And people with enough real life to not have time for facebook. ..
And then there are all those living in poverty who have too much "real life". They are too busy trying to find food and shelter for themselves and their families.
Galileo argued that comets were optical illusions (they are most definitely physical objects) and that ocean tides were the result of oceans sloshing around from Earth’s rotation (tides have more to do with the moon’s gravitational pull).
Did anyone else find it strange that a page called "Chemical & Engineering News" would need to point out that comets are real and that the moon's gravity is a factor in the cause of tides?
... doesn't have his personality or memories, or any learned talents for that matter.
Thank you, captain obvious.
Obvious to you and I, or most on/. for that matter. But did you even read the parents first sentence?
"It seems like most people don't understand what cloning is."
Now if you put that together with TFS:
People fantasizing about a Beatles comeback tour might yet see their dream come true......This DNA would serve to bring back John Lennon......'To potentially say I had a small part in bringing back one of Rock's greatest stars would be mind-blowing.
Apparently it's not very obvious to Dr. Zuk or even the author of this article.
And Big Pharma ain't got time for nobody being healthy either, so don't think for a second these pills are actually good for you.
Sure they do. One of the side effects is high blood pressure, but there's a pill for that. Another side effect is blindness, there's also a pill for that type of blindness. Of course that blindness medication also causes hearing loss and pain. But that's alright as there are medications for both of those too. One of those lowers immunity to certain types of bacteria though. So you may need antibiotics on occasion....
Where one revenue stream stops another one is engineered to start.
So your response is to build a big fucking straw man? I never once mentioned organic, GMO, or traditionally grown foods. Nor did the parent post.
The discussion was regarding processed and/or synthetic foods. Those foods contain all kinds of great stuff. such as insanely high sodium, butylated hydroxytoluene, byutylated hydroxyanisole, chemically hydrogenated fat, etc. Nutrients that get broken down/diluted when processed. Minerals that get added in (for nutrition), in non-biosoluble form. Much of this could be done away with, but it would cost more, decrease shelf life, and lower profits.
Still feeling good about your comprehension skills?
and all those people who try to tell me how awesome emacs is even though they're wrong.
"emacs outshines all other editing software in approximately the same way that the noonday sun does the stars. It is not just bigger and brighter; it simply makes everything else vanish.";-)
BHA HA HA HA ha ha ha... Oh wait, you're serious? While I agree that science and common sense are in agreement, they are about as "behind the wheel" as a school student in the back row of a school bus is "behind the wheel". They are there and going along for the ride, even occasionally shouting directions, but that's about as far as it goes.
Diets filled with processed and manufactured foods.
Pointless statement.
There is absolutely nothing that says that processed or manufactured food should be any different form other food.
That sounds like the defense the tobacco industry used for decades.
Even if the food is entirely synthetic doesn't mean that it is in any way less healthy than non-synthetic food.
There could be something wrong with the processed food that obese people eat but that doesn't mean that it isn't possible to create processed / manufactured food that is healthier.
You're right. It doesn't have to be. Unfortunately, it's not like there is an incentive for these manufactures to do this. But there are considerable profits to be made in making the food as cheaply as possible. That's the problem.
Here's some more "common sense". The ocean is huge. A fish would have to be pretty close to the source of the leak to be in an area of any appreciable radiation. And remain there for some time. Larger fish that migrate for thousands of miles do not come that close to the shore for very long, if ever (once adults). Even if for some reason it did, radiation would be concentrated in organs that you, or most people do not eat. A fish would die from radiation poisoning before levels in the tissue that you ingest would reach levels to be toxic to you or I.
Would I eat a fish that was caught from a dock in Japan? No, probably not. Even though even that is mostly irrational fear. But I wouldn't gave a second (or even a first) thought about a yellowfin.
Sure. Too bad you will be responsible to clean it up.
I saw something similar (non nuclear/smaller scale) happen in a town I lived in. CSX owned an abandoned roundhouse, but couldn't even give away the property due to the cost they or the new owners would incur to clean it up by doing so.
