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 Ahh, bullcrap. (Score 1) 95

First, it's patently absurd to predict the "redomestication" of wolves based on studying the behavior of dingoes, domesticated dogs gone feral and now often mixed with other dog breeds.

Second, the dependence on human garbage that the researchers posit is a fantasy of theirs. Wolf population density maps with their prey population density, not the garbage dump count.

If "normal", natural apex predators are desired, controlling their own numbers as apex predators do and avoiding humans sharing their habitat, being wary enough to be reliably safe, then wolves should simply be left alone to be wolves whenever possible, problem individuals and packs dealt with.

Making their packs bigger with nonbreeding adults and protecting huge territories with prey populations large enough to be sustained, their population controls, aren't going to work with wolf seasons tattering and decimating the wolf packs, and they'll be bred into the equivalent of coyotes, it will simply be easier for them to survive as small packs and pairs, and useless to depend on other pack members that will disappear. Just comparing the reproduction rate in Wisconsin and Michigan shows they adapt to humans giving a new breeding pair territory by killing a couple of wolves in a large pack instantly by moving in and adding their own litter, doubling the pups per adult wolf in that pack's former territory.

Comment Re:Bullshit (Score 4, Interesting) 574

Exactly, bullshit. It sounds to me like an employee used his laptop to visit an infected website, or answered a general phishing mail.

Hardly an attack aimed at the grid, and volume cranked up to 11 by WP as a part of the general current panic to glorify Obama and what his administration has done, and undermine the incoming administration.

Or the WP feels it is simply unimportant to get proper attribution and any of the details right.

Comment Re:alternate point of view (Score 1) 183

It's intriguing how many of the opponents of the inheritable fixes that indulge in hyperbole of dangers and dismiss benefit are involved in the somatic therapies.

It's rather obvious that they have the greatest conflict of interest. Not only do germline genetic repairs compete with their intellectual property for patients to cure, they threaten to reduce common genetic maladies as a profit center, like a communicable disease treatable with a lucrative antibiotic being eliminated would deprofit the antibiotic manufacturer.

Listen to what one critic wrote in Nature: "Philosophically or ethically justifiable applications for this technology â" should any ever exist â" are moot until it becomes possible to demonstrate safe outcomes and obtain reproducible data over multiple generations."

Jeeze - treatments for fatal diseases aren't justifiable until after they've been used for multiple generations already to demonstrate safe outcomes? Way to set a conveniently impossible bar. And absurd, compared to the standards for any other medical treatment. They are more interested in patents than patients.

As to the parent comment, you don't encourage innovation by eliminating competing approaches. Unless you're a utterly slimy-selfish dolt.

Slashdot Top Deals

Like punning, programming is a play on words.