A standard FM antenna 3 km line-of-sight away from a 1 watt transmitter should get about 1 microwatt at the antenna terminals.
That's not a good accomplishment; Typical cell tower spacing is 5 to 10 miles. That 3km is less than two miles, and there's no way the cell phone companies can justify the cost of building additional VHF cell sites to that density across the continent for a mere 20 Mhz of bandwidth. Cell phones using the existing bands have a range of more than 15 Miles.
Are you implying that high power signals aren't attenuated by building materials by the same ratio?
No. Higher Frequency signals aren't attenuated by building materials by the same ratio -- the function is nonlinear, and many frequencies less than the UHF range have a higher chance of being absorbed or reflected, But the 20-Fold increase in antenna size is a huge problem for having a compact mobile device. You cannot just increase cell phones from 500 mW to a full Watt, or 2 Watts..... The POWER your cell phone can transmit is fixed by the size of the device, Human safe RF exposure maximums (since phones will be held to the head), battery capacity, and the weight of materials within the phone whose purpose is to conduct energy and safely dissipate heat.
Until the courts go after people PERSONALLY (you know, like they do every time you get a ticket) there will be no change of behaviour.
The court has not precluded that. If the lawyer's compensation will be determined by the case they're working On, and their law firm is indigent, then the lawyer is personally a business partner too!
People referring to "spectrum" As if it was just some random commodity, and different frequencies didn't have different characteristics.
For starters; Assuming everybody on planet earth agrees to throw away their cell phone that does 800mhz and 1600mhz and buy a new one that adds a VHF radio that can work the band whose upper end is 88 Mhz.
One of the first things that has to change is the Cell phone Transmit power has to increase from 500 mW to more than 1 Watt.
The second thing that has to change, is your Cell phone's antenna has to increase in size. Because the wavelength is changing from 38 centimeter or 15 centimeter All the way up to 2.7 Meters.
This means that the Required antenna length increases from approximately 6 to 16 centimeters (5 to 6 inches) all the way up to about 1.7 meters, Or 5.5 feet, before it can be resonant across the broadcast range.
The required transmit power will go up two more times further if you use a less-efficient antenna.... E.g. Loading coils to electrically double the antenna length, so you can make it physically shorter.
Finally, the amount of spectrum is so miniscule, that it won't be useful for significant data applications ---- You could support a few 19200 baud streams over the entire 20 Mhz range, Or possibly 100 simultaneous voice conversations across the whole range.
But seriously, the existing more than 200 MHz already allocated for Cell phones and more than 600 MHz a is plenty adequate for local wireless technologies. Destroying a valuable radio service provide at most a potential 1% increase in available frequencies just don't make any sense.
I forgot to mention another counterpoint here..... the Total Spectrum available for all FM broadcasters combined is miniscule compared to the amount of spectrum available for Bluetooth or a single WiFi channel..
Furthermore, each frequency range has different propagation characteristics, And the spectrum allocated to FM broadcasters is not at all suitable for local applications such as Microwave frequencies used for Bluetooth, WiFi, and Cell phones.
Because the FM broadcast band is in the VHF frequencies which are largely line-of-sight propagation; the transmitter requires a high antenna with a high-power signal for receivers to pick this up, and low-power signals are greatly attenuated by building materials, such as trees or wood, you need a few watts at least and a long antenna to get out just a couple miles. Compared to Microwave-range signals , where Cell phones require less than a watt of transmit power.
In other words, these would not be useful for cell phones.
It's also not suitable to reclaim for High-speed data applications, because of limited bandwidth...
It would only be able to help Bluetooth, if say bluetooth was a 16-Kilobits per Second wireless technology. But it's not; Bluetooth requires more bandwidth than can be had from a few Mhz of bandwidth.
Unless your FM radios are sporting vacuum tubes, you're going to have the same problem with EMP
Not really..... EMP from a Large solar flare is likely to nuke the integrated circuits in your television, your internet router, all the computers required for cell towers to work, and other devices with silicon microchips at the end of a long wire. There are many possible scenarios where most FM radios ought to be fine, and since broadcasters require much less infrastructure than cell phone towers, they can be more quickly got back online....
