A co-worker of my pointed me to a group that would collect the umbilical cord and blood for research use. It didn't cost a dime: they mailed us a little collection kit which we gave to the delivery room doctor, and he packaged everything up and mailed it.
Now, granted, it's not earmarked for our kid's personal use. But it _is_ going towards stem cell research, which in my mind is a much more useful way to use cord blood at this juncture. Unless you have some family medical history for a condition that has a proven stem cell treatment, research is a good use for the cord blood, rather than spending a non-trivial amount of money renting freezer space.
Unfortunately I don't have a website for the group we used: my co-worker gave me a pamphlet with a phone number on it. But I'm sure a quick search should turn up groups that will do free cord blood collecting for research, if you choose to go that route.
Now, I have only a vague understanding of the subject, but from what I read, I was lead to believe that you didn't have one little agent running around like a little gnome (or group thereof) building some complicated structure. You had a sequence of these things which acted like an assembly line. Each agent knows how to slap a specific atom or subset of atoms onto some atomic structure it receives, and only does something when it receives that atomic structure. So there wouldn't really need to be any memory, or very little, since it only does a specific task repeatedly. The thing could almost be stateless.
Again, this is my dim recollection from something I read awhile back, so I bow down before more informed heads.
Yeah, but this runs contrary to current/. thinking: that SCO is full of hot air, and once the source code is made available to knowledgable scrutiny, it'll be shown that they have nothing. Assuming this is true, SCO has to know this, and I can't imagine a lawfirm agreeing to this unless they had a VERY strong belief that either a) SCO will win, or b) SCO will get bought. Unless they plan on dragging this out ad infinatum, and hope that IBM will buy them to stop the annoyance, which IBM does not seem inclined to do. So.... what do they know that we don't?
I think that's sorta the point. If life unfolds according to the Blessed Word of Darl, the man will have sold off his inflated options, and left the smoldering ruins that will be SCO in his wake as he skips to the bank. He won't have to get a job: he can afford to wreck companies for free.
Wouldn't $699 per CPU that Darl controls (i.e. in all of SCO) be more appropriate? And it'd be ironic if SCO cried foul and said that this pricing scheme was way out of proportion...
Didn't Bruce say the following in his SCO code rebuttal?:
You may re-publish this material. You may excerpt it, reformat it and translate it as necessary for your presentation. You may not edit it to deliberately misrepresent my opinion.
Isn't Darl taking Bruce's words out of context and misrepresenting them? Copyright violation, anyone?....
Slashdot Mirror
It's a prosthetic finger, right? I imagine it detaches. One hopes it's not actually bolted onto his hand.
A co-worker of my pointed me to a group that would collect the umbilical cord and blood for research use. It didn't cost a dime: they mailed us a little collection kit which we gave to the delivery room doctor, and he packaged everything up and mailed it. Now, granted, it's not earmarked for our kid's personal use. But it _is_ going towards stem cell research, which in my mind is a much more useful way to use cord blood at this juncture. Unless you have some family medical history for a condition that has a proven stem cell treatment, research is a good use for the cord blood, rather than spending a non-trivial amount of money renting freezer space. Unfortunately I don't have a website for the group we used: my co-worker gave me a pamphlet with a phone number on it. But I'm sure a quick search should turn up groups that will do free cord blood collecting for research, if you choose to go that route.
Well, come on. 7-11 has had these same shop lifting rates for years, and their business model couldn't be more secure.
Now, I have only a vague understanding of the subject, but from what I read, I was lead to believe that you didn't have one little agent running around like a little gnome (or group thereof) building some complicated structure. You had a sequence of these things which acted like an assembly line. Each agent knows how to slap a specific atom or subset of atoms onto some atomic structure it receives, and only does something when it receives that atomic structure. So there wouldn't really need to be any memory, or very little, since it only does a specific task repeatedly. The thing could almost be stateless.
Again, this is my dim recollection from something I read awhile back, so I bow down before more informed heads.
I'd take this guy a bit more seriously if he had bothered to spellcheck his bloody article.
Yeah, but this runs contrary to current /. thinking: that SCO is full of hot air, and once the source code is made available to knowledgable scrutiny, it'll be shown that they have nothing. Assuming this is true, SCO has to know this, and I can't imagine a lawfirm agreeing to this unless they had a VERY strong belief that either a) SCO will win, or b) SCO will get bought. Unless they plan on dragging this out ad infinatum, and hope that IBM will buy them to stop the annoyance, which IBM does not seem inclined to do. So.... what do they know that we don't?
I think that's sorta the point. If life unfolds according to the Blessed Word of Darl, the man will have sold off his inflated options, and left the smoldering ruins that will be SCO in his wake as he skips to the bank. He won't have to get a job: he can afford to wreck companies for free.
Hey, I've been going into SCO-news withdrawl.
Wouldn't $699 per CPU that Darl controls (i.e. in all of SCO) be more appropriate? And it'd be ironic if SCO cried foul and said that this pricing scheme was way out of proportion...
- You may re-publish this material. You may excerpt it, reformat it and translate it as necessary for your presentation. You may not edit it to deliberately misrepresent my opinion.
Isn't Darl taking Bruce's words out of context and misrepresenting them? Copyright violation, anyone?....Was there a memo passed around the RIAA and SCO that said, "Our customers will be sued"?