×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

125 comments

drug sniffing? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37676822)

Drug sniffing dogs? Neat. Now all we need to do is find something useful for them to do, you know, other than help destroy the lives of kind nonviolent people.

Re:drug sniffing? (1)

Antarius (542615) | more than 2 years ago | (#37676846)

Nah, they only sniff the drugs for leisure - recreational use. They have the Charlie Sheen gene in there somewhere.

Re:drug sniffing? (1)

FatdogHaiku (978357) | more than 2 years ago | (#37679640)

They have the Charlie Sheen gene in there somewhere.

So... that guy really does like the bitches...
I suppose there should be a furry joke tossed in now.

Re:drug sniffing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677522)

Nonviolent? Have you seen what happens when the chips run out? Sheer carnage man...

Dogs are old hat! (2)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 2 years ago | (#37676832)

Bees are where it's at [telegraph.co.uk]

Re:Dogs are old hat! (1)

AdmiralXyz (1378985) | more than 2 years ago | (#37679090)

Since it's Korea, I guess this is attributable to narcotics enforcement officers all being old people.

Power (2)

Tsingi (870990) | more than 2 years ago | (#37676852)

They should use their powers for good. Give every child a clone of Lassie.

Re:Power (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37676864)

Clone Natalie Portman so every slashdotter can have one!

Re:Power (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37676876)

I suspect that there wouldn't be many left slashdotting afterwards..

Re:Power (1)

johnsnails (1715452) | more than 2 years ago | (#37676942)

Depends... is it Natalie as she appeared in V for Vendetta or as she appeared in Black Swan? Just asking...

Re:Power (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677540)

As she appeared in Leon.

(Just a joke, but posting it anon anyway)

Re:Power (1)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677082)

What is it with geeks and the thin 12 year old boy look?

Re:Power (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677300)

What is it with fat girls always pretending that hot girls look like 12 year old boys? Nobody is falling for it but you.

Face it, hot thin girls have the classic feminine hourglass figure. Boobs. (not huge ones, but huge ones are sloppy and unattractive anyway) Pretty faces. Nicely shaped toned asses and legs. 12 year old boys have none of these.

Now compare a fat girl and a fat guy. Sloppy manboobs? Check and check. Lumpy gender neutral asses? Check and check. In fact, forget the ass, this is true for entire bodies. The main difference is the face and genitalia, otherwise its hard to tell fat male and female bodies apart.

Thin people are more attractive to the majority of people, and only delusional fat people think otherwise.

Re:Power (0)

wisty (1335733) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677470)

>> The main difference is the face and genitalia, otherwise its hard to tell fat male and female bodies apart.

Unless there's facial hair involved (and even then ..), the faces are similar. It's the hairdo and cheap makeup that make the difference. As for genitalia, if we are talking *massive*, you might need to peel back the apron to see for sure.

Re:Power (0)

Tsingi (870990) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677586)

Women go ga-ga over six packs. In order to have a six pack you have to have an absolutely lean body with no fat on it. That and do quite a few situps every day.

I highly recommend developing one at least once in your life. It's worth the effort, and anyone can do it.

In any event, I agree. The 12 year old boy comments come from women who think men should love them for their minds. These are the same women who go ga-ga over six packs.

Re:Power (0)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677758)

I highly recommend developing one at least once in your life. It's worth the effort, and anyone can do it.

What about those of us with potato-bodies who have the easy weight gain + difficult weight loss combo that women at least act like they have, and seem to be incapable of developing any muscle mass?

Re:Power (0)

Tsingi (870990) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677804)

What about those of us with potato-bodies who have the easy weight gain + difficult weight loss combo that women at least act like they have, and seem to be incapable of developing any muscle mass?

Maybe you should stop eating at McDonalds. Eating good food is a prerequisite to being healthy.

Re:Power (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677866)

I've probably eaten less than one McDonald's meal per year over my lifetime. I rarely eat fast food. I do eat a high proportion of various bachelor foods (TV dinner, ramen noodles, etc) but not much of it.

Re:Power (1)

Mister Whirly (964219) | more than 2 years ago | (#37679782)

As long as six packs of beer exist, I will never need a six pack on my abdomen to get women. Plus beer tastes better than exercise.

