It is important to separate concious morals from instincts - after all, what justice is there in nature? The strong live, the weak die. Do we want our human lives ruled that way? I'd vote no, and I hope you would too.
As a male I have an unconscious desire to procreate. I do not necessarily have a desire to stick around and raise a kid - I think I would want to stick around, tho. That is instinctual. The desire to stick around and take care of a child or to go through extra effort to help ensure that the child survives is based on a conscious moral decision. So too would the desire to genetically engineer the child. Is there justice in that? There is if everyone has access to the technology.
There is another argument that supports both genetic engineering and your idea of ethics. It's the idea that genetically engineered children would be better able to contribute to society at large and that their existence would be a boon.
This is very true and is one of the biggest reasons why this sort of genetic engineering should not be allowed until it is possible for everyone to participate
In a societal sense I agree with you that this shouldn't be allowed unless it is available to everyone. At the level of the individual I believe that parents have a duty to do what they can to give their child the best chance possible
But, I think that genetic tinkering and instrusive parenting are not necessarily the same thing. Genetic tinkering would come before the birth of the child. It could be argued that such tinkering would help the child become independent. Tinkering does not mean that the parent will be intrusive.
I would define Prosper as being the ability of a person to best continue his or her genetic line and/or to make a positive, lasting impression on society.
Continuing one's genetic line requires - normally - that the individual be a stable and able provider.
Making a positive lasting impression on society means creating something (idea, invention, etc) that makes a positive impact on the lives of a large number of people.
By this arguement both Gates and Torvalds are prosperous.
I've heard it said that one of the most important jobs someone can ever have is the job of raising a child. It is the responsibility of the parent (in a perfect world) to raise a child who can survive in this world. It is the ultimate accomplishment if the child can do more than survive and actually prosper.
That being the case Parents would be remiss in their duties if they didn't at least consider genetic engineering. Their childs prosperity may depend on his or her advantages relative to their neighbours.
It seems to me that Janes' submission to slashdot was almost a type of peer review. An article/paper was submitted to Slashdot for review for commentary. It was only after some very valid points were made that the editors of Jane's decided to write a new article. They are still the journalistic entity in the equation. This community just happens to have some independent observers who aren't afraid to share their opinion(as well as several people who probably shouldn't:) and only Jane's has control over content.
IMHO, of course
J:)
Where you stand in the Grand Scheme of SF
on
Ask Bruce Sterling
·
· Score: 1
Where do you stand? Who do you consider to be your peers? Which writers (SF and non-SF) do you like?
In my opinion on of the truly incredible things about Linux is that you can make changes to the system and *if* you can convince others that the changes are good they get incorporated and acknowledged as being yours. Once incorporated you can always look at that piece of code and say "I did that, I own that." For me that is the greatest allure of Linux.
Now with the Sun Licence (as with Apple's) you can make changes, but you can never own the change or - probably - even get acknowledgement. And that is the biggest hinderence for Sun's experiment.
Having experienced both systems I have lots of good and bad things to say about both. Most of the good things come from the bandwidth (cable is faster except in the early evening when everyone is on the system). Most of the bad things come from how the system is maintained. Personally, I think it's an awesome deal either way you slice it.
Of course, I only have to pay $40 CDN/mo for my service.:) (about $30 US)
What really matters, tho', is how well the service is run. Frequent service outages and short message timeouts in the Usenet archives can drive one batty. And beyond the high bandwidth, that's what is most important. IMHO of course.
Public keys are distributed to encrypt messages. The Distributer of the public key has a private key which is the only key which can decrypt a message.
The system: Public key can encrypt but not decrypt Private key can decrypt and is not distributed.
Sixth Sense was one movie that was well advertised but didn't show too much. The teasers were just that: teasers. They didn't give the whole plot and all the best lines away. I watched all the commercials and trailers and still really enjoyed the movie.
It seems these days that Lucas is merely the extreme of what has become the norm. With few exceptions, if I want to enjoy a movie it seems that I have to leave the room or cover my ears and eyes whenever a commercial for it comes on the tube. Some of the toys they come out with and advertise are simply silly (although I love the fact that you can get a "Fat Bastard" action figure from Austin Powers II).
