This is true, I should have said "lines" rather than "samples." But this has no effect on the point I was making. If private research creates additional lines, there's no reason why public researchers shouldn't be able to benefit from those new lines. No blood on federal hands, and the research still happens. Unless they're going to completely outlaw creating new lines, that's how it's going to wind up.
Potentially, it could allow some of the benefits of cloning (grow a new organ custom-fitted to your genes) without the atrocities (farming human beings for organs).
This is the same as my response to people who object to human cloning. The argument generally goes like, "we can't allow people to create clones of themselves and go harvesting them for spare organs and such!" Okay, but isn't harvesting organs from humans already sort of illegal? So as long as clones were treated like human beings, what's the problem?
What sickens me about this is that apparently the only way some people can think about a new technology is in terms of how to exploit it so callously like this. I mean, we can already create test tube babies. Nobody's carving them up for their organs just because they were born in an unusual way. Why should clones be different just because of the content of their genes?
This is an interesting cop-out, but it's not going to hold water in the long run. Let's run it down real quick:
There already exist some samples of embryonic stem cells from embryos that have been previously harvested.
Those embryos were harvested by privately-funded researchers (I think).
Federal funding will go only to researchers working with existing samples.
Privately-funded researchers will still be free to harvest more embryos.
Embryos harvested in the future will have the same status as those which have already been harvested today.
Thus, there's no reason why government-funded researchers couldn't do research on as many new samples as private researchers care to provide. Even if there's not as much private money, it can't cost all that much to cut up some embryos.
If I was against stem-cell research, I'd be pretty pissed at this point.
By the way, can anyone confirm the "60 samples" number? One of the guys giving commentary on NPR said it was more like 6.
What are you basing this on? The article explicitly contradicts what you're saying:
From the beginning, Branagan's goal was to develop a coating that would have real-world applicability. "We purposely used off-the shelf technology to apply the coatings with the idea of increasing the ease of getting this technology out to industry," Branagan said.
Oh yeah, and:
The product is also extremely affordable because it is only a steel which has exotic structures. It costs only a fraction of what hard ceramics such as tungsten carbide.
So I'm pretty optimistic about this process. The only potential difficulty I see is the environment needed to apply the coating -- high pressure, high velocity, high temperature. It could be that the combination of these may rule out some applications, but I guess that since we're talking about steel anyway most manufacturing processes should be able to withstand those conditions.
I'm more impressed by some of the other research being done in this area, such as the German scientists who are developing solar fabric. Maybe solar-powered textiles will finally explain 7of9's shiny wardrobe.
Not to seem argumentative (because for the most part, I agree with you), but you don't need technical savvy to understand privacy violations. Your average human being understands what it means to have your every move watched.
The point, as I see it, is that a judge who is techno-savvy is better equipped to make a sound decision based on such common sense as you mention, rather than being swept up by technophobic hysteria. That's what distinguishes technology-centric privacy issues from others: people get scared by ominous threats of new technology, and common sense goes out the window.
This whole business of granting preferential treatment to copyright holders or owners of already-existing domains is bogus. The ostensible purpose of adding new TLDs is to expand the namespace and allow more people the opportunity to register good domain names.
But if you say, "Okay, foobar.info is now available, but the owner of foobar.com gets first chance at it," then the owner of foobar.com will just own both and nobody really gets a chance at any good new domain names. The main effect is to line the pockets of the registration services.
Slashdot Mirror
Cheapest. Mod points. Ever.
This is true, I should have said "lines" rather than "samples." But this has no effect on the point I was making. If private research creates additional lines, there's no reason why public researchers shouldn't be able to benefit from those new lines. No blood on federal hands, and the research still happens. Unless they're going to completely outlaw creating new lines, that's how it's going to wind up.
What sickens me about this is that apparently the only way some people can think about a new technology is in terms of how to exploit it so callously like this. I mean, we can already create test tube babies. Nobody's carving them up for their organs just because they were born in an unusual way. Why should clones be different just because of the content of their genes?
In particular, there would be tremendous benefit to having access to stem cells with DNA identical to the individual needing treatment.
- There already exist some samples of embryonic stem cells from embryos that have been previously harvested.
- Those embryos were harvested by privately-funded researchers (I think).
- Federal funding will go only to researchers working with existing samples.
- Privately-funded researchers will still be free to harvest more embryos.
- Embryos harvested in the future will have the same status as those which have already been harvested today.
- Thus, there's no reason why government-funded researchers couldn't do research on as many new samples as private researchers care to provide. Even if there's not as much private money, it can't cost all that much to cut up some embryos.
If I was against stem-cell research, I'd be pretty pissed at this point.By the way, can anyone confirm the "60 samples" number? One of the guys giving commentary on NPR said it was more like 6.
From the beginning, Branagan's goal was to develop a coating that would have real-world applicability. "We purposely used off-the shelf technology to apply the coatings with the idea of increasing the ease of getting this technology out to industry," Branagan said.
Oh yeah, and:
The product is also extremely affordable because it is only a steel which has exotic structures. It costs only a fraction of what hard ceramics such as tungsten carbide.
So I'm pretty optimistic about this process. The only potential difficulty I see is the environment needed to apply the coating -- high pressure, high velocity, high temperature. It could be that the combination of these may rule out some applications, but I guess that since we're talking about steel anyway most manufacturing processes should be able to withstand those conditions.
The AC got modded as much as I did. If she wants to get the same score, she should log in for the extra point.
I'm more impressed by some of the other research being done in this area, such as the German scientists who are developing solar fabric. Maybe solar-powered textiles will finally explain 7of9's shiny wardrobe.
>rimshot<
I heard there's an operating system out there which can damage users' wetware, making them stupider and more complacent the more they use it.
The point, as I see it, is that a judge who is techno-savvy is better equipped to make a sound decision based on such common sense as you mention, rather than being swept up by technophobic hysteria. That's what distinguishes technology-centric privacy issues from others: people get scared by ominous threats of new technology, and common sense goes out the window.
But if you say, "Okay, foobar.info is now available, but the owner of foobar.com gets first chance at it," then the owner of foobar.com will just own both and nobody really gets a chance at any good new domain names. The main effect is to line the pockets of the registration services.
They can call it whatever they want, as long as Jar-Jar's role in this movie is as "expendable crewmember."