Words, what do they mean? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677902)

Have you ever seen an hourglass, you fuckwit? You sound the typical American who claimes to like big boobs, then picks the 34Bs ouf of the lineup.

Go back to your lolita porn.

Re:Words, what do they mean? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37679374)

Thin adult females look nothing like children. Go back to eating mayonnaise out of the jar or whatever it is bitter fat bitches like you normally do.

Re:Power (1)

fast turtle (1118037) | more than 2 years ago | (#37678512)

They all like Twiggy - Damn skin and bones are easier to hide (under bed/in closet). Sorry guys but I prefer some cusion for pushing, otherwise you risk bruising your nads.

Not much difference (3, Interesting)

hackertourist (2202674) | more than 2 years ago | (#37676874)

Pure-bred dogs are bred in such a small population that they were getting pretty close to being clones anyway.

Re:Not much difference (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677108)

There's a big difference between inbred and cloned.

Pure-bred dogs are inbred to the point of causing severe genetic deformities.

We don't look at the same inbreeding in humans and say "My, that's an interesting advancement in human cloning, isn't it?"

Re:Not much difference (1)

Tsingi (870990) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677630)

We don't look at the same inbreeding in humans and say "My, that's an interesting advancement in human cloning, isn't it?"

Why do we find foreign and mixed race women (/men) exotic?

We are naturally attracted because we can make excellent children with them. Shake up the gene pool.

Re:Not much difference (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677818)

[Same 'Anonymous Coward' as before so at this point I may have to create a full account!]

I meant 'inbreeding' as 'coming from the same family line'.
If i had a cat and it had kittens I wouldn't think that breeding a sister and brother from that litter with eachother would produce a 'clone' of the parent cat/ brother/ sister. That would be inbreeding, no matter what the species.

'Selective breeding' would be more in-line with what you're thinking and it a practice that works quite well. Just look at the Clydesdale horse, a testament to selective breeding.
Strong, reliable, immediately recognizable, and purpose bred- all of them can be traced back to Scotland in the 1800s (originating in an area called Clydesdale)
Now that really is an interesting advancement in horse breeding. But not in horse cloning.

Re:Not much difference (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37678016)

I meant 'inbreeding' as 'coming from the same family line'.
If i had a cat and it had kittens I wouldn't think that breeding a sister and brother from that litter with eachother would produce a 'clone' of the parent cat/ brother/ sister. That would be inbreeding, no matter what the species.

'Selective breeding' would be more in-line with what you're thinking and it a practice that works quite well. Just look at the Clydesdale horse, a testament to selective breeding.
Strong, reliable, immediately recognizable, and purpose bred- all of them can be traced back to Scotland in the 1800s (originating in an area called Clydesdale)
Now that really is an interesting advancement in horse breeding... But not in horse cloning.

Re:Not much difference (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37678792)

Properly bred purebreds do not have issues. The breeds are well in tact. Backyard breeders are the problem. Never buy from someone who doesn't show their dogs.

No factual difference if the genes are identical (1)

dutchwhizzman (817898) | more than 2 years ago | (#37678886)

How an embryo was formed is no longer significant, if inbreeds have 100% the same genes. Thats his point.

Re:No factual difference if the genes are identica (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37680438)

How an embryo was formed is no longer significant, if inbreeds have 100% the same genes. Thats his point.

Um no. I'm not sure how you even arrive at this assumption, because even someone completely ignorant of genetics should realize that a naturally conceived offspring can be both genders, while a clone will always be the same gender. But beyond that, you will get difference even beyond the sex chromosomes, because animals have two copies of genes. If the parents have (A, B), the offspring can have (A, A) (A, B) or (B, B), while the clone will always have (A, B). While the odds of being the same are 50% in a single instance, across the entire genome it is extremely unlikely that it would be so. Thus inbreeding identical (as can be) individuals will result in loss of genetic diversity, and the chances of getting rare recessive combinations increases greatly, whereas cloning will maintain the exact - known good - genome.

Have racehorses been cloned? (2)

wisebabo (638845) | more than 2 years ago | (#37676884)

They are the most expensive non-Human animals right? Other than perhaps extinct animals that people want to bring back like the Saber-tooth tiger, the wooly mammoth and the Dodo (not). What about truffle finding pigs?

Actually maybe certain transgenic animals that have had their DNA altered to express useful drugs (like goats with insulin laced milk) might be more expensive.

