In this case, yes. However, there are other sex selection technologies that do not require IVF, so the application to the broader population is still there.
I have two hesitations about non-medically needed sex selection. First, in countries where there is a bias towards a gender, I think it would cause serious societal problems if the male to female ration became to skewed one way or the other. Even in the USA, is there a chance that one gender or the other would become "trendy"? It removes a random element, and it's unclear what the consequence would be; although I suspect most in the U.S. would still leave it to chance.
The other hesitation is about the people who would spend serious money to get a child of one gender or another. Having a child is an exercise about accepting who that child turns out to be, and if you're not prepared to accept a given gender, what happens when they turn out to hate sports, or become religious, or want to be vegatarians, or some other thing you might not have originally signed on for? There's a level of "Dude, if you can't accept a child that's a (boy/girl), are you really ready to have one?"
In the end, I can accept regulation in the first case; however, having and raising kids is an intensely personal decision, and leaving the choice to the individuals involved shows the most deference to situations we do not understand.
The 6000 year old number has a basis outside of christian thought. The jewish calendar is traditionally taken to be a measure of time since the creation of the world, with the current year being 5765.
A rabbi friend of mine (I still find it weird to know rabbis my own age) gave a very good talk on the creation story. He talked about the moral teachings of the story, and the distinction it draws between G-d's influence and human influence on the world. His point was that the intent behind the story was moral, not historical.
The insistence on a literal reading the creation story (including attempts to reconcile it with current science by, for example, reinterpreting what a "day" might mean) seems to be a christian preoccupation, in my personal experience. The religious Jews I know don't seem to worry about it very much.
I've had a similar experience - I had a bunch of code in Python, and needed a UI, so I slogged through learning how to do it with Tkinter. Having done that, I wrote a form program that generates a string into a form (myButton@ will put in a button with the word "myButton" on it that will call the myButton method when pressed, for example). With the gridding functions in Tkinter, I can add and remove stuff from the form and it usually comes out looking all right. When it doesn't, it's not much work to make it so it does.
Like so many things, the first GUI was MUCH harder to write than the drag and drop method. Modifying existing GUIs and putting in repetitive structures (or generating varying forms on the fly) is now MUCH easier than it would be with the drag and drop.
(There are also "drag and drop" tools for making forms in Python, available through different toolkits, but I've never used them because I found out about them too late!)
More importantly: how come you are able to use software without copying it?
Do you copy a page of text when you look at it? An image is formed on your retina.
The idea that transfering into memory is "copying" is an old SCO thing, IIRC. Any reasonable definition of copying would mean creating something that can be given to someone else with losing your use of it. So transfering into memory from the hard drive, no. Sending from memory over the network to a receiver on the other end, yes.
Clearly, if the company wants to hold to its rights to the ownership of the changes, and the original code is licensed under the GPL, then the changes are essentially orphaned, legally.
However, the it sounds like the company is planning on ignoring the restrictions of the GPL.
How to proceed depends on your judgement of how your managers would react. You've clearly signed away your rights to the code, so I wouldn't argue that point. What I personally would do is point out in writing your opinion that the changes cannot be release with the original GPL code, and if you made extensive changes to existing code (i.e. you changed existing files instead of adding new ones), then there is no way to reasonably rewrite the code (under the theory that it is "contaminated".)
Then add that there are two options - let the code changes die, or let them be released under the GPL. Send this letter to more than one person - say your boss, the legal department, and anyone in management who likes you. Keep a copy for yourself, and keep any replies.
Having stated your case calmly and professionally, you have a choice if they disagree with your opinion - quit and do nothing, stay on and do nothing, whistle blow and stay, or quit and whistle blow. That's clearly a personal choice that depends on your particular circumstances and temperament. But I would encourage you to state your concerns calmly, nonconfrontationally, in a tone that suggests you believe everyone is rational and that your opinion is valid. If you don't try to draw a line in the sand from the beginning, it is easier for other people to change their minds.
Actually, you are abiding by the terms of the GPL if you just use it in house. (As opposed to attempting to reverse engineer Windows, which is against the terms of the agreement, even if I do it by myself and don't tell anyone.)
Unsolicited faxes are punishable by a fine of a few grand (I believe). We get five or six a day. It turns out civil penalities are difficult to enforce when people can dissolve and reform corporations.
