Slashdot Mirror

Linkage:

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s727003 .htm

"kick China out for censoring their citizens overtly!"

That, and for not respecting international borders.

• Are humpbacks a leaner alternative to minkes?
• Soy sauce or wasabe?
• Do the whales even mind when they've been harpooned?
• High-protein, low-carb - can whale flesh play a role in the Atkins diet?
• And why are they just so damn tasty anyway?

...people laughed at him, people wouldn't fund his research, he said "I'm going to do it anyway" and he did it. He patented some of the hugest, largest numbers of genes, human genes, that anyone has done. People said you couldn't sequence whole bacterial genomes, they laughed at him, he said "I'm going to do it", he just did it. People said you can't sequence the entire human genome that way he laughed, set up a company, and he did it. Link

I left NIH to create TIGR in part because, at the time, NIH was not in a position to conduct a large-scale human gene discovery study within the intramural program. In our first two years, we at TIGR used the EST strategy to identify more than half of the genes in the human genome. Then, using many of the laboratory and computational methods that we developed for the human gene discovery program, we pioneered the whole-genome shotgun sequencing of the first complete genome of a free-living organisms, Haemophilus influenzae, a bacterium that causes ear infections in children. Interestingly, an NIH study section said this couldn't be done with available technology. Ultimately, this approach became widely adopted. Link

"Leave China alone for Christ's sake. You're not going to change things, especially if you are NOT IN CHINA!"

No way. This has gone way too far.

If there is truth to these accusations that the Chinese government is intimidating citizens of my country in any way for something such as practicing Falun Gong, then we have a serious problem that need s addressing.

I'm in no way in favour of military action, but this is clearly and act of war on their part if it is true.

And the iNob - The last word in electronic accessories for tossers. You won't be able to take get your hand off it!

From Today today on Triple J :)

And the iNob - The last word in electronic accessories for tossers. You won't be able to take get your hand off it!

From Today today on Triple J :)

It reminds me of the Muslims in Iraq. The easing of pressure from Saddam and then the occupying forces allows the Sunnis and Shiites to argue amongst themselves (of course I hardly need to add that this behavior isn't restricted to Muslims, Christians, or even religious people). Now that Linux and BSD are beginning to be seen as an alternative to Windows in (parts of) the general computer user community, they're getting the gloves out.

"really wasnt even necessary to nuke japan since the war was practically over. the only reason was to test the weapon while still in war (to make it more acceptable)."

i can't believe there are people who still think that is true. Keep in mind this is the japanese we are talking about not the french, they will die before they surrender. They are still finding japanese soldiers who refused to surrender. The japanese are impressive warriors, you have to give them that much.

Living in the UK, one of the 3 most densely populated countries in the EU, I can walk five miles from practically anywhere outside central London and be in open, empty countryside

This is not what overpopulation means. It relates to agriculture, and being able to feed the population at a sustainable and reasonable cost to the environment.

We are not overpopulated. Look around you, look at the statistics.

Then think of it this way. We are over-agricultured, or at the very least, totally mis-managing our natural resources.

Yes, we could theoretically sustain a much larger population if humanity decided to get their act together and all submit to one all-powerful government who would responsibly divvy up all the land, reloacte CITIES that are sitting on the MOST FERTILE LAND (good plan for self-eradication - let's concrete all over our most productive soil! Yay!), enforce proper farming practices, shut down the utterly devastating fishing practices we have in many places that are doing irreversable damage to fish stocks, so on and so forth, don't even get me started on the pollution aspect.

But it isn't going to happen. We will rape and pillage, contaminate and destroy our natural resources at an outragous rate, thousands of times faster than it needs to be - because humans are inefficient, greedy, and do not consider the future until it bites them in the arse.

We have ever shrinking farmable land in many continents, including China and Australia (I come from a farming family forced off the land that was once very productive 50 years ago). Salinity is a massive problem in Australia. In Victoria, there's the Pyramid Salt Scheme that - and this is very scary - has taken a hopeless salinity situation where a once productive farming land existed - and turned it into a profitable salt mine.