Anyway, is it illegal race a cloned racehorse? Will they be requiring genetic tests on all winning racehorses? What about race horses that have already died (Seabiscuit?).

Re:Have racehorses been cloned? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677184)

In most places they don't even allow racehorses to be bred by artificial insemination, they insist on live cover only.(*) That stops a few issues, swapping a whole stallion is harder than swapping a test-tube of semen, so it cuts down on fraud. Also, semen can be thinned and used to breed more mares, so the already rather inbred population would get even worse if everybody was breeding their mares to just a handful of top stallions. Natural breeding puts an upper limit on the number of foals you can get from one stallion. You could clone your horse if you wanted, but there's no way that horse would be allowed to be registered in the stud books, so you could never race it or breed other racehorses from it.

What I have seen proposed is allowing a gelding to be cloned, once, so that you have a genetically identical stallion which can be used to breed from in place of the gelding. Currently racehorse owners just see dollar signs hanging between their stallions legs, even though it takes years to find out if your stallion is one of the few that will actually make any money at stud after retiring from racing. Since stallions can be violently unpredictable animals, it would make racing safer if they could all be gelded at the start, and just the few that are worthwhile cloned for breeding.

Cloning famous past horses might be a disappointment anyway. Some of the record times those horses put in back then are routine these days. Although it would answer some questions about how much of that is improved training vs genetics.

* - There are exceptions. The local racing board here allows an exemption for stallions who've been injured in a manner that prevents breeding naturally. The exemptions are granted on a case by case basis, and the stallion has to be excited by the mare he's going to be bred to, with the semen is transferred to the mare within 5 minutes.

Re:Have racehorses been cloned? (1)

kzanol (23904) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677262)

Yes. Been done. Austrian showjumper Hugo Simon had a very successfull horse, E.T. Problem: it was a gelding which certainly made breeding the horse a challenge. Entry "E.T. Stallion", a clone of E.T wich was not used in competition, but was used for breeding. a couple of offspring of E.T. Stallion are said to be active at the moment. See http://www.cryozootech.com/index.php?m=the_horses&d=et_stallion_en&l=en [cryozootech.com]

Re:Have racehorses been cloned? (1)

crossmr (957846) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677550)

so you could never race it or breed other racehorses from it.

Because what? The police would arrest you? The racing overlords would have you killed?
What would stop anyone from setting up a competing race with their own rules?

Re:Have racehorses been cloned? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677670)

The police would arrest you? The racing overlords would have you killed?
What would stop anyone from setting up a competing race with their own rules?

1) No, someone much worse. See #2
2) The mafia (that controls horse racing) would rub you out, and half your county for good measure.
3) See #2.

Re:Have racehorses been cloned? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37679932)

I'm pretty sure you meant "snuff you out". The mafia isn't traditionally known for giving people handjobs.

Re:Have racehorses been cloned? (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677828)

Yeah you could set up some kind of unlimited league where anything goes, then start setting limits when too many jockeys get killed in high-speed doped-up genetically modified horse crashes. The Formula One of the horse world.

Meh, still boring...

Re:Have racehorses been cloned? (1)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677910)

I don't know that that would be the "Formula One" of the horse world. Formula One has been sanitized and sterilized so much over the last two decades that I suspect such a horse could almost out-run a Formula One car! ;)

F1 is about entertainment now- not the cutting edge technology and speed.

Re:Have racehorses been cloned? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37678132)

Well horse races make their money from gambling, and gambling is illegal in most US states with some states making exceptions for horse tracks. You'd have to look at the laws for the location you want to build your track, and probably have to lobby the local legislature. At which point the existing race industry's lobbyists will paint you as a mad scientist who wants to race genetically modified cybernetic death horses that could escape and destroy the world.

Re:Have racehorses been cloned? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677344)

"non-Human animals"?

You should stop considering yourself as an animal. Humans != animals.

Re:Have racehorses been cloned? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677426)

You would prefer to see humans classified as fungus perhaps? Or maybe as a type of metamorphic rock?

Re:Have racehorses been cloned? (1)

alexandre_ganso (1227152) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677490)

I wonder then why my fur and claws never stop growing, even when I don't use them, and why do I feel aroused when some girls passes around with a high pheromone level... Or why do I get hungry and have to take a shit every day.

