Slashdot Mirror

Although the land won't be suitable for farming for many years, botanists already know how to accelerate the cleanup by using plants that soak up radiation and contamination like sponges (phytoremediation.) Such contamination studies have been done at several major universities (including my own local one, which cleaned up an area that had been contaminated with non radioactive mercury within one year.) The question is whether Japan will swallow its pride and have its farmland turned into short term radioactive gardens.

The universe can do things you can't. Inflation is a change in the scale of the universe, not the motion of some object within it. They're entirely different effects.

That jet only appears to be superluminal due to the relative motion of the solar system and the jet's source. It's not actually moving faster than light in its own reference frame. Also, Hawking radiation doesn't count: we're dealing with distances on the order of a Planck length, where speed becomes meaningless. You might as well say particles do the Macarena as say that they move faster than light.

We're not so sure that causality is a reflection of how our brain works or how the universe works.

A bit solipsistic are we? There is an objective universe out there, and it obeys laws of causality and logic without our being involved at all. To imagine otherwise is arrogance (especially if your name is Penrose.)

Written by Roger Pressman and has gone through 6 editions (that I'm aware of). It was first introduced in 1982, and I used it as a Senior during my undergrad - I have since used it repeatedly over the years as I've taught software engineering classes. 25yrs after graduating it is one of the books that I keep in my office.

I shouldn't feed trolls, but here's some clue sticks:

I suppose fair's fair. Here's hoping the meta-mods are a little less reactionary.

there are people who conflate time and money while interpreting the phrase "time is money". The real interpretation of that is, "time has value." Some people regard time spent out of doors exercising as valuable. Perhaps you don't. Your evaluation of time spent on a bicycle is your opinion, not a counterpoint.

The parent's point was an opinion, so I'm not sure your distinction is meaningful. As to assigning "X" a value, I didn't, which obviates the rest of your paragraph.

Ever heard of the fallacy called a "non sequitur"? What in blue blazes does using one's "transportation device correctly" have to do with the strength of a material used in an automobile?

I'm not sure why it was invoked in the first place -- by the time your bicycle's experiencing deformation, you have bigger problems.

HINT: Never, ever, argue with ambiguity. That is the pitfall of the Republican spokesperson in this election season.

I think you're saying I'm a rat bastard right-winger, which is almost as irrelevant as it is wrong. Browse my profile.

You didn't comprehend his entire post, did you? I'm pretty sure he suggested an electric bike at the beginning.

I replied to "exercise perks," thanks.

My car has an air conditioner. I rode my bike to school for years, and still take it downtown when practical, but it's not a car substitute. It's hard not to be offended at the suggestion I need to justify a personal choice not to buy "technical clothing" and pedal in whatever weather.

Not likely. His point was that industrialized people are whining too much about biking to work. You merely proved his point.

My point is bike zealots whine when people don't. I find contempt for "industrialized people" ridiculous, and it saddens me how it plays into the caricature of a meek, hypocritical, militant, and guilt-ridden political left.

The noble savage knows he's dead if he's fat, because he can no longer keep up with his prey. Keep your simplistic views of the world's natives to yourself, please.

You first. Kofi Annan says Africa's dream is to industrialize. I don't pretend stitching Reeboks for ten cents a week does the third world any tremendous favors, but neither does romanticizing poverty.

"No wonder you Americans are so fat," said an Aucan native in his first visit to the U.S. "You can ride up to a window, and they give you food. You don't have to hunt at all, because you have food already in your houses." Prosperity is not a virtue in and of itself; it comes with costs, and it comes with responsibilities.

Given the alternative, fat's not so terrible. Incidentally, "Auca" is ethnically insensitive.

My thesis adviser and professor Lynn Winters lent me some edition of this book: http://www.mhhe.com/socscience/psychology/runyon/ Which was quite helpful, went into WHY a particular statistical method is good for a particular data set, rather than just saying "for this, use this."

Let's get your facts straight, 1.) It IS UNNATURAL. 2.) It IS HARMFUL. 3.) genetic pollution HAPPENS OFTEN.

Genetically Modified High Frutcose Corn Syrup is harmful to people's health and GM crops don't grow by themselves.

Organic farms are increasingly finding that via cross-pollination their pure food has been contaminated with GM DNA thus ruining their businesses.

It is illegal to grow GM maize in Mexico..