Fast food and soft drink tie ins just inundate us with movie images and they do detract from the movie. Sometimes they even ruin the movie altogether.
But as for the complaints of Guinness and Neeson, well I don't think they should complain about being meat puppets. After all, they are actors and are paid to do a job.
On the other hand, Lucas's writing seems to have gone down hill since the first trilogy. Hopefully, the quality of the dialogue and plot will increase with practise.
btw, anyone see the Southpark with strange female critter who talks like Jar-Jar?
1. Weight different comments differently. IE. a relevent = +2 while a troll = -2.
2. Only use positive scoring with ID's; Your initial comment ranking is a result of the ranking of your previous comment rankings. Moderators would be responsible for browsing at the lowest levels to see if there are any decent AC posts for good posts from new users.
3. A more stable group of moderators could be used. Assign longer moderator terms to those who demostrate good judgement when moderating.
It's unclear why she was complaining. She might have been angling for a lawsuit or she might not have. The body she complained to does not - I Think - have the ability to award damages. They can get shows dropped or edited or require some sort of public retraction for statements made.
Comments on the ratio of Experts vs Crackpots? I don't think that there are that many crackpots, but neither do I think there are that many experts, either. At least not that many experts who post.
Maybe we should have a Poll? Are you a: 1. Expert 2. Lounger 3. Crackpot
If blank CD's are taxed and these taxes go to artists for the inevitable copies that are going to be made of their music, does that make it OK for me to copy music to one of these blank CD's?
If I pay a surcharge on a CD to cover someone's copyrights, I think I should have the RIGHT to store music on that medium.
It isn't clear from the article and I doubt it's a target but it is possible to digitally record music on Hard Drives. I'd hate to see the tax on those 2.3 TB drives that are supposed to be available in a couple of years.
What about software vendors? They'll have to pay tax on these even though they are original content creators.
I think that we all know that any company that releases this technology will be charging far more than $50 for 2.3TB of storage. It's not that they have to, but that they can to maximise their profit.
And that's not necessarily a bad thing either.
I predict that 2.3TB will be above $400 in two years IF this technology holds water
God help us if we trample on the sacred rights of smokers even if they can cause cancer in others or cause a host of respiratory ailments in their children. Or the God given right of the Freemen to pass bad checks. Maybe it's just me but it seems like religion has been getting stronger, not weaker.
I agree that the government should not be in the bedrooms of the country. However, that belief does not justify the actions of the Tax Evaders, or Corporate Tobacco, or some gun extremists.
If nobody paid taxes, there would be no way of enforcing law - the law would be made by the person with the biggest gun or the fastest draw. Common defence would not exist - militia just doesn't cut it in this day and age. Roads would be a hell of a lot more expensive. There would be no recourse to the law if some large company was dumping toxic waste in you drinking water - after all they could hire more goons than you could.
But the only way any of this has anything to do with privacy is when it has become apparent that someone has broken the law. The tobacco companies did something wrong and were investigated. The freemen did something wrong and were investigated. Gun dealers will sell to anyone and their brother - including recent escapees - and deserve investigation. And hey, people have been killed in road rage incidents. But in all these situations privacy was not broached until a crime -or civil tort- was commited. There are exceptions like Ruby Ridge, but the people involved have recourse to the law. And while I agree that the volk at Ruby Ridge have a case I definitely would not want them as my neighbors with the arsenal they have.
Anyway, my point is this. If you do something wrong you should be investigated. By "something wrong" I mean doing something that harms another. That includes blowing smoke in their face, not paying your fair share in taxes, and selling poisonous products to kids.
Laws exist to prevent people from hurting other people. Maybe they are good laws, maybe bad, but that does not give us the right to ignore them. What's interesting is that every example quoted in the last paragraph of the article resulted in some harm being done to individuals and society. I cannot have any sympathy for those who arbitrarily cause harm to others.
Slashdot Mirror
As a male I have an unconscious desire to procreate. I do not necessarily have a desire to stick around and raise a kid - I think I would want to stick around, tho. That is instinctual. The desire to stick around and take care of a child or to go through extra effort to help ensure that the child survives is based on a conscious moral decision. So too would the desire to genetically engineer the child. Is there justice in that? There is if everyone has access to the technology.
