Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Free Motorcycles (Score 1) 295

Like I said, one can fiddle with the numbers to swing the accounting a fair bit in one direction or the other. As you've demonstrated, if one makes optimistic assumptions about the age of the donor and maximizes the number of recipients by assuming a strict one-organ-per recipient (include just one lung at a time, and no multiple-organ transplants--bear in mind that the vast majority of pancreas transplants are actually pancreas-kidney, for example) and 100% organ recovery and transplantation, one can choose to make the math give you the result you're looking for.

It's very sticky if you want to score tissues that aren't necessarily lifesaving or for which artificial or animal alternative sources exist. (It's ethically problematic to suggest, for example, that more dead motorcyclists are a good thing because it will improve the supply of cadaveric ACL replacements, especially given that many patients could instead receive an autograft of their own tissue.)

It doesn't help that you're neglecting the last and most important part of my comment acknowledging that a very substantial fraction of potential organs won't be converted into actual transplants: helmetless motorcyclists who die too far from care or too quickly for their organs to be recovered; ones who have communicable diseases, malignancies, or other medical conditions that exclude them from donation; and so forth. (Going forward, helmet laws will only be suspended if you're over 40, free of hepatitis and HIV infection, have recently been screened for cancer, and are biking in an area with excellent ambulance service within 1 hour of a major transplant center. Hmmm...) Each dead motorcyclist is only "worth" 60 years multiplied by the fraction of viable organ recoveries--which probably comes out to well under 50%.

Finally, we're using "accounting" in a couple of different ways, here. I was using it purely to refer to life-years saved or lost. If we actually want to look at dollars and cents, it gets really ugly really fast. In the United States, the total billable costs for a heart transplant (including 30 days of pre-operative screening and prep, organ procurement, the transplant operation itself, and the subsequent 6-month period of recovery and rehab) comes out to about a million bucks. A single lung or a liver transplant are both well over half a million apiece. Kidneys are well clear of the quarter million mark.

From a purely financial perspective, it's waaaaay less costly to just let the motorcyclist survive and the potential transplant recipients die in a few months or a year, rather than let them be brutally expensive surgeries with steep and ongoing maintenance costs. Amortizing that heart transplant over the likely life of the recipient (or the transplanted organ) runs a hundred grand plus per year. Oh, and don't forget the cost of care and rehab for all those brain-damaged motorcyclists who don't manage to actually die from their head injuries....

Comment Several conflict resolution strategies (Score 2) 432

Most organizations have difficult people. Some pairs of people just get on each other's nerves. Often it comes down to circumstances -- did you meet at the beginning of a stressful period? Others who remember the "good old days" may have fond memories that help them through the present. etc.

In order to build a healthy career, you have to learn how to manage these situations productively. People who master the skill get promoted.

Some advice: Don't take it personally. Don't let the problem fester. Don't be overly aggressive. Do your homework. Proceed with caution. Scout out how your peers feel about this individual. Do others have strategies for working with him? Calmly approach the other individual, talk about the issues, and make sure they understand what you perceive as inappropriate actions. Sometimes people lose track and appreciate the wake-up call (especially introverted engineers). If it is intentional, try to find out why -- maybe you can call a truce or forge an alliance. Walking away over one person sounds extreme. Can you find a new project or role that reduces your interaction with this one individual? If you have issues with numerous people than walking might be more appropriate.

I would also recommend the book "Win-Win Negotiating" by Jandt and Gillette.

Comment Re:Free Motorcycles (Score 1) 295

I've said for years that helmet laws probably costs lives.

Maybe, but not necessarily. It depends a lot on your accounting. A 20-year-old dumbass male might expect to have around 60 years ahead of him, most of which will be time spent in good health.

His kidneys will probably last about 10 years in each of their recipients, so count 20 years "saved" total.

The median survival time for heart transplant recipients is also about 10 years.

Liver transplants tend to do particularly well; the median survival is closer to 20 years.

Lungs are a lot pickier; the median is closer to 5 years, but is steadily improving.

Add that all up, and we're just shy of breaking even (55 life-years for the recipients, versus 60 life-years lost by the motorcyclist). On can fiddle with the parameters to swing things a bit either way. In some cases, the liver can be split into two lobes; the larger right lobe goes to an adult and the smaller left lobe to a child recipient. Some recipients only need a single-lung transplant, so one pair of lungs can go to two recipients. And we're getting better at keeping transplanted organs functional for longer. And, of course, some dead motorcyclists are 40-year-olds having a mid-life crisis.

On the flip side, some recipients may need multiple organs (heart-lung, heart-liver, etc.).

More important, not all organs will be viable--not every helmet-less fatality leads to a full complement of usable donor organs. For reasons of underlying disease or quirks of the donor's physiology, it may not be possible to transplant some organs. The fatal motorcycle accident may damage some other organs beyond repair. The accident may even occur in a location or under circumstances where none of the organs can be recovered for donation. That is going to tip the scales a long way against the "benefit" of more brain-dead motorcyclists.

