Slashdot Mirror

"Did you know you helped 'better influence' my life via StarTrek, Capt. Kirk?"

(As well as countless others I'd imagine as well!)

* &, there you are...

APK

P.S.=> By "better influence" above, I meant in a good way too - StarTrek from the 1960's, great show!

(Basically a "morality play" each episode: Better than "modern muuzik" of today & other media & the "shoot the police", "women is ho's" crap imo @ least)

I.E.-> Mr. Spock & Capt. Kirk were 2 of my "boyhood heroes" who also helped my mastery of English too (a "big wordy" show to a kid I think/felt @ the time) & interests in sciences (put it THIS way on this account/note - GarySeven Holding ISIS the cat in the transporter-room near the start of episode "Assignment Earth" was my SETI forums & account icon I used circa 1999-2007 or so for Team Microsoft -> http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=26272&nowrap=true#222635 )

My signature in that thread, if not the icon/avatar I used there & since 1999?

"The object's hull is made of SOLID neutronium: A single StarShip cannot combat it!" quote Mr. Spock, Star Trek original series, episode title: "The Doomsday Machine"

&

Same on computing then as well as in the past decade-N-a-Half++ for a large part of my livelyhood (computing's paid off pretty well I felt so, thanks for the indirect impetus to "get into them" in a way - More to Mr. Spock here though, lol, sorry Mr. Shatner (gotta give credit where it's truly due on that particular account))...

... apk

SPICE is a general-purpose circuit simulation program for nonlinear dc, nonlinear transient, and linear ac analyses. Circuits may contain resistors, capacitors, inductors, mutual inductors, independent voltage and current sources, four types of dependent sources, lossless and lossy transmission lines (two separate implementations), switches, uniform distributed RC lines, and the five most common semiconductor devices: diodes, BJTs, JFETs, MESFETs, and MOSFETs. SPICE originates from the EECS Department of the University of California at Berkeley.

These all came from academia http://bwrc.eecs.berkeley.edu/classes/icbook/spice/

>>What is being proposed here is not new and in fact has been implemented on other devices before.

Right. And as a friend of mine pointed out in her Defcon talk this year, Android Intents are open to a wide range of abuse.

http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/~emc/slides/SevenWaysToHangYourselfWithGoogleAndroid.pdf

>>But there's one thing we haven't seen you meantioned in your comments, all the supposed keylogging and password stealing.

Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it is a massive security threat.

And heck, if you can do 8 hours of work at home in 2 hours, why not get 8 hours of pay! The key is productivity.

--PM

If the key is productivity, you need to think " If you can do 8 hours of work at home in 2 hours, why not work 8 hours and complete 32 hours of work!". That's how a productive person thinks. It does wonders for your career, and the economy.

yeah, whatever, uncle Tom

I think an innovative solution, assuming you have a defined timeframe for this project, is the following: Set aside a small portion of your budget (£250-£500 - I'm guessing) and set up a BOINC server on an EC2 instance; http://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/wiki/CloudServer . It will probably not cost as much as I have suggested above as it won't be *nearly* as intensive as actually doing the computing required for analysis of the experiments but you can use some of the budget to pay a server admin to set it up for you if you are not very confident. Although, I am certain, if you looked around any of the big communities involved in grid projects (overclock.net, evga, etc.), someone would be willing to assist you for free. Go around to the major forums posting a message in their grid computing projects asking for assistance and offering a £2000 prize or donation to a charity of their choosing for the group that completes the most work units over the project's life. This may sound like a lot of hard work, but these groups are fiercely competitive and are extremely willing to help to any cause and it will be not as difficult as it seems when reading this. At the very least, I can guarantee you about 20 users from a grid forum I am part of that will contribute - at £0 cost. Best of luck!

Somebody upthread mentioned BOINC, which is a great idea for many parallel-oriented compute-bound problems. However, while making your project compatible with BOINC is necessary, it's usually not sufficient. The problem is marketing, to convince enough people to run your work. World Community Grid, sponsored by IBM, is free and is an excellent way to solve that problem. You can submit a proposal, and if approved you'll quickly have lots of BOINC-powered computing working on your problem.

