A Geek Funeral 479
We've recently talked about a geek wedding, and now reader Sam_In_The_Hills writes in with news of his brother's geek funeral. "I've not seen this topic covered here before even though it's one that will concern us all at some time: what to do with our corporeal remains after we've left for that great data bank in the sky. For my recently departed brother (long illness, don't smoke!), I thought this nice SPARCstation would be a cool place to spend eternity. Yes, he's really in there (after cremation). I kept the floppy drive cover but for space reasons removed the floppy drive, hard drive, and most of the power supply. I left behind the motherboard and power switch and plugs to keep all openings covered. The case worked quite well at his memorial party. His friends and family were able to leave their final good-byes on post-notes. Anyone who wanted to keep their words private could just slip their note into the case through the floppy slot. All notes will be sealed in plastic and placed within the case. There has been one complication. His daughters like the look of it so much they aren't now sure if they want to bury him. One more thing: the words on the plaque really do capture one of the last things he ever said. Of course as kids we watched the show in its first run."
Sparc Station? (Score:5, Funny)
If he was a Sun admin, I would wager it wasn't the cigarettes.
Geek funeral? (Score:5, Informative)
Everybody knows that geeks want to be frozen until the day that they can be made into cyborgs
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Geek funeral? (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.alcor.org/ [alcor.org] . My wife and I are both signed up for cryonic suspension. Even if the chances of success are low, they beat the pants off of the alternative!
Also, if I may tout my own unofficial FAQ: http://datan0de.livejournal.com/144534.html [livejournal.com]
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
signed up for cryonic suspension
What about the ice crystals destroying all your cell walls?
Re:Geek funeral? (Score:4, Informative)
Plants have cell walls. (it's what allows them to stand up) Animals, including homo sapiens, have cell membranes only.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Even their name, "Alcor Life Extension Foundation" is completley dishonest. They sell death suspension perhaps, but saying they provide life extension is a flat out lie.
Re:Geek funeral? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Geek funeral? (Score:5, Interesting)
Sorry, your FAQ isn't very convincing. Firstly, you're screwing over any possible dependents by making Alcor your insurance beneficiary. Unless you want to pay for two life insurance policies, you're screwing over your kids/family/whomever on some hare-brained scheme for some infinitely small chance that you might "live" again in the future. Selfish at best, unless you are wealthy.
Then there's your certainty that the company will survive for the hundreds or thousands of years it will take for technology to be at the point where they can revive you. That's incredibly unlikely, since no company in history has survived for that long (your arguments about financial stability are laughable, since there will almost certainly be several currency devaluations and government, society, and world upheavals in that period). I put the chances of you actually staying frozen for 1000 years at basically zero.
And then you think that they would bother to revive you. That too is staggeringly unlikely. Sure, they would revive a few people just to prove that it can be done. But after that, why would they bother? There'll be tens or hundreds of billions of humans around, do you really think they'll need more? They got a couple hundred thousand dollars 1000 years ago to keep you frozen, do you really think they would go to the significant expense and effort to revive you, and then reverse your aging as well? Why would they bother? There's no more incentive for them to do that at all (altruism, don't make me laugh). Even if they've conquered aging by then, that's not at all the same as reversing the aging process, and will most likely not be trivial.
Finally, what I don't understand is this certainty that being frozen and revived beats the pants off being dead. How could you possibly know that? No one knows. Maybe if you were properly dead you'd be in heaven (not that I believe in that). Instead you get to spend the next thousand years being really freaking cold. Or maybe death would be oblivion (more likely) and you couldn't form any opinion of it since you can't think, so it's not bad, or good, or anything really.
Re:Geek funeral? (Score:5, Interesting)
The Hudson Bay Company lasted that long. 339 years and still going actually.
