Do you have a child? Much of this dialogue focuses on other peoples' live, other peoples' cells, and most definitely relies on a psychic distance from the connection of parent to child. One might be able to speak of what to do with the stem cells from baby X, but the thought of causing harm to your own child is unspeakable.
The application of the golden rule in this case seems simplistic (though perfectly applicable), but from whatever bent you view this topic, the over-arching principle is that we cannot discuss the "possibilities" that can be achieved at the expense of someone else's life if we are unwilling to assume that someone, at the very same moment, is postulating the same "possibilities" at the expense of your life.
The key is that we are unable to remove ourselves from the equation - it's not just "someone else's" child. At that point, it puts the inalienable rights that we are promised in true jeopardy. Our ethical protocol is always to include ourselves in the equation. I have a 6 month old infant. The actual connection to the human that is little more than a variable in someone else's equation puts the conversation in perspective.
Whoever has the job of listening to my phone calls has a worse job than I do and a worse life. The only thing worse than having issues is being forced to listen to someone else's issue that you can neither control, nor bring yourself to care about...g-men, are you listening? I'm going to the gas station to fill up my SUV, then I'm going to get milk on my way home...at which point I'll change my daughter's diaper, eat, and go to bed at 9:30...enjoy your job of listening to my laundry list. Listen closely, lest you miss the scorching details of my trip to Bed Bath & Beyond and maybe Home Depot if we have the time.
I don't think you are out of line at all. The concept of wire tapping / phone record collection is a bit disturbing to the average person, but I think most can't really put their finger on why exactly that is...it just has a creep factor to it.
If the government wants to know that I called my wife 3 times today and my parents once this week, well, my condolences to the poor schmo that has to sit in a cube and sift through that riveting piece of data. I'm not involved in any illegal activity, so there are no repercussions from them knowing whom I call.
What people fear, I think, is a shift of identity. If no one is collecting information on me, I'm free to be whomever I think I am. As a consumer, I can be as random or predictable as I want, and as a citizen I can live in what I see as a tax payer's anonymity - if I pay my taxes and don't commit crimes, I can do and be as I please. Where that breaks down now is that peoples' online activity has been tracked by cookies and spyware and have been categorized and put on the radar by advertisers. The fear is the same with government tracking. There is a fear of being "defined" (categorized) by someone other than yourself. That's not what the average American understands freedom to be, and that is the essence of the discomfort, IMHO.
I don't think you're wrong. I just think we are in a defining period of learning how to talk about how we feel about having more of our lives available for public display than we were aware of...when we were kids, the worst thing that could happen in our innocent years was having our name on the chalk board for doing something bad.
Glad you weren't put off by the banter. While we're on the topic, same concept applies for the Antichrist - typical theatrics aside, this is the person that will be in control of the UN and assert unilateral "moderating control" over Israel as a buffer between Israel and Palestine - claiming to bring peace. Again, it's just putting a person in control over something that God says He wants reserved for Himself.
Typical religious nut gets so tied up in the theatrics and drama of prophetic scenario that they can't really grab on to the way it possibly could play out in the day to day.
Where the two paths cross of the mark of the beast and the antichrist is where we move more toward world government - RFID (potentially the mark) or the Real ID Act (all Americans need to have a RID to open a bank acct - i.e. can't buy or sell without it - again, potentially the mark) are combined with a need of the global community to rely on a single government to police the individual states - again, something God would prefer to retain.
Though we have had empires prior to this time, world government or the implementation of something on the order of the mark of the beast haven't really been plausible without modern technology and the internet and a shrinking global spance. Technology actually does have a lot to do with how the end times will play out in my opinion...as does the politics of what happens to Israel. When you see them start to construct the 3rd temple in Jerusalem, probably wouldn't be a bad idea to take note that we could be in for a whirlwind last few years (3). You'll probably see a nuclear conflict starting with Iran, then China and Russia will enter the stage - Bible says the conflict is supposed to kill a third of man - roughly a few billion - and that it's going to start in the land of the Euphrates...frankly, I'll be glad when it's all over and I'm relocated to be with the one who made this whole show.
