Seventeen Democrats and one independent joined 49 Republicans in voting against the Dodd-Feingold amendment. Among those voting with the majority was Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the leading candidate for the GOP presidential nomination. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), who is battling for the Democratic nomination, voted in favor of the amendment. His chief rival, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), did not vote.
I think you underestimate just how rich Microsoft is. They just got done trying to buy Yahoo for nearly 48bn, they have lots of cash to throw around due to their desktop monopoly that others do not. If anyone could do it, it's MS by financial brute force alone.
HIV can also spread through "dirty" needles [needles re-used in medicine] blood transfusions + rape. then there's the practice of inheriting wives whose husbands have died from AIDS- those who refuse are often rejected by society and left to fend for themselves which frankly is a tough choice for someone who in all probability has children that would die from malnutrition/lack of medical care otherwise.
Come off it already. "great install experience"... hey, its not a f*cking condo timeshare!
funny you mention that, it was always my understanding that Microsoft made the point that your OS isn't really yours, ie you're just buying a license to use it- true you're not really sharing the time on your OS with anyone else but you did effectively buy the time you do have from MS.
This is as stupid as the naming conventions that have taken over in the open-source world, calling different versions by weird names,, like 'Gutsy Gibbon'.
nothing says you *need* to call the release Gutsy Gibbon, you could just as easily call it Ubuntu 7.10 or just Ubuntu if you like. it's just my opinion but really it's better to have a good OS with a silly name than a mediocre one with a great name.
Now, if you are using binary storage, and each bit stores 1 of 2 values, then you have the possibilities of: 00,01,10,11. Which is 4 different values. Now if you have 4 states for each bit (which I guess wouldn't, by definition, be a bit anymore), then you have 00,01,02,03,10,11,12,13,20,21,22,23,30,31,32,33. So, you have have squared the amount of information you can store.
simply put, no. 1 bit can either be 0 or 1 *not* 00, 01, 10, 11, that would be TWO bits. doubling the number of combos for one "bit" would likely be stored as 00,01,10,11 although what you're actually doing here is storing 0001 and 1011 together hence two "bits" of info can be stored per unit in a 4 state system.
it's about time someone had that point straight- milkyway replicators != Pegasus replicators! the first set basically destroyed the civilization that created reese who created the original replicators as "toys". the pegasus replicators however were created by the ancients to fight the wraith, later the ancients destroyed most but not all of their creation leaving the last surviving replicators to rebuild their "civilization" modeled after the ancients themselves with the exception being that they couldn't modify their own code [damned proprietary software!] and had a "nasty temper" rivaling that of the wraith. here's a more in depth explaination: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replicator_(Stargate)
either that or they end up using our "inferior" alloys instead of those fancy asguard alloys that don't rust. there's a reason they didn't compromise the hull integrity of that nuclear sub or the asguard ships. They are vulnerable to heat and apparently anything that damages the alloys they've used to make themselves out of.
yes, they can puncture cell membranes for one, they're like little molecular needles. That property likely makes them useful in killing bacteria. fullerene, a related molecule in the shape of a soccer ball more of less has shown some toxicity at ppm levels as well. from the attached PDF, it seems that single-walled carbon nanotubes are actually more toxic than multiwalled nanotubes or nanoparticles of SiO2 [quartz] these cells are upregulating certain genes involved in inflammation and then survival genes. the survival genes are in this case involved in regulating the inflammation so that the cell is more likely to survive. all in all rather disturbing considering the kind of cells that are mostly affected in this case [immune cells]
I disagree. Around half the population likes Bush; after all, they voted for him.
go take a look at the stats again- it's all split by political party and even a lot of the republicans are abandoning him.