Things to consider:
A. How much radioactive water has actually leaked into the Pacific Ocean prior to the latest reports?
B. What is the true amount of radioactive water still leaking into the Pacific Ocean?
C. How long until the leaks are stopped?
D. Given A,B and C, what will be the total amount of radioactive water to be dispersed from the local site?
E. Given D, how may fish are likely to encounter this area, considering fish migrate thousands of miles?
F. Given E, How many predatory fish will each the contaminated fish, spreading radiation through the marine food chain?
G. What is the period of time the radiation will remain in the marine food chain?
I think I'll be testing my fish with a geiger counter for a while.
H. Ignore A through G as you are probably more likely to win the lottery (even w/o every buying a ticket) than to suffer any ill effects from this unless you live in close proximity. And are more likely to get mercury poisoning than for this to affect you in any way.
Yes, this is why it is important to get the body cooled quickly for cryonics to have any chance, and that's why when someone who has signed up for cryonics is dying, they generally get a team ready to go so as soon as the person dies they can immediately begin prepping the body (cooling it down first, perfusing with anti-freeze compounds and then reducing the temperature further to liquid nitrogen temps).
I understand that. I also didn't watch the video. But I have seen what this company, or another like it did several years ago. It still takes a lot of time until they get access to the body, process it, and get it into the freezer (so to speak). Unless this has changed and is all done in well under an hour, I'm not sure I see the point. Other than an expensive way to preserve human cadavers for future scientists to see what we evolved from.
The fact the freezing process destroys the cells is all you need to know that cryonics is bullshit.
The fact that you have to already be dead before they can freeze you is a pretty big problem too. All kinds of crazy shit happens at the cellular level not long after death. Since they can't freeze you (near) instantaneously, there is already a lot of cellular damage even before freezing. This just ain't gonna work until Cerberus decides they need to bring commander Shepherd back.
Murder is an action that is morally objectionable. The definition of the word means the unjustified killing of someone. It is not my standard, I didn't create it. That standard is present in every religion and moral philosophy and I would argue that 99% of the world agrees killing someone for no reason is wrong.
I agree that unjustifiably killing someone is wrong. But you didn't just state murder, You also mentioned rapists (which I agree with you and find equally abhorred) and "other assorted bad guys". Apparently the Chinese government lumps those who were at "Tiannamen Square or oppose communism" into that category.
My point was that if it's OK to harvest one group of peoples organs who won't be using them anymore, then it fine for the other group too. It's not the act of doing this that is barbaric. It is executing people who simply don't agree with their government and peacefully protesting it that is barbaric.
If these prisoners were serial killers, rapists, murderers and other assorted bad guys, then I fully support using their organs to save lives. I find it poetic justice and a very fitting end for the life of a person who (possibly) killed so many others.
If these prisoners are political prisoners sentenced to death because they were at Tiannamen Square or oppose communism, then I welcome the end of such barbaric policies.
Wait a minute. You're saying that it's a great idea to do this if you find their crime morally objectionable, but not so if you don't agree with the crime? It's barbaric even! Either way, the prisoner is going to be dead and not be using their organs anymore. So either way it's a waste of their organs that could potentially help someone or even many people
Now the fact that someone is going to be executed for "political crimes". That is barbaric and what I find to be objectionable. I wish we had no need of capitol punishment and had some way to truly rehabilitate and help the mentally ill. But the fact is, is that there people who simply cannot be allowed to roam around killing and causing harm to others.
I just did a quick search, and it looks like there was some progress in 2006 I have a feeling we are going to see this happen in the next decade or two.
This XKCD seems appropriate. The first time I saw it I almost fell out of my chair laughing. At my previous company I practically had to write a doctoral thesis to get simple obvious bugs fixed.
Slashdot Mirror
And people with enough real life to not have time for facebook. . .
And then there are all those living in poverty who have too much "real life". They are too busy trying to find food and shelter for themselves and their families.
Galileo argued that comets were optical illusions (they are most definitely physical objects) and that ocean tides were the result of oceans sloshing around from Earth’s rotation (tides have more to do with the moon’s gravitational pull).
Did anyone else find it strange that a page called "Chemical & Engineering News" would need to point out that comets are real and that the moon's gravity is a factor in the cause of tides?