Our current trends are not sustainable. I don't see us changing our trends, do you? It's a simple matter of population × average per unit cost > resources.

Our current rate of destruction per capita to the enviornment would indicate that unless we can all reduce our per capita destruction, then the only way we will have sustainable population is to reduce that population.

As you seem to imply, perhaps per capit destruction WILL decrease naturally, if the 1st world countries with their negative population growth (Australia is still positive, btw) allow a shift of control of natural resources to what is at this point in time the more "efficient" 3rd world nations.

There's survival of the human race, and then there's survival of the earth's eco-systems and environment. I don't believe a solution exists to save both in a reasonable way that both sides would like.

unlike religion, science is self-correcting over the long term. If someone fudges the data and comes up with a wrong conclusion eventually someone else will discover that and get it right.

http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2005/s135 6362.htm

...
ELEANOR HALL: Is it the case that the Indonesian legal system is based on the presumption of guilt?

TIM LINDSAY: No, that is completely false. As a matter of fact it is completely the opposite. The system in Indonesia is the same as the system in Australia, and our Commonwealth system. Article 66 of the Criminal Procedure Code specifically states that the burden of proof to prove guilt in a criminal case lies with the prosecution.

In other words, that unless the prosecution can prove guilt, the person is innocent. So the common furphy that is being circulated in Australia in the media at the moment that people in the Indonesian system are presumed guilty until proven innocent is totally false.
...

Governments are hopeless at dealing with security. They are slow, lack innovative thinking and care more for their own careers than for their constituents. What matters most is whether or not you can protect yourself, your assets and your family when (if) the time comes. Then you can rid your mind of all the political and media led one-upmanship that comes along with security and the war on terrorism and get more important things done in life.

This isn't about preserving lakes, this is about figuring out what the global warming caused by us will mean for our common future. The early signs appear most dramatically in the artic regions, glaciars in mountain areas in Asia, Africa and on the water level influence on islands in the pacific. But if the melting accelerates, which it probably will, we better look at these examples to see how fast changes are happening and plan ahead.

Heh, well thanks for clearing that up. Bizarre indeed. If you get the chance, treat yourself to watching a current affairs show the BBC do called "Newsnight". I have no idea if its broadcast overseas but I imagine it might. Put it this way, remember George Galloway gave some American politicians a bloody nose recently? He, like every other politician on hte face of the plant, is scared of Paxman as you can see from this transcript (Note the trademark determination that his question is answered fully whatever the attempt at evasion). Its in my view the best thing they put out on the TV. Glorious stuff. What you won't get from that clip is that about ten minutes later he was doing the same thing to memebers of the (ostensibly) pro-war British cabinet, which would probably better illustrate my point about bias. Thats what politicians hate about the BBC in general, its actually their integrity thats the problem for a lot of people.

What about the viking experiment?

Test for life

Will this mission carry up the second stage of the experiment? I want to know the results of a reaction to right-handed molecules on mars...

See this.

Just to expand on the notion of 'continuity' a little.

In a child post someone used an example of a computer, where over time each part is replaced, and then asked the question, is it the same computer?

Well, here's a more accurate way of presenting that question: 'Consciousness' is 'continuity' of your neural network. If we had the technology, we could replace individual neurons with artificial equivalents, and providing that the rest of the network continued to function as we did this you would remain alive, and the same person. If doing this caused death, you would be no longer.

Expanding this to the computer analogy: if you have a simulation of a neural network running on a computer, and could replace parts of the computer without ending the neural network, it would remain the same 'entity'. The hardware isn't all that important, but the software needs continuity.

However, this doesn't answer everything. With a computer we can store the contents of the RAM onto a hard-disk, transfer that disk to another computer, load the contents of the RAM back in and continue the simulation. But, we could also image the disk and continue running it in the original computer. We now have two simulations, so which one is the real one? Did the original continue to be 'alive' or not? If not, when did it 'die'?

These questions have been pondered in one form or another by philosophers for eons, and we're not going to be able to answer it on /..

