From that perspective, if they do develop a highly accurate system for predicting patient wishes (right now it's accurate about two-thirds of the time), the crucial question then seems to be whether the patient's wishes or the family's come first. Arguing that the patient's wish would be to let the family chose seems perilously close to using sophistry to rationalize a desire for a human factor. But what does theMotherboard Knows Best: Should a Computer Make Life-or-Death Decisions? Researchers say computers, using a mathematical formula, can determine the wishes of incapacitated patients as well as—if not better—than their kin.
Just because a computer algorithm is a better predictor, it doesn't then follow that we should use it," says Dan Brock, director of medical ethics at Harvard Medical School. There are many other reasons for human surrogate decision makers, he adds, such as the fact that many patients want their family to have a say in what is perhaps the most important decision of their lives, regardless of accuracy.
"The broad drafting of the law so as to criminalize the activities of citizen journalists unrelated to the perpetrators of violent acts is no accident, but rather a deliberate decision by the authorities, said [Pascal Cohet, a spokesman for French online civil liberties group Odebi]. He is concerned that the law, and others still being debated, will lead to the creation of a parallel judicial system controlling the publication of information on the Internet.
Under pressure from state investigators, Best Buy is now confirming my reporting that its stores have a secret intranet site that has been used to block some consumers from getting cheaper prices advertised on BestBuy.com.
Kleeneness is next to Godelness.
