It is my understanding, that FDA's current stance is that all such person-specific treatments/medicines must be individually approved... And, because the approval process is so horrendously difficult and expensive, few would be willing (nay, able) to do it. Companies do it for mass-market drugs, but for individually-tailored mixtures — where the expected market is numbered in mere scores or, at best, hundreds of people — it just makes no sense...
Too many people suffer and die from too many diseases that we more or less understand, but can't effectively treat. I hated it when I worked in hands-on patient care, and I hate it now in the lab. We are, finally, getting there."
We all know that journalism in America sucks, and this is one heck of a prime example how sucks American journalism can be.
I fail to see, what's so particularly American about this case of paparazzi-journalism.
NSA may have planted holes in OpenSSL, GnuTLS and other important places. But NSA, at least, is an agency of a reasonably free country.
Contributions originating from North Korea should be viewed with much more suspicion. Not rejected, necessarily, but singled-out for extra scrutiny.
most people don't think that speech and efficient killing machines are on the same level
They certainly are, as far the Constitution and other law is concerned.
It is good to see continuing attempts to assert our freedoms based on the ever more creative and expanded interpretations of the First Amendment. If the book prohibits cooking a lamb in its mother's milk, then pepperoni pizza is not kosher either — alright...
But why is not the Second treated just as creatively? If the same narrow reading, that is being constantly applied to the Second, was applied to the First Amendment, your right to free speech would've been limited solely to petitioning the government — and only for the redress of grievances.
If, as is often asserted in some (highly moderated)
Nothing against porn, but why is it a right, while keeping and bearing arms wherever I please is deemed a mere privilege — which the Executive branch in the States (and even smaller locales) may or may not grant and, even having once granted, may withdraw at any time without bothering with pesky Judiciary?
The coding error may have been present since 2005
May it also be, the "coding error" was not an error at all, but a deliberately introduced bug? Government agencies always wanted to read our — and each other's — communications. Sometimes even for legitimate reasons...
Washington, DC was the first city to mandate LEED-certifications for all new construction in 2010. Today the city-wide average EUI for LEED-certified buildings is 205, whereas the non-certified buildings average 199..."
Link to Original Source
This guy isn't some crackpot blogger, he's a respected law professor
He could still be (is!) prejudiced. Decent reporting -- such as what we expect from Slashdot -- would not derogatory terms, when describing one of the parties of an ongoing lawsuit.
scare tactics employed by copyright trolls
Unless everybody asserting their copyright in court is denounced as "troll", use of the term reveals a bias. A point of view (POV), that objective reporting should not have.
A device talking to — and accepting instructions to modify itself from — something foreign over the air is likely to get hacked eventually. With phones that may not be bad enough to warrant the inconvenience of mandating wired updates. Cars are a different story...
Only because we — the people — chose to give them money. Foolishly, I might add.
And, perhaps even more foolishly, we made no requirements about limiting the executive salaries until the monies are paid back.But most of the banks have, actually, paid back years ago (unlike automakers) — so the question is moot.
Similarly, if all the wealth in the country except yours was to be confiscated by a single individual
Wealth confiscation — as well as murder and other crimes — are a valid concern of everyone. Salary is not.
You see, the distribution of wealth in a society has far-reaching effects
High levels of wealth concentration can result in things like the French Revolution
French Revolution was caused not by "wealth concentration", but by the government being bankrupt and by its trying to get out of it by high taxes. Nice try, though...
Troubles in Zimbabwe started from the top — the "revolutionary" leader decided to instill "justice" by confiscations. An even nicer try to shout down a right-leaning opponent by offering leftists' misdeeds as examples.
You seem to be suggesting that the gutting of the middle class only affects the middle class, which is hilarious.
All I said was, what non-governmental enterprises pay their employees (from CEOs to janitors) is — ought to be — between the said employers and employees. How do you infer "gutting middle class" from that is beyond me...
Can you express yourself in a polite debate without the "emperor's special clothes" kind of argument?
(Please, don't hate.)
Three of the Walmart exec/founders are in the top 10 richest people in the world. Walmart is a blight and an embarrassment for all of America.
That's the most mysterious leap of "logic" I've seen in a while... I'd expect, having even one exec/founder among the top 10 richest people in the world would be a source of (well-justified) pride, rather than embarrassment...
You must be the kind, who measures work in tiredness...