Sure, but the industry has nothing to do with how they treat their employees. You're arguing why they aren't an established company, but they've been around more than long enough to have figured out how to treat people.
Flash in the pan? They've been around for 13 years. Their products are rolling around all over the US. Compared to "latest instagram clone that is popular with VCs," I wouldn't call them a flash in the pan.
More important, there's no real connection between startups that are obviously going to go bust and employee abuse. Tesla being new or losing money has nothing to do with it. It's Elon Musk that is the issue. Companies with self-important assholes running shit treat employees like they treat furniture no matter their stage or revenue. I'm guessing Tesla employees are treated better than Amazon employees.
Give me a different reason other than race why people are so infuriated that health care insurance companies need to cover sick people with pre-existing conditions then. Bonus points if you can explain why it's totally unrelated that the GOP continues to have so many racist gaffes, or why the openly racist southern strategy isn't still in effect, or why Jeff Sessions is trying to get back to the racist war on drugs.
You, and others like you, suffer from the dunning kruger effect when it comes to race.
You're mistaking "People don't want to talk to you when you reveal yourself to be an ignorant asshole" with suppression of free speech.
When the government says you can't as a white dude use the N word in public, then we can discuss whether or not we're on a slippery slope to politically correct suppression of free speech. Otherwise, you're just whining about having to face consequences, which freedom of speech does not protect you from. You can say any hateful ignorant thing you want, and people do, and the police will likely even stop you from being punched in the face. That's freedom of speech without suppression.
So, is there some specific reason to think net neutrality can never be re-established? Aside from the fact that under the next administration, we'll still have millions of idiots who think lol liberal big government and comcast monopoly still funneling money into key legislators? I mean there's nothing structural to say the FCC can't turn around and say "And net neutrality back now"?
Is there a reason one would use a site like extratorrent rather than piratebay? They all just list torrents, right? I recognize I'm terribly uninformed when it comes to piracy, just wondering if I'm missing something.
"Misandry" on Slashdot seems to typically mean "Thinks sexual harassment should be punished rather than tolerated in the 'tech' industry." So no, I don't think it would.
Anyway, no, men cannot use this to have babies. You still need follicles to seed into the ovary, which you don't have. You'd also need a Fallopian tube and a uterus.
The first article is basically a press release blurb. That second link? The one you ignored? That's the published paper which has the answers you chose to make assumptions about.
It's like you're complaining an ad for a printer doesn't tell you how to install the drivers, while ignoring the manual it came with.
From a brief skimming of the nature article, it's much more impressive than you for some reason assume. These are not just eggs, they're the follicle. The non-egg components of the follicle secrete hormones.
From TFA:
Ovarian follicles are spherical, multicellular aggregates that include a centralized oocyte (female gamete) and surrounding support cells, granulosa and theca, that produce hormones in response to stimulation from the pituitary.
In the conclusions:
Importantly, we accomplish on-platform ovulation through a biomaterial that did not require mechanical manipulation or digestion of the material to release an egg... Since exogenous hormones were not given to the animals, ovulation was triggered endogenously which depends on estradiol and inhibin production from the follicles seeded within the implanted bioprosthesis...
In other words, no dude, the professional biomedical researchers who have specialized in the female reproductive system know more about it than you have despite the fact that you read an article in the guardian about it. When they say "We've accomplished this thing," maybe take them at their word. The gem you bring up is an accurate soundbite about an impressive technical advance they made possible.
There's no real order: Hearts and kidney efforts are well underway. Liver might be a bigger priority than kidneys actually. Dialysis is terrible compared to where we need to be with kidney function, but IIRC it's much further than where we are with liver dysfunction. Plus livers seem to have a better ability to organize and repair itself. The kidney would need a lot higher architectural precision, so it's a more distant goal unfortunately.