You are making a really bad assumption - that they can't cut the FM spectrum in half
Reducing the bandwidth reduces the range and eliminates the capability to receive weak signals.
These are extremely valuable traits that analog radio has..... Under BAD conditions, you can still get a signal.
The Digital audio is higher quality when you can get it, But when conditions are bad you don't hear static, it cuts out 100% instead.
That frees up VALUABLE spectrum to give to other technology.
The additional service that FM radio provides is more valuable than the other technology.
Ever have trouble using bluetooth? Not enough spectrum. Cell phone can't connect? not enough spectrum.
No..... There is plenty of spectrum. The trouble is largely a combination of cheaply made devices, bugs, and inefficient protocols.
In the case of Cell phones not being able to connect; it's usually bad location with respect to the provider's towers which results in poor signal.
Oh, poor signal conditions where Cell phones won't work because they're digital, but with an FM Radio you could still receive a signal (It would just have some static).
The NUMBER of Analog FM stations which the bands can accommodate are MORE THAN NEEDED.
And switching them off is a major public detriment, Because of the loss of the major advantage which Analog FM radio has....
Receivers for FM are CHEAP, UBIQUITOUS, Easy to receive transmissions, And Analog signals are very forgiving.
Also, the relatively small NUMBER IS AN ADVANTAGE. When FM receivers are being used for THEIR MAIN PURPOSE, which..... Is to receive broadcast messages, potentially during a time of emergency when aLL THE DIGITAL STUFF is broken..... (E.g. Due to EMP)
they'll remove that person from the data grab request so they no longer have standing to sue them, and get the case thrown out?
When it comes to a violation of personal liberty, privacy, and constitutional rights protecting individuals, the concept of "Standing" is bogus and needs to be eliminated. Every American is damaged if personal liberties and privacy are infringed upon by the government.
If you can show it's above 1%, let's talk again. Otherwise, it's essentially an irrelevant risk
(1) Less than 1% is all it takes. The average person has about a 0.4% chance of getting into a car accident and dying as a result. So tell me.... do you avoid wearing seatbelts? Do you take no steps to reduce the chance farther? Would you refrain from using seatbelts, if you learned that by not wearing it, you could potentially save one other person's life?
After all, the number of incidents is vanishingly small considering the global stats....
Next example; less than 1% of violent crimes actually happen in dark alleyways on the bad side of this particular city. Most people would still not be OK with the 15-year-old daughter taking nightly walks in that area.
We don't use globally summarized statistics to gauge personal levels of risk for different activities!
There are other values in play.... Also, when you think about it, 1% is not that small of a number.
If there are 325 million people in the US, then 1% is 3.25 million people
Different people may have cause to suspect treatment with their local facilities are more likely to be part of that 1%.
(2) Counterpoint: If ANY organs can show to ever have been harvested through unethical means, then it's a reasonable assumption that there have been many more similar events, And they've been successfully covered up. The nature of the whole thing is that cover-up would be trivial. The uncounted incidents are impossible to measure.
Knowing the medical industry..... Consumers are highly litigious. Hospitals and professionals alike have been known to deliberately cover up minor mistakes out of the concern of getting sued later and losing their entire business over 1 small goof. It's unlikely you could Ever produce any statistics on anything approaching deliberate malfeasance, As the cover-ups would be part of the equation.
For the paranoids, I offer a 'Not an organ donor!" tattoo for your sternum for only $99.99
They screwed up and only saw the "Organ Donor" part, Or after 'accidentally' harvesting the organs, they painted over the "Not an" part of the Tattoo or took out that bit of skin to conceal what was there.
then over the next 10 years the death rate in France will not decrease as much as in otherwise comparable countries which still require opt-in.
Actually.... this signal is likely to become distorted. Doing Opt-Out Is likely to result in more donations and legitimate lives saved from bonafide deaths as well.
