hmmm... while I'm not a frequent poster to slashdot (I'm just to occupied with other affairs) the label troll is one I must admit no prior experience with. Having now read the Troll HOWTO I'm put off with the supposed accusation that my motivation is to get as many replies as possible. With interest in full disclosure, yes many replies would be nice if not great. My motivation for getting such replies may be misunderstood though. The discussion is what is of value in a community. Not the ego boost that comes form harvesting as many replies as possible. That would be a purely individualistic goal at odds with the goal of positive discussion for the good of the community.
Slashdot seems hardly the place to debate the psychological, sociological, or even anthropological nature of "Trolls" as used above. So I will not delve into this arena of rapport here. I will say that if you feel my post is fabricated or exaggerated to produce replies then you check my research. Flu: The Story of the Great Influenza Pandemic of 1918 and the Search for the Virus That Caused It by Gina Kolata is a good place to start.
The pure goal of my post was to start an informed discussion.
I will close by playing the devils advocate here and point out that this reply itself could be viewed as a Troll defending oneself by denying they are a Troll, or an attempt to vindicate myself from the accusation of another. You be the judge. Both options are irrelevant in reference to the topic at hand though.
I'm all for the idea of this, but sometimes I feel science is too gung ho in the advances that we make. Have we thought about possible negative ramifications this may pose to us as a species? We genetically alter a pig to provide organs for humans. Okay, sounds great if it's is possible. However, in our quest to better ourselves are we forgetting that nature is bettering itself and has been doing so for billions of years through the evolutionary process itself? What happens when artificial evolution (humans modifying other species and ourselves) goes at odds with natural evolution?
Anyone bother to take note that the most deadly flu viruses incubate in pigs before they are transmitted to the human population? While this may be debatable itself there is plenty of evidence that is does. Swine flu has the same effects on pigs that the 1918 flu epidemic had on the human population. While I do not mean to insinuate that genetically altering pigs will lead to such an epidemic, it is plausible. Altering a pig to be able to produce human useable organs will make it even easier for natural evolution to breed diseases in pigs that will effect humans too. It is also plausible that such diseases would have the opportunity to be even more deadly in humans since we would have no time for our species in general to have developed an immunity to the natural afflictions that are already present in the population of pigs.
While I do not jump to any conclusions that this will happen. The possibility should at least be subject to debate in the scientific community before premature action is taken just because it is possible to take such action. If anything in the mean time can't more of us fill out the forms to become organ donors ourselves?
Every piece of space is precious space. Take a step back and look at it in a different way. Find ways to add shelves under your desk, over your desk, everywhere... You'll need to add your own custon shelves just for the zoo. Other than that it is a personel journey. Remember though, it is not the jar that is important but the empty space inside that is of value.
Although I'm not a fan of Microsoft in the spirit of OSS I must agree with the comment that "It's good that MS adapt Linux code" well... IMOHO maybe "Okay" is prefered over "good" but as stated I'm not a fan of MS.
The point made that the Linux community copies MS ideas (examples stated - WINE, Samba, & the "look and feel") is rather treacherous though. WINE can be rulled out right away as not a copy but a compatibility idea. Samba, is a tool to integrate MS Networking into a UNiX network, hardly a copy of any idea, again compatability. The "look & feel" though is the scariest thought though haven't we seen this already with Apple vs. Microsoft over Windows 3.1??? Let's just not travel down that road.:)
Slashdot Mirror
A troll.?.?....
hmmm
Slashdot seems hardly the place to debate the psychological, sociological, or even anthropological nature of "Trolls" as used above. So I will not delve into this arena of rapport here. I will say that if you feel my post is fabricated or exaggerated to produce replies then you check my research. Flu: The Story of the Great Influenza Pandemic of 1918 and the Search for the Virus That Caused It by Gina Kolata is a good place to start.
The pure goal of my post was to start an informed discussion.
I will close by playing the devils advocate here and point out that this reply itself could be viewed as a Troll defending oneself by denying they are a Troll, or an attempt to vindicate myself from the accusation of another. You be the judge. Both options are irrelevant in reference to the topic at hand though.
I'm all for the idea of this, but sometimes I feel science is too gung ho in the advances that we make. Have we thought about possible negative ramifications this may pose to us as a species? We genetically alter a pig to provide organs for humans. Okay, sounds great if it's is possible. However, in our quest to better ourselves are we forgetting that nature is bettering itself and has been doing so for billions of years through the evolutionary process itself? What happens when artificial evolution (humans modifying other species and ourselves) goes at odds with natural evolution?
Anyone bother to take note that the most deadly flu viruses incubate in pigs before they are transmitted to the human population? While this may be debatable itself there is plenty of evidence that is does. Swine flu has the same effects on pigs that the 1918 flu epidemic had on the human population. While I do not mean to insinuate that genetically altering pigs will lead to such an epidemic, it is plausible. Altering a pig to be able to produce human useable organs will make it even easier for natural evolution to breed diseases in pigs that will effect humans too. It is also plausible that such diseases would have the opportunity to be even more deadly in humans since we would have no time for our species in general to have developed an immunity to the natural afflictions that are already present in the population of pigs.
While I do not jump to any conclusions that this will happen. The possibility should at least be subject to debate in the scientific community before premature action is taken just because it is possible to take such action. If anything in the mean time can't more of us fill out the forms to become organ donors ourselves?
Every piece of space is precious space. Take a step back and look at it in a different way. Find ways to add shelves under your desk, over your desk, everywhere... You'll need to add your own custon shelves just for the zoo. Other than that it is a personel journey. Remember though, it is not the jar that is important but the empty space inside that is of value.
;)
Although I'm not a fan of Microsoft in the spirit of OSS I must agree with the comment that "It's good that MS adapt Linux code" well ... IMOHO maybe "Okay" is prefered over "good" but as stated I'm not a fan of MS.
:)
The point made that the Linux community copies MS ideas (examples stated - WINE, Samba, & the "look and feel") is rather treacherous though. WINE can be rulled out right away as not a copy but a compatibility idea. Samba, is a tool to integrate MS Networking into a UNiX network, hardly a copy of any idea, again compatability. The "look & feel" though is the scariest thought though haven't we seen this already with Apple vs. Microsoft over Windows 3.1??? Let's just not travel down that road.