Don't dress up greed as a moral obligation. It's not in theory or in practice. Corporate officers have very little to fear from not meeting their clear and well defined obligations (Andrew Fastow is serving how much time for losing how many thousands of people their retirement?), much less the fiduciary responsibility requirements.
The requirements of fiduciary responsibility are usually negative, not positive. You can't do something that's clearly BAD for the company (remember the flap about the network whose manaagement wanted to run an anti-Kerry show? He backed down because it was clearly not in the best fiduciary interest of the company.) However, as for taking a particular positive action (should we develop X or Y? Should we lobby the EU for software patents?), there is no consequence as a breach of "fiduciary responsibility" for taking one action or another. You might get fired for incompetence, but not sued.
Clearly greed is a human motivation, and serves a purpose - medieval scholars wrote "Blessed is the inclination to evil, without which a man would not plant a vineyard, take a wife, or establish a house." But we all know it can be destructive to society as a whole when applied on a huge scale.
Fiduciary responsibility does not, in a practical sense, mandate immoral behavior. Dressing it up as some sort of moral obligation is the worst sort of cynicism. It's a call to inaction - "These huge powerful companies HAVE to act this way - no sense in trying to make it turn out any differently." What a bleak world that would be to live in.
In Virginia, the libraries of the state universities allow public access to all on line publications and journals to which they subscribe. However, you have to go down to the library, you can't access online.
It's sometimes a pleasant break from being in the office, and the nearest university is only 20 minutes from here.
I've never left a job without having something else lined up, but I've been supporting someone else since I began working. Of course, none of the jobs I've had involved difficult people or bosses or other personally unpleasant aspects. It was always the commute, or being bored with the work, or wanting to move to another coast.
If you've got no one to support, and the job is killing you, and working would get in the way of finding another job, then quitting might be the best thing you can do. I've never been there, though.
My wife once had a charge for ~$600 appear on her card. It turns out a worker who had been in our house (don't know which one) got the card and ordered a bunch of bulk food. It was shipped to an address. For $600, no one (police, credit card company) was willing to investigate it to the point of actually checking out that address and seeing if someone lived there who worked in my house. The shipping company had the address but wouldn't give it to me.
Tracking down online transactions isn't necessarily so trivial or likely to happen.
three times the power of existing Lithium Ion batteries at the same price
Their NOT claiming three times the power at the same size and weight (which would really make me suspicious) but at the same price - which while technically interesting, is not as revolutionary. Heck, they could just be using slave labor for the price reduction.
The Dulles Toll Road (DTR) is an 8 lane (4 lanes in each direction) limited access highway approximately 14 miles in length which is owned and operated by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT).
I would argue that the torrent is linking to the files. Just like an html hyperlink, it provides software running on your machine a way to get a given file. I mean, the hyperlink was probably no more than 30 characters long, but functionally "published" the files, according to the court.
Slashdot Mirror
I have two hesitations about non-medically needed sex selection. First, in countries where there is a bias towards a gender, I think it would cause serious societal problems if the male to female ration became to skewed one way or the other. Even in the USA, is there a chance that one gender or the other would become "trendy"? It removes a random element, and it's unclear what the consequence would be; although I suspect most in the U.S. would still leave it to chance.
The other hesitation is about the people who would spend serious money to get a child of one gender or another. Having a child is an exercise about accepting who that child turns out to be, and if you're not prepared to accept a given gender, what happens when they turn out to hate sports, or become religious, or want to be vegatarians, or some other thing you might not have originally signed on for? There's a level of "Dude, if you can't accept a child that's a (boy/girl), are you really ready to have one?"
In the end, I can accept regulation in the first case; however, having and raising kids is an intensely personal decision, and leaving the choice to the individuals involved shows the most deference to situations we do not understand.
That link is hilarious.
A rabbi friend of mine (I still find it weird to know rabbis my own age) gave a very good talk on the creation story. He talked about the moral teachings of the story, and the distinction it draws between G-d's influence and human influence on the world. His point was that the intent behind the story was moral, not historical.
The insistence on a literal reading the creation story (including attempts to reconcile it with current science by, for example, reinterpreting what a "day" might mean) seems to be a christian preoccupation, in my personal experience. The religious Jews I know don't seem to worry about it very much.
