Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Get The Fastest VPN For Your Internet Security Lifetime Subscription Of PureVPN at 88% off. ×

Comment Re:Not a Canal (Score 1) 107

I don't have your deep understanding of the GP's credibility and undocumented insights into the as yet approved project

I don't think I claimed any insights into the project, and it's not your fault you never met the GP personally.

Having spent a number years living in Amsterdam: there are central areas where canals (kanaals) are not grachts;nor your "intuitions" about city marketing, determine where the final location will be.

Living there for thirty years now: true, but none that I could think of would make much sense for this project. Admittedly assuming that this is partly city marketing.

Don't be surprise if it winds up being built in Oog - the prophesies of Dutch politicians and the accuracy of news releases from the marketing departments of dutch engineering companies are no more reliable than those in other countries.

Not sure what you mean with 'Oog'; maybe Oost, after your spellchecker 'corrected' it? But, no argument about this not being certain. We'll see what gets built where and when.

Note that the "picture" that another poster mentions is not a real picture.


Comment Re:Anyone ever swim in those canals? (Score 3, Informative) 107

And live to tell?

Yes, it's not exactly clean water, but now that all houses and house boats are supposed to be connected to the sewer system for a few decades, it's definitely less filthy than it used to be.

How many window-sitter prostitutes wind up in those a month?

Zero-point-something. Not nearly as many as drunk tourists.

Can you smoke cannabis on the streets of Amsterdam? Hashish?

Sure, it's not necessarily a healthy idea, but it's allowed (and done a lot).

Is there an age limit to smoke dope?

Drink spirits? Wine? Beer?

Sure, 18 years for alcohol/sigarettes, I assume for dope too, not sure.

Comment Re:Terrible example of the use of 3D printing (Score 3, Interesting) 107

You raise an interesting point. The article linked to in an earlier post quotes the robot manufacturer like this:

MX3D says it can 3D print strong, complex structures of durable material, and that the new technique is more cost-effective and scalable than current 3D printing methods.

Sounds that comes straight from the marketing department, which suggests that something built using their technology is, at the moment, a more brittle, less durable, and not as cost-effective and scalable as something built using the traditional way. On the other hand, they do claim this new technology is making progress on these fronts.

Comment Re:Not a Canal (Score 1) 107

According to story you linked to (thanks, by the way), it'll be built 'in the centre of Amsterdam'. Which makes sense, from a city marketing perspective. This implies it will definitely be over a gracht. Call a it a canal or kannal if you like - but I can assure you you're wrong in assuming the original poster didn't know what she was talking about.

Comment Re:Piss-poor situation (Score 1) 130

Agreed, if you'd find a way to have most people make up their mind that might be enough. Combining it with a drivers license would make sure that 90-something percent of the people would at least think about it once.

And as for driving habits and risks.... You could do a lot worse than live in the US, trust me.

Comment Re:Piss-poor situation (Score 1) 130

Why do you want to maximise the number of expensive operations to keep people alive who are "for parts or not working"?

Basic decency?

It's not like we have a shortage of people. If you want more humans, just provide open access to your womenfolk.

There's certainly enough people already, and I'm not the Pope - birth control is just fine with me.

if that makes you feel uncomfortable, good - you want to make me & mine community property as soon as we pop our clogs?

You have a funny way of arguing - first lashing out instead of just coming up with the point you want to make. No, I don't want to take your choice about what to do with your corpse after you died away from you. Just read my comment again and you'll see.

Comment Re: Piss-poor situation (Score 1) 130

The problem with the resulting situation is that lots of people end up not being able to get kidneys, because they can't find somebody else willing to get them into the system by donating an organ. Organ donors are rare in general.

Why would I give a kidney (requiring life threatening surgery) to some total stranger with absolutely no benefit to myself?

Suppose that stranger could offer you $200k for that kidney? Maybe you'd think about it more then.

I'm afraid I would have to, if I were in serious financial problems. And I'd hate having to face that choice.
On the other hand, that stranger could also have them for free - if he would just wait for me to die first.
Live organ donors are rare indeed. But we could do much better with the other type and face less ethical challenges.

Comment Re:Piss-poor situation (Score 1) 130

Better question: what are your wife and kids going to do with the money when you're dead?

Agreed, after there's 'me' left that question makes more sense.

Seriously, I've been telling my wife for years to donate my leftovers to the local medical school. Unfortunately, my cancer history means my leftovers are basically useless for transplanting. But, given that I were reasonably healthy, I'd feel quite comfortable with her getting the proceeds from whatever leftovers still were useful after I got done using them....

I understand that, and I would feel the same. But would you consider helping your family financially more important than helping an unknown person fighting for his life? To personally, the second thing would be more important, unless my family would be in a really desperate financial situation.

Comment Re:Piss-poor situation (Score 2) 130

In the one case it is about helping strangers (the likely recipients of your organs), and in the other case it is about helping your family (the likely recipients of the money raised from selling your organs).

People will do a lot more for their family than strangers.

Absolutely true, and I understand the way this worked in this case. I was just thinking out loud about solving the problem of donor organ shortage in general. I'm not expecting most people to volunteer being an organ donor while alive - it's simply asking a bit much. But many people could be convinced to potentially become an organ donor after death simply for altruistic reasons. Neither organs nor money aren't going to be of any use to you. Why not help someone else, even if it's a person you don't know?

Comment Re:Piss-poor situation (Score 3, Informative) 130

Exactly my thoughts, except that people who really have problems with this solution for religious or whatever reason should have a way to opt-out. Simply changing the default from opt-out to opt-in would already make a big difference, maybe enough, maybe not.
If that wouldn't be enough, the deal could be that people who choose to opt-out would be placed behind people who choose opt-in in on the waiting list in case they need an organ themselves. That would be fair and still leave people the choice to opt-out if they are really uncomfortable with the whole organ donation idea (personally, I'm not - dead is dead).

Comment Re:Piss-poor situation (Score 2) 130

This is zero-sum thinking. Most life saving organ transplants go to the grave right now. If there was a financial incentive to donate....

It's indeed a shame a lot of potential organ transplants go to the grave right now. Reasoning about this primarily in financial terms first makes no sense, though. After all, what am I going to do with the money when I'm dead? Bury it with me? OK, it could give me a good feeling if I knew it would help my relatives. But then it's about helping others, not about money, and this should be the starting point of reasoning about this issue.

The clothes have no emperor. -- C.A.R. Hoare, commenting on ADA.