Someone also mentioned the good old '21 Grams' myth (when you die you lose 21 grams of weight which is the soul). Well, Google it. It's completely without any scientific foundation.

As is the ABC.

Australia's ABC radio national is currently testing podcasting as well

Dr Karl's Q&A sessions are a good start:
http://www.abc.net.au/science/k2/stn/podcast.htm

Triple J's hack has been podcasting since atleast January 2005. Also you can catch Dr Karl, another science show from Triple J, http://www.abc.net.au/science/k2/stn/podcast.htm

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation has been trialling podcasting for a few weeks now. DIG, an Internet only station has podcasting (http://www.abc.net.au/dig/podcast/), Triple J, a youth orientated station (http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/listen/podcast.htm) and Radio National, content orientated to older audiences (http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/listen/podcast.htm) are all running trials for podcasting. Good to see the Candian public broadcasters are joining the Aussies ;)

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation has been trialling podcasting for a few weeks now. DIG, an Internet only station has podcasting (http://www.abc.net.au/dig/podcast/), Triple J, a youth orientated station (http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/listen/podcast.htm) and Radio National, content orientated to older audiences (http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/listen/podcast.htm) are all running trials for podcasting. Good to see the Candian public broadcasters are joining the Aussies ;)

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation has been trialling podcasting for a few weeks now. DIG, an Internet only station has podcasting (http://www.abc.net.au/dig/podcast/), Triple J, a youth orientated station (http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/listen/podcast.htm) and Radio National, content orientated to older audiences (http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/listen/podcast.htm) are all running trials for podcasting. Good to see the Candian public broadcasters are joining the Aussies ;)

As is the ABC. And the BBC is doing it too.

No, he's right.

The archives of the Bill Clinton presidential library will contain almost 40 million emails by the former US president's staff and two by the man himself.

They didn't call it junk DNA for nothing. Most genetic scientists didn't think anything of the other 95% of the DNA because the coding part made up 5%. The rest must be junk, right? Wrong. Simons saw patterns in the non coding DNA and decided to prove to himself and others that nature could be so wasteful.

The non coding DNA often referred to as `junk DNA` was discovered by a maverick Kiwi Immunologist to perform a function (junk DNA provided markers to indicate abnormalities). Dr Malcolm Simons (I love it when Australians claim successful Kiwis for their own). Recognised as a world class leader in Immunology, Simons although untrained in genetics made a unique set of discoveries from 1987 onwards. He recognised that ...

• '... Junk DNA was serving a vital function; it provided markers that indicated susceptibility to disease ...' [ABC TV Catalyst, Genius of Junk (DNA), aired 10 July 2003 on Australian television]

This has immense implications for the diagnosis of human disease. What happened after the discovery, the taking on of a (ruthless) business partner, the awarding of patents on the subsequent business fallout, the ill health of Dr Simons (Multiple Myeloma a fatal cancer) and the IP enforcement by Genetic Technologies is documented in the ABC TV Catalyst, Genius of Junk (DNA), aired 10 July 2003 on Australian television.

Some interesting references:

• Original source - http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s898887.htm
• Dr. Malcolm J. Simons site - www.haplomics.com/
• Dr. Malcolm J. Simons explanation of junk dna - www.simonsjunkdna.com/
• Current patent holder - www.gtg.com.au

They didn't call it junk DNA for nothing. Most genetic scientists didn't think anything of the other 95% of the DNA because the coding part made up 5%. The rest must be junk, right? Wrong. Simons saw patterns in the non coding DNA and decided to prove to himself and others that nature could be so wasteful.

The non coding DNA often referred to as `junk DNA` was discovered by a maverick Kiwi Immunologist to perform a function (junk DNA provided markers to indicate abnormalities). Dr Malcolm Simons (I love it when Australians claim successful Kiwis for their own). Recognised as a world class leader in Immunology, Simons although untrained in genetics made a unique set of discoveries from 1987 onwards. He recognised that ...