*not flamebait* I wouldn't presume to tell you how you should think; just clarifying the mindset of the religious nut.
Speaking as one of your "religious nuts", the basic idea of the mark of the beast is not some sci-fi uber drama of fear and loathing. What it really boils down to is to what do you sell out?
The key of the mark, as it is described in Revelation, is that you will not be able to buy or sell without the mark (whatever it is will look like or ultimately turn out to be). In essence, all that is saying is that you are, either wittingly or unwittingly making a statement that everything you have been given, earned, or entrusted with is best managed by the principles of man (or the state, as it were) rather than those of God. To the "religious nut", God's design for life (presumably, as the author of life) superceeds man's interpretation of it.
Basically, the mark of the beast (in the dialogue of religious nut) is man saying that he doesn't need or want God to be involved in his day to day decisions...which, to the non-religious nut, wouldn't be a big deal. Privacy is the only real legitimate problem a non-religious nut would have with RFID. For myself, as a religious nut, I will opt out quietly and accept the consequences if there are any. It's no different than opting out of an affair if you're married.
My guess is that you really could care less what a religous nut thinks - fair enough. Thanks for reading this far if you did.
The idea of an RFID chip as being end-timish is actually a very astute observation. Christian prophecy states that there will be a time when everyone will be required to have a number to buy or sell or to own property. Until the advent of the computer, databasing and the shrinking of the world theater, this hasn't been a real possibility.
Between the Real ID Act that will require all US Citizens to have a National ID by 2008 and RFID chip implants, I think it's more than plausible. I will not be participating in either for religious reasons...it will be interesting to see how that works out for me and the few 100k people who see it coming and have similar concerns (not too well, I'm guessing).
I won't be aggressively fighting the system or anything of the sort (I have a morgage, wife, kid, dog, house, car - not the compound dwelling type or anything), but there is a point in time where I have to give legs to my faith and opt out of something that I believe is not in my best interest based on my primary citizenship in a Kingdom that isn't necessarily governed by US laws.
Don't get me wrong, I think the US is generally not interested in doing all the wrong things, but I can't have allegiance in 2 places, so any use of RFID technology or world-government-esque numbering / trackng system that raises red flags for me religiously will have to be something I peacefully decline. Glad you said what you did.
That may indeed be the case. If it is, bad situation. The threat of having the information is worse than acting out with it. Here is an example:
Remember all the "reports" that were on the news about America's vulnerabilities after 9/11? Remember all the sites of stored chemical weapons and biological weapons that were "possible targets" or weak port security, etc...that were expose' articles / briefs? How is this any different? Americans have always had a trouble with diarhea of information.
Terrorists go for impact on a large scale - that's why they bomb busses rather than stab individuals. Their killing isn't personal vendetta, it is public statement. A single murder to them is not as important as fear and confusion of many.
If the "secrets" were as big as the press intended them to be, we wouldn't have known anything about the contents, good or bad. 1) The LA Times is not an authority on much of anything except the spin that they put on the 2nd hand information that they gather. 2) Sensationalizing the contents of the disks (corrupt Afghani officials) doesn't make the information terribly sensitive.
It a war torn region like Afghanistan, it is no secret who is corrupt in the government, and it's no secret where military strikes are going to happen. The bottom line is that the media is turning routine military information into something more than it is and creating scandal where there should just be a little tightening of the reigns. I'm not saying that it's not a bad situation to have people thieving those thumb drives. I am saying that we are believing exactly what we are reading from a second / third hand source and that's a no-no. The LA Times, BBC, and AP for that matter are reporting on something that they know will appear terrible on first glance (that sells newspapers and tv time). If it is as bad as they reported, I will eat my own shoe when the congressional hearings commence.
We just assume the information is some military secret. There is a distict possibility that the information on those drives is nothing more than family pictures or some other relatively mundane piece of information. I have friends in the FBI who have thumb drives and I just assume that the information on them is classified, but in truth, I know that it is probably a collection of pictures of them at the local bar or on vacation that they are toting to the local photo lab for processing. Nothing like a good reason to freak out though, right?!