But there are many other companies that have existed for much longer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kong%C5%8D_Gumi [wikipedia.org]
That one survived for more than 1000 years. So yes, I think it's reasonable to assume that a company can survive, or at the very least, can ensure the safety of uhm... yourself. Just ensure that a legally binding contract ensures that you'll be kept for X amount of time. It's happened before. Guinness has a lease on its brewery for several thousand years. A contract like this can ensure that buyers of the company you originally signed up with will keep you going.
However, I agree with most everything else you said. I'm just saying... your second point is invalid.
Re: (Score:3)
Technically you're correct, but of course, these companies are actually doing something useful
Re:Geek funeral? (Score:5, Interesting)
Then there's your certainty that the company will survive for the hundreds or thousands of years it will take for technology to be at the point where they can revive you. That's incredibly unlikely, since no company in history has survived for that long (your arguments about financial stability are laughable, since there will almost certainly be several currency devaluations and government, society, and world upheavals in that period). I put the chances of you actually staying frozen for 1000 years at basically zero.
The oldest company in the world reached well over 1400 years before it fell to hard times. Link [wikipedia.org]. Other old companies can be found here [wikipedia.org].
And even if we were to accept your argument of losing money over long-term (which history has shown to be false, even during turbulent times such as these), the value of gold has stayed fairly same for most of the human existence.
However, I'm not sure about the chances of getting resurrected, but that's a whole other subject right there.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In other words, they have the money invested, probably in low-risk form as we are talking of hundreds of years. It isn't bound to be melting away in a few moments :)
If you're investing over a long term, a wide portfolio of high risk investments tends to work better. Despite the chance of your investment losing a large amount of it's value in a market crash, there is also plenty of time for it to recover that value again. This is how pensions usually work - as you get closer to your retirement, your investment is moved into low risk investments since you can no longer afford the time for it to recover.
Re:Geek funeral? (Score:5, Insightful)
You're making quite a few presumptions here. I'll try to take your main points one at a time, and will ignore the ad hominems and obvious trolling:
* I'm not screwing anybody over. I have no children and no plans to have any. My wife and I both established *plenty* of life insurance long before making any cryonics arrangements. If I go down tomorrow my wife is well taken care of, and vice versa. The separate policies that cover our cryosuspension are just that- separate. And no, we're not wealthy by any means- at least compared with the average non-student slashdotter. I suspect you're grossly overestimating the cost of cryonic suspension and the cost of an insurance policy for a healthy non-smoker in his early 30's.
* You may find my assessment of the Patient Care Trust's financial stability "laughable", but I find the idea that it'll take 1000 years for us to obtain control over matter at the molecular level patently absurd. Eric Drexler estimates that it'll happen within our lifetimes (or at least my lifetime), and the trends in nanotech development point to him being not too far off. Even if he's wildly optimistic, I suspect that nothing short of a global cataclysm will keep us from reaching that goal in this century, and I'm willing to bet my life on that. (And as I mention in the FAQ, if a global cataclysm does happen then we're all SOL anyway.)
* Why would they bother to revive us? Again, I covered this in the FAQ. The PCT is under contractual obligation, and one of the requirements to be on the board of directors is that you have to have a family member already in the tank, so they have a vested interest in their well-being. Why does anyone help anyone in a critical medical situation? You can call the question naive if you like, but the fact is that people do help each other. If nothing else, it's likely that anyone who does get revived will be highly motivated to rescue their fellow cryonauts. (I base this statement on my personal interactions with over 2 dozen Alcor members, every one of whom would take that position.)
If you prefer to disregard basic human empathy entirely, and are looking for a completely economic/rational reason, as technology continues to improve and spread eventually the cost of reviving patients will be less than the cost of maintaining their stasis.
* I'll disregard your conjecture about the future population levels in "1000 years", as well as your incorrect assessment of the cost of cryosuspension, but I will point out that defeating aging is far less of a challenge than reviving a vitrified person. Assuming that the revived person is instantiated in a "meat body" (which is not a given), undoing age-related damage will likely be a side effect of undoing suspension-related damage. In fact, I can scarcely imagine a scenario where that wouldn't be the case.