Frankly, we have more than enough cadavers now; what we need is for more of them to donate their organs. Presumed consent (an opt-out rather than opt-in) system would be far more effective than suspending helmet laws.

Comment No. It didn't "predict" anything. (Score 0, Troll) 186

It reacted when there were "obvious" signs of trouble, and it didn't "predict" anything. The 2nd car in front was slowing fast enough that the Tesla would have started to brake on its own -- just as happened here. Would a person have noticed and reacted in the same way? Maybe; probably not. What I'm saying here isn't dismissing what the Tesla did...but the Tesla also didn't "predict" anything or see into the future; it reacted to inputs that were already present, and a good and attentive human driver might have done the same thing. Once perfected, self-driving cars and accident avoidance technology will make the roads safer â" but let's not make them seem magical, because they aren't.

Comment There is, and will be, no "Muslim registry" (Score 1, Informative) 600

They are protesting something that will never be created, because when the rhetoric was translated into reality, it was a proposal to reestablish the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS)[1], which was in force through half of President Obama's presidency, and which tracks certain individuals who enter the United States based on country/region of origin and other factors. Useless publicity stunt with commensurate absolutely abysmal coverage by The Intercept.

See also:

8 U.S. Code  1182 - Inadmissible aliens[2]

"Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President:

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."

Flashback:

"The Secretary of State and the Attorney General will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly."[3] -- President Jimmy Carter, April 7, 1980

[1] https://www.ice.gov/nseers
[2] https://www.law.cornell.edu/us...
[3] http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu...

Comment Re:You will always be a foreigner (Score 1) 219

From Wikipedia:

"Since the 1980s, an estimated 200 million Chinese live outside their officially registered areas and under far less eligibility to education and government services, living therefore in a condition similar in many ways to that of illegal immigrants... There are around 130 million such home-staying children, living without their parents, as reported by Chinese researchers."

Of course if the Chinese government was less secretive and obsessed with control, we could probably find more accurate statistics. But then this is the country that tried to discourage the US embassy in Beijing from posting accurate air pollution metrics because they were so embarrassing.

Comment Re:You will always be a foreigner (Score 3, Interesting) 219

Veering slightly off-topic here, but in addition to what you said, the limitations on internal migration (for Chinese citizens) are absolutely insane by Western standards. Imagine that you couldn't attend school or obtain a driver's license or even legally reside in California despite being born there because your parents were "registered" as Illinois residents and moved without permission. As someone who rarely has to deal with any government agency more oppressive than the local DMV office, I can't imagine living in a country with that level of control over my life, even if they were handing out citizenship papers freely.

Comment Since no one apparently said it (Score 1) 588

Twitter doesn't do government services and they'll be out of business shortly. Also, their leader is a left wing ideologue.

The rest of the companies would gladly take on the work. This surprises you how?

Did you somehow think that your ideology was going to keep on preventing people from working with Trump without political power? Think again.

Comment They won't. (Score 1) 333

Period. It's a waste of time. Any government that tries to force standard of living reduction will be voted out of office. This is essentially what happened with Obama, and he tried to do it in a stealthy way. Imagine someone openly taking an axe to public prosperity in the interest of climate change? They'd shove knives up his ass like Quaddafi.

You have to create a totalitarian state with the full apparatus of secret police, surveillance, detention camps and summary executions to even start to go there, and the focus on climate change would impair your ability to maintain that social control. Beside which, the inherent corruption in such a state would ultimately subvert your efforts to reduce your carbon footprint.

Also, i'd rather have the climate change than the secret police, thanks.

Comment I've never seen so much effort futilely wasted (Score 1, Insightful) 333

The climate change police are getting more and more shrill over time. This decreases rather than increases their power to convince. But it was all futile anyway because you are asking people to reduce their standard of living by choice to accomplish a community goal. Even people who see the danger are loath to do that...thinking Al Gore and his planes and houses. It's the Whole Earth Catalog thing all over. "living guilt-free with our appropriate technology like Indians in the woods...free at last!". Only a tiny percentage of people will ever share in that goal meaningfully.

Nothing is going to change politically even when the oceans start encroaching cities, because the argument then will be that it is too late to fix the problem at that point. So, why bother with the stupid political activity, when we all know it's a nonstarter? Aren't there more constructive uses for their time? Instead of futile political activity, how about carbon sequestration-related work? Fund startups to do that... Plant trees. Do *something* to combat the problem you see rather than all of this wasted political activity...dare I say hot air? Solve the problem and stop trying to force others to change to 'solve' it.

But they won't, because it's not really about climate change. It's about social control and mandating lifestyles. People who apparently really don't like personal success very much because they choose goals that are unachievable.

Slashdot Top Deals

If you are good, you will be assigned all the work. If you are real good, you will get out of it.

Working...