• '... Junk DNA was serving a vital function; it provided markers that indicated susceptibility to disease ...' [ABC TV Catalyst, Genius of Junk (DNA), aired 10 July 2003 on Australian television]

This has immense implications for the diagnosis of human disease. What happened after the discovery, the taking on of a (ruthless) business partner, the awarding of patents on the subsequent business fallout, the ill health of Dr Simons (Multiple Myeloma a fatal cancer) and the IP enforcement by Genetic Technologies is documented in the ABC TV Catalyst, Genius of Junk (DNA), aired 10 July 2003 on Australian television.

Some interesting references:

• Original source - http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s898887.htm
• Dr. Malcolm J. Simons site - www.haplomics.com/
• Dr. Malcolm J. Simons explanation of junk dna - www.simonsjunkdna.com/
• Current patent holder - www.gtg.com.au

The Australian Bureau of Statistics begs to differ on the supposed "rapidly rising crime rate".

I think that there should be a blanket patent exemption for pure research, though I'm not quite sure how one should define the exemption.

Consider some of the examples of Australian responses to problems with petrol sniffing or chroming. These seem to be directly related to your examples of spray paint and gasoline. Yes, people are considering restrictions on gasoline and spray paint as a way of dealing with the problems of substance abuse.

Governments may not be good nannies but they are a damn side better than most people at taking care of themselves.

There was an interview with the article's author on the media report last week. You can listen to the audio or read the transcript here

Actually, I tend to agree with the quit voting thing, here's why.

Something like this should have been an entirely NATIONAL VOTE. Not two hundred fat fucks in plush chairs smoking cigars, caring about nothing but their own paychecks and fuck everyone else.

Makes me wish THE "GRENADE" WOULD HAVE GONE OFF AND SAVED US ALL THIS TROUBLE.

actually, it is very flat, oh topographically challenged one

Except, for the hills, of course. :)

Just hope that they don't install any hotspots on the hills, we won't want to have another great bush fire in there (fifth image from top left corner)!

U.S has alot more cases of mad cow, they just cover it up and act like nothing happened. After all, it would hurt their economy if other countries banned U.S beef.

Concerns raised about 1997 U.S. mad cow tests
US Officials Engaged in Mad Cow Coverup: Former Official
Greens Charge Government Cover-Up of Mad Cow Crisis
United States is intentionally under reporting mad-cow disease
More articles from google search

I remember seeing the documentary on CBC about the U.S mad cow cover up a couple years ago. It was pretty interesting. U.S of course doesn't want cases of mad cow to be found in their beef, since other countries would ban imports, and U.S would lose money. One small scale cow farmer in the states wanted to test every single one of his cows for BSE upon death. The USDA threatened him and prevented him from doing this. Why? because the idea of scanning every cow for BSE scares the USDA, it would raise production costs, increasing the price of beef, and alot more cases of BSE would potentially be found.

As it is, the current US policy on beef is to only test cows that look very sick. So alot of cows that have BSE go unchecked and ends up being sold as safe beef. Luckily for me, I have a choice, and I only eat local Canadian beef.

You are kidding, right? I think Sgrena is flattering herself a bit much if she really thinks the US wanted her dead - someone that up to that point was as far as the US was concerned still a hostage. The Italians *did not* tell the US that they were coming, with their just freed hostage. I also find it interesting that she claims the car was riddled with 400 rounds, which would make me ask if that were really the case, why is she still alive?

The italians also claimed they were driving just 30mph, though satellite pics indicates otherwise.

Sgrena also claimed that was able to pickup handfuls of bullets off of the seats of her car, supporting her claim of 400 rounds fired. Anyone who knows anything about ballistics knows bullets do not pass through one side of a car and then land harmlessly on the seat. They would either embed themselves in the opposite side of the vehicle, or pass all the way through. They would also probably be way too hot to touch.

She also at one point claimed to have been shot with a 4 inch tank round. People who are shot by 4" rounds do not live to talk about it.

I think the true story here is that Sgrena didn't like the US before this happened, and is inclined to try and paint by any means the US as the responsible party here.