Just look at how neocons Romney and McCain are doing in the polls and primaries right now: they're doing quite well, despite the fact that they're basically clones of Bush in policy.
like I said, it's all split on party lines, it's devolved into a battle between "us" and "them" and as long as the canidates are technically in line with the majority of party voting/policy people are more than willing to vote for them. then there's the fact that the party throws most of its support behind a single canidate who most often ends up being one of two major contenders making everyone else "irrelevant" in the eyes of most voters. the most anyone one the republican side wants now is to get someone else from their side to be POTUS no matter how much they actually are like Bush. there's blind mindless devotion to a party for you.
Firefox is as popular in Europe as GW Bush is in the US.
the vast majority of support for Bush comes from one specific group of people, not the nation as a whole, the rest of us want him the fuck out of here.
And they both think that gives them some kind of mandate...
considering firefox has at least 10x what anyone else has I'd say that they're doing alright considering IE is "just there" and people need to actively seek out firefox to have it installed. that's the part you're missing, that people actually went out of their way to download firefox rather than use the browser that was already there.
just looking at the new base pair molecular structures here: http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/jacsat/asap/abs/ja078223d.html contrasting with the 4 bases existing in nature it is very unlikely that natural t-rna aminoacylases could recognize these new base pairs and even if they could, it wouldn't result in a new amino acid, it would result in one amino acid having an extra set of synthetic sequence(s) that code for it. these proteins are very specific, if they were not as specific as they are, we'd see a lot more proteins that just aren't right. very bad considering that something as little as exchanging aspartate for glutamate and vice versa can destroy a protein's functionality [one in particular I remember being extremely specific, an exception rather than the rule]
We've done this for 4 base codons and stop codons, there's not much to stop us from doing it with a few extra base pairs.
It's interesting, don't get me wrong--but how -practical- is it?
yes! that's the thing about it, from TFA, it seems that this one in particular somehow doesn't require any extra molecular machinery. there are several other synthetic base pairs that exist in addition to the ones mentioned in TFA and once we evolve the enzymes to replicate DNA with these new base pairs and the t-rna aminoacylase(s) we can certainly make use of them! the interesting thing is that these enzymes are often times not designed at all but EVOLVED.:) here's a few links if you're interested: http://online.sfsu.edu/~rone/GEessays/DNAaltlife.html coding for extra amino acids using existing base-pairs http://de.scientificcommons.org/12040423 6-base DNA prevented from mis-pairing by using a thio analogue of thymidine http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16076453 using 4-base codons to code for proteins
So, essentially, a computer is an extension of my body?
yes. you just communicated to all of us using a computer just as you would have spoken to us. it's an extension of your ability to communicate ideas like your voice or hand signals or any other method a human can use to communicate. heck, half of us or more have momorized where the keys are and don't bother to look down while we type, it's gotten to the point where we don't need to think about it much more than we would if we were speaking.
then is linux really the best method of doing so? Isn't the school in some way doing its students a dis-service my training them on a computing method that they will very likely never use again?
Can you think of anything in Windows that couldn't be figured out by someone who has been trained on Linux? My point is this, the sheer amount of software available out of the box in many linux distros allows you to use many different software programs [open office, Koffice etc..] so after a while, you generally get to understand the general workings of different programs making learning new ones easier. That would as far as I'm concerned, be an advantage. To be able to figure out new software that is similar to what you're already familiar with rather than being trained in one specific program on one specific OS is an advantage not a deficit.
or us to exist using evolutionary theory had to be done in the right order,
not really, experiments with pseudomonas bacteria had shown that these bacteria like others, can and do evolve enzymes to metabolize newly introduced chemicals, most importantly each bacterium evolved new enzymes in different ways. none were alike, none were done in "the right order" in a sense. we later sequenced the gene(s) encoding for these enzymes and showed what set of mutations lead to the formation of these genes. all of them simple steps that occur from time to time in bacterial genomes from deletions to recombination to point mutations and duplications.
that were built upon each other with dependent parts of the microscopic human body all working towards the end goal of a single living cell which don't exactly live well outside the body today.