Two, "hard reality" when it comes to biomedical science? "Adopt rather than have a baby" is a weird place to draw the line. "The hard reality is if you get cancer, you should probably just accept there are more than enough people on earth, so just hurry up and die and be glad you get time to make peace with it rather than in a car accident."
Three, TFA specifically points out, in case high school biology fails you, that the ovary does more than just poop out eggs.
The goal of the project is to be able to restore fertility and endocrine health to young cancer patients
A woman in her 20s gets ovarian cancer and is unable to reproduce ever again, that's bad enough, but there's also the added awfulness of menopause. Osteoporosis, heart disease, a bunch of other shit that cancer survivors really shouldn't have to deal with.
Fourth, tissue engineering like this is really in it's infancy. Successfully duplicating an organ should be exciting to you even if you don't happen to have that organ and you aren't convinced the organ's function is really so important. You like your testicles functional? How about having a non-diabetic pancreas? Odds aren't bad you'll have problems with some organ some day and could benefit from a new one. Lessons learned here won't be strictly confined to ovaries, it makes it more likely an organ you'll want to replace will be possible. Plus, what the fuck? Slashdot is news for nerds who are supposed to like technology. Just because it's wet, squishy, and feminine, we've decided we don't like THIS technology?
I don't get why this would be "juicy." I've seen items about the wanna decryptor on slashdot and reddit, that's it.
The tabloid-reading masses were not, as far as I could tell, clamoring for the identity of this computer superhero in the same way they're evidently clamoring for a picture of Brittney Spears' ordering a soda.
Also, "Health care automation isn't happening fast enough" is a fair point, except that he seems to think it's because the health care industry is holding it back just because they don't want to change. Medical records are not being held back by a simple lack of will.. Surgical robots often cost enough money to make the military blush, and hospitals don't have infinite money, so we still have human surgeons. Replacing doctors with AI right now would kill a lot of people in addition to the money issue.
So the gate agents can marvel that your laptop has a graphics card. Like they did with mine. With a long line of passengers and only two gates. I was more flattered than I should have been but mostly really annoyed at how inefficient TSA is.
Normally sure, but ISPs might have realized that lobbying is pointlessly expensive and unnecessary given recent political events. The dumber the approach, the more likely it is to succeed. Anyone paying attention will realize only the most hated companies in america will benefit from this, while everyone else will suffer. But clearly, most people are paying no attention. "Half the comments on this boring internet thing were happy about it, so you can ignore it" is probably all the cover they'll need.
I'd agree if "Someone is going to be offended" were the concern behind the cleanup, but it mentions "incitement to violence."
IMHO, we get to Fahrenheit 451 not by being overly concerned that people are going to get upset, but because people like Infowars and 4chan continue with swatting, releasing personal details, and spamming victims. State-sponsored hacking and propaganda too.
Any government whose goal is to clamp down on free speech that says "Oh, people might get upset if they see uncensored twitter" is a government too incompetent to be likely to make it stick. That's terrible marketing. They're going to sell you eroding your rights the same way they have forever: by saying it's for public safety.
Cable monopolies have been around for eons and they were just as strong under the Dems and would have retained that strength under Hillary.
Wheeler would have stayed on as head for at least a bit. Net neutrality was protected under Obama and nearly immediately killed under GOP rule. Do you have a reason to suggest Hillary would have been the same aside from an insistence that democrats must be as bad as republicans despite evidence to the contrary?
Monopolies are anti-free market. It is not a Republican vs. Democrat issue.
In theory. In theory, communism works. In theory.
In reality, "free market" should join santa claus on the list of things adults realize aren't real.
Oh, by the way, the Sherman Antitust Act was passed under a Republican president...
You say they did it for that reason, but I'm not seeing reason anywhere.
"I decided to shit in the middle of the floor. Why? So people will see my poop and maybe even step in it. That's the reason, it's a magnum opus of trolling and manipulation!"
It's really sweet you think our election was the result of a nefarious Russian dictator and not just us Americans being hateful idiots.