She could also consider creating a BOINC project. She could then do some publicity locally and on forums, to get people to choose her project. I've never tried creating a BOINC project, so I don't know how hard this is. However, I do run the client as a background task, and I imagine many other people do as well.

I can't tell if you're trolling or just stupid. You're given a scientific publication and you're asking for citations? Fine, then take a look at this diagram titled "vertebrate evolution", which shows that Aves (birds) are a divergent branch of Archosauria (prime lizards), which evolved from diapsida. Wikipedia will tell you that Diapsida are reptiles. That diagram is contained in the 2nd reference in TFA, quoted as "Hillier, L. W. et al. Sequence and comparative analysis of the chicken genome provide unique perspectives on vertebrate evolution. Nature 432, 695–716 (2004) ". It took me all of two mouseclicks to find it.

How about asking the 'net: http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=are+dinosaurs+reptiles?

Still not good enough? Maybe the authority of Berkeley will do then? Read the entire first paragraph of both, not only the title.

I'm not going to do any more spoonfeeding for you. If you want more citations I suggest you go find them yourself. The references list in TFA should be a good starting point. And before you go and try sophistry: "dinosaurs may have evolved from reptiles but they are not reptiles" is as true as "humans may have evolved from apes but they are not apes". If you want to go that route, please also explain why humans are not mammals.

I can't tell if you're trolling or just stupid. You're given a scientific publication and you're asking for citations? Fine, then take a look at this diagram titled "vertebrate evolution", which shows that Aves (birds) are a divergent branch of Archosauria (prime lizards), which evolved from diapsida. Wikipedia will tell you that Diapsida are reptiles. That diagram is contained in the 2nd reference in TFA, quoted as "Hillier, L. W. et al. Sequence and comparative analysis of the chicken genome provide unique perspectives on vertebrate evolution. Nature 432, 695–716 (2004) ". It took me all of two mouseclicks to find it.

How about asking the 'net: http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=are+dinosaurs+reptiles?

Still not good enough? Maybe the authority of Berkeley will do then? Read the entire first paragraph of both, not only the title.

I'm not going to do any more spoonfeeding for you. If you want more citations I suggest you go find them yourself. The references list in TFA should be a good starting point. And before you go and try sophistry: "dinosaurs may have evolved from reptiles but they are not reptiles" is as true as "humans may have evolved from apes but they are not apes". If you want to go that route, please also explain why humans are not mammals.

See (for instance):
http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/hall_tour/spectrum/non_flash_index.html

This isn't about an imposed classification, it is about a family tree. Crocodiles are more closely related to birds than either are to snakes. Snakes are more closely related to birds than either are to turtles.

That is, these guys:
http://www.wolaver.org/animals/crocodile-plover.jpg

share a *much* more recent common ancestor than these two:
http://berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2009/02/images/salamander-pgoebeil.jpg
and:
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090630160120/uncyclopedia/images/2/2f/Geico-gecko.jpg

You are more closely related to a goldfish than the goldfish is to a shark:
http://rlv.zcache.com/goldfish_bowl_tshirt-p23514656184174989535jn_400.jpg

http://bit.ly/nknQ00

Dinos are reptiles, birds are dinos

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phylogenetics
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/phylogenetics_04
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/File:Phylogenetic-Groups.svg

However, mammals are not reptiles (but reptiles and mammals are both amniotes)

First off, I am intimately familiar with the Russel/Norvig book that props up that monitor. Reminds me of my AI courses at two different universities. Guessing it's the de facto standard. !

Yeah, I used that AI textbook, too, for my fourth-year "Intro to Artificial Intelligence" course at the University of Waterloo.

First off, I am intimately familiar with the Russel/Norvig book that props up that monitor. Reminds me of my AI courses at two different universities. Guessing it's the de facto standard.

When I first saw this, I imagine that the inclusion of the mythos of a unicorn randomly by the male character caused the conversation to turn to belief in god. Still, from "Hi how are you" to "Do you believe in god" is a pretty funny and rapid conversation. They do not beat around the bush. I don't know why but I get the idea that they're annoyed with each other -- which is an emotion so that's actually a pretty good jump for AI!