We'll find out on CNN sometime that the drives contained Osama's location, Sadam's smoking gun, Slobadan Milosevich's memoirs, and Jimmy Hoffa's remains...oh, and the location of Salmon Rushdie's appartment that he shares with Elvis, the Loch Ness Monster and Bigfoot.
The fact of the matter is that she is throwing stones at the RIAA and she is indeed guilty! She said it was shocking to see how cold the system was to unwaveringly process her case and provide no flexibility. Are you kidding me? Has she never heard about how the court system is with most African Americans who are accused/convicted of a crime? Guilty or not, they are processed like cattle with little to no effective advocacy. I'm not a big fan of the RIAA, but I understand that breaking the law - whether you agree with it or not - puts you at the mercy of the court system. That system doesn't do armchair discernment like the/. community. They read the law and apply it. If you don't like the law, petition the legislative branch of the government to change it. If you have transgressed the law, expect the judicial branch of the government to uphold it. Since there are few cops on the internet neighborhood beat, the RIAA has had to act as it's own neighborhood watch to make sure that the laws that it worked to get into place are enforced. This isn't science. I'm not a sympathizer to the RIAA tightening its screws on its audience. I do understand, though, how pirating music has a monetary impact on the people that make the music. People want grey area in the law so that they can live in the exceptions and blame the people that the law was meant to protect for being too prudish. I would too if I wanted something for nothing and someone said no.
It is interesting that when the news media reports on a crime, it is an alleged homicide that someone allegedly committed. It has to be tested and proven before they will make a definitive statement about it.
On the contrary (IMHO) it seems that a scientific "find" is automatically classified as "evidence of" some theory without being tested or proven at the point on which it is reported to a journalistic/blogging community like/. or CNN or whatever...then it is up for debate - why? Because debate among amateurs who have little to no access to the entire story is much more arousing than the scientific process. I'd much rather speculate and hear myself pontificate among other equally bullheaded individuals than put in the lab time and maintain perspective on the bigger picture.
Could it be that we just blindly trust whatever "scientists" tell us? I have my theories on different scientific hot-button issues, but they are irrelevant as news or banter because some are faith-based and others are just how I process bits and pieces of scientific information I receive (not being a professional scientist, my opinion isn't one to lean on unless you are, well...me).
Maybe this is the long way around just saying that we should take what we hear with a grain of salt. Finding a missing link doesn't change my life. Finding a missing remote changes my life. What I think about a missing link doesn't ultimately make much difference in your life. What I think about you and how I treat you does.
$18 for older films? That's like the $80 they used to charge if you lost a VHS tape that you rented from Blockbuster. Hopefully capitalism will step in and give them a bargain bin so that I don't have to pay $18 for Monty Python's Holy Grail or Wierd Science...
I probably have 14 counts of whatever he is finally charged with sitting in my inbox this morning...as does the rest of my company/city/county/state/country/continent...what does it really take to get him convicted?
PDA's lack storage, but provide an excellent interface.
Tablets don't have the smaller portability.
I think the future looks like smaller HDD players or flash drives with an OS but NO DISPLAY and a video out (bluetooth or hardline). Hook it up to your car, your computer, the screen on your phone, your home theater...whatever.
The common denominator is not the interface, it's the data.
The problem is not that 7.1 or 6.1 is poor technology and inappropriate for the home. You could have a microsystem of 100.1 that technologically creates a very real 3d soundfield; however, if you don't have the sound engineers with the vision and capability to produce good tracks, you might as well forget it. Even the old stereo recordings of the 70's that are played on the classic rock stations are better engineered than today's canned poo (and I'm not a classic rock fan...just an audiophile). When we talk about technology being overkill, we're actually talking about sound engineering being underwhelming, uninspired, and unimaginative.
Wow...profanity is the attempt of the feeble mind to express itself forcefully. While I totally agree with everything you said, dumping the random explitives is like handing out a free bag of dog poo with a well-made widget.