That is small comfort, however, for additional people that actually die as a result of malfeasance with organ harvesting. This is a Risk to Individuals. Even in the malfeasance case or unethical donations case, the Total Number of Lives saved is likely higher by more organ donations, because when organs to transplant are scarce, each person dying and successfully donating organs saves multiple lives.
hasten your death and then claim they assumed you had not opted out because they "couldn't find" an opt-out record for you?
"Our computer system was down, or hacked by ransomware", Or "Due to a technical error, their Opt-Out was accidentally missed, And we had to harvest the organs immediately, or they would become non-viable"....... "We've already implanted the Heart and Lungs in other people, They'll die if we take them back, what are you going to do, try and get a court order to kill?"
Sorry if you are not willing to donate then what moral right do you have to receive?
It's not a question of rights. Opting in to donate in the past doesn't give you any right either. Prioritizing people with less need than others based on administrative criteria over people with greater need would reduce the number of lives saved and reduce the value of organ donation.
There's a fundamental principle that Mercy is a virtue; medical centers care for the sick and try to save the dying, And past deeds are not a factor; there is always a chance for reform.
Assuming you're able to procure payment for the procedure; you can be a Lowly tradesman, or a Twice-convicted Burglar, or Rapist in the past, and it doesn't even matter, doctors have sworn to try to save your life all the same, Because the life is still precious, And you should actually have an equal priority Versus Bill Gates, Donald Trump, Barrack Obama, etc, receiving an organ donation, assuming the both of you developed the same extent of medical need.
Opt-in does not work because it is opt-in for donating. It should be opt-in for both donating and receiving at the same time.
I think you're on the right track to suggest Provide an incentive for opting in.
However, I am in disagreement about excluding those who Opt-Out from receiving. The purpose of organ donation is to save lives, and we should save as many lives as possible, PERIOD.
I would however suggest a few possible incentives:
(1) A cash payment while you are alive for agreeing to be a donor:
(a) A $20US non-refundable credit against your taxes for every year that you are signed up. This doesn't necessarily mean the government's giving up money..... they can levy an extra $20/Year tax on your health insurance before offering you this credit.
(b) When you donate to a non-family member without other consideration: A $500US individual tax credit, for every year, for the rest of your life, if you make a donation such as an un-needed Kidney when you are alive.
Multiply by the number of categories donated from these 3 things: (Kidney, Liver nodes, Stem cells).
(c) After making any actual donation, priority placement on donor lists, waiver of fees, if you ever have problems later.
(2) If you require an organ; An 'Organ receipt' fee to be charged to you after you complete the operation used to fund the donor registry; A portion of the fee will be discounted if you signed up as an Organ Donor.
No.... donated body parts, if they cannot be used to save somebody's life will likely be used for Scientific research, or educational purposes instead.
Can one's entire body be donated for the purpose of research or training?
Yes. Schools that graduate people as medical Doctors use Human kadavers for the purpose of teaching physiology and teaching surgeons.
Historically, these are expensive and hard for them to obtain. There may be research uses as well.
I don't know what the new French law is, but this would be clearly incomprehensible and a possible major infringement of the free exercise of religion regarding robbing one's deceased loved ones from the grave......
I just don't get the mentality of people who refuse organ donation. If you're dead, you're dead, why take other people with you?
The concern is not "If you're dead". The concern is, If i'm in critical condition, the hospital that knows I'm a potential organ donor may treat me differently in a manner that makes me less likely to survive, Or they may prematurely declare me dead out of concern for the organs they could get from me to save someone else..... perhaps someone they deem "More worthy" of being saved.
What kind of contract are you suggesting? You pay someone who holds BTC cash for a contract where they lock up some of their BTC and that BTC will be awarded to you (Or bought back from you for cash) if the BTC increases in value with respect to USD, and if the value of USD stays the same or increases in value with respect to BTC, then the Cash you spent on that contract becomes worthless?
