3801333
submission
Stanislav_J writes:
A U.S. study suggests that people with strong religious beliefs appear to want doctors to do everything they can to keep them alive as death approaches. The study, following 345 patients with terminal cancer, found that "those who regularly prayed were more than three times more likely to receive intensive life-prolonging care than those who relied least on religion." At first blush, this appears paradoxical; one would think that a strong belief in an afterlife would lead to a more resigned acceptance of death than nonbelievers who view death as the end of existence, the annihilation of consciousness and the self. Perhaps the concept of a Judgment produces death-bed doubts? ("Am I really saved?") Or, given the Judeo-Christian abhorrence of suicide, and the belief that it is God who must ultimately decide when it is "our time," is it felt that refusing aggressive life support measures or resuscitation is tantamount to deliberately ending one's life prematurely?
716755
submission
Stanislav_J writes:
In a bizarre revelation, the judge who is presiding over the Isaacs obscenity trial in Los Angeles was found to have sexually explicit material on a publicly-accessible website. Alex Kozinski, chief judge of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, acknowledged that he had posted the materials, but says he believed the site to be for personal storage only, and not accessible to the public, though he does acknowledge sharing some of the material with friends.) The files included images of masturbation, public sex, contortionist sex, a transsexual striptease, a photo of naked women on all fours painted to look like cows, and a video of a half-dressed man cavorting with a sexually aroused farm animal. The latter two are especially ironic in that the trial involves the distribution of allegedly obscene sexual fetish videos depicting bestiality, among other things, by Ira Isaacs, an L.A. filmmaker. Though the judge has blocked public access to the site (putting up a graphic that reads, "Ain't nothin' here — y'all best be movin' on, compadre").
Isaacs' defense had welcomed the assignment of Kozinski to the case because of his long record of defending the First Amendment, but the startling news about his website (the revelation of which seems to have been interestingly timed to coincide with today's scheduled opening arguments) now have many folks calling for him to be removed from the case. There is no indication that any of the images on Kozinski's site would be considered obscene or illegal. But certainly, one has to believe that most would consider this at the very least to represent a serious conflict of interest given the nature of the trial.
597404
submission
Stanislav_J writes:
All you wealthy Slashdotters (if that's not a contradiction in terms) better start making alternate arrangements for stashing your millions. The country's storied role as discreet banker to the world's tax-avoiding wealthy is under threat like never before, and this time it may not ultimately be able to stop the rest of the world from prying into those legendary "secret" accounts (said to contain between $1 trillion and $2 trillion). A massive German tax-evasion scandal is putting pressure on the Swiss to cooperate, and the rest of Europe is also hardening their resolve to force change upon them. Per the article, "The official Swiss reaction has been self-conscious detachment, which they hope will deflate the issue," but even their own citizens are not too concerned about those outside their borders: "80 percent of Swiss support the banking confidentiality law — but that number drops into the 40s when it is applied to foreigners, suggesting the Swiss care much less about the privacy of non-Swiss citizens." Pressure is also coming from U.S. pols — not the "let's pry into everyone's business" Republicans, but the "make the rich pay their fair share" Democrats, including Michigan Senator Carl Levin and Illinois Senator (and presidential candidate) Barack Obama.
525110
submission
Stanislav_J writes:
"The internet is a copy machine. At its most foundational level, it copies every action, every character, every thought we make while we ride upon it. In order to send a message from one corner of the internet to another, the protocols of communication demand that the whole message be copied along the way several times...Unlike the mass-produced reproductions of the machine age, these copies are not just cheap, they are free." So begins the musings of Kevin Kelly, Senior Maverick at Wired magazine. In a very thought-provoking essay, "Better Than Free," he probes the question of how thoughts, ideas and words that are so constantly, easily, and casually copied can still have economic value. "If reproductions of our best efforts are free," he asks, "how can we keep going? To put it simply, how does one make money selling free copies?" He enumerates and explains eight qualities that can, indeed, make something financially viable — "better than free." A very timely article in light of the constant barrage of RIAA/piracy/copyright discussions on this website. The essay cannot be easily or briefly summarized, so (though it is asking a lot of Slashdotters), I urge you to (*gulp*) RTFA before commenting.
520274
submission
Stanislav_J writes:
It happens to the best of us: you drop off your laptop at the local branch of some Super Mega Electronics McStore, go to pick it up, and they can't find it. Lost, gone, kaput — probably sucked into a black hole and now breeding with lost airline luggage. It would make any of us mad, but Raelyn Campbell of Washington, D.C. isn't just mad — she's $54 million mad. That's how much she is asking from Best Buy in a lawsuit that seeks "fair compensation for replacement of the $1,100 computer and extended warranty, plus expenses related to identity theft protection." Best Buy claims that Ms. Campbell was offered and collected $1,110.35 as well as a $500 gift card for her inconvenience. (I guess that extra 35 cents wasn't enough to sway her.) Her blog claims that Geek Squad employees spent three months telling her different stories about where her laptop might be before finally acknowledging that it had been lost.
For those who follow economic trends, this means that a laptop's worth is roughly equivalent to that of a pair of pants.