Or six months and a 16in infrared telescope.

Actually it is more like 1/1500000th of the sky at one time. And now that it is done taking a unfathomable (to you) 1.5 million pictures, it has successfully taken a picture of the entire sky.

Why would you just assume that NASA is lying about its capabilities. Presumably you read about the telescope or at least looked at some real info. Are you aware that when you are running a mission you don't use the $100 dollar telescope that parents buy for their kids? Did you realize that a telescope in space can take pictures at any angle it wishes?

Or perhaps you didn't read the article, didn't do any research, and are talking out of your ass instead?

Berkeley's Cal Memorial Stadium is on top of the Hayward fault, so what?

OT I know, but this is the same guy who did this http://cnr.berkeley.edu/ucce50/ag-labor/7article/article35.htm which together with the Stanford Prison experiment http://www.prisonexp.org/ shed some light on the darker side of human tendencies.

LHC@home has been around for years (They used to run simulations but the project wasn't awfully active in the construction phase).

There are actually multitude of projects available.

http://boinc.berkeley.edu/projects.php

That list doesn't include projects like http://renderfarm.fi/ and probably many others.

We specifically detect this condition in Netalyzr as well: we fetch three different 404 pages from our server (a blank page, a default apache page, and a custom page) and detect if they are changed in flight.

Add Verizon DSL in Manhattan, NY:

http://n3.netalyzr.icsi.berkeley.edu/summary/id=ae81b058-20468-26aad796-356d-4fce-806b

I was using my own nameservers before, but I'd recently swapped out my older Linksys BEFSR81 (which was becoming flaky) to an E2100L.
Its DHCP server was using Verizon-supplied nameservers by default. Fixed that, thank you ICSI team.

Yes. Netalyzr specifically detects this condition amongst its many other tests. We also have a Java Command Line Client.

You can also check by doing a "dig search.yahoo.com". If the authority is "jomax.net", its a Paxfire appliance changing the results.

Yes. Netalyzr specifically detects this condition amongst its many other tests. We also have a Java Command Line Client.

You can also check by doing a "dig search.yahoo.com". If the authority is "jomax.net", its a Paxfire appliance changing the results.

Could you email a Netalyzr execution from One Communications to netalyzr-help@icsi.berkeley.edu, so we can verify this? It could be due to IBBS, which runs DNS for multiple ISPs.

Google did. This is why the ISPs that were proxying Google stopped in the past couple of months: Google's abuse-detection threw up a CAPTCHA on the queries, and then Google posted about it.

Also, you can run Netalyzr to detect this condition.

berkeley. Also see section 3 of this.

http://journalism.berkeley.edu/projects/biplog/archive/000431.html
"It may prove difficult in the short term to reduce the term of copyrights which have already been extended. Also, the forces pushing perpetual copyright are strong. However, there is another route, which may be easier, employing the concepts of Aikido -- moving with the strong force and redirecting it in a better way. Rather than fight to reduce the maximum term of copyrights, consider that existing and future copyrights could be taxed annually just like real estate as long as they are kept from the public domain. This uses a market-based approach to limit the external costs of copyright monopolies."

Yes, it certainly is too bad that NASA doesn't do anything anymore.

(Sorry if I left out your favorite misson; there's just so many.)

There is already existing infrastructure and projects where people can donate their system's computational power: http://boinc.berkeley.edu/

Interesting, google search results is full of claims that chlorine kills, but most of those claims link directly to water filter sales. The most reliable of my finds says that rats and mice are immune to chlorine. Someone ought run those tests on humans! Anyways, thanks for debunking that myth.

Or you could tax copyrights based on a small percentage of a self-assessed value, where anyone could pay the self-assessed amount to put the work into the public domain. I suggested that almost a decade ago, based on someone's slashdot sig that said something like "if it is intellectual property, why isn't it taxed?"

More on that suggestion:
    http://journalism.berkeley.edu/projects/biplog/archive/000431.html

But in general, if about 20 years was long enough for copyright in the age of the Pony Express, why should copyrights be longer in an age of optical fiber?
   