You could probably do it simpler with Call options on an ETF holding BTC
Someone will be along to checkout 'It takes a village' any year now. They just know it.
Why are they using checkouts as the metric to decide on purges, anyways?
I pull books all the time, mostly non-fiction materials, and read from them, maybe take the notes and record the details I need for later reference for what i'm working on, and then put the book back on the shelf in the same slot I got it from.
At no point is it necessary to check most of the books out and take it out of the library..... I sometimes do that, but it doesn't mean the books I didn't need to check-out were not useful.
Especially the periodical volumes, which for some reason... we're not allowed to checkout, anyways.
Also, this is going to create a perverse incentive to immunize yourself against organ harvesting by picking up the latest incurable disease
Disincentivize catching one of those by having required testing And assigning a more painful method of execution and expediting the executions of prisoners found to have them.
They may possibly be hacked to turn this relay on - or off, making them a bit of a nuisance.
Well, if they cycle a relay fast enough from software, they may very well destroy equipment at the other end.
Also.... if the meter hardware has the capability to cycle it in the range of Milliseconds, then software can select an average voltage and create a sustained undervoltage condition.
Yep. Do you have any idea how big a 100+A relay is? (~1 cm contacts) The cooling?
Various smart meters DO have the ability to do a remote shutdown / remote restore. It's one of the major selling features to the utilities.
They DON'T NECESSARILY contain standard-design relays.
The components in a Smart meter are also determined by the manufacturer and the utility; They can engineer the sizes of the relays to whatever will work, and they're not beholden to anyone else's safety margins or requirements regarding size. The Utilities and their meters are not regulated by the government or required to be listed by a testing agency like UL for safety in the way that components installed by the consumer or consumer's contractors are required to have...... Essentially, the utility and their manufacturers can do whatever they want, Including using underrated parts or parts that will barely do the job.
The Smart Meters contain parts of specialized engineering. And the remote Shut-off/Shut-On is not a frequent duty-cycle application like an industrial relay.
Also, a couple years ago, Portland General Electric had to recall 70,000 meters to get a problem repaired with the remote Shut-off function that was supposedly causing fires.....
In some cases, the POCOs are having people put HVAC on separate feed so POCO can delay/stagger/prevent startup separately during peak usage in exchange for a homeowner cost savings.
Most permanent organ failures occurs due to genetic diseases, substance abuse, Or more rarely cancer, damage done by accidental poisoning, Or an infection.
I know this is kind of harsh.... but perhaps regarding the genetic defects, evolution will take its course if it is a shortage of transplantable organs, and these mutated genes causing the problem will get obliterated from existence instead of continued to the next generation by having a donor recipient continue to live and then pass on the genes.....
I don't believe vehicle crash damage is a common reason to need an implant. If you hit a vital organ other than a lung or kidney, then chances are you bleed to death long before emergency medical professionals (Who can't do a transplant) get their first look.
This isn't a bad idea....... Let's compel all prisoners to submit their organs in the event they should be executed Or die.
Step up the number of offenses that will be given the death penalty in order to help with the shortages, And make sure the manner of death preserves the organs.
More than one count of 1st degree murder = Automatic death penalty for 90% of cases.
Being convicted a second time dealing hard drugs or narcotics after serving Jailtime, or a 3rd time for any illegal substance = Automatic death penalty for 90% of cases.
Being convicted of aggravated rape on more than 1 victim Or sexual assault or statutory rape on more than one minor victim = Automatic death penalty for 90% of cases.
There are more than enough people being caught doing these crimes to be taken out of society make up for the shortfall that safer cars' bettering society will cause.
This should also help with prison population issues and associated costs and reduce recidivism.
Slashdot Mirror
A standard FM antenna 3 km line-of-sight away from a 1 watt transmitter should get about 1 microwatt at the antenna terminals.
That's not a good accomplishment; Typical cell tower spacing is 5 to 10 miles. That 3km is less than two miles, and there's no way the cell phone companies can justify the cost of building additional VHF cell sites to that density across the continent for a mere 20 Mhz of bandwidth. Cell phones using the existing bands have a range of more than 15 Miles.