* I don't know that being revived will be better than being dead, but a society that's a living hell is a society that won't be in a position to revive cryonics patients. And if nothing else, being revived gives me the ability to make that decision for myself. If I'm revived and for some reason prefer oblivion then I can simply find something large and fast moving to step in front of. If I rot in the ground then I rob myself of any control over my fate. (And for the record, I don't believe in Heaven either, so that argument is a waste of time.)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Speak for yourself, I want all my corporal remains* to be donated to medical science, anything that is left should be used as fertiliser. I really don't get the point of this cremation bullshit waste of good nutrients I say!
*my brain patterns should be backed up to for future reference, I'll take a fully cybernetic body over your crappy hybrid any day!
Re:Geek funeral? (Score:5, Insightful)
I want nothing left of my corpse.
Give any useful organs away. Let a child see a sunset through my corneas; let my heart break again in the ribcage of a teenager; let my lungs have their breath taken away when holding a new infant.
My skeleton can inspire and educate biology students. My brain can shed new light on diseases, either ones I don't know I have yet or as a control group.
When I'm dead, I'm done with the meatsack. Anyone who wants it can have it.
Re:Sparc Station? (Score:5, Funny)
Good way to go (Score:5, Insightful)
Remembered as in life, not as the struggle through the end.
I'm sure your brother appreciates the sentiment.
Looks awesome!! (Score:2)
The ultimate case mod: is that the magic smoke I see coming out of your computer?
I don't know about you guys... (Score:4, Funny)
but I want a bunch of screaming Klingons at mine.
Re: (Score:2)
but I want a bunch of screaming Klingons at mine.
Yeah best not to leave any remains at all.
Not far off... (Score:5, Interesting)
I think I should clarify with him whether he wants someone to recite Kirk's speech, or have that video played.
Re:Not far off... (Score:4, Informative)
My father actually has it written that he wants bagpipe music and Admiral Kirk's speech about Spock from Wrath Of Khan at his funeral. If we can find a casket that looks like a photon torpedo, so much the better. I think I should clarify with him whether he wants someone to recite Kirk's speech, or have that video played.
What you want is this company's cocoon model coffin: http://www.uono.de/english/home.html [www.uono.de]
Re:Not far off... (Score:4, Informative)
I believe you're looking for Eternal Image's Star Trek Casket [eternalimage.net], inspired by the scene you describe.
fitting (Score:5, Insightful)
Well done. My sentiments to those left in the away team. Live long and prosper
I'm signed up to have my head put in cryostorage.. (Score:2)
... which IMHO is about the geekiest funeral there is. (Think "the intent of the pyramids" but with stainless steel dewars and liquid nitrogen condensation fog.)
They can do what they want with the rest of my body once I'm done with it.
And who knows - there's some slight chance they WILL figure out how to download the person from a frozen-head-saved-game into a new model body (or fix the cracks in the brain, implant it in a cloned corpus, and restart it) - and somebody will think it's worthwhile to try it w
Re: (Score:2)
Not everyone can afford to have a proper geek burial
Re:I'm signed up to have my head put in cryostorag (Score:5, Interesting)
It's already in my will that way, changed from 'cremate me, mix my ashes with 6 oz of the best weed my estate can score, and smoke me in my fave bar' that I had in it in my 20's. Guess I'm getting old...
Re: (Score:2)
Not everyone can afford to have a proper geek burial
It's not all that expensive - especially if you sign up young.
For instance: ALCOR: You buy an insurance policy to cover the costs of the actual suspension and storage ($800ish/year for me - will depend on how old you are when you sign up) and pay your dues ($400/yr) and standby fee (your share of keeping the ambulance and such ready) ($120/year). $1400ish a year is not chump change. But it doesn't take a millionaire to do it either.