If there's apathy about Russian interference, I think it's a realization that there's unlikely to be much of a change. We'll still have the dumbasses who voted for him, we'll still have the GOP.
So... why are there still so many bushiness there? Why'd apple build there instead of buttfuck Tennessee?
You people seem so convinced that California is a dysfunctional socialist nightmare, but never seem to explain why it's economy is so huge. You likely think the state budget is still in the red (it's not, democrats gained power and sorted out the nonsensical tax cuts, the state budget has been doing well for the past 6 years or so). Meanwhile Kansas has been a conservative's wet dream and shit is so bad there the GOP is trying to decide between selling the state off for scrap or (shudder) raise taxes.
On topic specifically, "it's already taxed" by the federal government, not the state. Companies utilize both state and federal resources and should pay both. This sounds less like "California is fucking over the rocket industry" and more like "California is not willing to let the rocket industry fuck over the state as much as other states are begging to." POSSIBLY because California having by far the biggest state economy and having sufficient funding, is not as desperate to whore itself out like red states are.
Is it a good idea? I dunno, I don't have any numbers on anything in front of me. Neither do you. You know who might? California legislators. Maybe they even talked with the rocket industry directly through intermediaries like lobbyists or telephone calls to determine if it was a good idea. Maybe not, maybe this is just one crazy bureaucrat who saw a rocket and thought "No. Looks far too much like a penis. I won't have it happening in MY state tax free!"
Either way, your bumper-sticker sized economic wisdom doesn't square with reality here.
Slashdot Mirror
I can see literally nothing wrong with giving him Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Auerus.
In terms of auto makers, 13 years is nothing.
Sure, but the industry has nothing to do with how they treat their employees. You're arguing why they aren't an established company, but they've been around more than long enough to have figured out how to treat people.
Flash in the pan? They've been around for 13 years. Their products are rolling around all over the US. Compared to "latest instagram clone that is popular with VCs," I wouldn't call them a flash in the pan.
More important, there's no real connection between startups that are obviously going to go bust and employee abuse. Tesla being new or losing money has nothing to do with it. It's Elon Musk that is the issue. Companies with self-important assholes running shit treat employees like they treat furniture no matter their stage or revenue. I'm guessing Tesla employees are treated better than Amazon employees.
1994 is really too recent to be doing revisionist history like that. It was because of the economy and NAFTA.
Give me a different reason other than race why people are so infuriated that health care insurance companies need to cover sick people with pre-existing conditions then. Bonus points if you can explain why it's totally unrelated that the GOP continues to have so many racist gaffes, or why the openly racist southern strategy isn't still in effect, or why Jeff Sessions is trying to get back to the racist war on drugs.
You, and others like you, suffer from the dunning kruger effect when it comes to race.
politically correct suppression of free speech
You're mistaking "People don't want to talk to you when you reveal yourself to be an ignorant asshole" with suppression of free speech.
When the government says you can't as a white dude use the N word in public, then we can discuss whether or not we're on a slippery slope to politically correct suppression of free speech. Otherwise, you're just whining about having to face consequences, which freedom of speech does not protect you from. You can say any hateful ignorant thing you want, and people do, and the police will likely even stop you from being punched in the face. That's freedom of speech without suppression.
So, is there some specific reason to think net neutrality can never be re-established? Aside from the fact that under the next administration, we'll still have millions of idiots who think lol liberal big government and comcast monopoly still funneling money into key legislators? I mean there's nothing structural to say the FCC can't turn around and say "And net neutrality back now"?
Is there a reason one would use a site like extratorrent rather than piratebay? They all just list torrents, right? I recognize I'm terribly uninformed when it comes to piracy, just wondering if I'm missing something.
"Misandry" on Slashdot seems to typically mean "Thinks sexual harassment should be punished rather than tolerated in the 'tech' industry." So no, I don't think it would.