"Genetic pollution" and collateral damage from GE field crops already have begun to wreak environmental havoc. Wind, rain, birds, bees, and insect pollinators have begun carrying genetically-altered pollen into adjoining fields, polluting the DNA of crops of organic and non-GE farmers. An organic farm in Texas has been contaminated with genetic drift from GE crops on a nearby farm and EU regulators are considering setting an "allowable limit" for genetic contamination of non-GE foods, because they don't believe genetic pollution can be controlled. Because they are alive, gene-altered crops are inherently more unpredictable than chemical pollutants--they can reproduce, migrate, and mutate. Once released, it is virtually impossible to recall genetically engineered organisms back to the laboratory or the field.

Large-scale genetic contamination of imported cottonseed in Greece

http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge/gepollution.cfm
http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge/pollution.cfm
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Monsant o_and_Genetic_Pollution
http://www.globalchefs.com/column/archive/col011po l.htm
http://www.mhhe.com/biosci/pae/environmentalscienc e/casestudies/case15.mhtml

And on and on and on and on and on and fucking on...

(the following snipet was stolen at random from: http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Dangers-of-High-Fruc tose-Corn-Syrup&id=28535 )

High Fructose Corn Syrup

High fructose corn syrup is made by treating corn (which is usually genetically modified corn) with a variety of enzymes, some of which are also genetically modified, to first extract the sugar glucose and then convert some of it into fructose, since fructose tastes sweeter than glucose. The end result is a mixture of 55% fructose and 45% glucose, that is called "high fructose corn syrup." Improvements in production occurred in the 1980's making it cheaper than most other sweeteners. I remember in the 1980's when the price of Pepsi dropped from about $3 for a sixpack to about $1.50. In 1966 refined sugar such as sucrose was the was the leading sweetener / additive. In 2001 corn sweeteners accounted for 55% of the sweetener market. Consumption of high fructose corn syrup went from zero in 1966 to 62.6 pounds per person in 2001. A 12 ounce soda can contain as much as 13 teaspoons of sugar in the form of high fructose corn syrup.

Once again, the dangerous combination: fructose and glucose.

When high fructose corn syrup breaks down in the intestine, we once again find near equal amounts of glucose and fructose entering the bloodstream. As covered in recent newsletters, the fructose short-circuits the glycolytic pathway for glucose. This leads to all the problems associated with sucrose. In addition, HFCS seems to be generating a few of its own problems, epidemic obesity being one of them. Fructose does not stimulate insulin production and also fails to increase "leptin" production, a hormone produced by the body's fat cells. Both of these act to turn off the appetite and control body weight. Als

Thank you for mentioning plastic. I have heard also in general, many man-made chemicals appear in the body as estrogens, including pesticides. One link that has been made in other studies, that I haven't seen posted yet as I'm scrolling down reading comments, is studies of polution and the sexual effects on wild-life animals. There also in some populations are dramatic declines. They could be our dying [dead?] canary in the mine warning of imminent danger for us. Maybe I can find a link via quick google search:

http://www.ourstolenfuture.org/Basics/chapters.htm
http://www.holology.com/hormone.html
http://www.mhhe.com/biosci/pae/environmentalscienc e/casestudies/case7.mhtml
http://www.mindfully.org/Plastic/Plasticizers/Out- Of-Diet-PG5nov03.htm

Anyways, that's just a sampling. I think it's already a pretty well known issue. Not saying there's not other possible contributing factors. But this is being studied and there's quite a few references attached to some of those articles. Have fun. Who needs to reproduce anyways? We have genetics. We can clone! Muwahahahaha.... :-)

and another: Pocket Book of Technical Writing by Dr. Leo Finkelstein, Jr.

I had Dr. Finkelstein as an instructor for a CS/CEG required technical writing course.

His book has come in handy since then.

The fault line in question is the Cascadia Subduction Zone off the coast of Oregon, which produces large tsunamis on a fairly regular basis--geologically speaking, that is. And there's the problem. Nobody on this side of the Pacific Rim remembers the last damaging Cascadia quake. The Japanese do, however. The 1700 quake produced a 10-foot wave there, though the damage was exceedingly mild compared to the recent catastrophe in the Indian Ocean.

Nevertheless, the Cascadia fault is a major threat that coastal communities have failed to factor into their planning while building all of those low-lying structures. Geological evidence, as well as seismologists' own calculations, suggest surges of as much as 60 feet in height for the coastal areas closest to the Cascadia zone.

'The smallest mass ever measured would have to go to the electron.'

Give yourself a quick reality check ask yourself these two questions.

What's the mass of Light?
is is smaller than the mass of and electron?

The mass of an electron or light it proportional to the energy contained in the light or electron.
But they are both equally proportional, i.e. they are both leptons.

The energy of Light is Planck's constant times its frequency. E = hv, I assume this is the same for an electron. (google doesn't turn up anything).