Re: (Score:2)
You really need to read "Rammer" [fantasticfiction.co.uk] by Larry Niven.
What to do with our corporeal remains (Score:5, Interesting)
When we die our remains will be nothing more than a snapshot of the atoms we occupied right before we died. Had we lived a year longer, a good proportion of those atoms would have been replaced with new material we drank, ate and breathed in through the year. It is as if living is a type of standing wave through which matter flows.
My point? I wouldn't care what happened to my remains. I was a wave, and all that remains of me are ripples left behind in a shared pool of memories.
Re:What to do with our corporeal remains (Score:5, Funny)
**Tooooooooooooooooooooke**
Re:What to do with our corporeal remains (Score:5, Insightful)
I wouldn't care what happened to my remains. I was a wave, and all that remains of me are ripples left behind in a shared pool of memories.
Well, in most cases, my opinion is that treating remains in a certain way helps families say goodbye.
So, of course you don't care what happens to your remains, but it's not *for* you. Whatever ceremony greets your departure from this earth is primarily for your family. So, you should at least care about your funeral for your family's sake. This is the main chance for them to say goodbye.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't care what happened to my remains. I was a wave, and all that remains of me are ripples left behind in a shared pool of memories.
Well, in most cases, my opinion is that treating remains in a certain way helps families say goodbye.
When I go I would prefer not to be used to promote somebodies stupid religion, which is what happened to my wife's father.
Having endured that funeral I reckon dying in the wild and having your body eaten by animals would be more dignified.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Now as for how I'd like to be sent along... well, I figure I've ate so many animals and destroyed so many tree's and generally caused a hefty footprint on this world. My present thought on burial... (whic
Re: (Score:2)
Bull. There is only one appropriate way to go, Viking ship funeral pyre.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Dude, I read that as:
and all that remains of me are nipples left behind
I was left wondering what kind of weird donor card you must be carrying.
Got to get some sleep...
Re: (Score:2)
RIP (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm sorry for your loss (Score:2, Insightful)
As to the assholes who posted below me, SHAME ON YOU! You should be respectful to people in such an important time. Seriously, do you feel that a few good laughs is worth this embarrassment? Grow up.
Re:I'm sorry for your loss (Score:4, Insightful)
If we can't laugh at death, then we are truly dead.
Just imagine a beowulf cluster of these! (Score:5, Funny)
Would that count as a zombie botnet?
*ducks*
RIP
Other Geek options (Score:5, Informative)
There are several more traditional geek options. You can donate your brain to the Harvard Brain Tissue Resource Center [mclean.org] and get their cool "I'm going to Harvard!" card. Plastination is a pretty interesting option as well. There's also the more generic "donate to science" option, which usually means you get to help train the next doctors going through Gross Anatomy. I have to recommend the book "Stiff: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers" for more information. It's really a hilarious read and very educational.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'm donating my organs. They can give my brain to some motorcycle rider.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
My minty Sinistar arcade game = open casket for me (Score:5, Interesting)
Then genius struck: remove the monitor (and I guess the boards too - let another collector use 'em), slap my lifeless remains in there so my face is right behind the glass, and BOOM, we have the makings of a great open-casket for what will surely be a somber wake.
Extra points for the nerdy friend who manages to get the game's synthesized voice to occasionally cry out BEWARE! I live! [whoopis.com].
Re:My minty Sinistar arcade game = open casket for (Score:2)
I had to carry 1/6th of my father in law + casket a couple of weeks ago. I suggest you make sure your proposed coffin is either light in weight, or equipped with wheels and power. My back still hurts.
No Subject (Score:2, Funny)
Dude, you're getting a Dell!
Re:No Subject (Score:5, Funny)
Oh come on, it's:
Dell, you're getting a dude!
My plan? (Score:3, Interesting)
Last words? Hmmmmmmm....
Lay low and look nifty.
or...
Don't be cruel.
