As far as I can see, this tool is mostly a rhetorical gimmick, designed to make clearer the fact that there's no formal, rigorous distinction between the transmission of speech and the transmission of copyrighted material.
This serves to illustrate why much of copyright law is inconsistent with basic engineering truths.
But if both happen at once, then the potential baby that would arise from the lady and gent in question if they were to meet, is killed.
Since sperm cells outnumber eggs on Earth by like a zillion to one, I'd say the scarcer resource (and therefore the lion's share of the human worth) is in the ova.
Given that sperm cells die by the million with every orgasm a male ever has, we can more or less take for granted that for every egg that's wasted, whatever sperm was destined for it will die too.
As I see it the disagreement lies in the gradual nature of babymaking.
We know that the goo that goes into the lady's underbits is not a person, and the thing that comes out a while later is. The problem is in defining a single moment in the intervening time when we can say "okay, it wasn't a person a millisecond ago, but now it is." Since the mechanisms that make us us are just kinda grown, there's really no biologically defensible moment to do this. To me, a ball of cells is a teensy bit more of a human then a single fertilized egg, which is a little more human than an egg with a spermatozoa jammed halfway into its membrane, which is still a little more human than an egg and a spermatozoa which are a few millimeters apart. And to me, all of those things probably scale up to less than 1% of a full-term baby in terms of human worth.
I guess indirectly, my response is that everytime a woman ovulates and fails to get pregnant, someone's entire DNA is also destroyed.
Because whether or not something is homo sapiens is a different question from whether or not it is a person. Boring debaters will point out here that if we're just going by DNA, fingernail clippings are homo sapiens.
Don't get me wrong. I will get into fist fights with dudes who disagree with my many ill-informed opinions about the supremacy of Cabernet Shiraz over all other blended reds. I am a wine asshole of the highest order.
Riesling is pretty much always way too sweet for me though, and I honestly don't know any dudes who feel differently. Same with ice wines.
Slashdot Mirror
You're gonna die soon!
Yup. Definitely not one of the Internet's intended uses.
I would mod you up so hard.
I am a bush, you insensitive... etc.
I nominate this as the new "But does it run Linux?"
The symmetric key is in fact the diagonal squares, from top left to bottom right, in the solution to this 1024x1024 Sudoku puzzle.
If you aren't humming Dire Straits' Money for Nothing to yourself right now, you didn't get it.
As far as I can see, this tool is mostly a rhetorical gimmick, designed to make clearer the fact that there's no formal, rigorous distinction between the transmission of speech and the transmission of copyrighted material.
This serves to illustrate why much of copyright law is inconsistent with basic engineering truths.
On the third computer.
Macbook keyboards make a depressingly feeble 'snik' when you tap them. I can understand his reasoning.
No no, you're thinking of Japan.
But if both happen at once, then the potential baby that would arise from the lady and gent in question if they were to meet, is killed.
Since sperm cells outnumber eggs on Earth by like a zillion to one, I'd say the scarcer resource (and therefore the lion's share of the human worth) is in the ova.
http://futureoftheinternet.org/
Given that sperm cells die by the million with every orgasm a male ever has, we can more or less take for granted that for every egg that's wasted, whatever sperm was destined for it will die too.
As I see it the disagreement lies in the gradual nature of babymaking.
We know that the goo that goes into the lady's underbits is not a person, and the thing that comes out a while later is. The problem is in defining a single moment in the intervening time when we can say "okay, it wasn't a person a millisecond ago, but now it is." Since the mechanisms that make us us are just kinda grown, there's really no biologically defensible moment to do this. To me, a ball of cells is a teensy bit more of a human then a single fertilized egg, which is a little more human than an egg with a spermatozoa jammed halfway into its membrane, which is still a little more human than an egg and a spermatozoa which are a few millimeters apart. And to me, all of those things probably scale up to less than 1% of a full-term baby in terms of human worth.
I guess indirectly, my response is that everytime a woman ovulates and fails to get pregnant, someone's entire DNA is also destroyed.
Because whether or not something is homo sapiens is a different question from whether or not it is a person. Boring debaters will point out here that if we're just going by DNA, fingernail clippings are homo sapiens.
Or it took 1 minute, plus 4 more for Slashdot to allow him to comment again.
Don't get me wrong. I will get into fist fights with dudes who disagree with my many ill-informed opinions about the supremacy of Cabernet Shiraz over all other blended reds. I am a wine asshole of the highest order.
Riesling is pretty much always way too sweet for me though, and I honestly don't know any dudes who feel differently. Same with ice wines.
You, AC, win the thread.
Nicknames are meaningless. The big giveaway that you're a girl was that you drink Rieslings.
That shit's for ladies and, uh, whoever plays one on the Internet.
http://thepiratebay.org/tor/4221412/Sid_Meier____s_Alpha_Centauri_for_Linux
familiarity > sanity.
Just ask 98% of the PC-using public.
The IRS will be President?
Awesome! So it's cool if I just leave all that important-looking IRS mail in an unopened pile by the door, right?
Let's have an inane discussion about what WE think overused partisan cliches mean!
I bet then everyone will thank us for being so (+5) Insightful!