Computer Science, Logo Style. Free for personal use.

Oh, it gets juicier. You haven't even hit the good part. Rio Red, one of the most popular grapefruit varieties, was produced by more than just hybridization. You see, most varieties are grown from seeds, one of perhaps tens of thousands of seedlings is selected for the right combination of genetic alterations (conventional breeding is based on mixing thousands of recessive genes & random mutations and hoping for the best, yet people have the huevos to complain about genetic engineering inserting only a few genes), and shoots of the selection grafted en masse to rootstocks, shipped to orchards, and grown. Not in this case. Ruby Red, not Rio Red, came from the seed. Rio Red came from Ruby Red. They exposed Ruby Red cells to radiation and selected the best mutant produced to get Rio Red. That's right, they use mutation inducing radiation and chemicals in plant breeding, and odds are you've eaten this. The only reason those ignorant anti-GMO twats don't complain is because they don't have the level of biological knowledge to see past popular stuff like genetic engineering. Even the organic ones are like this (and for the same reason, the people who set the organic standards are also idiots). Read all about it. Next time you're in that situation, drop that bombshell on them. Might also show them a picture of teosinte, tell them just how much of the genetic code of just about everything is made up of jumping genes (a good chunk, I forget the average amount, but that weirdo corn is 75% genes that move themselves), let them know that something like 30% of the human genome is junk left behind from viruses, and explain to them how many food crops are polyploids that have had their entire genome doubled, sometimes several times (where do they think seedless fruits come from).

Those anti-GMO people get on my nerves so much. They don't know anything about genetics or botany or agriculture or molecular biology or biochemistry or anything else but love to talk about it. And yes, IIAGE, well, studying to be one anyway. Most of the misinformed comments here make my head hurt, I wish I had the time and moxie to correct them all, but since there's hundreds of them, I think I too shall laugh and get on with my life...at least until they're destroying my research anyway.

The cheap version:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kite_aerial_photography
http://scotthaefner.com/kap/
http://arch.ced.berkeley.edu/kap/kaptoc.html

I have 30874 on the Ptolemy II repository, see http://www.ohloh.net/accounts/cxbrx. Hauke Fuhrmann put up Codeswarm videos of the software evolution of the Ptolemy II project. See Chaotic, Less Chaotic. The number of commits is a poor measure though. I tend to make lots of small commits while cleaning code. A student doing a Ph.D., may make many fewer commits, but their commits have greater impact in the form of support for their Ph.D. We see software as a form of publication, see Software Practice in the Ptolemy Project.

I, of course, submitted a direct link to the Berkeley press release but apparently the Slashdot editors decided the one that was most wrong was the one to pick. First, SETI isn't a project, it's a field of study conducted by a lot of institutions. Nobody would talk about "the Physics Project started 2100 years ago by Pythagoras" when describing a particle accelerator.

This project in particular, is conducted by the Berkeley SETI group which is known for their SETI@home project, Astropulse search for radio pulses and their the SERENDIP project The exciting parts are 1) This targets earthlike planets. 2) It uses the Green Bank Telescope, which is the biggest steerable dish around and 3) they are recording time domain data at 3.2 Gbps (because the observations are short duration) rather than the 64 Mbps they get at Arecibo. That allows them to cover 800MHz of instantaneous bandwidth, rather than the 2.5MHz they get at Arecibo (albeit at much higher sensitivity)

I understand the desire to link this to the ATA shutdown, but that give the mistaken impression that this is a project of the SETI Institute. And they didn't even put a link to SETI@home (where the data will be processed) in the story.

I, of course, submitted a direct link to the Berkeley press release but apparently the Slashdot editors decided the one that was most wrong was the one to pick. First, SETI isn't a project, it's a field of study conducted by a lot of institutions. Nobody would talk about "the Physics Project started 2100 years ago by Pythagoras" when describing a particle accelerator.