that's very incoherent but it seems like you're trying to imply that the human body couldn't have evolved from ancestors that lived in a very different environment. bacteria [similar to archea] => eucaryotes => multicellular => evolution of hoc genes, increase in O2 in atmosphere supporting collagen synthesis increasing body size and complexity of available reactions=> vertebrates [stronger body form, some could burrow] => first land animals => [plants with roots evolve] => first mammals => [KT boundary marks mass extinction] => "primitive monkeys" => primate species split off leading to pan and homo genera=> Australopithecus => Homo erectus => two separate species in Homo, one the neanderthals, one humans => neanderthals die out ~30kya recently sequenced neanderthal DNA differs significantly from modern human DNA putting it in its own species separate from ours [fossils suggested this as well] http://www.astro.psu.edu/users/niel/scales/geohist1.ascii it's rather abbreviated although a lot more details can be found in science journals, nature in particular is a good source as is sciencedirect which actually has sections devoted specifically to human evolution, PLOS is a much better source as it is an open access journal [libraries and universities usually have nuch greater access to nature/sciencedirect]
I've yet to see a prediction by scientists of when, where, and what the next species will be, care of evolution.
the timing of species evolution depends on several factors that you would at the least need to take into account. 1) rate of mutation 2) generation time 3) environmental conditions such as predation, toxins, food availability, population size, and/or whether the populations are separated or not. in one specific case two species of wasp like insects were found to have been reproductively isolated because of symbiotic bacteria which occured like this: species A had a certain bacteria that kills the gametes of species B and vice versa, attempts at interbreeding would result in the gametes being destroyed before fertilization. when these bacteria were artificially killed, the two could again interbreed. in another instance, a single gene is responsible for shell shape of certain mollusks which prevents the two groups from interbreeding. chromosomes line up and share/exchange/recombine genetic material in what is called chromosomal crossover. if chromosomes can not pair it can result in sterility. chromosome suplication can cause speciation as was likely the case with human chromosome 2. humans have 46 chromosomes, primates have 48, two primate chromosomes fused to form chromosome 2 [so sayeth the human genome project] in any case, any prediction would need to be done knowing the conditions in which it is to occur. much like I wouldn't ask you to figure out precisely where and when an arrow fired from some random bow would hit the ground without knowing the relative gravity, shape/mass of the arrow, density of air it is flying through, air cur
who says that the people who posted anonymously even visited the site any time close to when the most was made? I mean if you really didn't like someone you'd probably know about sites like that DAYS before posting anything. Or that they posted on the same computer as the one they found the search results? find the results at a public station and post elsewhere or vice versa?
never mind that, imagine how much air was displaced and heated to great temperature. these ships were supposed to be 15 miles in diameter and entered the atmosphere at over 10,000 mph- that's a lot of now very very hot air that needs to get out of the way in a hurry. the air has momentum and while the ship ""could"" stop, the air most decidedly can not. that alone would kill everything beneath these ships. then there was the fact that the ships "hacked" our satellites for their own use when they could have done it with their own technology much more easily without being discovered or needing to find out how our systems worked to even be able to hack them.
I mean, a PowerBook from 1997 connecting to the Internet on the move?
*that* was what bothered you about independence day? It didn't bother you that the guy uploaded a virus on to the Alien mothership's computer which somehow managed to take the shields out? these aliens travel trillions of miles across the galaxy destroying everything in their path and get taken out by a virus that a guy on some backwater planet called Earth whipped up in less than an hour? WTF? Deep impact wasn't as bad as Armageddon, I mean you can't beat the idea that an asteroid "the size of Texas" can be neatly split down the middle by a tactical nuke [the nuke wasn't that big] the only asteroids around that big are sitting comfortably in the asteroid belt and if they ever decided to venture toward Earth there isn't anything we could do about it. You might as well commit Seppuku because something that big isn't going to even notice our entire nuclear arsenal. It'll jsut keep on coming, slamming into the Earth and peeling the Earth like an orange killing *everything* even those pesky bacteria.