Yeah. An Elvis quote. Just cuz I roll like that.
RS
Cute... (Score:2)
Reminds me of a similar geek funeral.
Albeit for a dog but...
http://www.videogameobsession.com/personal/bo_neogeo/index.htm [videogameobsession.com]
I guess a NeoGeo home cartridge is better than a silly urn. More useful than the fatal fury guts that was in there in the first place.
(IF it was RB FF, FF2, FF3, RB FF2 or RB Special, sure, blasphemy. But it's FF*1*)
Silicon heaven (Score:2)
have to ask (Score:2)
Does he run Linux?
As an alternative... (Score:4, Interesting)
Powder his ashes into an ultrafine dust, mix with iron pigment, and print ASCII art with him on acid free paper. Once he's done being printed, anyone who loved or respected him could take a piece of him with them, mount, frame, and proudly display in their respective data centers... could a bit basher ask for any possible better fate?
Very sorry to hear about your loss, Sam .. (Score:5, Insightful)
.. but what you did here was really awesome.
Funerals and memorials should be about celebrating a person's life, not mourning a person's death. It appears that you and your brother both had a whimsical sense of humor, and that you were able to harness that and put together a very unique tribute that captured the essence of what he loved in life. I don't know how or when I'm going to go (nor do I want to) but when that time comes, I'd love to think that my family will be as creative and thoughtful as you were here.
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:4, Insightful)
I need my smokes to get through work
Not really, you don't. It's a choice. There are other ways.
My smokes pay for the roads, education, utilities...
If I had my way, they wouldn't. Every cent earned on cigarette taxes would go towards a public anti-smoking campaign. If drugs were legalized and taxed, all the money made from the taxes would also go towards a public anti-drug campaign.
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:5, Funny)
Not really, you don't. It's a choice. There are other ways.
Homicide is illegal in most countries.
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:5, Funny)
Homicide is illegal in most countries.
We should legalize it, tax it, and spend all the money earned towards an anti-homicide campaign.
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:5, Insightful)
Next up, we legalize gay marriage, tax it, and spend the revenue on a public anti-homosexuality campaign.
Seriously, why can't people just mind their own business?
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, why can't people just mind their own business?
It's not surprising that someone arguing in favor of smoking is having a hard time understanding that smoking doesn't impact ONLY the smoker. Sure is disappointing, though.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
So, my new neighbours are heavy smokers. The prevailing winds blow their smoke straight into my house. Given your maxim that nobody should be able to tell anyone else how to live their life - so I can't dicate they give up smoking and they can't dictate I install air filters or a giant windbreak or move elsewhere - what solution does the wise prince propose that still lets my family have clean air?
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:5, Interesting)
All of those things put vastly more stuff into the air than my cigarettes do.
Have you ever blown into an automotive gas analyser? One lungful of cigarette smoke contains as much unburnt hydrocarbon as a 1988 Volvo 340 produces in three minutes of running at 2500rpm.
Not to mention, you can actually *see* as well as smell cigarette smoke. You can't see (or shouldn't be able to see) car exhaust gases, and they don't really have much of a smell unless your engine is broken.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Sure is disappointing you couldn't figure this out: the simplest way to avoid second hand smoke is to not hang around people who are smoking. Problem solved.
And the solution of in making sure you don't get robbed in the street is to make sure that you are not near any robbers?
Instead of that, how about making sure that smokers don't smoke when there are non-smokers nearby? Why do the smokers have the greater right to pollute their immediate surroundings, instead of non-smokers rights of enjoying air that is not filled with carcinogens?
Smokers right to smoke should end where non-smokers lungs begin. Yes, that would mean banning smoking in public places.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, and your right to talk should end where my ears begin.
My talking doesn't inflict cancer or heart disease on others, or aggravate conditions like asthma, like secondhand smoke does. Talking doesn't cause others to smell like shit, like secondhand smoke does. Generally speaking, smokers should keep their habit to themselves, unless in the company of people who don't mind it. Covering others with the waste product of your habit is rude. That's the reason beer drinkers don't usually pee all over you.
