As already stated, the software is released with the bugs and security holes already. When you get an update, you aren't really getting increased value...you're getting reduced lack-of-value. Big difference.
What percentage of games are actually non-violent?
Is a game considered non-violent as long as the characters are represented in a cartoonish, non-human, guise...and cute child-like music is playing in the background? Or is there some other arbitrary designation? Who defines the line?
This alternative approach to harvesting stem cells from baby teeth could help researchers to bypass the moral debate over using embryonic stem cells for research. Not quite. If this turns out to be the case, it will mean that those of us against embryonic stem cell research, where the embryonic stem cells come from a fetus destroyed for this purpose, will have a new, even more devatstating argument.
Devastating argument against what? The original post was regarding the ability of scientific researchers to take stem cells from sources other than embryos...and in doing so, they themselves can bypass the debate on such practices. It had nothing to do with whether or not people were still capable of disagreement on embryonic research.
Slashdot Mirror
also...
...and pretty much anything else a human being can acquire, understand and manipulate in any way whatsoever.
Baseball Bats
Steak Knives
Bowling Balls
Pitch Forks
Fertilizer
Battery Acid
Pine Sol
Drano
As already stated, the software is released with the bugs and security holes already. When you get an update, you aren't really getting increased value...you're getting reduced lack-of-value. Big difference.
What percentage of games are actually non-violent?
Is a game considered non-violent as long as the characters are represented in a cartoonish, non-human, guise...and cute child-like music is playing in the background? Or is there some other arbitrary designation? Who defines the line?
...remind me of This
This alternative approach to harvesting stem cells from baby teeth could help researchers to bypass the moral debate over using embryonic stem cells for research.
Not quite. If this turns out to be the case, it will mean that those of us against embryonic stem cell research, where the embryonic stem cells come from a fetus destroyed for this purpose, will have a new, even more devatstating argument.
Devastating argument against what? The original post was regarding the ability of scientific researchers to take stem cells from sources other than embryos...and in doing so, they themselves can bypass the debate on such practices. It had nothing to do with whether or not people were still capable of disagreement on embryonic research.