I think the only thing worse as far as "hacking" or tech movies would be the one released recently whose plot revolved around getting killed by a text message or something equally ridiculous. The sad thing is that it will probably rake in millions because the general public doesn't care about plot, just how pretty the explosions are and that everything is dumbed down [mutilated] so that they can understand.
sodium cooled reactors also have a tendancy to produce radioactive isotopes of sodium like Na22 or Na24 from the high levels of neutron radiation exposure, the first produced by knocking a neutron out of Na23 and the second from neutron capture. sodium reacts with water to produce sodium hydroxide [caustic soda] and hydrogen gas, both of which are very dangerous in large quantities for obvious reasons.
RNA likely does the same thing as the only differences being that uracil replaces thymine and there's a hydroxyl group in the 2' position. RNA is thought to be one of the most important or the most important chemicals in the formation of life on Earth. it forms complex structures that can be catalytic [self cleaving, primitive peptidase activity etc..] just like proteins and it is a carrier of genetic information. in many organisms, RNA segments are "charged" with an amino acid and the amino acids are strung together like a bead necklace by ribosomes that match RNA anticodons to specific amino acids although in certain viruses, RNA acts primarily as an information carrier in several virus classification groups.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you underestimate just how rich Microsoft is. They just got done trying to buy Yahoo for nearly 48bn, they have lots of cash to throw around due to their desktop monopoly that others do not. If anyone could do it, it's MS by financial brute force alone.
HIV can also spread through "dirty" needles [needles re-used in medicine] blood transfusions + rape. then there's the practice of inheriting wives whose husbands have died from AIDS- those who refuse are often rejected by society and left to fend for themselves which frankly is a tough choice for someone who in all probability has children that would die from malnutrition/lack of medical care otherwise.
it's about time someone had that point straight- milkyway replicators != Pegasus replicators! the first set basically destroyed the civilization that created reese who created the original replicators as "toys". the pegasus replicators however were created by the ancients to fight the wraith, later the ancients destroyed most but not all of their creation leaving the last surviving replicators to rebuild their "civilization" modeled after the ancients themselves with the exception being that they couldn't modify their own code [damned proprietary software!] and had a "nasty temper" rivaling that of the wraith. here's a more in depth explaination:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replicator_(Stargate)
either that or they end up using our "inferior" alloys instead of those fancy asguard alloys that don't rust. there's a reason they didn't compromise the hull integrity of that nuclear sub or the asguard ships. They are vulnerable to heat and apparently anything that damages the alloys they've used to make themselves out of.
40 pieces of silver
-Judas
just looking at the new base pair molecular structures here: http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/jacsat/asap/abs/ja078223d.html contrasting with the 4 bases existing in nature it is very unlikely that natural t-rna aminoacylases could recognize these new base pairs and even if they could, it wouldn't result in a new amino acid, it would result in one amino acid having an extra set of synthetic sequence(s) that code for it. these proteins are very specific, if they were not as specific as they are, we'd see a lot more proteins that just aren't right. very bad considering that something as little as exchanging aspartate for glutamate and vice versa can destroy a protein's functionality [one in particular I remember being extremely specific, an exception rather than the rule]
http://de.scientificcommons.org/12040423 6-base DNA prevented from mis-pairing by using a thio analogue of thymidine
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16076453 using 4-base codons to code for proteins
they don't record their own calls, only the "peasants" beneath them...
not really, experiments with pseudomonas bacteria had shown that these bacteria like others, can and do evolve enzymes to metabolize newly introduced chemicals, most importantly each bacterium evolved new enzymes in different ways. none were alike, none were done in "the right order" in a sense. we later sequenced the gene(s) encoding for these enzymes and showed what set of mutations lead to the formation of these genes. all of them simple steps that occur from time to time in bacterial genomes from deletions to recombination to point mutations and duplications.