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:4, Informative)
No study has ever found a statistically significant risk of cancer due to 2nd hand smoke exposure.
http://www.lungusa.org/site/pp.asp?c=dvLUK9O0E&b=35422 [lungusa.org]
"The current Surgeon Generalâ(TM)s Report concluded that scientific evidence indicates that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke. Short exposures to secondhand smoke can cause blood platelets to become stickier, damage the lining of blood vessels, decrease coronary flow velocity reserves, and reduce heart rate variability, potentially increasing the risk of heart attack."
"Secondhand smoke has been classified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a known cause of cancer in humans (Group A carcinogen)."
"Secondhand smoke exposure causes disease and premature death in children and adults who do not smoke. Secondhand smoke contains hundreds of chemicals known to be toxic or carcinogenic, including formaldehyde, benzene, vinyl chloride, arsenic ammonia and hydrogen cyanide."
"Research indicates that private research conducted by cigarette company Philip Morris in the 1980s showed that secondhand smoke was highly toxic, yet the company suppressed the finding during the next two decades."
And so forth. This isn't rocket-science people!
And even if we assume that there is no risk when exposed to second hand smoke, what rights do smokers have to expose others to smoke that smells like shit, makes clothes smell like shit, makes other cough and generally feel bad etc. etc.? By that logic I should have the right to carry exposed septic-tanks in subway. Sure, it might smell bad, but there's no harm, right? Therefore others have no right to tell me what to do.
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:5, Informative)
"The current Surgeon Generalâ(TM)s Report concluded that scientific evidence indicates that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke. Short exposures to secondhand smoke can cause blood platelets to become stickier, damage the lining of blood vessels, decrease coronary flow velocity reserves, and reduce heart rate variability, potentially increasing the risk of heart attack."
None of which has anything to do with cancer.
"Secondhand smoke has been classified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a known cause of cancer in humans (Group A carcinogen)."
Which is largely a political action, not a scientific one. The study which the EPA cited to support this ruling has been roundly debunked [google.com].
Secondhand smoke exposure causes disease and premature death in children and adults who do not smoke
Where's the study that shows it increases cancer risk? I'm not denying that it's harmful. It's clear that it does cause disease. It's just not clear that it causes cancer.
Secondhand smoke contains hundreds of chemicals known to be toxic or carcinogenic, including formaldehyde, benzene, vinyl chloride, arsenic ammonia and hydrogen cyanide."
Everything contains carcinogens. Including that burger you grilled. Showing that something contains carcinogens is not the same as showing that it causes cancer.
And so forth. This isn't rocket-science people!
No, it's health science which is significantly more complicated than rocket science. That's why it's important to make accurate claims. Argue that 2nd hand smoke is harmful, but do so with real data.
By that logic I should have the right to carry exposed septic-tanks in subway.
I wouldn't argue that anyone should be trapped in an enclosed space with a smoker. But if you choose to go someplace where the owner has allowed smoking, you really shouldn't complain. Smoking bans in public places are a good idea. Smoking bans in private establishments are not.
Re: (Score:2)
If I had my way, they wouldn't. Every cent earned on cigarette taxes would go towards a public anti-smoking campaign. If drugs were legalized and taxed, all the money made from the taxes would also go towards a public anti-drug campaign.
I'd be more impressed if it went to healthcare.
And honestly, is walking past a smoker more "leathal" than walking past a car or a bus?
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:5, Insightful)
Surely a recommendation to not do what recently (and slowly, and no doubt unpleasantly) killed your brother in a post about his funeral arrangements isn't on the same level as cheap moralistic point-scoring.