There is another argument that supports both genetic engineering and your idea of ethics. It's the idea that genetically engineered children would be better able to contribute to society at large and that their existence would be a boon.
Just some more thoughts
J
In a societal sense I agree with you that this shouldn't be allowed unless it is available to everyone. At the level of the individual I believe that parents have a duty to do what they can to give their child the best chance possible
Actually, I agree with you.
But, I think that genetic tinkering and instrusive parenting are not necessarily the same thing. Genetic tinkering would come before the birth of the child. It could be argued that such tinkering would help the child become independent. Tinkering does not mean that the parent will be intrusive.
I would define Prosper as being the ability of a person to best continue his or her genetic line and/or to make a positive, lasting impression on society.
Continuing one's genetic line requires - normally - that the individual be a stable and able provider.
Making a positive lasting impression on society means creating something (idea, invention, etc) that makes a positive impact on the lives of a large number of people.
By this arguement both Gates and Torvalds are prosperous.
IMHO, as per....
J:)
I've heard it said that one of the most important jobs someone can ever have is the job of raising a child. It is the responsibility of the parent (in a perfect world) to raise a child who can survive in this world. It is the ultimate accomplishment if the child can do more than survive and actually prosper.
That being the case Parents would be remiss in their duties if they didn't at least consider genetic engineering. Their childs prosperity may depend on his or her advantages relative to their neighbours.
IMHO, of course.
J
It seems to me that Janes' submission to slashdot was almost a type of peer review. An article/paper was submitted to Slashdot for review for commentary. It was only after some very valid points were made that the editors of Jane's decided to write a new article. They are still the journalistic entity in the equation. This community just happens to have some independent observers who aren't afraid to share their opinion(as well as several people who probably shouldn't:) and only Jane's has control over content.
IMHO, of course
J:)
Where do you stand?
Who do you consider to be your peers?
Which writers (SF and non-SF) do you like?
J:)
also...
which is stranger; fact or fiction?
In my opinion on of the truly incredible things about Linux is that you can make changes to the system and *if* you can convince others that the changes are good they get incorporated and acknowledged as being yours. Once incorporated you can always look at that piece of code and say "I did that, I own that." For me that is the greatest allure of Linux.
Now with the Sun Licence (as with Apple's) you can make changes, but you can never own the change or - probably - even get acknowledgement. And that is the biggest hinderence for Sun's experiment.
anyway....
J
Having experienced both systems I have lots of good and bad things to say about both. Most of the good things come from the bandwidth (cable is faster except in the early evening when everyone is on the system). Most of the bad things come from how the system is maintained. Personally, I think it's an awesome deal either way you slice it.
Of course, I only have to pay $40 CDN/mo for my service.:) (about $30 US)
What really matters, tho', is how well the service is run. Frequent service outages and short message timeouts in the Usenet archives can drive one batty. And beyond the high bandwidth, that's what is most important. IMHO of course.
J:)
Oooops, sorry. They never existed.
J:)
Public keys are distributed to encrypt messages. The Distributer of the public key has a private key which is the only key which can decrypt a message.
The system: Public key can encrypt but not decrypt
Private key can decrypt and is not distributed.
Have a look at PGP. (or GPG:)
J:)
Sixth Sense was one movie that was well advertised but didn't show too much. The teasers were just that: teasers. They didn't give the whole plot and all the best lines away. I watched all the commercials and trailers and still really enjoyed the movie.
Kudos to the producers of that flick.
J:)
It seems these days that Lucas is merely the extreme of what has become the norm. With few exceptions, if I want to enjoy a movie it seems that I have to leave the room or cover my ears and eyes whenever a commercial for it comes on the tube. Some of the toys they come out with and advertise are simply silly (although I love the fact that you can get a "Fat Bastard" action figure from Austin Powers II).
Fast food and soft drink tie ins just inundate us with movie images and they do detract from the movie. Sometimes they even ruin the movie altogether.
But as for the complaints of Guinness and Neeson, well I don't think they should complain about being meat puppets. After all, they are actors and are paid to do a job.
On the other hand, Lucas's writing seems to have gone down hill since the first trilogy. Hopefully, the quality of the dialogue and plot will increase with practise.
btw, anyone see the Southpark with strange female critter who talks like Jar-Jar?
anyway...