Anyway, no, men cannot use this to have babies. You still need follicles to seed into the ovary, which you don't have. You'd also need a Fallopian tube and a uterus.
It's like you're complaining an ad for a printer doesn't tell you how to install the drivers, while ignoring the manual it came with.
From a brief skimming of the nature article, it's much more impressive than you for some reason assume. These are not just eggs, they're the follicle. The non-egg components of the follicle secrete hormones.
From TFA
Ovarian follicles are spherical, multicellular aggregates that include a centralized oocyte (female gamete) and surrounding support cells, granulosa and theca, that produce hormones in response to stimulation from the pituitary.
In the conclusions:
Importantly, we accomplish on-platform ovulation through a biomaterial that did not require mechanical manipulation or digestion of the material to release an egg... Since exogenous hormones were not given to the animals, ovulation was triggered endogenously which depends on estradiol and inhibin production from the follicles seeded within the implanted bioprosthesis...
In other words, no dude, the professional biomedical researchers who have specialized in the female reproductive system know more about it than you have despite the fact that you read an article in the guardian about it. When they say "We've accomplished this thing," maybe take them at their word. The gem you bring up is an accurate soundbite about an impressive technical advance they made possible.
Spoken like a true anonymous coward.
There's no real order: Hearts and kidney efforts are well underway. Liver might be a bigger priority than kidneys actually. Dialysis is terrible compared to where we need to be with kidney function, but IIRC it's much further than where we are with liver dysfunction. Plus livers seem to have a better ability to organize and repair itself. The kidney would need a lot higher architectural precision, so it's a more distant goal unfortunately.
I wish it were, but the GOP is legitimately intent on bringing down quality of coverage simply because a black man brought it up.
Two, "hard reality" when it comes to biomedical science? "Adopt rather than have a baby" is a weird place to draw the line. "The hard reality is if you get cancer, you should probably just accept there are more than enough people on earth, so just hurry up and die and be glad you get time to make peace with it rather than in a car accident."
Three, TFA specifically points out, in case high school biology fails you, that the ovary does more than just poop out eggs.
The goal of the project is to be able to restore fertility and endocrine health to young cancer patients
A woman in her 20s gets ovarian cancer and is unable to reproduce ever again, that's bad enough, but there's also the added awfulness of menopause. Osteoporosis, heart disease, a bunch of other shit that cancer survivors really shouldn't have to deal with.
Fourth, tissue engineering like this is really in it's infancy. Successfully duplicating an organ should be exciting to you even if you don't happen to have that organ and you aren't convinced the organ's function is really so important. You like your testicles functional? How about having a non-diabetic pancreas? Odds aren't bad you'll have problems with some organ some day and could benefit from a new one. Lessons learned here won't be strictly confined to ovaries, it makes it more likely an organ you'll want to replace will be possible. Plus, what the fuck? Slashdot is news for nerds who are supposed to like technology. Just because it's wet, squishy, and feminine, we've decided we don't like THIS technology?
Fifth, how much time and money were "wasted" on this? From NIH reporter, it looks like $300,000 was spent specifically on this project. About a third of a single tomahawk missile, like the 60 we used to do fuck all in Syria in a vain attempt to boost Trump's ratings. Or less than three times as much as has been raised to make onesies for fully grown manchildren.
In conclusion, leave questions about science and priorities to the adults.
Er... how exactly do we tackle the cause, which as you said is human nature?
I don't get why this would be "juicy." I've seen items about the wanna decryptor on slashdot and reddit, that's it.
The tabloid-reading masses were not, as far as I could tell, clamoring for the identity of this computer superhero in the same way they're evidently clamoring for a picture of Brittney Spears' ordering a soda.
Seems like that would be complicated by bed sheets.