Like so many things, the first GUI was MUCH harder to write than the drag and drop method. Modifying existing GUIs and putting in repetitive structures (or generating varying forms on the fly) is now MUCH easier than it would be with the drag and drop.
(There are also "drag and drop" tools for making forms in Python, available through different toolkits, but I've never used them because I found out about them too late!)
Do you copy a page of text when you look at it? An image is formed on your retina.
The idea that transfering into memory is "copying" is an old SCO thing, IIRC. Any reasonable definition of copying would mean creating something that can be given to someone else with losing your use of it. So transfering into memory from the hard drive, no. Sending from memory over the network to a receiver on the other end, yes.
However, the it sounds like the company is planning on ignoring the restrictions of the GPL.
How to proceed depends on your judgement of how your managers would react. You've clearly signed away your rights to the code, so I wouldn't argue that point. What I personally would do is point out in writing your opinion that the changes cannot be release with the original GPL code, and if you made extensive changes to existing code (i.e. you changed existing files instead of adding new ones), then there is no way to reasonably rewrite the code (under the theory that it is "contaminated".)
Then add that there are two options - let the code changes die, or let them be released under the GPL. Send this letter to more than one person - say your boss, the legal department, and anyone in management who likes you. Keep a copy for yourself, and keep any replies.
Having stated your case calmly and professionally, you have a choice if they disagree with your opinion - quit and do nothing, stay on and do nothing, whistle blow and stay, or quit and whistle blow. That's clearly a personal choice that depends on your particular circumstances and temperament. But I would encourage you to state your concerns calmly, nonconfrontationally, in a tone that suggests you believe everyone is rational and that your opinion is valid. If you don't try to draw a line in the sand from the beginning, it is easier for other people to change their minds.
Actually, you are abiding by the terms of the GPL if you just use it in house. (As opposed to attempting to reverse engineer Windows, which is against the terms of the agreement, even if I do it by myself and don't tell anyone.)
Unsolicited faxes are punishable by a fine of a few grand (I believe). We get five or six a day. It turns out civil penalities are difficult to enforce when people can dissolve and reform corporations.
Perhaps for the benefit of other search engines.
The requirements of fiduciary responsibility are usually negative, not positive. You can't do something that's clearly BAD for the company (remember the flap about the network whose manaagement wanted to run an anti-Kerry show? He backed down because it was clearly not in the best fiduciary interest of the company.) However, as for taking a particular positive action (should we develop X or Y? Should we lobby the EU for software patents?), there is no consequence as a breach of "fiduciary responsibility" for taking one action or another. You might get fired for incompetence, but not sued.
Clearly greed is a human motivation, and serves a purpose - medieval scholars wrote "Blessed is the inclination to evil, without which a man would not plant a vineyard, take a wife, or establish a house." But we all know it can be destructive to society as a whole when applied on a huge scale.
Fiduciary responsibility does not, in a practical sense, mandate immoral behavior. Dressing it up as some sort of moral obligation is the worst sort of cynicism. It's a call to inaction - "These huge powerful companies HAVE to act this way - no sense in trying to make it turn out any differently." What a bleak world that would be to live in.
It's sometimes a pleasant break from being in the office, and the nearest university is only 20 minutes from here.
Wow, I'm a WHOLE lot cleverer than I thought!
Just curious - why would you think I was a "conservative wackjob" based on my .sig?
If you've got no one to support, and the job is killing you, and working would get in the way of finding another job, then quitting might be the best thing you can do. I've never been there, though.
Tracking down online transactions isn't necessarily so trivial or likely to happen.
three times the power of existing Lithium Ion batteries at the same price
Their NOT claiming three times the power at the same size and weight (which would really make me suspicious) but at the same price - which while technically interesting, is not as revolutionary. Heck, they could just be using slave labor for the price reduction.
Broad, yes... but dangerous? How?
2. The incident happened months ago, and ChoicePoint just got permission from law enforcement to disclose the incident.
I would say it's pretty likely they wouldn't report data thefts about people in other states...
Naked Mole Rat?
Privately funded? Like through taxes?
But did you code in the 1954 version of fortran? I've coded fortran as well, but it was FORTRAN77.
For me, I sat in on a class on PL/I when I was in high school. The chart says it was created in 1964, which predates my birth by several years.
Oh, did you mean large quantities of sodium metal? Yeah, that'll cause burns, or if it's big enough, leave a nasty bruise when it lands on your head.