What folks are failing to see is that the stem cell argument centered around harvesting stem cells from fetuses and umbilical blood / placenta...gross!
What science is finding is that adult stem cells are just as viable as those found in baby town - we can get stem cells from our own bone marrow, from inside the lining of our noses, and from other places yet to be determined.
People who argue about stem cells now do it just to argue - adult stem cells have no contriversy in the therapeutic realm. Use my marrow to repair my heart tissue. Use my nose lining to repair my liver. No rejection drugs, no unfortunate (dead) donor, no worries. Stem cell research isn't about cloning, and it isn't about killing babies, it's about learning how to make our own bodies work for us...
Well, that would be helpful if it were just for me. I am webmaster of an intranet that includes several corporate documents which are in PDF form. Instead of it being just my machine, now it's 3000 machines in 1/4 of the ConUS, with widely varying computer skills and a shortage of IT folk.
We shashdotters rely on our own ingenuity to fix our own problems, but we still need to push for software companies to make accomodations for the masses.
Because of my job, I have the latest version of everything and a computer with some sick specs...I have optimized, defragged, etc...and it's still slow. It's because that opening dialogue in adobe reads like an Oscar acceptance speech with geeks and patents in place of directors and producers. If they would cut the bologna and the opening graphics, maybe they could gain a few seconds.
With all those great minds together, maybe they'll find a way to make pdf's load in less than half a day. Both companies have great offerings, but Adobe's products are slow with a side of slow and an extra helping of slow...
It has been tried on 2 women confined to wheelchairs (spinal cord injuries) and it has produced some promising results of renewed sensation and neuromuscular "flutters". A second trial of stem cells derived from bone marrow were used on a damaged heart with a near 100% recovery of a heart that was 75% inoperative after being impaled by a board.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you have a child? Much of this dialogue focuses on other peoples' live, other peoples' cells, and most definitely relies on a psychic distance from the connection of parent to child. One might be able to speak of what to do with the stem cells from baby X, but the thought of causing harm to your own child is unspeakable.
The application of the golden rule in this case seems simplistic (though perfectly applicable), but from whatever bent you view this topic, the over-arching principle is that we cannot discuss the "possibilities" that can be achieved at the expense of someone else's life if we are unwilling to assume that someone, at the very same moment, is postulating the same "possibilities" at the expense of your life.
The key is that we are unable to remove ourselves from the equation - it's not just "someone else's" child. At that point, it puts the inalienable rights that we are promised in true jeopardy. Our ethical protocol is always to include ourselves in the equation. I have a 6 month old infant. The actual connection to the human that is little more than a variable in someone else's equation puts the conversation in perspective.
Whoever has the job of listening to my phone calls has a worse job than I do and a worse life. The only thing worse than having issues is being forced to listen to someone else's issue that you can neither control, nor bring yourself to care about...g-men, are you listening? I'm going to the gas station to fill up my SUV, then I'm going to get milk on my way home...at which point I'll change my daughter's diaper, eat, and go to bed at 9:30...enjoy your job of listening to my laundry list. Listen closely, lest you miss the scorching details of my trip to Bed Bath & Beyond and maybe Home Depot if we have the time.
I don't think you are out of line at all. The concept of wire tapping / phone record collection is a bit disturbing to the average person, but I think most can't really put their finger on why exactly that is...it just has a creep factor to it.
If the government wants to know that I called my wife 3 times today and my parents once this week, well, my condolences to the poor schmo that has to sit in a cube and sift through that riveting piece of data. I'm not involved in any illegal activity, so there are no repercussions from them knowing whom I call.
What people fear, I think, is a shift of identity. If no one is collecting information on me, I'm free to be whomever I think I am. As a consumer, I can be as random or predictable as I want, and as a citizen I can live in what I see as a tax payer's anonymity - if I pay my taxes and don't commit crimes, I can do and be as I please. Where that breaks down now is that peoples' online activity has been tracked by cookies and spyware and have been categorized and put on the radar by advertisers. The fear is the same with government tracking. There is a fear of being "defined" (categorized) by someone other than yourself. That's not what the average American understands freedom to be, and that is the essence of the discomfort, IMHO.
