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


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

Comment Re:Keep dreaming (Score 1) 70

Neanderthals are/were human, just not homo sapiens. Fire, tools, bigger brains than us, probably language. They may even have been more intelligent than some modern stone-age indigenous peoples. And close enough to us that a modern human could be a surrogate mother.

It looks like resurecting them may be a real possibility:

Comment Re:Never (Score 1) 379

both a traitor and a hero. He can be both, at the same time.

Of course, that's part of my point. The Founding Fathers are more obviously both - heroes to millions, but clearly traitors and they never denied this but only justified it. They had their reasons, but the damage done to achieve their goals was staggering. The harm done by Snowden is minuscule in comparison, and he is suffering for it, rather than gaining wealth and power, so perhaps his justifications are worth listening to?

Comment Re:Keep dreaming (Score 1) 70

OK, so Jurassic-Park is pure fantasy, but I'm still holding out hope for cloning a 10,000 year-old Wooly Mammoth.

And if you want a real ethical problem, what if we could clone and give birth to real Neanderthals, using DNA fragments from 40,000 yo frozen specimens?
I'd do it, just for the spectacle of seeing the lawyers and priests struggling with it.

Comment Re:What is sexual is viewer dependent (Score 1) 412

It's not hard to make an argument that any picture of a naked child could be considered child porn.

Its an old argument and a poor one. The problem is the logic leap from "it can be used for sexual gratification" to "porn". People made the same argument for partially clothed kids, so catalogues no longer have models for kids underwear. But perverts will still like photos of fully clothed models, so next stop is for all kids to wear burkas in public? Once you start changing your behaviour for fringe views, where do you stop?
What about foot fetishes? More common than you think. Does that make bare feet porn? No - for reasons that should now be obvious, useful definitions of porn include intent and context, not just content.

  Lets just draw the line at commonly accepted standards. In more conservative parts of the US or Middle East, that means no nudity. In the rest of the world, its OK.

Slashdot Top Deals

No man is an island if he's on at least one mailing list.