As for immortality, we currently have two options: children and accomplishments. As most people's accomplishments are not recorded in the history books, it leaves children as our best bet to immortality.
The problem is that I don't count any of those two alternatives as immortality. If immortality is possible it's through medicine and technology.
Anyway, we're discussing definitions now, both my original message and this one were only an opinion:)
First of all - please don't use generalized arguments just to run away from the discussion about the matter at hand...
Oh, because the brain evolves independently from the rest of our bodies, and it's evolution has stopped. Thank you Dr. Miss-the-point
See above.
Correct your sentence. I had to take a stab at it, because it didn't make any sense.
Maybe I misused the word favor, I'm not sure though (english is not my first language). What I meant was that the circumstances which emerge from the way our civilization works make evolution much less prominent than it used to be...
As noted in the above post, evolution works when there are more favorable genes to be found. I would note that it's also true about negative selection on bad genes (although it's really the same thing). The gene for hemophilia is decreasing in frequency, because people with the gene die (also a large number got HIV in 80s). Whenever a genetic disease kills a person, that's evolution.
This article is about the brain though...
Our society doesn't favor crime, rape, murder, ect. And it doesn't have any effect. Favor by society doesn't stop things from happening. "The US congress repealed the law of gravity."
Invalid argument or you misunderstood my sentence, please try again.
Well, I heard that the slashdot chicks always hang on to the guys who get first posts. So this might be a selective pressure in the future, don't joke about it:P
Yeah, if we talk about the past 60,000 years period this doesn't amaze me much. But if we talk about the present, I would say I doubt there's much evolution. Our society doesn't favor it.
The real risk with drowning cases, and the reason I suggest that anybody who drowns goes to the hospital irregardless of how they feel after revival is secondary drowning. Often what happens, when your lungs fill with water, is that the water will be absorbed into the blood stream. Later, when you're asleep, the blood can reenter the lungs and because your pulse is lower and your breathing is both slower and shallower, you can suffocate hours after the accident actually happened. If you've had an accident in the water and there's *any* chance that water entered your lungs, you should go to the hospital for observation overnight.
Thanks for this piece of information, I had no idea!
PS: I wouldn't never trust a lifeguard with a nickname of KillerBob;) j/k
A good lifeguard can tell which swimmers can swim and which can't by watching them. Those that can't swim get watched more, and if they do something stupid, like jumping into the deep end, in seconds you'll know if their coming up or not.
Suppose the system lasts for 10 years. Suppose that the running costs of the system bring the total price up to 70,000 pounds. How many goo lifeguards can you contract for 10 years for that price? Is that number enough for watching a very crowded pool?
Besides, lifeguards are human, not gods. Computer systems are much less faulty than humans for some kind of tasks. This may very well be one of those tasks (finding out drowning swimmers).
Please try to stop thinking about everything in terms of costs. Or do you also calculate if it's worth it to pick your nose every time you feel like doing it?
Slashdot Mirror
As for immortality, we currently have two options: children and accomplishments. As most people's accomplishments are not recorded in the history books, it leaves children as our best bet to immortality.
:)
The problem is that I don't count any of those two alternatives as immortality. If immortality is possible it's through medicine and technology.
Anyway, we're discussing definitions now, both my original message and this one were only an opinion
Among other things, fingerprint and iris identification technologies will be used.
Haven't those guys seen this movie?
However, almost everyone wants to continue their genetic line. It's how we gain immortality.
A really strange concept of immortality if you ask me...
Maybe you should save some money for learning how to spell names and use google properly. This is the query you wanted.
First of all - please don't use generalized arguments just to run away from the discussion about the matter at hand...
Oh, because the brain evolves independently from the rest of our bodies, and it's evolution has stopped. Thank you Dr. Miss-the-point
See above.
Correct your sentence. I had to take a stab at it, because it didn't make any sense.
Maybe I misused the word favor, I'm not sure though (english is not my first language). What I meant was that the circumstances which emerge from the way our civilization works make evolution much less prominent than it used to be...
This article is about the brain though...
Invalid argument or you misunderstood my sentence, please try again.
Agreed, but if we talk about brains...
So that means... George Bush is the Intelligent Designer!
Parsing sentence, standb#!#"%#"$=IFDS==!"#!"# NO CARRIER
Well, I heard that the slashdot chicks always hang on to the guys who get first posts. So this might be a selective pressure in the future, don't joke about it :P
Yeah, but the subject line says "Researchers Say Human Brain is Still Evolving".
:)
If he got confused, that may have been the reason
Well, you took the words out of my mouth, and managed to explain it better than I could :)
Yeah, if we talk about the past 60,000 years period this doesn't amaze me much. But if we talk about the present, I would say I doubt there's much evolution. Our society doesn't favor it.
Not to mention using a cell phone connected to a laptop...
(btw, only on slashdot would the GP post be modded up and your post still unmodded...)
Speaking of WoW... Are the answers to this interview not coming? :(
See subject :)
I perfectly agree.
Thanks for this piece of information, I had no idea!
PS: I wouldn't never trust a lifeguard with a nickname of KillerBob
A good lifeguard can tell which swimmers can swim and which can't by watching them. Those that can't swim get watched more, and if they do something stupid, like jumping into the deep end, in seconds you'll know if their coming up or not.
Suppose the system lasts for 10 years. Suppose that the running costs of the system bring the total price up to 70,000 pounds. How many goo lifeguards can you contract for 10 years for that price? Is that number enough for watching a very crowded pool?
Besides, lifeguards are human, not gods. Computer systems are much less faulty than humans for some kind of tasks. This may very well be one of those tasks (finding out drowning swimmers).
Knock knock. Is anybody home? Smartass, this can also save adults, not only children. Or are adults too smart to drown?
Please try to stop thinking about everything in terms of costs. Or do you also calculate if it's worth it to pick your nose every time you feel like doing it?
You're an idiot. Seriously...
It wasn't CmdrTaco who wrote the article summary.
Have you RTFA?
He got modded down, so I guess I was right anyway ;)
More or the same that you gained from posting that here :)