I don't think you're wrong. I just think we are in a defining period of learning how to talk about how we feel about having more of our lives available for public display than we were aware of...when we were kids, the worst thing that could happen in our innocent years was having our name on the chalk board for doing something bad.
Glad you weren't put off by the banter. While we're on the topic, same concept applies for the Antichrist - typical theatrics aside, this is the person that will be in control of the UN and assert unilateral "moderating control" over Israel as a buffer between Israel and Palestine - claiming to bring peace. Again, it's just putting a person in control over something that God says He wants reserved for Himself.
Typical religious nut gets so tied up in the theatrics and drama of prophetic scenario that they can't really grab on to the way it possibly could play out in the day to day.
Where the two paths cross of the mark of the beast and the antichrist is where we move more toward world government - RFID (potentially the mark) or the Real ID Act (all Americans need to have a RID to open a bank acct - i.e. can't buy or sell without it - again, potentially the mark) are combined with a need of the global community to rely on a single government to police the individual states - again, something God would prefer to retain.
Though we have had empires prior to this time, world government or the implementation of something on the order of the mark of the beast haven't really been plausible without modern technology and the internet and a shrinking global spance. Technology actually does have a lot to do with how the end times will play out in my opinion...as does the politics of what happens to Israel. When you see them start to construct the 3rd temple in Jerusalem, probably wouldn't be a bad idea to take note that we could be in for a whirlwind last few years (3). You'll probably see a nuclear conflict starting with Iran, then China and Russia will enter the stage - Bible says the conflict is supposed to kill a third of man - roughly a few billion - and that it's going to start in the land of the Euphrates...frankly, I'll be glad when it's all over and I'm relocated to be with the one who made this whole show.
*not flamebait* I wouldn't presume to tell you how you should think; just clarifying the mindset of the religious nut.
Speaking as one of your "religious nuts", the basic idea of the mark of the beast is not some sci-fi uber drama of fear and loathing. What it really boils down to is to what do you sell out?
The key of the mark, as it is described in Revelation, is that you will not be able to buy or sell without the mark (whatever it is will look like or ultimately turn out to be). In essence, all that is saying is that you are, either wittingly or unwittingly making a statement that everything you have been given, earned, or entrusted with is best managed by the principles of man (or the state, as it were) rather than those of God. To the "religious nut", God's design for life (presumably, as the author of life) superceeds man's interpretation of it.
Basically, the mark of the beast (in the dialogue of religious nut) is man saying that he doesn't need or want God to be involved in his day to day decisions...which, to the non-religious nut, wouldn't be a big deal. Privacy is the only real legitimate problem a non-religious nut would have with RFID. For myself, as a religious nut, I will opt out quietly and accept the consequences if there are any. It's no different than opting out of an affair if you're married.
My guess is that you really could care less what a religous nut thinks - fair enough. Thanks for reading this far if you did.
The idea of an RFID chip as being end-timish is actually a very astute observation. Christian prophecy states that there will be a time when everyone will be required to have a number to buy or sell or to own property. Until the advent of the computer, databasing and the shrinking of the world theater, this hasn't been a real possibility.
o dID=79377
Between the Real ID Act that will require all US Citizens to have a National ID by 2008 and RFID chip implants, I think it's more than plausible. I will not be participating in either for religious reasons...it will be interesting to see how that works out for me and the few 100k people who see it coming and have similar concerns (not too well, I'm guessing).
I won't be aggressively fighting the system or anything of the sort (I have a morgage, wife, kid, dog, house, car - not the compound dwelling type or anything), but there is a point in time where I have to give legs to my faith and opt out of something that I believe is not in my best interest based on my primary citizenship in a Kingdom that isn't necessarily governed by US laws.
Don't get me wrong, I think the US is generally not interested in doing all the wrong things, but I can't have allegiance in 2 places, so any use of RFID technology or world-government-esque numbering / trackng system that raises red flags for me religiously will have to be something I peacefully decline. Glad you said what you did.