"be heard" sounds a bit familiar, in fact it was part of the jingle of an australian youth IT show: "Radioactive.net.au, Don't just listen, be heard!". What I'd call an example of interactive radio. It teamed conventional radio, internet radio and IRC to create a community. Its the first radio station I've heard where a song was pulled off halfway through because nobody wanted to listen to it - thats interactive. Shame it had to come to an end, no commercial stations wanted a youth IT show (but they wanted the technology, funny that). This is only rebranding a radio station that nobody wanted to listen to in the beginning and trialing it in another project. No net loss, and they get to throw in a lot of buzz words too. In Australia (again), the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Commission) has not only been streaming its radio live (Radio National, Triple J and Radio Australia to name a few) but has its own internet radio station "Dig". They're not doing some work and trials with podcasting with Dig, RN and Triple J Those are real stations that people actually listen to (and get ratings), instead of a pathetic station that nobody listens to.

"be heard" sounds a bit familiar, in fact it was part of the jingle of an australian youth IT show: "Radioactive.net.au, Don't just listen, be heard!". What I'd call an example of interactive radio. It teamed conventional radio, internet radio and IRC to create a community. Its the first radio station I've heard where a song was pulled off halfway through because nobody wanted to listen to it - thats interactive. Shame it had to come to an end, no commercial stations wanted a youth IT show (but they wanted the technology, funny that). This is only rebranding a radio station that nobody wanted to listen to in the beginning and trialing it in another project. No net loss, and they get to throw in a lot of buzz words too. In Australia (again), the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Commission) has not only been streaming its radio live (Radio National, Triple J and Radio Australia to name a few) but has its own internet radio station "Dig". They're not doing some work and trials with podcasting with Dig, RN and Triple J Those are real stations that people actually listen to (and get ratings), instead of a pathetic station that nobody listens to.

"be heard" sounds a bit familiar, in fact it was part of the jingle of an australian youth IT show: "Radioactive.net.au, Don't just listen, be heard!". What I'd call an example of interactive radio. It teamed conventional radio, internet radio and IRC to create a community. Its the first radio station I've heard where a song was pulled off halfway through because nobody wanted to listen to it - thats interactive. Shame it had to come to an end, no commercial stations wanted a youth IT show (but they wanted the technology, funny that). This is only rebranding a radio station that nobody wanted to listen to in the beginning and trialing it in another project. No net loss, and they get to throw in a lot of buzz words too. In Australia (again), the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Commission) has not only been streaming its radio live (Radio National, Triple J and Radio Australia to name a few) but has its own internet radio station "Dig". They're not doing some work and trials with podcasting with Dig, RN and Triple J Those are real stations that people actually listen to (and get ratings), instead of a pathetic station that nobody listens to.

"be heard" sounds a bit familiar, in fact it was part of the jingle of an australian youth IT show: "Radioactive.net.au, Don't just listen, be heard!". What I'd call an example of interactive radio. It teamed conventional radio, internet radio and IRC to create a community. Its the first radio station I've heard where a song was pulled off halfway through because nobody wanted to listen to it - thats interactive. Shame it had to come to an end, no commercial stations wanted a youth IT show (but they wanted the technology, funny that). This is only rebranding a radio station that nobody wanted to listen to in the beginning and trialing it in another project. No net loss, and they get to throw in a lot of buzz words too. In Australia (again), the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Commission) has not only been streaming its radio live (Radio National, Triple J and Radio Australia to name a few) but has its own internet radio station "Dig". They're not doing some work and trials with podcasting with Dig, RN and Triple J Those are real stations that people actually listen to (and get ratings), instead of a pathetic station that nobody listens to.

"be heard" sounds a bit familiar, in fact it was part of the jingle of an australian youth IT show: "Radioactive.net.au, Don't just listen, be heard!". What I'd call an example of interactive radio. It teamed conventional radio, internet radio and IRC to create a community. Its the first radio station I've heard where a song was pulled off halfway through because nobody wanted to listen to it - thats interactive. Shame it had to come to an end, no commercial stations wanted a youth IT show (but they wanted the technology, funny that). This is only rebranding a radio station that nobody wanted to listen to in the beginning and trialing it in another project. No net loss, and they get to throw in a lot of buzz words too. In Australia (again), the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Commission) has not only been streaming its radio live (Radio National, Triple J and Radio Australia to name a few) but has its own internet radio station "Dig". They're not doing some work and trials with podcasting with Dig, RN and Triple J Those are real stations that people actually listen to (and get ratings), instead of a pathetic station that nobody listens to.

