any publi…

What problems do you see beside the ones that basically any country with a public health care system has (/has solved)?

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#64

Post by midasuni »

pm90 wrote: post #38
sjtindell wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just in my personal opinion, things like a UBI move us towards that world. It wound allow people flexibility.

UBI + Government funded, free healthcare for everyone. It makes no sense that, with all the excess industrial supply that we have today, that we refuse to provide a basic minimum standard of living for all human beings.

Most (all?) advanced countries have government funded free healthcare for everyone. It’s UBI that’s the hurdle.

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#65

Post by rasengan »

Dear Roy,

It is unfortunate you are dealing with this. I am so sorry and hope for the best. The Handshake founders had an airdrop pre allocated for you in the Handshake Blockchain [1] so there is about $64,000.00 in there that you can claim under marples.name as of writing.

[1] https://dns.live/top.html

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#66

Post by sneak »

vmception wrote: post #34
shadeslayer_ wrote: post #21

This is so sad because if you read his blog post from January 2021, he sounds so very hopeful and happy at the prospect of the immunotherapy working. It sounds like he discovered a new lease of life. Being thrown from that situation to the new prognosis which is infinitely worse, sounds like a hammer blow.

Cancer requires clinging to glimmers of hope. Yes, he felt that way at the time and yes, he wrote it down, but these improbabilities are all anyone ever has, its not over till it’s over. I read that post too, going from a tiny undetectable bump under the skin that only his partner noticed, to unbearable pain pressing against his spine making him unable to sleep and think clearly. It seems like 4 months were wasted ju…

> Cancer requires clinging to glimmers of hope.

Does it, though? Is there anything that suggests the mental state of the patient is a factor in the efficacy of treatment?

Pieter Hintjens has written a bit against the "fight" model.

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#67

Post by bch »

userbinator wrote: post #50

That's sad to hear, but to think about the situation a bit more deeply, is DHCP software really something that needs "maintenance"? The protocol is decades old and stable, and no doubt the implementations in equally-old routers and other equipment continues to function unchanged and interoperate with much newer equipment.

Browse his work[0] to see what’s been going on with it. As a NetBSD user, I’m always happy and impressed to see dhcpcd getting the attention it does.

[0] https://roy.marples.name/cgit/dhcpcd.git/log/

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#68

Post by sneak »

ceejayoz wrote: post #47
kortilla wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlikely. If you expect something different you’re missing the point of open source. Roy didn’t have to fix anything if he didn’t want to.

I mean, it's not a legal obligation, but it might be a nicer world if we considered it an ethical one.

I think perhaps you mean "moral" rather than "ethical".

It is entirely ethical to use free software, even to generate massive profits, without paying anyone anything. That's literally the whole point of software freedom: you're free.

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#69

Post by grecy »

fastball wrote: post #45
pm90 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI + Government funded, free healthcare for everyone. It makes no sense that, with all the excess industrial supply that we have today, that we refuse to provide a basic minimum standard of living for all human beings.

The problem with healthcare is that "basic minimum" is wildly subjective. Healthcare is still very expensive. There are diseases (including cancer) we could easily spend millions per patient on. Pulling out all the stops you could spend 10s of millions. But we really don't have that kind of societal overabundance, not yet. So how much do you spend per patient? Are there certain diseases that you don't spend any publi…

> There are diseases (including cancer) we could easily spend millions per patient on. Pulling out all the stops you could spend 10s of millions. But we really don't have that kind of societal overabundance, not yet.

My Mum in Australia had a rare and aggressive form of lung cancer, discovered at stage four.

She had almost three years of radiation, chemo, all the associated drugs, scans, treatments and even two different trial drugs.

She never paid a cent, all of it on Australia's standard "heathcare for all".

If Australia and many other countries can manage it, then more countries can too.

Anything less is just an excuse.

Re: Dhcpcd Will Need a New Maintainer

#70

Post by jimbob45 »

pm90 wrote: post #38
sjtindell wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just in my personal opinion, things like a UBI move us towards that world. It wound allow people flexibility.

UBI + Government funded, free healthcare for everyone. It makes no sense that, with all the excess industrial supply that we have today, that we refuse to provide a basic minimum standard of living for all human beings.

In times of plenty, such socialism works well. In times of struggle and famine, someone other than you gets to decide how resources are allocated. Your hard work and instinct to survive no longer belongs to you at that point. Many today have only ever known times of plenty and think the USSR was a failure because of selfish leaders, not because there were genuinely hard decisions to make during struggle and famine.

You see the narrative today being that whites don’t deserve what they have. Whites don’t deserve their hard work because it was built on empire building and slavery and privilege. To me, this is being set up to cripple capitalism, pretending that the hard work capitalism encourages is somehow false or fake.

Yes, UBI would solve your problem in the short term. However, I think proponents of UBI are deviously attempting to downplay capitalism’s benefits and entirely hiding UBI’s drawbacks when society is no longer as well off (e.g. during wars)

Post reply on HN