Fact is, we are animals. And much more than most care to admit. The only difference, really, is that most animals are more selective about what they eat than us.

Re:Have racehorses been cloned? (1)

Inda (580031) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677682)

Pigs aren't used for finding truffles any more, they tend to eat them.

Dogs are better at the job, and they can be trained not to eat the goods.

And truffles can be farmed.

Just saying :)

Re:Have racehorses been cloned? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37679042)

I think they'd bring back Secretariat first. More samples to use too since (I think) he was one of very few horses to have his whole body buried when he died.

Still, don't cloned animals still have a variety of health problems? I mean, this dog could be an interesting case study but they should probably make sure they can keep clones healthy before they start relying on stuff like this.

Re:Have racehorses been cloned? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37679946)

Could you imagine a clone of Secretariat??or Affirmed??....wow..(they're long since deceased, but..)

I'm the horse racing authorities would put their foot down on racing cloned horses.

Of course, it's not all the horse....the fastest horse in the world can't win with a crappy jockey..

Labrador retriever (3, Informative)

Dark Lord of Ohio (2459854) | more than 2 years ago | (#37676894)

No wonder, they are they smartest dogs on this planet. And really good friends. And really kids friendly.

Re:Labrador retriever (1)

Inda (580031) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677640)

We had a male Labrador.

One day it decided to test its place on the ladder, and went for my mother.

My father reasserted his authority as alpha male, by means of a neck grab and shake, and that was the end of the situation.

Labradors are dogs; pack animals; and they play by their rules. Never underestimate a dog's potential, no matter what breed.

Re:Labrador retriever (0)

Dark Lord of Ohio (2459854) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677750)

This goes bit off topic but ok. I had three labs before this one. So it's my fourth. Never had any problems with them, except ruined shoes and stuff, but they do stupid things when they are young and full of energy. There are dogs who have "personality disorders", like we humans have. So maybe you were just out of luck or something went wrong when your dog was young pup. My labs never showed aggression, you have to work with your dog if you want to have perfect companion for your family. Thats why humans go to school, we learn that fighting with each other is bad thing and that violence is not always the way to solve problems. Without that we would probably never make it further than the Dark Ages. Same with dogs (not only labs) you will let them act stupid, they will.

Re:Labrador retriever (2)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 2 years ago | (#37678430)

Yes, yes, $(YOUR_FAVOURITE_BREED) is a proud, noble dog. Alert, intelligent, sociable, $(YOUR_FAVOURITE_BREED) is a loyal companion if correctly raised. Behavioural problems with $(YOUR_FAVOURITE_BREED) are inevitably the fault of the owner.

Save it for Wikipedia, where thanks to gushing starry eyed defensive owners, every other breed page reads exactly like $(YOUR_FAVOURITE_BREED)'s page.

Re:Labrador retriever (2)

Dark Lord of Ohio (2459854) | more than 2 years ago | (#37679340)

Yes, my dog is proud, inteligent, loyal and you don't have such friend and you will never have, unless you have Nintendo DS/DSi/3DS and will get yourself and play Nintendogs.

Re:Labrador retriever (1)

dargaud (518470) | more than 2 years ago | (#37679460)

Well, my dog is gentle but very dumb. Yells a lot at passing people but strangely if we aren't around anybody can come to the house while she hides in the back of the garden. Great with kids and cats though. Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's a dog.

Re:Labrador retriever (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37679258)

We had one. He was batshit crazy. Bit me on one occasion (unprovoked) and tried several other times.

Of course there will (2)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#37676898)

Monsanto has already patented their GMOs. Silly to ask if somethings goign to happen when it's already done.

Re:Of course there will (2)

sosume (680416) | more than 2 years ago | (#37676932)

Impossible, the prior art is obvious! In the case of Monsanto one could argue that the seeds have been specifically engineered. However, in this case, it is a direct clone of a naturally bred dog. You cannot get a patent on a copy?

Re:Of course there will (1)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677002)

It would be a debatable point if you're patenting a particular expression of genes, as every non-cloned individuals genome is unique and therefore has no "prior art." Genetics are a very specific expression of something compared most modern patents.