Are you implying that high power signals aren't attenuated by building materials by the same ratio?
No. Higher Frequency signals aren't attenuated by building materials by the same ratio -- the function is nonlinear, and many frequencies less than the UHF range have a higher chance of being absorbed or reflected, But the 20-Fold increase in antenna size is a huge problem for having a compact mobile device. You cannot just increase cell phones from 500 mW to a full Watt, or 2 Watts..... The POWER your cell phone can transmit is fixed by the size of the device, Human safe RF exposure maximums (since phones will be held to the head), battery capacity, and the weight of materials within the phone whose purpose is to conduct energy and safely dissipate heat.
Until the courts go after people PERSONALLY (you know, like they do every time you get a ticket) there will be no change of behaviour.
The court has not precluded that. If the lawyer's compensation will be determined by the case they're working On, and their law firm is indigent, then the lawyer is personally a business partner too!
People referring to "spectrum" As if it was just some random commodity, and different frequencies didn't have different characteristics.
For starters; Assuming everybody on planet earth agrees to throw away their cell phone that does 800mhz and 1600mhz and buy a new one that adds a VHF radio that can work the band whose upper end is 88 Mhz.
One of the first things that has to change is the Cell phone Transmit power has to increase from 500 mW to more than 1 Watt.
The second thing that has to change, is your Cell phone's antenna has to increase in size.
Because the wavelength is changing from 38 centimeter or 15 centimeter All the way up to 2.7 Meters.
This means that the Required antenna length increases from approximately 6 to 16 centimeters (5 to 6 inches) all the way up to about 1.7 meters, Or 5.5 feet, before it can be resonant across the broadcast range.
The required transmit power will go up two more times further if you use a less-efficient antenna.... E.g. Loading coils to electrically double the antenna length, so you can make it physically shorter.
Finally, the amount of spectrum is so miniscule, that it won't be useful for significant data applications ---- You could support a few 19200 baud streams over the entire 20 Mhz range, Or possibly 100 simultaneous voice conversations across the whole range.
But seriously, the existing more than 200 MHz already allocated for Cell phones and more than 600 MHz a is plenty adequate for local wireless technologies. Destroying a valuable radio service provide at most a potential 1% increase in available frequencies just don't make any sense.
I forgot to mention another counterpoint here..... the Total Spectrum available for all FM broadcasters combined is miniscule compared to the amount of spectrum available for Bluetooth or a single WiFi channel..
Furthermore, each frequency range has different propagation characteristics, And the spectrum allocated to FM broadcasters is not at all suitable for local applications such as Microwave frequencies used for Bluetooth, WiFi, and Cell phones.
Because the FM broadcast band is in the VHF frequencies which are largely line-of-sight propagation; the transmitter requires a high antenna with a high-power signal for receivers to pick this up, and low-power signals are greatly attenuated by building materials, such as trees or wood, you need a few watts at least and a long antenna to get out just a couple miles. Compared to Microwave-range signals , where Cell phones require less than a watt of transmit power.
In other words, these would not be useful for cell phones.
It's also not suitable to reclaim for High-speed data applications, because of limited bandwidth...
It would only be able to help Bluetooth, if say bluetooth was a 16-Kilobits per Second wireless technology. But it's not; Bluetooth requires more bandwidth than can be had from a few Mhz of bandwidth.
Unless your FM radios are sporting vacuum tubes, you're going to have the same problem with EMP
Not really..... EMP from a Large solar flare is likely to nuke the integrated circuits in your television, your internet router, all the computers required for cell towers to work, and other devices with silicon microchips at the end of a long wire. There are many possible scenarios where most FM radios ought to be fine, and since broadcasters require much less infrastructure than cell phone towers, they can be more quickly got back online....
You are making a really bad assumption - that they can't cut the FM spectrum in half
Reducing the bandwidth reduces the range and eliminates the capability to receive weak signals.
