believe it or not, some people find *not* doing this more unethical/immoral than doing this.
And some people believe that *not* killing infidels is more unethical/immoral than letting them live. Does that make them right?
No, but the OP said something suggesting that this was basically a voteout against morals or something like that, which I will argue it wasn't, because there are certain camps of morality that believe there is nothing wrong with this.
I think there is nothing wrong with stem cells being harvested/used instead of decaying in the ground.
I believe that there is nothing wrong with a fetus being developed used, in a lab (not in a woman) and terminated before there is a chance for any neural tissue (and hence brain activity) to form. No one is being hurt by this, the life that was created wouldn't have been created anyway, and it has less ability to feel pain than the average lab animal used for various experiments.
I got a black DS, and my fugly polar white mysteriously dissapeared afterwards...
Course, that could be because the polar white was bought from me, but I prefer to think of the the cannibalism aspect. One DS munching on another is kinda funny...
believe it or not, some people find *not* doing this more unethical/immoral than doing this.
This can take something that is rather upleasant in the first place, that would not be avoided, and turn it into something that can save millions of lives.
That being said, I hope the bill has a rider in it that says a person cannot recieve compensation for donating the genetic material.
Still the money in whatever form, is being put in resources that are used for the purpose of getting back more money. There is little difference between wise investment and hoarding except expense.
As for income redistribution, I'm not sying force redistribution, I'm suggesting more consumable/service purchasing by the wealthier groups, and somewhat slimmer profit margins by the more profitable companies, that go towards allowing the less financially secure to be able to get out of some of the debt cycles they are in with a bit less difficulty.
The absolute wealth value isn't as relevant as the wealth value related to the cost of living.
Example: If you live in a place where food costs $1/day and housing is $100/month, you can live off of not much more than $40 a week.
Now, if you live in a place where food costs $5/day and housing is $500/month, that $40/week won't even cover your food expenses.
Now assuming that other necessities and luxuries are all proportional to the house/food values, then who would be richer? The person in the first place making $80/week or the person in the second making $400? Answer: neither, in terms of what they can obtain, they are the same.
However the prices rarely scale like that, in this case the "equivalent" amounts for the first and second location might be $150 to $400 in stead, but the basic idea that absolute wealth means only so much, still holds.
Note: I'm not saying it isn't a problem that most of the wealth is in a few hands, it should be distributed around more to boost the economy (spend, not give), but instead they hoard, I'm saying that just looking at the wealth, and not the wealt compared to the cost of living and luxuries, is the problem
That's not such a bad thing - things to make what you can do more easy/efficient (such as reducing the angle you need to turn your head to see behind you - i.e. the dashboard reaview camera), or distance sensors to tell you how close you are to the curb that the front or right side of your car prevents you from seeing.
That's great.
If you have trouble telling that the person front/left of you is about to switch into your lane, that a turn is coming up, or that the cars ahead of you are stopping, you might want to consider giving up your license.
I did, and I would not get it back even with the adaptive equipment like mentioned here, because it would not improve safty, as one would suspect.
I never said they did, I said they/threatened too/, this was a couple of years ago, when the bytecode interperater wasn't turned off. Now they ship it with that functionality turned off to prevent such litigations.
interested in initiating lawsuits except in self defense from other lawsuits.
Guess the author never heard of the "FreeType" library, I believe Apple threatened to sue them for the parts of their text rendering engine, that allowed them to effectively do things like antialiasing. Apple also, as mentioned in the article, tried to sue Microsoft for various violations.
He also never mentioned what the actual patent was about did he?
The article seems to have very little to do with the title, and the evidence is lackluster for the case, at best.
I've purchased many books it turned out I didn't like, and I didn't recommend.
I'd rather see a "You liked these books, which indicate the following books may also be for you, and the other books here won't be as interesting, based on reviews of other users."
Rather than a "Users who bought this book also bought that book!"
I dunno, say something that takes your oppinion on a book, such as: "Book A", 8 of 10
and then comes up with: The top three books for people who gave "Book A" an 8 of 10 are: "Book B" "Book C" "Book D" The bottom three are: "Book E" "Book F" "Book G"
The top three books for people who gave "Book A" greater than 5 out of 10 are: "Book B" "Book H" "Book I"
Please mod whoever said that is off topic as "stupid"
Honestly, it's a very good point, why are two agressively competative companies, having half the market share being examined for antitrust, while the RIAA fatcats, who are obviously a TRUSTworthy consortium not?
that are making gaming graphics cards that are actually really useful - their great cards are making it impossible for competators to compete with their lackluster cards! It must be a case worth of an antitrust suit!