However, I do believe there was some discussion in the UN about banning patents on genomes, but I don't know what ever came out of those discussions. I'm sure if they did the smart thing and decided to ban patenting natural genomes that the corporate world will appeal and fire a rather large team of lawyers at the issue rather than accept that they can't own something.

Re:Of course there will (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677036)

Or just de-naturalise the genome.

1. Take prize-winning animal.

2. Take sample cell.

3. Make some small but patentable modification. Doesn't have to do much.

4. Incinerate original animal, to make sure the competition can't get their hands on it.

5. Start mass-cloneing your slightly modified and thus patent-protected genome.

We've been doing that in plants for years (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37676922)

With avocados, oranges, and lots of other fruits.
I'm still not sure if I would like to clone my dog, since I will have to re train him anyway...

Questionable at best. (0)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 2 years ago | (#37676988)

Considering that recent, careful studies have shown that the abilities of drug-sniffing dogs are little more than police wet dreams anyway, the efficacy of the "clones" has to be questioned too.

In most cases, the dogs responded to cues (intentional or not) on the part of the dog's handler, rather than any actual detection of drugs. Double-blind studies have shown how effective they actually are in the real world, which is... not.

Re:Questionable at best. (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 2 years ago | (#37676998)

I mean, come on, folks. Korea is claiming performance in the cloned dogs that has never been proven in the original dogs. If they are correct, it would have to be some kind of magic.

Re:Questionable at best. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677000)

Thank you for providing a link to these studies!

Electronics aren't much better (2, Interesting)

msobkow (48369) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677030)

I remember the Toronto airport security testing out one of the electronic sniffers. It was supposed to be much more sensitive than dogs are.

The problem is, it was too sensitive. It turns out that after a few decades of smuggling, pretty much every surface in the baggage handling are has been exposed to drugs or explosives at some time or other, so the electronic sniffer kept going off.

When they turned down the sensitivity, it was no better than a dog.

Case in point: 90 percent of U.S. bils carry traces of cocaine. [cnn.com] The fact that a sniffer or a dog "goes off" only justifies further investigation; it's far from proof.

Re:Questionable at best. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677118)

That's why we should use cats instead: cats wouldn't respond to cues from the handler.

Re:Questionable at best. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677494)

It's obvious you don't like police, but dogs can and do detect drugs effectively.

In the part of the world I live in the police seem too busy looking for real druggies than waste time emitting useless cues about folks they dislike. If that's a problem your side of the world, get elected and fix your handler and dog training programs.

And no, owing an untrained dog from the shelter does not make one an expert on sniffer dogs. The training of sniffer dogs focuses them on detecting drugs, not responding to subconscious cues. If youve seen a confident dog sniffing you'd note they too are really too busy in their search to pay attention to subtle cues from their handler

Re:Questionable at best. (1)

Muad'Dave (255648) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677714)

...emitting useless cues about folks they dislike.

The cues they 'emit' do not have to be intentional - a reaction to seeing a particularly ugly piece of luggage or one that screams "conspicuous consumption" might set the dog off. You allude to that in the next sentence with the word 'subconscious'.

Re:Questionable at best. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37678964)

I agree. (am the original poster) my point is that the busier the handler is, and the more focussed on his job, the less likely he is to "emit" biased cues the dog would notice.

My second point is that a sniffer dog would be trained to focus on the sniffing, and not the biases of the handler ... the dog handler and dog trainer(s) are generally separate people

all that means... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677018)

...is that one day a drug cartel will create a genetically engineered virus that kills/disables those particular clones in order to defeat the detection. the big drug cartels outdo law enforcement in ingenuity and resources.

there's actually a story about how some american narco-cartel had their own IBM mainframe - while the agents trying to get them were relying on paper files

Copyright != Patent (1)

TenDollarMan (1307733) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677028)

Copyright is a different protection to patent.

A patent could protect a novel method of cloning. Ie, the specific way the geneticist uses his or her test tubes etc in the lab to get the clone. Wouldn't stop anyone breeding a sniffer dog.

A copyright cannot protect the clone. Unless the scientist actually wrote out the genome from his or her mind in some inspired supergenius way: GTTACCAATGCA....... Which is impossible.

Re:Copyright != Patent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677538)

Copyright also protects code that's not binary.

I guess they'll claim it the animal version of glutSolidTeapot.