Katherine Albrecht writes an interesting book series on RFID chips, "Spy Chips."
https://secure.endtime.com/apstore/product.asp?Pr
Hi, Bill Gates here. I'd like you to visit my new site:
http://www.m1cr0s0ft.com/
That may indeed be the case. If it is, bad situation. The threat of having the information is worse than acting out with it. Here is an example:
Remember all the "reports" that were on the news about America's vulnerabilities after 9/11? Remember all the sites of stored chemical weapons and biological weapons that were "possible targets" or weak port security, etc...that were expose' articles / briefs? How is this any different? Americans have always had a trouble with diarhea of information.
Terrorists go for impact on a large scale - that's why they bomb busses rather than stab individuals. Their killing isn't personal vendetta, it is public statement. A single murder to them is not as important as fear and confusion of many.
If the "secrets" were as big as the press intended them to be, we wouldn't have known anything about the contents, good or bad. 1) The LA Times is not an authority on much of anything except the spin that they put on the 2nd hand information that they gather. 2) Sensationalizing the contents of the disks (corrupt Afghani officials) doesn't make the information terribly sensitive.
It a war torn region like Afghanistan, it is no secret who is corrupt in the government, and it's no secret where military strikes are going to happen. The bottom line is that the media is turning routine military information into something more than it is and creating scandal where there should just be a little tightening of the reigns. I'm not saying that it's not a bad situation to have people thieving those thumb drives. I am saying that we are believing exactly what we are reading from a second / third hand source and that's a no-no. The LA Times, BBC, and AP for that matter are reporting on something that they know will appear terrible on first glance (that sells newspapers and tv time). If it is as bad as they reported, I will eat my own shoe when the congressional hearings commence.
We just assume the information is some military secret. There is a distict possibility that the information on those drives is nothing more than family pictures or some other relatively mundane piece of information. I have friends in the FBI who have thumb drives and I just assume that the information on them is classified, but in truth, I know that it is probably a collection of pictures of them at the local bar or on vacation that they are toting to the local photo lab for processing. Nothing like a good reason to freak out though, right?!
We'll find out on CNN sometime that the drives contained Osama's location, Sadam's smoking gun, Slobadan Milosevich's memoirs, and Jimmy Hoffa's remains...oh, and the location of Salmon Rushdie's appartment that he shares with Elvis, the Loch Ness Monster and Bigfoot.
The fact of the matter is that she is throwing stones at the RIAA and she is indeed guilty! She said it was shocking to see how cold the system was to unwaveringly process her case and provide no flexibility. Are you kidding me? Has she never heard about how the court system is with most African Americans who are accused/convicted of a crime? Guilty or not, they are processed like cattle with little to no effective advocacy. I'm not a big fan of the RIAA, but I understand that breaking the law - whether you agree with it or not - puts you at the mercy of the court system. That system doesn't do armchair discernment like the /. community. They read the law and apply it. If you don't like the law, petition the legislative branch of the government to change it. If you have transgressed the law, expect the judicial branch of the government to uphold it. Since there are few cops on the internet neighborhood beat, the RIAA has had to act as it's own neighborhood watch to make sure that the laws that it worked to get into place are enforced. This isn't science. I'm not a sympathizer to the RIAA tightening its screws on its audience. I do understand, though, how pirating music has a monetary impact on the people that make the music. People want grey area in the law so that they can live in the exceptions and blame the people that the law was meant to protect for being too prudish. I would too if I wanted something for nothing and someone said no.
It is interesting that when the news media reports on a crime, it is an alleged homicide that someone allegedly committed. It has to be tested and proven before they will make a definitive statement about it.
/. or CNN or whatever...then it is up for debate - why? Because debate among amateurs who have little to no access to the entire story is much more arousing than the scientific process. I'd much rather speculate and hear myself pontificate among other equally bullheaded individuals than put in the lab time and maintain perspective on the bigger picture.