This project in particular, is conducted by the Berkeley SETI group which is known for their SETI@home project, Astropulse search for radio pulses and their the SERENDIP project The exciting parts are 1) This targets earthlike planets. 2) It uses the Green Bank Telescope, which is the biggest steerable dish around and 3) they are recording time domain data at 3.2 Gbps (because the observations are short duration) rather than the 64 Mbps they get at Arecibo. That allows them to cover 800MHz of instantaneous bandwidth, rather than the 2.5MHz they get at Arecibo (albeit at much higher sensitivity)

I understand the desire to link this to the ATA shutdown, but that give the mistaken impression that this is a project of the SETI Institute. And they didn't even put a link to SETI@home (where the data will be processed) in the story.

I, of course, submitted a direct link to the Berkeley press release but apparently the Slashdot editors decided the one that was most wrong was the one to pick. First, SETI isn't a project, it's a field of study conducted by a lot of institutions. Nobody would talk about "the Physics Project started 2100 years ago by Pythagoras" when describing a particle accelerator.

This project in particular, is conducted by the Berkeley SETI group which is known for their SETI@home project, Astropulse search for radio pulses and their the SERENDIP project The exciting parts are 1) This targets earthlike planets. 2) It uses the Green Bank Telescope, which is the biggest steerable dish around and 3) they are recording time domain data at 3.2 Gbps (because the observations are short duration) rather than the 64 Mbps they get at Arecibo. That allows them to cover 800MHz of instantaneous bandwidth, rather than the 2.5MHz they get at Arecibo (albeit at much higher sensitivity)

I understand the desire to link this to the ATA shutdown, but that give the mistaken impression that this is a project of the SETI Institute. And they didn't even put a link to SETI@home (where the data will be processed) in the story.

I, of course, submitted a direct link to the Berkeley press release but apparently the Slashdot editors decided the one that was most wrong was the one to pick. First, SETI isn't a project, it's a field of study conducted by a lot of institutions. Nobody would talk about "the Physics Project started 2100 years ago by Pythagoras" when describing a particle accelerator.

This project in particular, is conducted by the Berkeley SETI group which is known for their SETI@home project, Astropulse search for radio pulses and their the SERENDIP project The exciting parts are 1) This targets earthlike planets. 2) It uses the Green Bank Telescope, which is the biggest steerable dish around and 3) they are recording time domain data at 3.2 Gbps (because the observations are short duration) rather than the 64 Mbps they get at Arecibo. That allows them to cover 800MHz of instantaneous bandwidth, rather than the 2.5MHz they get at Arecibo (albeit at much higher sensitivity)

I understand the desire to link this to the ATA shutdown, but that give the mistaken impression that this is a project of the SETI Institute. And they didn't even put a link to SETI@home (where the data will be processed) in the story.

I, of course, submitted a direct link to the Berkeley press release but apparently the Slashdot editors decided the one that was most wrong was the one to pick. First, SETI isn't a project, it's a field of study conducted by a lot of institutions. Nobody would talk about "the Physics Project started 2100 years ago by Pythagoras" when describing a particle accelerator.

This project in particular, is conducted by the Berkeley SETI group which is known for their SETI@home project, Astropulse search for radio pulses and their the SERENDIP project The exciting parts are 1) This targets earthlike planets. 2) It uses the Green Bank Telescope, which is the biggest steerable dish around and 3) they are recording time domain data at 3.2 Gbps (because the observations are short duration) rather than the 64 Mbps they get at Arecibo. That allows them to cover 800MHz of instantaneous bandwidth, rather than the 2.5MHz they get at Arecibo (albeit at much higher sensitivity)

I understand the desire to link this to the ATA shutdown, but that give the mistaken impression that this is a project of the SETI Institute. And they didn't even put a link to SETI@home (where the data will be processed) in the story.

From the relevant thread over at Seti@Home:

"Grad student Andrew Siemion reports that new modifications to a data recorder at Green Bank that we need for our Kepler SETI observations are now complete, thanks to a huge amount of help from Paul Demorest, a former grad student and one of initial authors of AstroPulse. Our first hour of test time is scheduled for this Saturday, 17:30 EDT. We'll be observing with 450 seconds per target on 90 Kepler field stars with interesting planet candidates (~habitable zone, ~Earth size, ~Earth period, ~several planets), then do a raster scan of the entire Kepler field. " - Eric Korpela

According to this site that would be 9.57 billion Libraries of Congress. If you only consider the printed collection.