If I'm translating your post right, which I'm probably not, what I gather you are saying is that there is no logical reason for them to use blocks?
Actually, if the process were innacurate, blocks would be easier so they could undo mistakes in smaller portions. Additionally, separate blocks are probably sturdier than one solid wall, and finally, depending on how fast the stuff set, they may have time to fill a block mold with the concrete, but not a full wall mold.
because in science, a hypothesis is interesting, but prooving a hypothesis is important. What you heard was the hypothesis. This right now is the information that major strides have been made towards actually prooving it.
Some comparisons: I played Asheron's Call and Final Fantasy XI, both are "infinetly long" as they are MMOs, but I found I like AC better overall. Why? I, a semi casual gamer, could pop in and play AC for 15 mins, log out again, and actually do stuff for that duration. For FFXII, I had to make sure I had a block of at least two hours before considering it.
At another angle, the earlier Final Fantasy games vs. the current games - I could save a lot more frequently in them than the current games (I'll add Xenosaga in here too), because I didn't need to use special save points all the time - so I again could pop in for a much shorter time.
There are many more cases of this with me - "what is the minimum time investment per session while still being fun", and not "what is the overall time of the game".
I didn't mean that open source has no bugs - I meant to say that they are more rare, for the reasons you mentioned. At least, in the security department, when security matters.
Slashdot Mirror
I think there is nothing wrong with stem cells being harvested/used instead of decaying in the ground.
I believe that there is nothing wrong with a fetus being developed used, in a lab (not in a woman) and terminated before there is a chance for any neural tissue (and hence brain activity) to form. No one is being hurt by this, the life that was created wouldn't have been created anyway, and it has less ability to feel pain than the average lab animal used for various experiments.
Oh man, I never thought about that problem... Crud...
Oh well, I think we should start by teaching some mods the difference between "troll" and "bad humor". Overrated? Sure! Troll? WTF!?
I got a black DS, and my fugly polar white mysteriously dissapeared afterwards...
Course, that could be because the polar white was bought from me, but I prefer to think of the the cannibalism aspect. One DS munching on another is kinda funny...
believe it or not, some people find *not* doing this more unethical/immoral than doing this.
This can take something that is rather upleasant in the first place, that would not be avoided, and turn it into something that can save millions of lives.
That being said, I hope the bill has a rider in it that says a person cannot recieve compensation for donating the genetic material.
Actually, I think it limbo for blastula at that point...
Still the money in whatever form, is being put in resources that are used for the purpose of getting back more money. There is little difference between wise investment and hoarding except expense.
As for income redistribution, I'm not sying force redistribution, I'm suggesting more consumable/service purchasing by the wealthier groups, and somewhat slimmer profit margins by the more profitable companies, that go towards allowing the less financially secure to be able to get out of some of the debt cycles they are in with a bit less difficulty.
at part of the picture.
The absolute wealth value isn't as relevant as the wealth value related to the cost of living.
Example: If you live in a place where food costs $1/day and housing is $100/month, you can live off of not much more than $40 a week.
Now, if you live in a place where food costs $5/day and housing is $500/month, that $40/week won't even cover your food expenses.
Now assuming that other necessities and luxuries are all proportional to the house/food values, then who would be richer? The person in the first place making $80/week or the person in the second making $400? Answer: neither, in terms of what they can obtain, they are the same.
However the prices rarely scale like that, in this case the "equivalent" amounts for the first and second location might be $150 to $400 in stead, but the basic idea that absolute wealth means only so much, still holds.
Note: I'm not saying it isn't a problem that most of the wealth is in a few hands, it should be distributed around more to boost the economy (spend, not give), but instead they hoard, I'm saying that just looking at the wealth, and not the wealt compared to the cost of living and luxuries, is the problem
yes, but those don't reduce the requirements that the pilots need to gain a piloting license either.
Note: I'm saying this from the perspective (mine) of someone who would probably be able to get a license with such equipment, but cannot now.