On the contrary (IMHO) it seems that a scientific "find" is automatically classified as "evidence of" some theory without being tested or proven at the point on which it is reported to a journalistic/blogging community like
Could it be that we just blindly trust whatever "scientists" tell us? I have my theories on different scientific hot-button issues, but they are irrelevant as news or banter because some are faith-based and others are just how I process bits and pieces of scientific information I receive (not being a professional scientist, my opinion isn't one to lean on unless you are, well...me).
Maybe this is the long way around just saying that we should take what we hear with a grain of salt. Finding a missing link doesn't change my life. Finding a missing remote changes my life. What I think about a missing link doesn't ultimately make much difference in your life. What I think about you and how I treat you does.
$18 for older films? That's like the $80 they used to charge if you lost a VHS tape that you rented from Blockbuster. Hopefully capitalism will step in and give them a bargain bin so that I don't have to pay $18 for Monty Python's Holy Grail or Wierd Science...
I probably have 14 counts of whatever he is finally charged with sitting in my inbox this morning...as does the rest of my company/city/county/state/country/continent...what does it really take to get him convicted?
PDA's lack storage, but provide an excellent interface.
Tablets don't have the smaller portability.
I think the future looks like smaller HDD players or flash drives with an OS but NO DISPLAY and a video out (bluetooth or hardline). Hook it up to your car, your computer, the screen on your phone, your home theater...whatever.
The common denominator is not the interface, it's the data.
The problem is not that 7.1 or 6.1 is poor technology and inappropriate for the home. You could have a microsystem of 100.1 that technologically creates a very real 3d soundfield; however, if you don't have the sound engineers with the vision and capability to produce good tracks, you might as well forget it. Even the old stereo recordings of the 70's that are played on the classic rock stations are better engineered than today's canned poo (and I'm not a classic rock fan...just an audiophile). When we talk about technology being overkill, we're actually talking about sound engineering being underwhelming, uninspired, and unimaginative.
Wow...profanity is the attempt of the feeble mind to express itself forcefully. While I totally agree with everything you said, dumping the random explitives is like handing out a free bag of dog poo with a well-made widget.
What folks are failing to see is that the stem cell argument centered around harvesting stem cells from fetuses and umbilical blood / placenta...gross!
What science is finding is that adult stem cells are just as viable as those found in baby town - we can get stem cells from our own bone marrow, from inside the lining of our noses, and from other places yet to be determined.
People who argue about stem cells now do it just to argue - adult stem cells have no contriversy in the therapeutic realm. Use my marrow to repair my heart tissue. Use my nose lining to repair my liver. No rejection drugs, no unfortunate (dead) donor, no worries. Stem cell research isn't about cloning, and it isn't about killing babies, it's about learning how to make our own bodies work for us...
Well, that would be helpful if it were just for me. I am webmaster of an intranet that includes several corporate documents which are in PDF form. Instead of it being just my machine, now it's 3000 machines in 1/4 of the ConUS, with widely varying computer skills and a shortage of IT folk. We shashdotters rely on our own ingenuity to fix our own problems, but we still need to push for software companies to make accomodations for the masses.
That makes sense - thanks, that's helpful!
Because of my job, I have the latest version of everything and a computer with some sick specs...I have optimized, defragged, etc...and it's still slow. It's because that opening dialogue in adobe reads like an Oscar acceptance speech with geeks and patents in place of directors and producers. If they would cut the bologna and the opening graphics, maybe they could gain a few seconds.
With all those great minds together, maybe they'll find a way to make pdf's load in less than half a day. Both companies have great offerings, but Adobe's products are slow with a side of slow and an extra helping of slow...
It has been tried on 2 women confined to wheelchairs (spinal cord injuries) and it has produced some promising results of renewed sensation and neuromuscular "flutters". A second trial of stem cells derived from bone marrow were used on a damaged heart with a near 100% recovery of a heart that was 75% inoperative after being impaled by a board.
Whatever it takes to get them to quit emailing me for a place to hide their money...
Maybe they will actually rule the world!