Rule 34
I skimmed the title and thought they were talking about David Carradine.
Agreed. If this were the case we wouldn't have Citizen Kane, The Wizard of Oz, Blade Runner, Office Space, Donnie Darko, etc.
Not to mention the fact that FOIA requests are always backlogged, 30 day response requirements be damned.
Well the Historical Collections Division is legally backlogged by at least 25 years. What's an extra 30 days? ;-)
... doesn't have his personality or memories, or any learned talents for that matter.
Thank you, captain obvious.
Obvious to you and I, or most on /. for that matter. But did you even read the parents first sentence?
"It seems like most people don't understand what cloning is." Now if you put that together with TFS:
People fantasizing about a Beatles comeback tour might yet see their dream come true... ...This DNA would serve to bring back John Lennon... ...'To potentially say I had a small part in bringing back one of Rock's greatest stars would be mind-blowing.
Apparently it's not very obvious to Dr. Zuk or even the author of this article.
And Big Pharma ain't got time for nobody being healthy either, so don't think for a second these pills are actually good for you.
Sure they do. One of the side effects is high blood pressure, but there's a pill for that. Another side effect is blindness, there's also a pill for that type of blindness. Of course that blindness medication also causes hearing loss and pain. But that's alright as there are medications for both of those too. One of those lowers immunity to certain types of bacteria though. So you may need antibiotics on occasion....
Where one revenue stream stops another one is engineered to start.
Exactly
Yeah, I remember that too. But times change. It's pretty damn small compared to current things. Just look at Firefox.
If you haven't see this video of Stallman yet, I'm sure you'll appreciate the humor.
So your response is to build a big fucking straw man? I never once mentioned organic, GMO, or traditionally grown foods. Nor did the parent post.
The discussion was regarding processed and/or synthetic foods. Those foods contain all kinds of great stuff. such as insanely high sodium, butylated hydroxytoluene, byutylated hydroxyanisole, chemically hydrogenated fat, etc. Nutrients that get broken down/diluted when processed. Minerals that get added in (for nutrition), in non-biosoluble form. Much of this could be done away with, but it would cost more, decrease shelf life, and lower profits.
Still feeling good about your comprehension skills?
and all those people who try to tell me how awesome emacs is even though they're wrong.
"emacs outshines all other editing software in approximately the same way that the noonday sun does the stars. It is not just bigger and brighter; it simply makes everything else vanish." ;-)
Science and common sense are behind the wheel.
BHA HA HA HA ha ha ha... Oh wait, you're serious? While I agree that science and common sense are in agreement, they are about as "behind the wheel" as a school student in the back row of a school bus is "behind the wheel". They are there and going along for the ride, even occasionally shouting directions, but that's about as far as it goes.
Diets filled with processed and manufactured foods.
Pointless statement.
There is absolutely nothing that says that processed or manufactured food should be any different form other food.
That sounds like the defense the tobacco industry used for decades.
Even if the food is entirely synthetic doesn't mean that it is in any way less healthy than non-synthetic food. There could be something wrong with the processed food that obese people eat but that doesn't mean that it isn't possible to create processed / manufactured food that is healthier.
You're right. It doesn't have to be. Unfortunately, it's not like there is an incentive for these manufactures to do this. But there are considerable profits to be made in making the food as cheaply as possible. That's the problem.
Here's some more "common sense". The ocean is huge. A fish would have to be pretty close to the source of the leak to be in an area of any appreciable radiation. And remain there for some time. Larger fish that migrate for thousands of miles do not come that close to the shore for very long, if ever (once adults). Even if for some reason it did, radiation would be concentrated in organs that you, or most people do not eat. A fish would die from radiation poisoning before levels in the tissue that you ingest would reach levels to be toxic to you or I.
Would I eat a fish that was caught from a dock in Japan? No, probably not. Even though even that is mostly irrational fear. But I wouldn't gave a second (or even a first) thought about a yellowfin.
I wonder if you can actually buy it at all.
Sure. Too bad you will be responsible to clean it up.
I saw something similar (non nuclear/smaller scale) happen in a town I lived in. CSX owned an abandoned roundhouse, but couldn't even give away the property due to the cost they or the new owners would incur to clean it up by doing so.