"be heard" sounds a bit familiar, in fact it was part of the jingle of an australian youth IT show: "Radioactive.net.au, Don't just listen, be heard!". What I'd call an example of interactive radio. It teamed conventional radio, internet radio and IRC to create a community. Its the first radio station I've heard where a song was pulled off halfway through because nobody wanted to listen to it - thats interactive. Shame it had to come to an end, no commercial stations wanted a youth IT show (but they wanted the technology, funny that). This is only rebranding a radio station that nobody wanted to listen to in the beginning and trialing it in another project. No net loss, and they get to throw in a lot of buzz words too. In Australia (again), the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Commission) has not only been streaming its radio live (Radio National, Triple J and Radio Australia to name a few) but has its own internet radio station "Dig". They're not doing some work and trials with podcasting with Dig, RN and Triple J Those are real stations that people actually listen to (and get ratings), instead of a pathetic station that nobody listens to.

"be heard" sounds a bit familiar, in fact it was part of the jingle of an australian youth IT show: "Radioactive.net.au, Don't just listen, be heard!". What I'd call an example of interactive radio. It teamed conventional radio, internet radio and IRC to create a community. Its the first radio station I've heard where a song was pulled off halfway through because nobody wanted to listen to it - thats interactive. Shame it had to come to an end, no commercial stations wanted a youth IT show (but they wanted the technology, funny that). This is only rebranding a radio station that nobody wanted to listen to in the beginning and trialing it in another project. No net loss, and they get to throw in a lot of buzz words too. In Australia (again), the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Commission) has not only been streaming its radio live (Radio National, Triple J and Radio Australia to name a few) but has its own internet radio station "Dig". They're not doing some work and trials with podcasting with Dig, RN and Triple J Those are real stations that people actually listen to (and get ratings), instead of a pathetic station that nobody listens to.

"be heard" sounds a bit familiar, in fact it was part of the jingle of an australian youth IT show: "Radioactive.net.au, Don't just listen, be heard!". What I'd call an example of interactive radio. It teamed conventional radio, internet radio and IRC to create a community. Its the first radio station I've heard where a song was pulled off halfway through because nobody wanted to listen to it - thats interactive. Shame it had to come to an end, no commercial stations wanted a youth IT show (but they wanted the technology, funny that). This is only rebranding a radio station that nobody wanted to listen to in the beginning and trialing it in another project. No net loss, and they get to throw in a lot of buzz words too. In Australia (again), the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Commission) has not only been streaming its radio live (Radio National, Triple J and Radio Australia to name a few) but has its own internet radio station "Dig". They're not doing some work and trials with podcasting with Dig, RN and Triple J Those are real stations that people actually listen to (and get ratings), instead of a pathetic station that nobody listens to.

Xix.

Xix.

Since the end of 2003, most metropolitan areas in Australia had access to the free-to-air channels as both analogue and digital transmission. The free-to-air networks sometimes use this separate transmission pathway for additional programming, most notably the ABC and SBS.

Recently, the primary Cable TV operator, Foxtel (in conjunction with Telstra) has been pushing their digital services, and the added benefits they claim to deliver through the digital signal (i.e. multiple camera angles for sports, selected news coverage, localised weather, movies-on-demand).

In 2008, the Australian Federal Government will be reviewing whether to convert all free-to-air television transmission to 100% digital. Currently the digital transmissions can be received through set top boxes (which then translates for analogue display), which seem to be coming down in price as more companies come into the market, and can be had for around $150 AUD.

Kids these days! In my day we only had 2 J's and liked it!

Australia

Triple J
Triple M
ABC Radio

And that's just the first three radio stations I could think of in my home city of Sydney.