It's like comparing a Jack Thompson op-ed hit piece to a a eulogy for some kid who was shot for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
For the record, I think that anti-smoking campaigning took on a distasteful moralistic tone some time ago; but the notion that you can't mention the subject after watching your brother die slowly of it seems a bit much.
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:5, Insightful)
Please don't ever have a family. My wife had a father who smoked like a chimney, and now she's saddled with serious asthma and allergies which cause her real medical problems, simply because of his selfishness. If you dislike life so much you want to cut your own short, be my guest, but don't condemn anyone else to the same fate.
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:5, Insightful)
It is possible to quit. If you won't work on the problems in your life that make you smoke, and you're subjecting someone else to your secondhand smoke, then fuck you. I don't care how addicted you think you are; it might be true, but it's no excuse for making anyone else breathe your nasty smoke. I say this as a repeat quitter (over a year this time so far though) and when I smoked, I did my best to get downwind. Your right to clean air supersedes my right to feed my monkey.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If only everyone was so thoughtful- I'm 6 months pregnant now and it's amazing the smokers I know who rant and rave about how terrible women are who smoke while pregnant (I have never smoked in my life, personally)... But then insist on smoking while standing right next to me, or in the same house as me. I walk away, every time, but they act so clueless. Like it's suddenly so much better because it's second hand smoke instead? Thank you for being considerate.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You didn't quit, you probably paused. (smoker since my 14 th, umptieth time pauser, this hopefully pausing till endoflife)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
As an ex-smoker I can confirm that it's almost impossible to quit for long if your partner is constantly lighting up. Temptation is always right under your nose, so to speak.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you crazy? I'd much rather be killed by a falling rack than by smoking. Much quicker (although not necessarily painless, depends how it falls), leaves an interesting story for future generations, and chances are it'll have a much better payout for those that you leave behind from some sort of workers comp or wrongful death case.
And the company would probably rename the server to Black Widow.
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:5, Insightful)
Look, the guy probably died from lung cancer or some other complication that resulted from smoking. The dangers of smoking are well known, even and especially to smokers. Give the grieving family member a break for putting in an anti-smoking message into the write-up. You might think smoking is great and gets you through the day, but if you leave this world due to some smoking complication, I doubt the grieving members of your family that you leave behind are going to give a crap about the roads you helped build with a couple bucks in tobacco taxes seeing as how you're no longer with them.
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:5, Insightful)
The dangers of cheeseburgers are also well known, but I don't hear families whose loved ones die of heart disease feel the need to get on soapboxes when people die of heart disease. Why is Mickey-D's acceptable, and Marlboro's worth offering advice on?
I realize people get a lot of slack when a family member dies, and should. But I can certainly understand why smokers get a bit tired when complete strangers feel the need to offer off-the-cuff advice against smoking (as if smokers didn't realize it's unhealthy).
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:5, Interesting)
The dangers of cheeseburgers are also well known, but I don't hear families whose loved ones die of heart disease feel the need to get on soapboxes when people die of heart disease.
You either are not a fat guy or you don't have a family that gives a damn. Fat guys do get hassled. Now you can quit smoking altogether. You can quit drinking alcohol altogether. You can quit drugs altogether. You can't quit eating altogether without death following in short order. Unlike cravings for drugs/alcohol/cigarettes hunger for food is normal and natural and not something you want to curve. Also people have very different hunger drives and metabolise their food very differently. Makes food one of the hardest addictions.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Because when you eat a hamburger it has no effect on anyone else.
When you smoke you're forcing other people to breathe in your smoke, and forcing them to deal with that awful smell that you're soaked in.
People usually don't complain about smokers because they're worried about them killing themselves early, they complain because they themselves don't want to be killed early and made uncomfortable due to not being able to breathe fresh air in the meantime by a smoker.
If smokers want to fuck themselves over fi
Re: (Score:2)
It's not the nicotine, it's the smo-o-o-o-oke
fa-a-a-a-a-il [doi.org]
P.S. Where do you think you get the nicotine? Though you can pick up many of the nasty compounds in cigarettes by touching surfaces in a smoker's home, usually, it's in the smoke. Did you mean the tar? Or perhaps one of the dozens of other compounds often added to cigarettes, and found in some form in the smoke?