that's very incoherent but it seems like you're trying to imply that the human body couldn't have evolved from ancestors that lived in a very different environment. bacteria [similar to archea] => eucaryotes => multicellular => evolution of hoc genes, increase in O2 in atmosphere supporting collagen synthesis increasing body size and complexity of available reactions=> vertebrates [stronger body form, some could burrow] => first land animals => [plants with roots evolve] => first mammals => [KT boundary marks mass extinction] => "primitive monkeys" => primate species split off leading to pan and homo genera=> Australopithecus => Homo erectus => two separate species in Homo, one the neanderthals, one humans => neanderthals die out ~30kya recently sequenced neanderthal DNA differs significantly from modern human DNA putting it in its own species separate from ours [fossils suggested this as well] http://www.astro.psu.edu/users/niel/scales/geohist1.ascii it's rather abbreviated although a lot more details can be found in science journals, nature in particular is a good source as is sciencedirect which actually has sections devoted specifically to human evolution, PLOS is a much better source as it is an open access journal [libraries and universities usually have nuch greater access to nature/sciencedirect]
the timing of species evolution depends on several factors that you would at the least need to take into account. 1) rate of mutation 2) generation time 3) environmental conditions such as predation, toxins, food availability, population size, and/or whether the populations are separated or not. in one specific case two species of wasp like insects were found to have been reproductively isolated because of symbiotic bacteria which occured like this: species A had a certain bacteria that kills the gametes of species B and vice versa, attempts at interbreeding would result in the gametes being destroyed before fertilization. when these bacteria were artificially killed, the two could again interbreed. in another instance, a single gene is responsible for shell shape of certain mollusks which prevents the two groups from interbreeding. chromosomes line up and share/exchange/recombine genetic material in what is called chromosomal crossover. if chromosomes can not pair it can result in sterility. chromosome suplication can cause speciation as was likely the case with human chromosome 2. humans have 46 chromosomes, primates have 48, two primate chromosomes fused to form chromosome 2 [so sayeth the human genome project] in any case, any prediction would need to be done knowing the conditions in which it is to occur. much like I wouldn't ask you to figure out precisely where and when an arrow fired from some random bow would hit the ground without knowing the relative gravity, shape/mass of the arrow, density of air it is flying through, air cur
who says that the people who posted anonymously even visited the site any time close to when the most was made? I mean if you really didn't like someone you'd probably know about sites like that DAYS before posting anything. Or that they posted on the same computer as the one they found the search results? find the results at a public station and post elsewhere or vice versa?
never mind that, imagine how much air was displaced and heated to great temperature. these ships were supposed to be 15 miles in diameter and entered the atmosphere at over 10,000 mph- that's a lot of now very very hot air that needs to get out of the way in a hurry. the air has momentum and while the ship ""could"" stop, the air most decidedly can not. that alone would kill everything beneath these ships. then there was the fact that the ships "hacked" our satellites for their own use when they could have done it with their own technology much more easily without being discovered or needing to find out how our systems worked to even be able to hack them.
I think the only thing worse as far as "hacking" or tech movies would be the one released recently whose plot revolved around getting killed by a text message or something equally ridiculous. The sad thing is that it will probably rake in millions because the general public doesn't care about plot, just how pretty the explosions are and that everything is dumbed down [mutilated] so that they can understand.
sodium cooled reactors also have a tendancy to produce radioactive isotopes of sodium like Na22 or Na24 from the high levels of neutron radiation exposure, the first produced by knocking a neutron out of Na23 and the second from neutron capture. sodium reacts with water to produce sodium hydroxide [caustic soda] and hydrogen gas, both of which are very dangerous in large quantities for obvious reasons.
RNA likely does the same thing as the only differences being that uracil replaces thymine and there's a hydroxyl group in the 2' position. RNA is thought to be one of the most important or the most important chemicals in the formation of life on Earth. it forms complex structures that can be catalytic [self cleaving, primitive peptidase activity etc..] just like proteins and it is a carrier of genetic information. in many organisms, RNA segments are "charged" with an amino acid and the amino acids are strung together like a bead necklace by ribosomes that match RNA anticodons to specific amino acids although in certain viruses, RNA acts primarily as an information carrier in several virus classification groups.