These are extremely valuable traits that analog radio has..... Under BAD conditions, you can still get a signal.
The Digital audio is higher quality when you can get it, But when conditions are bad you don't hear static, it cuts out 100% instead.
That frees up VALUABLE spectrum to give to other technology.
The additional service that FM radio provides is more valuable than the other technology.
Ever have trouble using bluetooth? Not enough spectrum. Cell phone can't connect? not enough spectrum.
No..... There is plenty of spectrum. The trouble is largely a combination of cheaply made devices, bugs, and inefficient protocols.
In the case of Cell phones not being able to connect; it's usually bad location with respect to the provider's towers which
results in poor signal.
Oh, poor signal conditions where Cell phones won't work because they're digital, but with an FM Radio you could still receive a signal (It would just have some static).
The NUMBER of Analog FM stations which the bands can accommodate are MORE THAN NEEDED.
And switching them off is a major public detriment, Because of the loss of the major advantage which Analog FM radio has....
Receivers for FM are CHEAP, UBIQUITOUS, Easy to receive transmissions, And Analog signals are very forgiving.
Also, the relatively small NUMBER IS AN ADVANTAGE. When FM receivers are being used for THEIR MAIN PURPOSE, which.....
Is to receive broadcast messages, potentially during a time of emergency when aLL THE DIGITAL STUFF is broken.....
(E.g. Due to EMP)
I'd wonder what happens to the left over chloride ions.
Sell them to the city to treat the drinking water?
they'll remove that person from the data grab request so they no longer have standing to sue them, and get the case thrown out?
When it comes to a violation of personal liberty, privacy, and constitutional rights protecting individuals, the concept of "Standing" is bogus and needs to be eliminated. Every American is damaged if personal liberties and privacy are infringed upon by the government.
If you can show it's above 1%, let's talk again. Otherwise, it's essentially an irrelevant risk
(1) Less than 1% is all it takes. The average person has about a 0.4% chance of getting into a car accident and dying as a result. So tell me.... do you avoid wearing seatbelts? Do you take no steps to reduce the chance farther? Would you refrain from using seatbelts, if you learned that by not wearing it, you could potentially save one other person's life?
After all, the number of incidents is vanishingly small considering the global stats....
Next example; less than 1% of violent crimes actually happen in dark alleyways on the bad side of this particular city.
Most people would still not be OK with the 15-year-old daughter taking nightly walks in that area.
We don't use globally summarized statistics to gauge personal levels of risk for different activities!
There are other values in play.... Also, when you think about it, 1% is not that small of a number.
If there are 325 million people in the US, then 1% is 3.25 million people
Different people may have cause to suspect treatment with their local facilities are more likely to be part of that 1%.
(2) Counterpoint: If ANY organs can show to ever have been harvested through unethical means, then it's a reasonable assumption that there have been many more similar events, And they've been successfully covered up. The nature of the whole thing is that cover-up would be trivial. The uncounted incidents are impossible to measure.
Knowing the medical industry..... Consumers are highly litigious. Hospitals and professionals alike have been known to deliberately cover up minor mistakes out of the concern of getting sued later and losing their entire business over 1 small goof. It's unlikely you could Ever produce any statistics on anything approaching deliberate malfeasance, As the cover-ups would be part of the equation.
For the paranoids, I offer a 'Not an organ donor!" tattoo for your sternum for only $99.99
They screwed up and only saw the "Organ Donor" part, Or after 'accidentally' harvesting the organs, they painted over the "Not an" part of the Tattoo or took out that bit of skin to conceal what was there.
then over the next 10 years the death rate in France will not decrease as much as in otherwise comparable countries which still require opt-in.
Actually.... this signal is likely to become distorted. Doing Opt-Out Is likely to result in more donations and legitimate lives saved from bonafide deaths as well.
That is small comfort, however, for additional people that actually die as a result of malfeasance with organ harvesting.
