Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

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:Just y'know... reconnect them spinal nerves (Score 1, Flamebait) 209

by NotBornYesterday (#49146787) Attached to: Surgeon: First Human Head Transplant May Be Just Two Years Away
Morally speaking, testing on lawyers and politicians would be preferable to using rats. However, scientific consensus is that the lack of a high-functioning nervous system in most politicians and lobbyists, et al, means that any results would not likely work on real humans.

Comment: Re:dem haxx0rz (Score 3, Insightful) 96

by NotBornYesterday (#48704579) Attached to: FBI Monitoring Hacking Targets For Retaliation
Probably not. Any hacker with two brain cells to rub together would quietly infiltrate systems in company A, from there infiltrate Company B, C & D, rinse/repeat until sufficient layers of abstraction sit between them & their target, and then use them to attack the real target. If the response of victim X is to nuke the IPs from which the attack came, they are a) hitting the wrong entity, b) potentially destroying evidence left by the real perps, and c) probably initiating a re-retaliation from the victim of their attack.

Comment: Re:Not worth answering (Score 1) 768

by NotBornYesterday (#43940817) Attached to: Seeking Fifth Amendment Defenders

The theory behind the Bill of Rights says that our rights exist whether or not the Bill of Rights says we do, or because it is convenient, or because it is logical to your mind. We have them because they are part of our nature as human beings, and the rights in the Bill of Rights confirm that there are certain aspects of our nature as people in which the government has no authority to intervene.

The ability to freely think, speak, associate with others, and move about, or the ability to worship as we please, or not worship at all, involve our sovereignty over our own minds and persons. The government cannot compel moon-landing doubters and conspiracy theorists to disavow their crackpot ideas. Not because the crackpots are necessarily right (sometimes paranoid bastards ARE right, after all), but because our government has no sovereign right to rule our minds. An earlier commenter related the 5th amendment protections as analogous to the 4th interms of search and seizure. I view the 5th amendment's right to not self-incriminate as more like an intersection of the 1st and 4th amendments, because it involves not just our things, but our thoughts. I see it as self-evident that our thoughts are more closely bound to our being, and more deserving of impenetrable legal protection than our effects.

At their root, "Rights" as the Constitution lays them out are an explicit restriction on governmental power. Not the other way around.

Biotech

+ - College student creates gel to stop bleeding, star healing->

Submitted by NotBornYesterday
NotBornYesterday (1093817) writes "A 20-year-old New York University student has invented a gel which, according to him, can stop heavy bleeding instantly. With the introduction of the latest invention by Joe Landolina,routine bandages could soon become a thing of the past. According to Landolina the Veti-Gel produced by him, can not only stop bleeding but also instantly start the healing process even on major wounds and wounds on internal organs and key arteries.

The gel, according to the report, is an artificial version of extracellular matrix, which is a substance present in the connective tissue which holds up an animal body together.

In a video with the article, the experimenter can be seen cutting a deep slice into the pork flesh while real pigs blood is being injected into the flesh at the same time. Soon after the flesh is cut, the blood starts flowing freely. However, as soon as the gel is applied on the cut and second liquid sprayed over it, the bleeding suddenly stops."

Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:So much for a fair trial. (Score 1) 1855

by NotBornYesterday (#36003164) Attached to: Osama Bin Laden Reported Dead, Body In US Hands

I mean, a guy arrested at the scene of a mass shooting, covered in blood and holding an assault rifle, screaming about how the aliens in his head told him to murder all of mankind... still gets a trial. Timothy McVeigh (the second biggest terrorist to attack US soil) got a trial. People who systematically abduct and rape hundreds of little girls and hide their bodies in barrels get a trial.

I'm certain the US would have loved to put him on trial. If he had wanted one, all he had to do was surrender. The loonies you mention, both hypothetical and real, seem to have been willing to be taken alive. Whether he really believed in his 72 virgins or not, he obviously preferred death to arrest.

Comment: Re:If I wanted consequences (Score 1) 352

by NotBornYesterday (#34864012) Attached to: Balancing Choice With Irreversible Consequences In Games
I'll second the Fallout bit. The hardcore mode in New Vegas forces you to eat, drink, and sleep every so often. Also, rest and medicine don't instantly and automagically heal you and regrow lost limbs. That said, the save/reload/undo option the author of TFA philosophizes about still exists, and the automagic recovery and regrowth still happens with ludicrous speed and ease compared to the real world, etc., but I then again, didn't get it so my kids could learn a life lesson from it.

Machines certainly can solve problems, store information, correlate, and play games -- but not with pleasure. -- Leo Rosten

Working...