Re:Copyright != Patent (1)

garyebickford (222422) | more than 2 years ago | (#37678204)

I am pretty sure that a particular clone set (clones of a particular dog) would be patentable, just as at present there are many patented varieties of roses and other plants, that result from selective breeding. (USPTO info on plant patents [uspto.gov]). In those cases they are effectively clones, having been created by making cuttings of the original plant. They are genetically identical. Patent would be stronger protection than copyright.

However, from my reading of the USPTO info, those patents apply to plants, not animals. I'm too lazy to research further. It may be that animal clones would have be to added to this patent structure by legislation in order to be patentable. Whether that is a good idea is an exercise for the reader. But I expect it will happen.

Do Cloned Drug-Sniffing Dogs Taste Better? (2, Funny)

SpaghettiPattern (609814) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677056)

How do they prove successful? Do Cloned Drug-Sniffing Dogs simply taste better?

Re:Do Cloned Drug-Sniffing Dogs Taste Better? (0)

catmistake (814204) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677106)

How do they prove successful? Do Cloned Drug-Sniffing Dogs simply taste better?

Well played, Sir.

Slamhound (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677092)

They sent a slamhound on Turner's trail in New Delhi, slotted it to his pheromones and the color of his hair. It caught up with him on a street called Chandni Chauk and came scrambling for his rented BMW through a forest of bare brown legs and pedicab tires. Its core was a kilogram of recrystallized hexogene and flaked TNT. He didn't see it coming. The last he saw of India was the pink stucco facade of a place called the Khush-Oil Hotel.

Count Zero (1986) William Gibson

Does this mean (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677100)

That long-winded dog names like SH CH VBOS The Kentuckian are going to have version numbers now? SH CH VBOS THE KENTUCKIAN v2.1: Bugs fixed with this release: Fleas.

Imagine... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677308)

... a Beowulf cluster of cloned drug-sniffing dogs...

The New Evolution (1)

ardeez (1614603) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677438)

This is the new evolution

If you're fit enough to serve humans' purpose, you get to survive to the next generation.

Pity those animals that currently don't.

Re:The New Evolution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37678982)

This is the new evolution

If you're fit enough to serve humans' purpose, you get to survive to the next generation.

Pity those animals that currently don't.

Um, where have you been for the last 12000 years?

Cows? Sheep? Chickens? Do you think these creatures just sprung into existence in the perfect form for human exploitation?
Meat and dairy cows have been selectively bred (The 'best' [for some farmer defined value of 'best'] cows are allowed to have calves, the others are prevented from breeding) for ages.

Dogs used to be wolves until they were selectively bred to be tolerant and loyal to their human handlers. We've been doing this shit for a long time already.

I'm going to guess they have the same issues (1)

tlambert (566799) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677500)

I'm going to guess they have the same issues as other clones, to wit: shortened telomeres resulting in a shortened Hayflick limit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayflick_limit [wikipedia.org] and therefore a shortened lifespan. Subtract out the age of the dog at the time the samples used for cloning were taken.

I made this same point (to NBC) as a possibility in early 1997 when Dolly the sheep was announced, and it turned out I was correct in my assertion; see this report: http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/15204559950020003 [liebertonline.com]

-- Terry

Pointless Retardation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677744)

Legalize drugs, and you don't need drug dogs and all this retarded crap.

Re:Pointless Retardation (1)

DigiTechGuy (1747636) | more than 2 years ago | (#37677844)

Agreed. Prohibition never works. It only breeds crime and violent criminal organizations which would never exist without prohibition. Legalize drugs and pull the rug out from under these violent gangs.

To much "IP" news on my brain (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37677838)

My first thought on reading the headline was "wow, a dog can reliably detect generic pharmaceuticals?!" - thought "cloned" referred to the drugs, not the dogs.

Sure they can sniff out drugs (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37678114)

But sniffing another clone's ass sends them into an existensial crisis.

Age issue (1)

Artem Tashkinov (764309) | more than 2 years ago | (#37678214)

A few years ago I read that cloned animals have the same age as their originals (right from the birth), thus cloning even middle aged animals becomes less attractive financially as clones have a substantially short(er) life span.

Is this fact still valid?

Sumilov Dogs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37678724)

This type of thing has been done for a long time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulimov_Dog

None of those dogs are allowed out of Russia, and are all technically property of Aeroflot.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...