Futurismic

Prohibiting the use of heroin and crack is stupid. Prohibition of cannabis is stupid and hypocritical, as further confirmed by a report (link is to background to the report) from the Beckley Foundation:

“Although cannabis can have a negative impact on health, including mental health, in terms of relative harms it is considerably less harmful than alcohol or tobacco,”

…

The Beckley Foundation, a charitable trust, claimed only two deaths worldwide have been attributed to cannabis, while alcohol and tobacco use together kill an estimated 150,000 people in Britain alone.

…

“Many of the harms associated with cannabis use are the result of prohibition itself, particularly the social harms arising from arrest and imprisonment,”

Ending prohibition isn’t like ending climate change - it’s a comparatively straightforward way of solving Mexico’s drugs problems, our drugs problems, and generally making the world a better place.

What does this have to do with science fiction? I hope that prohibition will seem like the product of a dystopian science-fiction novel someday, and join slavery and the divine right of kings on the trash-heap of history.

[via Physorg][image from aforero on flickr]

Related posts

• U.S. Presidential science (2)
• The Street Finds Its Own Use for Things (…and so does prison) (1)
• The straight dope - performance enhancement drugs and the Olympics (0)
• The space race and the Presidential race (0)
• The RFID and the saguaro (0)

J K Rowling might be interested to see that suing people who make derivative works based on your own creations isn’t necessarily the best option. YA author Stephanie Myers Meyer took the opposite approach by encouraging her fans to produce a Lexicon of her Twilight Vampire books, and as a result has engendered a hard core of people who evangelise the books on her behalf. [via TechDirt]

Word-of-mouth is the best form of marketing there is, so they say - and getting someone else to do the hard work for you seems like a smart move in a networked world. As I’ve mentioned before, I think the importance of fan-fic in building an author’s career is set to increase over time, and it is in author attitudes to fan-created works that we’ll start seeing the split between writers who have embraced the internet and those who cling to the old paradigms of print.

Related posts

• Do free ebooks actually affect the sales of paper books? (6)
• Writing and piracy - Stoddard pops Pogue’s balloon (8)
• The economics of book retailing (2)
• Second Life, 3D dildos and the intellectual property mindset inversion (0)
• Optimal Copyright Term (0)

Sven Johnson reports on intellectual property wranglings in Second Life for the latest instalment of Future Imperfect.

Second Life’s unique content creation tools have been its strongest unique selling point, resulting in a vigorous virtual economy. But there, just as in real life, intellectual property rights are a thorny issue - and there are signs that the social media masses are starting to change their attitude to content theft.
Continue reading “Second Life, 3D dildos and the intellectual property mindset inversion”

Related posts

• Terry Pratchet visits Second Life, understands derivative works as fan activity (0)
• Thought-controlled avatars for Second Life (0)
• The banks are shutting down! (3)
• Second Life not actually crawling with terrorists after all - who knew? (1)
• Second Life is hell - classic literature meets the metaverse (0)

So, riddle me this: a deaf couple want a second child, and because of the woman’s age they’ll probably need to use in-vitro fertilisation techniques. No problem so far … until you find that the parents want to be able to select for a deaf child, and the UK government’s recent embryology bill will not allow them to do so.

This is a textbook ethical dilemma, but it’s the sort of thing that advances in reproductive technology and genetic engineering are going to make more commonplace. I find myself (unusually) wanting to side with the government on this one - but then I’m not a parent, and I imagine that changes your perspective quite severely.

I’ve sat here at the keyboard for about half an hour trying to formulate an argument for either side, but I can’t find anywhere I’m entirely comfortable - what do you think?

Related posts

• Transgender pregnancy (20)
• Stem Cells show major breakthrough in treatment of Parkinson’s (3)
• Second Life, 3D dildos and the intellectual property mindset inversion (0)
• Robots evolve ability to lie…and be heroes (0)
• Rights for robots? Not according to Peter Watts. (10)

The title tells it all - a Nebraskan State Senator, in an attempt to make a point about frivolous lawsuits, files an injunction against God. I can hear the cranks revving their engines already … [Via Pharyngula]

Related posts

• Why do people vote Republican? (9)
• Time - Part 2 (0)
• Time - part 1 (0)
• THE RIVERS OF EDEN by Jay Lake and Ruth Nestvold (0)
• STRIKE A POSE by Donnàrd Ricardo Sturgis (0)

What is the optimum length of copyright (from a social benefit perspective)? Rufus Pollock calculates it to be 14 years in this paper (pdf). He’s a Ph.D. candidate at Cambridge University, and reached his conclusion based on a few assumptions (which he backs up with data): (a) that as copyright length increases, it encourages the creation of new works, (b) up to a certain point, after which it can inhibit the creation of new works, and (c) that the optimal length of copyright is in part a function of the cost of production, so that as the cost of production falls so to does the optimal copyright length. [slashdot]

Related posts

• Second Life, 3D dildos and the intellectual property mindset inversion (0)
• Pay attention, J K Rowling - fan-created content can work in your favour (1)
• Wormholes a ‘possibility’ (0)
• Terry Pratchet visits Second Life, understands derivative works as fan activity (0)
• Revenge of the Sneakernet (1)