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


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Wrong way around... (Score 1) 139

You're right. We're not prophets. But scientists have experimented enough with embryo implantation to get a pretty damn good idea when those embryos are too damaged or degraded to work any more. They're not just going to throw away embryos that took so much work to get to in the first place. They're donations, they gave their word, and up until a certain point they're viable and can be used for barren couples. But, if you don't believe doctors can be ethical or moral, then they're also investments. They paid for them.

But these embryos will no longer work. They are simply unusable and the only option is to dispose of them and replace them with new, viable embryos.

And, more importantly, you make the assumption I equate embryos with live humans as well. I don't. Embryos are NOT humans. They are, at most, could be humans. Proto-humans. Would be if they were viable. But the embryos we're discussing are not, and no blastocytes or undeveloped embryos are period. They're capable of being stored away, they have no nervous system, none of that which would make them a living, breathing creature. A potential is not the real thing, and an embryo is not waiting to live nor would it screamed if it 'died' since it was never alive in the first place. So no, euthanasia is not the same as utilizing a dysfunctional no longer viable embryo. And you know what, yeah. I do believe in willing euthanasia in the case of an incurable, going to kill you in weeks disease. If you want to be euthanized at that point to spare yourself needless suffering, then that should be your right.

Comment Re:Wrong way around... (Score 1) 139

Yeah. Sure, why not. Except here "deem unfit for use" is "They will not survive the womb. They cannot plant themselves." I know you like to think of embryos as magical always work things, but the fact of the matter is a lot of those embryos AREN'T going to ever work any more. You'd put them in the womb they'd just take time before withering. And I am trying to grab an organ donor card. Something besides this silly organ donor sticker.

Comment Re:Wrong way around... (Score 1) 139

You may find it distasteful, but that's the sad truth. There are a lot of blastocytes and similar such embryos that are simply slated for destruction anyways. They're simply no longer viable. As grim as it might be, SOMETHING should be made of them. While they're not a live, I can understand distaste from using something that could have been, but our only options are to dump it in the trash or put it to use in helping people's lives. And unless they can make skin stem cells act like the ungodly powerful stem cells of a developing embryo, we're probably still going to end up having to use them for research.

Comment Re:Adult entertainment? (Score 1) 251

Even ignoring that that's part of what you accept as your role when you have a child, there are a hundred internet censorship programs out there that work pretty effectively. It's not that difficult to install them, hell to even just install them for one user. And setting up different user profiles on a computer, with passwords, is one of the easiest things to do. When it comes to TV, just tell them when their bed time is or when they can't watch TV. Sure, they might anyways, though thousands of kids watch 'inappropriate TV' and come out just fine. But, more importantly than any of that, the parents need to teach their kids the concept of a moral compass. More important than blocking what they see is teaching them how to UNDERSTAND what they see, teaching them right from wrong. If a kid knows right from wrong, it's safe to assume he'll turn out fine even if he runs across hundreds of horrible sites advocating nasty things like racism or religious extremism. Encourage open discourse. Finally, know your own damn kid. Know if he's impressionable and needs some extra help understanding things or just blocking things that would be far beyond him just yet, or know when he's responsible enough to handle himself and let him deal with more mature things. Many parents have done it for years, decades, perhaps even centuries. Why do we have such difficulty with it?

Comment Re:The collection of taxes is not theft! (Score 1) 347

Have you done any research at all into privately run and own security forces or fire departments? They were not good organizations. They were horribly corrupt and horribly inefficient. As much as we hate the bureaucracy and as slow as it is, it is still much more efficient than what came before it. These government controlled organizations grew as a response to what society expressed as a need, a need that a corporation could theoretically fill but never did to any satisfaction of the public. As for not wanting these services, there IS a simple solution. If you're at the age where you are required to pay taxes, it's also safe to assume you're probably capable of moving out of the country and into another country with ideals and tax laws you agree a great deal more with. No, it is not easy to move out of home and away from people you love, but if that is a large of a problem as it is for you then it is, financially, feasible. Admittedly less so given the current economic climate in the world, but then again you have those people back packing all over Europe on little money. As for the other uses of taxes, you're right. The majority will not always agree. However, the majority DID place the people making those decisions in office and have means to dislodge those people if the majority feels fit. That being said, some of the things the majority disagrees with has to be done to protect the minority, and nor is the US a genuine democracy. It is a republic because a democracy just does not work at the scale of whole countries. It worked fine in the acropolises and in the town halls, not with something as vast and as populated as the US.

Comment Re:The collection of taxes is not theft! (Score 4, Insightful) 347

Okay, try this. You're constantly using infrastructure, and like it or not the government has been integral in the production of and modernization of many of the services (Police, fire department, a justice system, which however flawed at least exist) you enjoy as well as the protection of those services you enjoy (For all the ills of the military, and for all the idiocy of war, it is still a necessary evil to have at least a defensive force because the world does not run on rational discussion just yet). Taxes fund and ensure these programs and projects continue. Yes, taxes are also being and have been taken far beyond what they should be and at times are used improperly. But that's what the legal system is for, and while not perfect it's rarely one to sit back and overlook something big like government embezzlement when it's brought to the public.

Diskeeper Accused of Scientology Indoctrination 779

touretzky writes "Two ex-employees have sued Diskeeper Corporation in Los Angeles Superior Court after being fired, alleging that the company makes Scientology training a mandatory condition of employment (complaint, PDF). Diskeeper founder and CEO Craig Jensen is a high-level, publicly avowed Scientologist who has given millions to his Church. Diskeeper's surprising response to the lawsuit (PDF) appears to be that religious instruction in a place of employment is protected by the First Amendment." The blogger at believes that the legal mechanism that Diskeeper is using to advance this argument ("motion to strike") is inappropriate and will be disallowed, but that the company will eventually be permitted to present its novel legal theory.

Slashdot Top Deals

Real wealth can only increase. -- R. Buckminster Fuller