Also, "Health care automation isn't happening fast enough" is a fair point, except that he seems to think it's because the health care industry is holding it back just because they don't want to change. Medical records are not being held back by a simple lack of will.. Surgical robots often cost enough money to make the military blush, and hospitals don't have infinite money, so we still have human surgeons. Replacing doctors with AI right now would kill a lot of people in addition to the money issue.
So the gate agents can marvel that your laptop has a graphics card. Like they did with mine. With a long line of passengers and only two gates. I was more flattered than I should have been but mostly really annoyed at how inefficient TSA is.
Normally sure, but ISPs might have realized that lobbying is pointlessly expensive and unnecessary given recent political events. The dumber the approach, the more likely it is to succeed. Anyone paying attention will realize only the most hated companies in america will benefit from this, while everyone else will suffer. But clearly, most people are paying no attention. "Half the comments on this boring internet thing were happy about it, so you can ignore it" is probably all the cover they'll need.
I'd agree if "Someone is going to be offended" were the concern behind the cleanup, but it mentions "incitement to violence."
IMHO, we get to Fahrenheit 451 not by being overly concerned that people are going to get upset, but because people like Infowars and 4chan continue with swatting, releasing personal details, and spamming victims. State-sponsored hacking and propaganda too.
Any government whose goal is to clamp down on free speech that says "Oh, people might get upset if they see uncensored twitter" is a government too incompetent to be likely to make it stick. That's terrible marketing. They're going to sell you eroding your rights the same way they have forever: by saying it's for public safety.
Well they won't want to give an uncontested market to... um... google plus?
Cable monopolies have been around for eons and they were just as strong under the Dems and would have retained that strength under Hillary.
Wheeler would have stayed on as head for at least a bit. Net neutrality was protected under Obama and nearly immediately killed under GOP rule. Do you have a reason to suggest Hillary would have been the same aside from an insistence that democrats must be as bad as republicans despite evidence to the contrary?
Monopolies are anti-free market. It is not a Republican vs. Democrat issue.
In theory. In theory, communism works. In theory.
In reality, "free market" should join santa claus on the list of things adults realize aren't real.
Oh, by the way, the Sherman Antitust Act was passed under a Republican president...
Different definition of "republican party" as you should know from high school.
You say they did it for that reason, but I'm not seeing reason anywhere.
"I decided to shit in the middle of the floor. Why? So people will see my poop and maybe even step in it. That's the reason, it's a magnum opus of trolling and manipulation!"
It's really sweet you think our election was the result of a nefarious Russian dictator and not just us Americans being hateful idiots.
If there's apathy about Russian interference, I think it's a realization that there's unlikely to be much of a change. We'll still have the dumbasses who voted for him, we'll still have the GOP.
So... why are there still so many bushiness there? Why'd apple build there instead of buttfuck Tennessee?
You people seem so convinced that California is a dysfunctional socialist nightmare, but never seem to explain why it's economy is so huge. You likely think the state budget is still in the red (it's not, democrats gained power and sorted out the nonsensical tax cuts, the state budget has been doing well for the past 6 years or so). Meanwhile Kansas has been a conservative's wet dream and shit is so bad there the GOP is trying to decide between selling the state off for scrap or (shudder) raise taxes.
On topic specifically, "it's already taxed" by the federal government, not the state. Companies utilize both state and federal resources and should pay both. This sounds less like "California is fucking over the rocket industry" and more like "California is not willing to let the rocket industry fuck over the state as much as other states are begging to." POSSIBLY because California having by far the biggest state economy and having sufficient funding, is not as desperate to whore itself out like red states are.
Is it a good idea? I dunno, I don't have any numbers on anything in front of me. Neither do you. You know who might? California legislators. Maybe they even talked with the rocket industry directly through intermediaries like lobbyists or telephone calls to determine if it was a good idea. Maybe not, maybe this is just one crazy bureaucrat who saw a rocket and thought "No. Looks far too much like a penis. I won't have it happening in MY state tax free!"
Either way, your bumper-sticker sized economic wisdom doesn't square with reality here.