Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


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:Rights? (Score 1) 565

by dziman (#31479564) Attached to: Scientology Tries To Block German Documentary
Even though Scientology isn't a recognized entity in Germany, would having someone present the "facts" about it to the court imply that Scientology is recognized entity? After all, who makes the decision that the facts must be presented? Who else would make the proposition to the government except the "unrecognized" entity in this case? Is this a contradiction of its "non-recognition"?

Comment: Re:Rights? (Score 5, Informative) 565

by dziman (#31479480) Attached to: Scientology Tries To Block German Documentary
From the official translation: https://www.btg-bestellservice.de/pdf/80201000.pdf

Article 5 [Freedom of expression, arts and sciences] (1) Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing and pictures, and to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources. Freedom of the press and freedom of reporting by means of broadcasts and films shall be guaranteed. There shall be no censorship. (2) These rights shall find their limits in the provisions of general laws, in provisions for the protection of young persons, and in the right to personal honour. (3) Arts and sciences, research and teaching shall be free. The freedom of teaching shall not release any person from allegiance to the constitution.


Scientology Tries To Block German Documentary 565

Posted by timothy
from the piece-of-blue-sky dept.
eldavojohn writes "The Guardian is reporting on the strained relationship that Scientology is having with the German government and the airing of a pesky documentary on Southwest Broadcasting. Until Nothing Remains, a $2.3 million documentary, is slotted to air on German television at the end of this month. It recounts the true story of Heiner von Rönn and his family's suffering when he tried to leave the Church of Scientology. A Scientology spokesperson called the film false and intolerant and also said they are investigating legal means to stop the film from being aired. More details on the film can be gleaned here."

Comment: Re:Sounds fair (Score 3, Insightful) 582

by dziman (#31479210) Attached to: In Israel, Potential Organ Donors Could Jump the Queue

Should a smoker dying of lung cancer get a second pair of lungs before a person that is not a smoker and did not choose to be an organ donor, but instead has lung cancer due to second hand smoke? That's a nice gray area for you.

Or would you like it a bit more simple:

A child whose parents are not organ donors, and can't choose because the child is not old enough, is dying of a disease that has destroyed her lungs. Should the smoking lung cancer patient that selected "organ donor" get the lungs before the child?

These are hard choices.

Comment: Re:I'm a donor. Are you? (Score 2, Insightful) 582

by dziman (#31479120) Attached to: In Israel, Potential Organ Donors Could Jump the Queue

Not being an organ donor does not make you a douche bag. People may have valid reasons for choosing not to be a donor. Some of those are religious or ethical, others might be medical.

Would you want to accept an organ from a person that has a communicable disease and that disease would come to you from a donated organ?

Would you want to accept an organ from a person that has not taken good care of that organ in their body?

The organ you receive could actually kill you if your body outright rejects it without appropriate post operative medical care. Should we give organs to people that mark themselves donors, but are unlikely to obtain reasonable post operative medical care?

Some people may be better donors than others! Would they re-prioritize organs to people that are more likely to be better organ donors than people that are not as good organ donors? For example, lets say that I'm fairly healthy except for this kidney I have that won't work. Would I get the kidney before a person that is less healthy than myself? Which types of organs are more desirable? Age matched? Younger? Older? Larger? Smaller? Is there a grading scale for organ donor-ability?


In Israel, Potential Organ Donors Could Jump the Queue 582

Posted by timothy
from the unorthodox-move dept.
laron writes "In Israel, a new law is in the making: Holders of donor cards and their families would get preference if they should need an organ for themselves. Apparently this initiative faces resistance from Orthodox rabbis, who hold that organ donation is against religious law. Jacob Lavee, director of the heart transplant unit at Israel's Sheba Medical Center, and one of the draftees of this new law, hopes that a broader pool of organs will ultimately benefit everyone, but acknowledges that one of his primary motivations is 'to prevent free riders.' (Apparently receiving an organ is OK under religious law.)"

Comment: Abstraction (Score 1) 196

by dziman (#31393186) Attached to: Microsoft Demos Three Platforms Running the Same Game

If you're writing cross-platform code, which may even use different APIs, there will still be more high level code than low level code (in quantity). A lot of this depends on the design of the abstraction that helps adapt between the platforms. With this in mind, I can easily see 90% being obtainable on ANY complex system where there is a lot of high level code.

What Microsoft is likely referring to is that they don't have to change 90% of their low-level code too. This means they have pushed the abstraction further down into the low-level code using directx et al.

It is masked but always present. I don't know who built to it. It came before the first kernel.