Actually, I think even better than that is to use an SSD as a caching disk, backed by regular disks.

Then everything can benefit from the speed boost since the computer is better than you at deciding which files need a speedup. You don't want to move so many high write files off of the SSD that you make it pointless.

If you are on linux see: http://bcache.evilpiepirate.org/

There is also patronage.

Missed my point.

I mean: In a situation where normally you would not skid at all, how do you know the ABS will not turn on when it shouldn't?

I was just saying the testing regime Gazoogleheimer mentioned is incomplete. You also need to test it for false positives, it's not enough to test for true positives.

That's only half the test. How do you know that it doesn't trigger when it shouldn't?

Say an emergency stop on the freeway, but without skidding?

ABS helps with steering, but it hurts braking power.

The subject of self sacrifice is very very complicated. There is no settled answer - it varies by circumstance.

But basically it is prohibited if you are certain you are going to die. Risking your life on the other hand is quite different. Intent matters more than probability here.

However if someone did do it, they are not condemned, as you say. But that's not the same as saying they are allowed to do it.

And certainly you can not help kill someone.

What about arguing logic with ignorant people?

Because you are wrong, Jews do not believe that. Organ donation has nothing to do with resurrection whatsoever. There is a prohibition of mutilating a corpse, but saving a life trumps that.

The problem is the definition of death and organ donation while the donor heart still beats is considered murder.

I know I posted this multiple times.

Most of the posts here were about organ donation and how it's not fair to take but not donate, blah, blah.

What I wanted was to at least inform the conversion toward the actual issues, and not some invented problem.

I have no problem with people arguing over the definition of death, like you did. I just wanted people to at least be aware of what the true issue was.

I don't agree with you BTW. We don't know anywhere near enough about the brain to be able to say what you did. By that definition (upper brain death) many lower animals are dead their entire life. (Or for example that chicken that lived without a head - but it had a living brain stem.)

Cardiac death is much more unambiguous. And BTW, the heart can not beat without a functioning brain stem. So even brain death, is not total brain death.

I posted this before, but I figured I'd scatter these replies everywhere so people will see them. There is no religious object to organ donation.

The objection is to murder. Jews do not consider brain death to be death - only cardiac death. But most organ donation is done after brain death, but before cardiac death.

And that's the problem. Not organ donation.

> Once you're dead it's not like you're harming your body by allowing someone else to cut into it and use your organs to save lives.

And that's the crux of the matter. Jews do not consider brain death to be death. As long as the heart is beating, the person is alive. So removing organs would then be murder.

I wish the article was clearer. The problem is not organ donation. The problem is that most donations are done after brain death, but before cardiac death.

Jews consider that murder. As long as the heart is beating the person is alive.

Donation after cardiac death are always permitted. But that's rarely done.

That's not accurate.

What Jews prohibit is organ donation after brain death, but while the heart is still beating.

They consider it murder.

The argument is over the definition of life, not organ donation.

I posted this before, but here it is again:

Jews do not believe it's wrong to donate. What they believe is that, as long as a persons heart is beating they are alive.

Meaning: They believe it's wrong to murder someone to harvest organs.

Others believe that after brain death the person is dead, and it's not murder.

The argument is not over organ donation, which even the strictest rabbi agrees with.

The argument is over the definition of death, since most organ donation are done after brain, but not cardiac, death.

Jews do not believe it's wrong to donate. What they believe is that, as long as a persons heart is beating they are alive.

Meaning: They believe it's wrong to murder someone to harvest organs.

Others believe that after brain death the person is dead, and it's not murder.

The argument is not over organ donation, which even the strictest rabbi agrees with.

The argument is over the definition of death, since most organ donation are done after brain, but not cardiac, death.

They can't.

This is probably not patentable, and therefor no one will do the necessary trials to get it approved.

Unpatentable but useful procedures are a big hole in FDA policy, and I think the whitehouse should fund the HIH to get approvals for such procedures.

Compare http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detonation super-sonic pressure wave with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deflagration sub-sonic pressure wave.

Sound is defined as a pressure wave, so I guess this is sound, but it's really more like a small explosion.