Typically the wavelengths of light are equivalent to an electron with a potential of just a few volts, so sometimes light is heavier than an electron, but more frequently electrons are heavier than light.

I suppose for an atom you should count the ironzation levels for the potential of electrons, they they are between 500 and 2500 kj/mol, which works out as roughly between 5 and 25 electron volts. again showing electrons to be heavier than photons.

Hello Again!

"the way that excel talks about the sample variance vs. population variance is misleading..."

The way excel talks about it (which I'm sure is copyrighted) is:

VAR(number1,number2,...)
Estimates variance based on a sample...

VARP(number1,number2,...)
Calculates variance based on the entire population...

Note the words "estimate" and "calculate", and "sample" and "population".

>> inferring to the population (which is typical, but is NOT the sample variance).

No, this is the definition of SAMPLE VARIANCE... Sample variance is the variance of a sample of random variables drawn from some distribution... see: http://www.mhhe.com/business/opsci/bstat/Sahai_PDF _files/S.pdf.

Your statements above appear incorrect.

BTW: I don't like MS anymore than the next guy, but I love Excel, and don't use OO because the functions are frustrating compared to Excel.

(oh, and I am a Statistician)
Gregg Lind
U of MN
Dept. of Biostatistics
contact me offline with any further questions:
lind1199 _ umn.edu

You have your history a bit wrong.

Peet's was first being founded by Alfred Peet in 1966.

Starbucks was founded by Jerry Baldwin (current CEO of Peet's), Gordon Bowker (also a co-founder of Red Hook Ale and The Seattle Weekly), and Zev Siegel who were all fans of Peet's coffee. Peet essentially taught them everything they knew about buying, roasting, brewing, and selling gourmet specialty coffee.

Howard Schultz didn't join the company until 1982 when he became the company's marketing manager (he esssentially lobbied Baldwin, Bowker, and Siegel for the job).

In 1984 the owners of Starbucks jumped at the chance to buy Peet's (Peet was retiring).

In 1985 Schultz left Starbucks to pursue his vision of Milanese style espresso bars by founding Il Giornale. He received considerable help from Baldwin and Bowker, both financial and in retailing and marketing advice.

In 1987 Baldwin and Bowker decided they wanted to sell Starbucks. Bowker wanted to focus on Red Hook and Baldwin wanted to focus on Peet's. Schultz made the winning bid for Starbucks and merged it with Il Giornale. The rest they say is history.

Schultz hired the founder of Seattle's Cafe Allegro to be Il Giornale's retail operations manager. He continues to serve as a Starbucks executive to this day.

Jim Stewart founded The Wet Whisker in 1970, which was later known as Stewart Brother's Coffee, then SBC, then as Seattle's Best Coffee. SBC's parent company Seattle Coffee Company was acquired by Starbucks in 2003. Stewart was also influenced and mentored by Alfred Peet.

Jerry Baldwin continues to serve as Director of Peet's Coffee & Tea. Baldwin's prior association with Starbucks probably explains some of the ill will between the two companies.

Links to more info:
http://www.mhhe.com/business/management/thompson/1 1e/case/starbucks.html
http://www.mondaymemo.net/020923feature.htm
http://www.starbucks.com/aboutus/timeline.asp

Check out:

Fundamentals of Digital Logic by Brown & Vranesic

Available in both a VHLD and Verilog version for your learning pleasure. Both books ship with a copy of Quartus II from Altera. You can get Altera development kits here if you're looking for something bigger and better than a Spartan-IIe.

Disclaimer: I work with the authors.

What you're describing is basically a Catch-22 situation. The 2-party system has to be changed before someone not in one of the two major political parties can win, but the system won't change unless something major happens to shake it up ... like a third-party candidate winning.

Frankly, I'm fed up with both parties. Now what would be really interesting would be if a group of people who had a Clue would start working now to get momentum going for a third-party candidate to challenge the Democrats and Republicans in 2008. After all, one definition of impulse is:

the product of force and the time interval over which the force acts

Now the major parties have a lot of force, but act over a short period of time. A minor party might be able to cause the same impulse by using less force but for a longer period of time.

So ... CowboyNeal in 2008!

There are some rumors that the prions which cause mad cow disease were developed as part of the extensive biological and chemical weapons programs of the former Soviet Union. Agencies such as: Biopreparat, the FSB (formerly the KGB), and the Soviet Military were all involved.

In another chilling development, Vozrozhdeniye Island in the Aral Sea, where much testing of biological agents including anthrax, bubonic plague, glanders, and other extremely infectious agents occurred supposedly contains massive amounts of anthrax hastily buried by Russian scientists amidst the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989. More fodder for the conspiracy theorists out there...