This is a Risk to Individuals. Even in the malfeasance case or unethical donations case, the Total Number of Lives saved is likely higher by more organ donations, because when organs to transplant are scarce, each person dying and successfully donating organs saves multiple lives.
hasten your death and then claim they assumed you had not opted out because they "couldn't find" an opt-out record for you?
"Our computer system was down, or hacked by ransomware", Or "Due to a technical error, their Opt-Out was accidentally missed, And we had to harvest the organs immediately, or they would become non-viable".......
"We've already implanted the Heart and Lungs in other people, They'll die if we take them back, what are you going to do, try and get a court order to kill?"
Sorry if you are not willing to donate then what moral right do you have to receive?
It's not a question of rights. Opting in to donate in the past doesn't give you any right either. Prioritizing people with less need than others based on administrative criteria over people with greater need would reduce the number of lives saved and reduce the value of organ donation.
There's a fundamental principle that Mercy is a virtue; medical centers care for the sick and try to save the dying, And past deeds are not a factor; there is always a chance for reform.
Assuming you're able to procure payment for the procedure; you can be a Lowly tradesman,
or a Twice-convicted Burglar, or Rapist in the past, and it doesn't even matter, doctors have sworn to try to save your life all the same, Because the life is still precious, And you should actually have an equal priority Versus Bill Gates, Donald Trump, Barrack Obama, etc,
receiving an organ donation, assuming the both of you developed the same extent of medical need.
Opt-in does not work because it is opt-in for donating. It should be opt-in for both donating and receiving at the same time.
I think you're on the right track to suggest Provide an incentive for opting in.
However, I am in disagreement about excluding those who Opt-Out from receiving.
The purpose of organ donation is to save lives, and we should save as many lives as possible, PERIOD.
I would however suggest a few possible incentives:
(1) A cash payment while you are alive for agreeing to be a donor:
(a) A $20US non-refundable credit against your taxes for every year that you are signed up. This doesn't necessarily mean the government's giving up money..... they can levy an extra $20/Year tax on your health insurance before offering you this credit.
(b) When you donate to a non-family member without other consideration: A $500US individual tax credit, for every year, for the rest of your life, if you make a donation such as an un-needed Kidney when you are alive.
Multiply by the number of categories donated from these 3 things: (Kidney, Liver nodes, Stem cells).
(c) After making any actual donation, priority placement on donor lists, waiver of fees, if you ever have problems later.
(2) If you require an organ; An 'Organ receipt' fee to be charged to you after you complete the operation used to fund the donor registry; A portion of the fee will be discounted if you signed up as an Organ Donor.
But is that the case?
No.... donated body parts, if they cannot be used to save somebody's life will likely be used for Scientific research, or educational purposes instead.
Can one's entire body be donated for the purpose of research or training?
Yes. Schools that graduate people as medical Doctors use Human kadavers for the purpose of teaching physiology and teaching surgeons.
Historically, these are expensive and hard for them to obtain. There may be research uses as well.
I don't know what the new French law is, but this would be clearly incomprehensible and a possible major infringement of the free exercise
of religion regarding robbing one's deceased loved ones from the grave......
I just don't get the mentality of people who refuse organ donation. If you're dead, you're dead, why take other people with you?
The concern is not "If you're dead". The concern is, If i'm in critical condition, the hospital that knows I'm a potential organ donor
may treat me differently in a manner that makes me less likely to survive, Or they may prematurely declare me dead out of concern for
the organs they could get from me to save someone else..... perhaps someone they deem "More worthy" of being saved.
What kind of contract are you suggesting? You pay someone who holds BTC cash for a contract where they lock up some of their BTC and that BTC will be awarded to you (Or bought back from you for cash) if the BTC increases in value with respect to USD, and if the value of USD stays the same or increases in value with respect to BTC, then the Cash you spent on that contract becomes worthless?
You could probably do it simpler with Call options on an ETF holding BTC
Someone will be along to checkout 'It takes a village' any year now. They just know it.
Why are they using checkouts as the metric to decide on purges, anyways?