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:5, Insightful)
TFS didn't put anyone down for smoking and it didn't suggest we tax smokers, all it said was *don't smoke*. Which is actually pretty good advice.
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:5, Insightful)
Do we need the anti-smoking jab
I don't know. If your sister died due to liver-failure as a result of alcoholism, wouldn't it be understandable if you disliked alcohol?
If one of my siblings died as a result of an addiction to cigarettes, I believe I too would warn people about the risks of smoking.
I don't believe it's a jab, either, just harsh reality.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:5, Interesting)
That's not really a fair argument. After all, who ever died from not smoking?
It's a perfectly fair argument. If you die from a smoking-related illness, then you have smoking to blame for your death. If you die from an obesity-related illness, then you have too many cheeseburgers to blame for your death.
Are you going to suggest that, if someone dies from a smoking-related illness, it doesn't matter because they would have died someday anyway? Well, sure, if that's the attitude, then just shoot heroin while you're driving the wrong direction on the freeway. When you die, however, be prepared for your family to resent your callous disregard for the consequences of drug abuse and reckless driving.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not really a fair argument. After all, who ever died from not smoking?
I know I didn't! See, that's 100% of respondents right there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Who modded that pissed-off smoker flamebait? Oh! I see what you did there ...
Re:Do we need the anti-smoking jab (Score:4, Insightful)
So did I, for many years. Then one day I got pissed off at being addicted and kicked it, with no assistance (chemical or otherwise).
The most important thing is wanting to give up. If you don't want to, then don't bother. It's your choice, after all.
Re: (Score:2)
Will you people stop complaining about moderation! Moderators are just people who make comments. They are then given mod points randomly. So You can moderate: Just make a few logical comments and you'll get a good Karma, and you'll then get mod points every few months. If you really want them, then go an meta-moderate a few times, and you'll get them more often.
Then you can start complaining about YOURSELF!
Re: (Score:2)
But I'm worried that cremation has destroyed his chance to be resurrected in body at the Rapture.
Don't worry, an all powerful god would have foreseen this development and made backup provisions. Like many old programmers, he just burned out, and went into hibernation mode.
He's one with the Father and the Sun. Who could ask for more?
MOD PARENT FUNNY (Score:2)
The first sentence is way too stupid if it's not funny.
Re: (Score:2)
The second sentence ("He looks like a great family man[...]") is even funnier if the only picture of him you've seen is what he looks like now [flickr.com]. Let's see, his parents are VME SPARCs while his grandfolks are 68k VME (I hear his uncle was a 3/370) and his kids are SS10s and 20s... in another generation they'll have Hypersparcs, and his great-great grandkids will basically be mediocre PCs with UltraSPARC processors and PCI buses. From the look of that plaque, though, there's a NeXT in the... oh, somebody stop
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You have to know SPARC hardware a little bit to know that that box is already infinitely outdated. I have many outdated sparc machines much newer and more powerful than that. I can't decide if that makes them better or worse as a place to store my ashes one day. Probably worse.
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Insightful)
Here was a person, who existed in a quite definite span of time and space, who was (no doubt) strongly formed by that time and place, and who now exists only as a period artifact and in the memory of others who shared some of that time.
If we were timeless, we wouldn't need funerals.
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Insightful)
The hardware is outdated now. It is a Sparcstation IPC with a 25Mhz CPU. They started making those in about 1990.
It is geek history and a far better thing to be buried in then an fiberglass and steel coffin.
If I have to be placed in anything but the raw dirt it is not a bad choice.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget to put his red stapler in the coffin.
Re: (Score:2)
Any time I see the words magnesium and bright I get the urge to burn something....but you took it a different direction!