Tomatoes are poisonous

It's part of the deadly nightshade family. The berries are okay when they're ripe. Don't eat the leaves.

> Doubt it. The Y chromosome is a mutation of the X chromosome and contains much less information.

Well, that's why you want to use two parents, each carries an X chromosome. I'd guess it'd involve the use of Cyst Progenitor Cells and an Artificial Womb.

> this research and my time machine seem about equally incomplete

That's what Ebay is for ;)

One of the leaders in computer architecture, Yale Patt, has already written a book based on this concept. He gives enough of an overview of logic design to understand things at an RTL (register) level, and distills CPU design to its essentials. He doesn't get to C until half way through the book.

His observation is that CS students have a MUCH easier time comprehending things like recursion when they understand what's really going on inside.

(My efforts to get this book introduced at my old university were unsuccessful, as the department chairman was afraid that teaching assembly language would drive students away. He wanted to teach them Java instead.)

Head... about... to... EXPLODE!!!

Here's a very interesting paper on multiculturalism with an excellent bibliography should you want to look into it further.

You want stats about ethnic diversity? Compare China (.118), Japan(.01), and Korea (.004) to Canada (.75) and the USA (.50) (a higher number indicates greater diversity: it's the chance of two random people being of different ethnicity).

The point is that Canada and the US are very diverse because they're centres of ongoing immigration, even though they deal with it differently (mosaic VS melting pot: see the previous link on multiculturalism).

I'm just beginning to make the transition from completely clueless to slightly clueless. One of the first things I discovered is that flashes (at least the built-in kind on the sort of cheap digital camera I use) are horrible and evil, and you really want to do without a flash whenever you possibly can. Fortunately, CCDs are pretty fast, so all I have to do is forcibly disable the flash and hold the camera really steady.

But perhaps you are at a more advanced stage than I am, and having more interesting problems. I generally am quite happy with the quality of the colors I take outdoors. Are you?

Incidentally, National Geographic got in trouble for using tricks and doesn't anymore.

It explains the broad steps each software project should have, and applies the lessons taught to a (somewhat trival) sample application.

1. Requirements
2. Specifications
3. Design
4. Implementaiton
5. Integration
6. MAINTENANCE!

I think this (or any other software engineering book worth its weight, such as the Unified Software Development Process, the preeminent book on UML by the creators of UML) is a must have in any IT person's bookshelf, manager or not.

Lastly, note that the 6th edition of this book is going to print soon and should be available in a few months. The new edition has been highly reworked to include concepts from the Unified Software Development Process and more on UML and how to use it in software engineering.

I'm not even going near your other fantasies.

Here's a link to the website.
http://www.mhhe.com/engcs/engmech/beerjohnston/vm/ index.mhtml

But you don't need to do every problem with a graph. Look into operations research. What you do there is boil down all the limits.

Example, to fly this plane means R fuel cost, S crew cost, T maintenance, U airport costs, V etc... Now put in this information for all possible flights, and all the passenger demand info (you'd want regular flight days, as well as holidays, etc..) and put all of this into a gigantic equations where you are trying to maximize or minimize something - maximize profits, or maybe minimize certain costs. Then you can relate this to a rather large matrix. Now so far we haven't asked for any info you wouldn't need for your graph. Then you apply one of the methods from operations research to your data set and you get either a number, or maybe a bound range of an answer - without the contruction of the graph, or all of the graph traversals...

Yes, if you want to do something on-the-fly, like have a computer fly the planes for you, and update as weather changes then you'd probably want to think about a graph. But to generate the day-to-day schedules for your planes, look into OR.

Here's the textbook I reccoment to learn Operations Research: here

It starts with transistors, talks about the design of a basic computer, introduces assembly language, and ends with an introduction to C. All of this in one or two semesters designed to be taken as an intro. sequence or in parallel with a more traditional track. I'd love to see a curriculum where the first year includes a course that uses Java and another course that uses this book.

"The trouble with biology is that it is full of facts. An unimaginable number of factual statements could be made about the few million species of organisms on earth. Someone once published an example of a college zoology exam from the pre-Darwinian era that required only the recitation of endless anatomical facts; the Darwinian paradigm changed that, and for a long time, biology was taught primarily as a collection of these facts organized around the principle of natural selection and the fact of evolution. Of course, students of biology must still learn many facts about the natural world, often fascinating facts that motivate them to continue their personal explorations. But as the science of biology matures, it should increasingly subsume facts under general principles and develop coherent general concepts. As our knowledge of molecular, cellular, and physiological processes has grown, that foundation emerges from the genetic conception of an organism: a structure that operates on the basis of information in its genome."

Burton Guttman, author of the College textbook Biology