I pull books all the time, mostly non-fiction materials, and read from them, maybe take the notes and record the details I need for later reference for what i'm working on, and then put the book back on the shelf in the same slot I got it from.
At no point is it necessary to check most of the books out and take it out of the library.....
I sometimes do that, but it doesn't mean the books I didn't need to check-out were not useful.
Especially the periodical volumes, which for some reason... we're not allowed to checkout, anyways.
I guess the first people they need to subpoena are the owners of...
127.0.0.1, 192.168.1.10, and 192.168.100.10.
Those crazy guys at "blackhole-2.iana.org / IANA"..... I tell you what..... They have just about EVERY movie ever made in their collection.
Maybe it's just an attempt to collect IP addresses of people worried about their torrent activities.
Good luck sorting out the millions of people just curious about what they're doing or who accidentally clicked the link on Slashdot.
By the way, clicking a link won't be sufficient cause for a subpoena.
Also, this is going to create a perverse incentive to immunize yourself against organ harvesting by picking up the latest incurable disease
Disincentivize catching one of those by having required testing And assigning a more painful method of execution and expediting the executions of prisoners found to have them.
They may possibly be hacked to turn this relay on - or off, making them a bit of a nuisance.
Well, if they cycle a relay fast enough from software, they may very well destroy equipment at the other end.
Also.... if the meter hardware has the capability to cycle it in the range of Milliseconds, then software can select an average voltage and create a sustained undervoltage condition.
Yep. Do you have any idea how big a 100+A relay is? (~1 cm contacts) The cooling?
Various smart meters DO have the ability to do a remote shutdown / remote restore. It's one of the major selling features to the utilities.
They DON'T NECESSARILY contain standard-design relays.
The components in a Smart meter are also determined by the manufacturer and the utility; They can engineer the sizes of the relays to whatever will work, and they're not beholden to anyone else's safety margins or requirements regarding size. The Utilities and their meters are not regulated by the government or required to be listed by a testing agency like UL for safety in the way that components installed by the consumer or consumer's contractors are required to have...... Essentially, the utility and their manufacturers can do whatever they want, Including using underrated parts or parts that will barely do the job.
The Smart Meters contain parts of specialized engineering. And the remote Shut-off/Shut-On is not a frequent duty-cycle application like an industrial relay.
Also, a couple years ago, Portland General Electric had to recall 70,000 meters to get a problem repaired with the remote Shut-off function that was supposedly causing fires.....
In some cases, the POCOs are having people put HVAC on separate feed so POCO can delay/stagger/prevent startup separately during peak usage in exchange for a homeowner cost savings.
Most permanent organ failures occurs due to genetic diseases, substance abuse, Or more rarely cancer, damage done by accidental poisoning, Or an infection.
I know this is kind of harsh.... but perhaps regarding the genetic defects, evolution will take its course if it is a shortage of
transplantable organs, and these mutated genes causing the problem will get obliterated from existence instead of continued
to the next generation by having a donor recipient continue to live and then pass on the genes.....
I don't believe vehicle crash damage is a common reason to need an implant.
If you hit a vital organ other than a lung or kidney, then chances are you bleed to death long before emergency medical
professionals (Who can't do a transplant) get their first look.
This isn't a bad idea....... Let's compel all prisoners to submit their organs in the event they should be executed Or die.
Step up the number of offenses that will be given the death penalty in order to help with the shortages, And make sure the manner of death preserves the organs.
More than one count of 1st degree murder = Automatic death penalty for 90% of cases.
Being convicted a second time dealing hard drugs or narcotics after serving Jailtime, or a 3rd time for any illegal substance = Automatic death penalty for 90% of cases.
Being convicted of aggravated rape on more than 1 victim Or sexual assault or statutory rape on more than one minor victim = Automatic death penalty for 90% of cases.
There are more than enough people being caught doing these crimes to be taken out of society make up for the shortfall that safer cars' bettering society will cause.
This should also help with prison population issues and associated costs and reduce recidivism.