Things to consider: A. How much radioactive water has actually leaked into the Pacific Ocean prior to the latest reports? B. What is the true amount of radioactive water still leaking into the Pacific Ocean? C. How long until the leaks are stopped? D. Given A,B and C, what will be the total amount of radioactive water to be dispersed from the local site? E. Given D, how may fish are likely to encounter this area, considering fish migrate thousands of miles? F. Given E, How many predatory fish will each the contaminated fish, spreading radiation through the marine food chain? G. What is the period of time the radiation will remain in the marine food chain?
I think I'll be testing my fish with a geiger counter for a while.
H. Ignore A through G as you are probably more likely to win the lottery (even w/o every buying a ticket) than to suffer any ill effects from this unless you live in close proximity. And are more likely to get mercury poisoning than for this to affect you in any way.
homer simpson makes level 3's all the time
Fortunately he can pull a Homer and fix it too.
Yes, this is why it is important to get the body cooled quickly for cryonics to have any chance, and that's why when someone who has signed up for cryonics is dying, they generally get a team ready to go so as soon as the person dies they can immediately begin prepping the body (cooling it down first, perfusing with anti-freeze compounds and then reducing the temperature further to liquid nitrogen temps).
I understand that. I also didn't watch the video. But I have seen what this company, or another like it did several years ago. It still takes a lot of time until they get access to the body, process it, and get it into the freezer (so to speak). Unless this has changed and is all done in well under an hour, I'm not sure I see the point. Other than an expensive way to preserve human cadavers for future scientists to see what we evolved from.
The fact the freezing process destroys the cells is all you need to know that cryonics is bullshit.
The fact that you have to already be dead before they can freeze you is a pretty big problem too. All kinds of crazy shit happens at the cellular level not long after death. Since they can't freeze you (near) instantaneously, there is already a lot of cellular damage even before freezing. This just ain't gonna work until Cerberus decides they need to bring commander Shepherd back.
Murder is an action that is morally objectionable. The definition of the word means the unjustified killing of someone. It is not my standard, I didn't create it. That standard is present in every religion and moral philosophy and I would argue that 99% of the world agrees killing someone for no reason is wrong.
I agree that unjustifiably killing someone is wrong. But you didn't just state murder, You also mentioned rapists (which I agree with you and find equally abhorred) and "other assorted bad guys". Apparently the Chinese government lumps those who were at "Tiannamen Square or oppose communism" into that category.
My point was that if it's OK to harvest one group of peoples organs who won't be using them anymore, then it fine for the other group too. It's not the act of doing this that is barbaric. It is executing people who simply don't agree with their government and peacefully protesting it that is barbaric.
If these prisoners were serial killers, rapists, murderers and other assorted bad guys, then I fully support using their organs to save lives. I find it poetic justice and a very fitting end for the life of a person who (possibly) killed so many others.
If these prisoners are political prisoners sentenced to death because they were at Tiannamen Square or oppose communism, then I welcome the end of such barbaric policies.
Wait a minute. You're saying that it's a great idea to do this if you find their crime morally objectionable, but not so if you don't agree with the crime? It's barbaric even! Either way, the prisoner is going to be dead and not be using their organs anymore. So either way it's a waste of their organs that could potentially help someone or even many people
Now the fact that someone is going to be executed for "political crimes". That is barbaric and what I find to be objectionable. I wish we had no need of capitol punishment and had some way to truly rehabilitate and help the mentally ill. But the fact is, is that there people who simply cannot be allowed to roam around killing and causing harm to others.
I just did a quick search, and it looks like there was some progress in 2006 I have a feeling we are going to see this happen in the next decade or two.
This was from back in 2001 I don't know how much the research has progressed in 12 years though.
This XKCD seems appropriate. The first time I saw it I almost fell out of my chair laughing. At my previous company I practically had to write a doctoral thesis to get simple obvious bugs fixed.
Too bad Americans don't have the balls to try him for treason!
Too bad the civilian population doesn't have the balls or the armament to try 90%+ of our current government officials for treason.
When was the last time congress has put a budget in front of the president for a signature? I find that alone to be disgusting.