Dictionary.com : Slander
Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation.
Of course the legal definition requires that at least one other person be around to hear the slander for it to be such... like someone taking dictation maybe.
>Non base two computing is nothing new. But it is an
>idea that, for various reasons, never really caught on.
The various reasons not being so various; A binary system can be constructed in a much more stable fashion than can a trinary or quatrinary system. Everyone knows that 1 is not always exactly 5v (or 3v). Having several values confuses the picture even more
"but we have progressed enough that trinary systems are much more stable now!"
No matter what level of stability someone can get out of a trinaty or quatrinary system, a binary system will always be able to be more stable.
'ON', 'OFF' will *always* be superior to 'ON', 'KINDA ON', 'KINDA OFF', 'OFF'
The way that (real) stem cells are collected (or used to be collected) is in such a way that no moral dilemma exists anyway. When a woman goes in for artificial insemination, several eggs are removed from her body. These eggs are all impregnated a once, and then cryogenically frozen (-500 C). These eggs are defrosted one at a time and put back inside the womans uterus. This process continues until a child is born. Then all of the embryos that could have become humans are (get this) thrown away. Those embryos are the stem cells that can really become _anything_ that they are exposed to. Cells from things like placenta (and very possibly rabbits) are already biased and not truely stem cells.
What, I ask you, moral dillema exists when given a choice between studying these embryos and throwing them away. It is not as if these embyos are going to ever become viable fetuses either way.
Slashdot Mirror
What if he was dictating the letter?
Dictionary.com : Slander
Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation.
Of course the legal definition requires that at least one other person be around to hear the slander for it to be such... like someone taking dictation maybe.
>Non base two computing is nothing new. But it is an
>idea that, for various reasons, never really caught on.
The various reasons not being so various; A binary system can be constructed in a much more stable fashion than can a trinary or quatrinary system. Everyone knows that 1 is not always exactly 5v (or 3v). Having several values confuses the picture even more
"but we have progressed enough that trinary systems are much more stable now!"
No matter what level of stability someone can get out of a trinaty or quatrinary system, a binary system will always be able to be more stable.
'ON', 'OFF' will *always* be superior to 'ON', 'KINDA ON', 'KINDA OFF', 'OFF'
The way that (real) stem cells are collected (or used to be collected) is in such a way that no moral dilemma exists anyway. When a woman goes in for artificial insemination, several eggs are removed from her body. These eggs are all impregnated a once, and then cryogenically frozen (-500 C). These eggs are defrosted one at a time and put back inside the womans uterus. This process continues until a child is born. Then all of the embryos that could have become humans are (get this) thrown away. Those embryos are the stem cells that can really become _anything_ that they are exposed to. Cells from things like placenta (and very possibly rabbits) are already biased and not truely stem cells.
What, I ask you, moral dillema exists when given a choice between studying these embryos and throwing them away. It is not as if these embyos are going to ever become viable fetuses either way.