J:)
Three Ideas:
1. Weight different comments differently. IE. a relevent = +2 while a troll = -2.
2. Only use positive scoring with ID's; Your initial comment ranking is a result of the ranking of your previous comment rankings. Moderators would be responsible for browsing at the lowest levels to see if there are any decent AC posts for good posts from new users.
3. A more stable group of moderators could be used. Assign longer moderator terms to those who demostrate good judgement when moderating.
Just a couple of ideas...
J:)
It's unclear why she was complaining. She might have been angling for a lawsuit or she might not have. The body she complained to does not - I Think - have the ability to award damages. They can get shows dropped or edited or require some sort of public retraction for statements made.
On the other hand she does sound like a goofball.
J:)
Crackpot
Definitely
:)
Comments on the ratio of Experts vs Crackpots? I don't think that there are that many crackpots, but neither do I think there are that many experts, either. At least not that many experts who post.
Maybe we should have a Poll?
Are you a:
1. Expert
2. Lounger
3. Crackpot
IMHO, as per.
J:)
If blank CD's are taxed and these taxes go to artists for the inevitable copies that are going to be made of their music, does that make it OK for me to copy music to one of these blank CD's?
If I pay a surcharge on a CD to cover someone's copyrights, I think I should have the RIGHT to store music on that medium.
Just another thought
J:)
It isn't clear from the article and I doubt it's a target but it is possible to digitally record music on Hard Drives. I'd hate to see the tax on those 2.3 TB drives that are supposed to be available in a couple of years.
What about software vendors? They'll have to pay tax on these even though they are original content creators.
Just some thougths
J:)
I think that we all know that any company that releases this technology will be charging far more than $50 for 2.3TB of storage. It's not that they have to, but that they can to maximise their profit.
And that's not necessarily a bad thing either.
I predict that 2.3TB will be above $400 in two years IF this technology holds water
IMHO of course.:)
J:)
Hey, it's a marketing guy. He's not a real person to begin with. Now if they made the programmers eat the bugs, that would be impressive.
J:)
Sixth Sense kid definitely. Introspection, not an extrovert. That's what we need.
God help us if we trample on the sacred rights of smokers even if they can cause cancer in others or cause a host of respiratory ailments in their children. Or the God given right of the Freemen to pass bad checks. Maybe it's just me but it seems like religion has been getting stronger, not weaker.
I agree that the government should not be in the bedrooms of the country. However, that belief does not justify the actions of the Tax Evaders, or Corporate Tobacco, or some gun extremists.
If nobody paid taxes, there would be no way of enforcing law - the law would be made by the person with the biggest gun or the fastest draw. Common defence would not exist - militia just doesn't cut it in this day and age. Roads would be a hell of a lot more expensive. There would be no recourse to the law if some large company was dumping toxic waste in you drinking water - after all they could hire more goons than you could.
But the only way any of this has anything to do with privacy is when it has become apparent that someone has broken the law. The tobacco companies did something wrong and were investigated. The freemen did something wrong and were investigated. Gun dealers will sell to anyone and their brother - including recent escapees - and deserve investigation. And hey, people have been killed in road rage incidents. But in all these situations privacy was not broached until a crime -or civil tort- was commited. There are exceptions like Ruby Ridge, but the people involved have recourse to the law. And while I agree that the volk at Ruby Ridge have a case I definitely would not want them as my neighbors with the arsenal they have.
Anyway, my point is this. If you do something wrong you should be investigated. By "something wrong" I mean doing something that harms another. That includes blowing smoke in their face, not paying your fair share in taxes, and selling poisonous products to kids.
Laws exist to prevent people from hurting other people. Maybe they are good laws, maybe bad, but that does not give us the right to ignore them. What's interesting is that every example quoted in the last paragraph of the article resulted in some harm being done to individuals and society. I cannot have any sympathy for those who arbitrarily cause harm to others.
Phhhhh
Just come up with a slightly different protocol with a slightly different type of interface, put it on a different port and call it c-mail.
Or just get a shell account in another country:) That also works.
J:)
I guess this would be the wrong time to ask for a new poll. *sigh*
J:)