By your argument, you also own, or partially own, the university's buildings and facilities, and should be allowed to do whatever you wish with them, from grafitti to setting them on fire. Or, since some of your tuition goes to your professors' salaries, do you think can you fire them?
Who's your mortgage lender? My last 2 have both required life insurance, in case I kick the bucket and for some reason my house isn't enough to pay off the mortgage. And it's a standard requirement - I've never heard of one that didn't require it.
Won't work. It just means that you get tested under clause 1 (medical reasons), then quintuple your insurance. Too people do that, and the insurance company goes belly-up.
A few comments have touched on this issue, but no one's tackled it head-on.
Genetic testing has advantages for the insurance companies, true. But it has some advantages for the testee as well. They get to find out whether they have a genetic disease. This could affect, say their vigilance in self-examination, or choices about whether to have children.
But if it's materially to their disadvantage to know, then clearly they won't get tested. The analogy here, of course, is to AIDS/HIV, where if you were tested, you could be denied insurance. But if you weren't tested, you could delay treatment & lifestyle changes that could save your life. This issue is going to grow and grow as more tests are put in place.
Unfortunately, the fact that the FIRST impact of genetic testing is negative will probably put people off testing, even though it could do them good. How can we balance the risks and rewards so that people can reap the benefits of these tests?
Given that the majority of troll postings are a waste of the pixels it takes to display them - still, there is some value in AC comments even as they shade into trollism.
Some ideas at the edge of the bell-curve are good ones. The viability of open source software was a strange idea once. Come to that, so was a computer you could pick up. What's on the lunatic fringe today that's next year's best thing?
And some ideas are sufficiently weird that they're best posted anonymously, even at the price of a Coward label and low Karma. Look at some of the AC postings on this topic, which sure sound like they come from/. regulars.
If we don't leave space for the outsiders and the strange posters, don't we risk becoming a closed community, only expressing the ideas we already agree with?
Anything we do will be abused by a troll somewhere along the line. I'd be sorry to see us throw out the innovation baby out with the troll bathwater.
Join the club! Yet another US-centred techie toy that the rest of the world is unlikely to benefit from...but still has to pay for to get the hardware.
I'm contemplating ditching my PalmPilot with PalmIII upgrade card for a Palm Vx - but I don't see the point of the VII, or any other wireless connectivity solution, while I'm living in Edinburgh, Scotland.
evilrooster
- the email of the species is deadlier than the mail -
Slashdot Mirror
Because it's being relayed through your servers, Zeng
Mr. Xiaozhen...
Zeng Xiaozhen, being a Chinese name, is cited surname first. Thus he is Mr. Zeng, or Xiaozhen to his friends.
Don't you just *hate* it when people can't get basic concepts like how to address people?
By your argument, you also own, or partially own, the university's buildings and facilities, and should be allowed to do whatever you wish with them, from grafitti to setting them on fire. Or, since some of your tuition goes to your professors' salaries, do you think can you fire them?
Who's your mortgage lender? My last 2 have both required life insurance, in case I kick the bucket and for some reason my house isn't enough to pay off the mortgage. And it's a standard requirement - I've never heard of one that didn't require it.
Won't work. It just means that you get tested under clause 1 (medical reasons), then quintuple your insurance. Too people do that, and the insurance company goes belly-up.
Genetic testing has advantages for the insurance companies, true. But it has some advantages for the testee as well. They get to find out whether they have a genetic disease. This could affect, say their vigilance in self-examination, or choices about whether to have children.
But if it's materially to their disadvantage to know, then clearly they won't get tested. The analogy here, of course, is to AIDS/HIV, where if you were tested, you could be denied insurance. But if you weren't tested, you could delay treatment & lifestyle changes that could save your life. This issue is going to grow and grow as more tests are put in place.
Unfortunately, the fact that the FIRST impact of genetic testing is negative will probably put people off testing, even though it could do them good. How can we balance the risks and rewards so that people can reap the benefits of these tests?
Thoughts? Suggestions?
Actually, in the UK, you ARE required to have insurance, if you want to own a house. You can't get a mortgage without life insurance.
Some ideas at the edge of the bell-curve are good ones. The viability of open source software was a strange idea once. Come to that, so was a computer you could pick up. What's on the lunatic fringe today that's next year's best thing?
And some ideas are sufficiently weird that they're best posted anonymously, even at the price of a Coward label and low Karma. Look at some of the AC postings on this topic, which sure sound like they come from /. regulars.
If we don't leave space for the outsiders and the strange posters, don't we risk becoming a closed community, only expressing the ideas we already agree with?
Anything we do will be abused by a troll somewhere along the line. I'd be sorry to see us throw out the innovation baby out with the troll bathwater.
I'm contemplating ditching my PalmPilot with PalmIII upgrade card for a Palm Vx - but I don't see the point of the VII, or any other wireless connectivity solution, while I'm living in Edinburgh, Scotland.
evilrooster
- the email of the species is deadlier than the mail -