It's called BOINC.

And has anyone documented a repeatable real world test for 'bufferbloat' or is this still an academic issue?

Yeah, bufferbloat is real and easily reproducible. Run the Netalyzr test: http://netalyzr.icsi.berkeley.edu/

Furiously burnishing Reagan's shield, eh? You must have been told that by a republican revisionist. May I suggest perhaps reading a Russian history of the fall of the soviet union? Or one perhaps less blatantly biased.

I heard the same line from my civics teacher in high school. I just didn't eat it up with a spoon and ask for seconds.
http://econ161.berkeley.edu/politics/fitzgerald.html

Anyone using Mediacom, please run Netalyzr ( http://netalyzr.icsi.berkeley.edu) and post the results link, this might be able to detect whatever manipulation is ongoing.

Thanks!

"Evolution is demonstratively proven. Here is the long list of cases which support evolution."

Sooooo........where's that list?

Posting as AC because I'll likely be flamed for asking this question, but, I've looked all over the place for evidence of this claim. I've found pages such as this http://evolution.berkeley.edu/, and this http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3790531.stm, but neither of these offer incontrovertible examples of speciation. Instead, they say "the populations stopped breeding with each other". There is a lively debate in biology even about the definition of a species http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species_problem. The fact that two populations, when combined, only interbreed with those of their own population doesn't necessarily mean speciation has occurred, only that there is a selection mechanism in play between the two populations. In fact, it is would be foolish to conclude that you just witnessed speciation until you've proven that the underlying genetic material has sufficiently changed between the two populations, something not accomplished in any of the fruit fly studies I've seen.

How does evolution account for the number of positive mutations that would be necessary to achieve current biodiversity? With mutation rates of ~10E-8 per base pair per generation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation_rate and say a 2/3 chance that mutation is beneficial or has no impact (but may contribute to a beneficial gene later on) how many billions of years would be required to go from a pond full of proteins to what we currently observe? Is that number less than the current estimated age of the universe according to astro physicists? Do we have to assume faster mutation rates earlier on to make things work out? If so, why? How is that explained?

Speaking of that pond of proteins form whence life sprang, has there ever been a case in which simple elements have been observed to form into protein chains in nature with no pre-existing biological influence? I'm talking fundamental elements in solution here. How did the proteins get there if not through simple chemical reactions? If it was just chemistry at work, why do we not see this occurring now?

I pose all these questions because the current science curriculum has been so hell-bent on convincing me that evolution is "proven" that it forgot to actually show the proof. I really want to know, but I'm almost certain the response to these questions will be to call me an "idiot", assume my beliefs are exactly X and then explain why X is so wrong without once engaging on any of the above questions. Please prove me wrong /.

160,000 years ago

I mean its not very hard to find which is surprising considering how hard fossils are to make.

You might as well cite prison guard salaries in Indochina, it'd be as relevant.

You might want to cite anything let alone California. In California the average correctional officer's salary is $66,720. This may be more than the national average but hardly the fat cat 6 figure salaries that keep being espoused.

Public sector workers make MORE, on average, in California than Private sector workers when benefits are included on both sides.

And they are also MORE EDUCATED on average.

http://www.whaletimes.org/hagfish.htm

'Hagfish have been seen as deep as 16,405 feet (5000 m)'

do not doubt cthulhu's minions

even worse:

'Looking closer, one might discover an alarming sight: Those dead organisms resting on the deep sea floor are actually pulsating! What could cause such movements? Usually, it's a passel of scavenging hagfish feeding on the carcasses from the inside out.'

http://www.jyi.org/volumes/volume5/issue7/features/lee.html

I would spare relatives the idea that human bodies would be found pulsating from within as they are consumed by hagfish. hagfish are the fate of all bodies that go to the deep. i don't want to know the details

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/vertebrates/basalfish/myxini.html

'The adjective which best describes the Myxini is "Lovecraftian".'