Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:SMH! (Score 1) 353

This is all especially ridiculous since the original Abrahamic religion literally mandates drinking wine. At least once a year, you are supposed to drink four cups of wine. Taken literally, using big cups, you end up seeing your whole family drunk. As a ten year old, you also end up puking your guts out and this teaches you to moderate your drinking.

Damn goys ruining it for everybody.

Comment: Re:Merchants do not need to touch bitcoins ... (Score 1) 121

by Eddi3 (#47479159) Attached to: New York State Proposes Sweeping Bitcoin Regulations
I'm not sure how that's relevant to my point. I was talking about Bitcoin based businesses such as exchanges, mixers, etc.

If you have a company that sells computer parts, but accepts Bitcoin via a third party merchant service among other payment methods, I would think they aren't directly subject to these regulations and certainly aren't reliant upon Bitcoin to survive. Perhaps the third party would have to charge more for the transfer if they were based in NY.

Comment: Re:The Death of Bitcoin? (Score 5, Insightful) 121

by Eddi3 (#47479119) Attached to: New York State Proposes Sweeping Bitcoin Regulations
Bitcoin is inherently the opposite of anonymous. Every single transaction is forever part of the blockchain, free for anybody and everybody to download, and even compulsory if you want to have a local wallet.

The only way to anonymize your coin is to use a service which mixes up your coins so that it's nearly impossible to trace where they went once they go into the system.

Comment: Already covered? (Score 1) 121

by Eddi3 (#47478997) Attached to: New York State Proposes Sweeping Bitcoin Regulations
Aren't there already laws on consumer protection, money laundering, fraud, abuse, and cybersecurity? I'm honestly wondering why they need extra laws to outlaw actions that are already illegal.

If this is about taxes (can't tell from TFA), aren't these business already taxed on their profits like any other business? It seems to me that this is all a bit unnecessary, and likely to drive away people who seek to start Bitcoin based companies.

Comment: Unfortunately (Score 2) 69

This sounds great, but unfortunately from TFA:

"Demonstration of a mini organ model lighting a bulb might be feasible in five years. But developing the technology for transplantation, hooking that up to the blood stream, connecting and synchronizing it with a heart with failed AV node will take much longer." Long enough that we probably wonâ(TM)t be enjoying superhuman organs in our lifetimes. Bioprinted "self-powered humanâ parts that generate electricity are at least 100 years off, Ozbolat said.


3D Bioprinters Could Make Enhanced, Electricity-Generating 'Superorgans' 69

Posted by timothy
from the finally-some-competition dept.
New submitter meghan elizabeth (3689911) writes Why stop at just mimicking biology when you can biomanufacture technologically improved humans? 3D-printed enhanced "superorgans"—or artificial ones that don't exist in nature—could be engineered to perform specific functions beyond what exists in nature, like treating disease. Already, a bioprinted artificial pancreas that can regulate glucose levels in diabetes patients is being developed. Bioprinting could also be used to create an enhanced organ that can generate electricity to power electronic implants, like pacemakers.

FTC Approves Tesla's Direct Sales Model 328

Posted by samzenpus
from the sell-how-you-want dept.
cartechboy (2660665) writes "We've all read about Tesla and the ongoing battles its having with different dealer associations. Basically, dealer associations aren't too pleased about the Silicon Valley startup's direct sales model. Today the FTC has had made a statement on the matter and it's actually in favor of Tesla's direct sales model. 'In this case and others, many state and local regulators have eliminated the direct purchasing option for consumers, by taking steps to protect existing middlemen from new competition. We believe this is bad policy for a number of reasons,' wrote Andy Gavil, Debbie Feinstein, and Marty Gaynor in the FTC's 'Who decides how consumers should shop?' posting to the Competition Matters blog. The FTC appears to take issue not with those laws, but with how they're being used, and with the direct-sales bans being passed in several states. Now the only real question is how long will it be before Tesla prevails in all states?"

Climate Scientist: Climate Engineering Might Be the Answer To Warming 343

Posted by samzenpus
from the warm-up-the-cloud-gun dept.
Lasrick (2629253) writes "Tom Wigley is one of the world's top climate scientists, and in this interview he explains his outspoken support for both nuclear energy and research into climate engineering. Wigley was one of the first scientists to break the taboo on public discussion of climate engineering as a possible response to global warming; in a 2006 paper in the journal Science, he proposed a combined geoengineering-mitigation strategy that would address the problem of increasing ocean acidity, as well as the problem of climate change. In this interview, he argues that renewable energy alone will not be sufficient to address the climate challenge, because it cannot be scaled up quickly and cheaply enough, and that opposition to nuclear power 'threatens humanity's ability to avoid dangerous climate change.'"

Comment: Surely (Score 3, Insightful) 313

by Eddi3 (#46717381) Attached to: Double Take: Condoleezza Rice As Dropbox's Newest Board Member
If Brendan Eich could be forced out for a $1,000 donation, surely Ms. Rice can be for influencing privacy policy herself, something which is highly relevant to this business. In addition, she has defended her position since leaving office. I think the real question here is where does this end?

"Pascal is Pascal is Pascal is dog meat." -- M. Devine and P. Larson, Computer Science 340