That's not such a bad thing - things to make what you can do more easy/efficient (such as reducing the angle you need to turn your head to see behind you - i.e. the dashboard reaview camera), or distance sensors to tell you how close you are to the curb that the front or right side of your car prevents you from seeing.
That's great.
If you have trouble telling that the person front/left of you is about to switch into your lane, that a turn is coming up, or that the cars ahead of you are stopping, you might want to consider giving up your license.
I did, and I would not get it back even with the adaptive equipment like mentioned here, because it would not improve safty, as one would suspect.
You probably shouldn't be driving, unless the car can drive itself, in which case you aren't driving anyway...
I already gave an example. Also, you are calling MS a have not, but suggeting that somehow Apple isn't? MS has a lot more than Apple.
They do now, doesn't mean they did back then.
Kindof like we have computers now. Doesn't mean we have always had them.
but given my full comment, it's still wrong.
/is/ interested in initiating lawsuits, just against people who have no patent shield.
Apple
I never said they did, I said they /threatened too/, this was a couple of years ago, when the bytecode interperater wasn't turned off. Now they ship it with that functionality turned off to prevent such litigations.
Good, they we can convert to the more interesting Mayan character for null/nil: a turtle!
interested in initiating lawsuits except in self defense from other lawsuits.
Guess the author never heard of the "FreeType" library, I believe Apple threatened to sue them for the parts of their text rendering engine, that allowed them to effectively do things like antialiasing. Apple also, as mentioned in the article, tried to sue Microsoft for various violations.
He also never mentioned what the actual patent was about did he?
The article seems to have very little to do with the title, and the evidence is lackluster for the case, at best.
not purchases.
I've purchased many books it turned out I didn't like, and I didn't recommend.
I'd rather see a "You liked these books, which indicate the following books may also be for you, and the other books here won't be as interesting, based on reviews of other users."
Rather than a "Users who bought this book also bought that book!"
I dunno, say something that takes your oppinion on a book, such as:
"Book A", 8 of 10
and then comes up with:
The top three books for people who gave "Book A" an 8 of 10 are:
"Book B"
"Book C"
"Book D"
The bottom three are:
"Book E"
"Book F"
"Book G"
The top three books for people who gave "Book A" greater than 5 out of 10 are:
"Book B"
"Book H"
"Book I"
hmm... slashdotters unite! We could make this!
Seems like this is a government initiated suit...
/hides
wait, the government wants to make 3D cards?
Please mod whoever said that is off topic as "stupid"
Honestly, it's a very good point, why are two agressively competative companies, having half the market share being examined for antitrust, while the RIAA fatcats, who are obviously a TRUSTworthy consortium not?
that are making gaming graphics cards that are actually really useful - their great cards are making it impossible for competators to compete with their lackluster cards! It must be a case worth of an antitrust suit!
If I'm translating your post right, which I'm probably not, what I gather you are saying is that there is no logical reason for them to use blocks?
Actually, if the process were innacurate, blocks would be easier so they could undo mistakes in smaller portions. Additionally, separate blocks are probably sturdier than one solid wall, and finally, depending on how fast the stuff set, they may have time to fill a block mold with the concrete, but not a full wall mold.
because in science, a hypothesis is interesting, but prooving a hypothesis is important. What you heard was the hypothesis. This right now is the information that major strides have been made towards actually prooving it.
That kinda encapsulated my reason for liking Metroid Fusion.
I wished the game were longer, but I liked that I could play for a short while and not have an issue with shutting it down and loosnig a lot.
it's session length.
Some comparisons:
I played Asheron's Call and Final Fantasy XI, both are "infinetly long" as they are MMOs, but I found I like AC better overall. Why? I, a semi casual gamer, could pop in and play AC for 15 mins, log out again, and actually do stuff for that duration. For FFXII, I had to make sure I had a block of at least two hours before considering it.
At another angle, the earlier Final Fantasy games vs. the current games - I could save a lot more frequently in them than the current games (I'll add Xenosaga in here too), because I didn't need to use special save points all the time - so I again could pop in for a much shorter time.
There are many more cases of this with me - "what is the minimum time investment per session while still being fun", and not "what is the overall time of the game".
Anyone else agree to this?
I didn't mean that open source has no bugs - I meant to say that they are more rare, for the reasons you mentioned. At least, in the security department, when security matters.