Re:Free O'Reilly Advertising
on
Bioinformatics
·
· Score: 1
... this Newsweek article on bioinformatics
Neat-o! Sounds like news for nerds, and I'm a nerd! great!
, and also notes: "At O'Reilly, we just published our first bioinformatics book last week, Learning Bioinformatics Computer Skills, by Cynthia Gibas and Per Jambeck,
Good to get the word out, I guess.. for me, and O'Reilly..
and it immediately rocketed to the top of the Amazon Computer bestseller list.
Um... do you want a medal?
This definitely appears to be a new area for the computer industry that's just starting to hit people's radar big time.
Because you published the book? Oh, because the book has done well for all of a week. Right.
I've also made the point to VCs looking at distributed computation startups that what I see on sites like slashdot is a lot of movement by hackers towards new and interesting problems.
Wait.. I read slashdot.. hackers, apparently, read slashdot.. I'm just like a hacker! That's a good thing, I think! Thanks for the free compliment! btw, what's the book cost?
And science looks a lot more interesting than some of the business computing that's been front and center the past couple of years. And the Biological Open Source Computing Conference I spoke at last year was definitely popping with ideas and excitement.
OPEN SOURCE!!! GOOD!!!! OPEN GOOD OPEN GOOD GOOD GOPENOD GOOOOOD
Unfortunately, this year's conference is in Copenhagen, right before the O'Reilly open source convention, but I definitely urge slashdotters to check out this area.
The O'Reilly open source convention, eh? Is that free? No? What's the cost for that?
Demand for perl expertise is especially high.
Um.. at the open source convention, the Biological Open Source Computing Conference, slashdot, at O'Reilly, or at Newsweek? I'm getting confused...
You're assuming - without a shred of evidence - that there won't be further developments in either the technologies you mentioned, or other technologies entirely. The tech on my mind is nuclear _fusion_; current theoretical technologies can, on paper, power the earth at ~1000 times it's current energy demands for >1 000 000 years, or some such nutty time/level like that. And, within that past ~30 years, the tech has gone from a theory of the reaction to a working reactor design, several experimental reactor designs around the world, and (as of 1997/98), a reactor has reached a 1-1 ratio of energy input to energy output.
All this aside, the technology itself is a better solution than all other current solutions combined: single reactors can have high levels of output, the reaction produces no long-term radioactive waste and the reactors themselves require only 50 years to become safe, there is no risk of meltdown/explosion, and the reaction itself is simply a fusion of dutireum (sp?) (H30) and plasma, meaning that the oceans themselves are the only fuel needed.
unlike me, the station gets it's cd's for free from the record companies - why is the $$$ I pay in cd costs different that the $$$ the station pays in licensing costs?
You're assuming those who get music of the free services won't consiously support the artists they listen to most. I'm also from Nova Scotia; a local band (the sycamores) both sells cds and gives away mp3s on their website. I first listened to the mp3s; I now listen their cds. By asking these services to be stopped, you're asking people to abbridge their right to use that which they have bought for their own ends, in order to protect a third party. Unless the free services actually do harm to the third party (musicians, that is), you should not be so eager to end trading. And, were you to have followed the news, you would know - music sales have risen every year since napster and it's breathren have been around.
I work at a college radio station. The munificant record companies have given us the right to play anything in their many catalogues (essentially any shrink-wrapped cd is ok to play on-air). The have, thus, given myself and the other progammers there the right to share many songs with many people, one at a time. Why, I ask you, is this form of music sharing any diffferent on a basic level than swapping mp3s or.mov's?
Yeah. The PM still has two (non-theoretical) parties who hold power over him: the supreme court (The justify their decisions convincingly, and appear - so far as I can tell - to be impartial), who can decide on the constitutionality of any laws the PM tries to put into place, and the PM's own party (the prime ministierial position is a creation of party politics; our system has simply adapted from a non-party based to party-based parliament) who can, if they wish, vote the pm out of his position as the leader of the party.
So long as the pm has a loyal majority and party, however, I do admit - it is _very_ difficult to place much restraint on his actions. But, it is good to remember that danger to society comes not from potential, but from practice.
The system as it is has some advantages, as well, in terms of accountablility: daily question period - only really effective when the pm shows up, but non-attendance is notices quickly in the press, which leads to the real utility - it is a ~2 hour period where, unrestrained by most potential limits to speech; mp's can't be charged with libel while in parliament; the only real rules that can be used are the rules of conduct. What this creates is a time when any dirty laundry can be aired, without reprecussions on the critic. Further, the public sees this (watch cpac. it's slow, but it can be very interesting. it's not like there's anything good on cbc! though pbs might be another matter:) ), meaning that the vital tool - public opinion - can be used any day in which parliament is in session. And it is that - an informed public - that is the greatest safeguard against any overly strong powers. The perfect system (for fun, someday, look at the actual constitution of the ussr. It's a read more stirring than the declaration of independance or the bill of rights) can always be twisted, but as long as people are given a chance to head off any unhelpful leader, they can bring in the courts to full effect, which is the true most powerful tool in place to inhibit real problems. But, I ramble again... a bit like the guy who said...
Whether the CBC should compete against private corporations is a bit of a pandora's box so far as debates are concerned.. I think I stand somewhat near where you do; as long as there is a dearth (sp?) of 'canadian' (and by that I use Trudeau's 'multicultural' meaning of nationality) content on television, I support the existance of a publically-funded station to fill in that gap. If private industry somehow manages to produce good-quality cdn content, then I don't see a real need for the cbc. That being said, I think the probability of that happening is slim to none.
So far as broadcast control goes, I worry less about the Prime Minister than I do about the CRTC, and the considerable power concentrated there in terms of broadcasting licences (the best example is the long and hard try to get an urban radio station in Toronto), what is 'proper' content on the airwaves (read: censorship (I can't say 'fuck' on the air at 2pm on the radio in halifax. That's because of the CRTC. Oh, and sex is too mature for anyone who listens to radio between ~6am and ~9pm...)), and so forth.. I ramble, so I'll finish.. If the PM has a hand in crtc policy, I'm even more worried about his power.. if not, I'll seperate the two entities and treat them as such.
They are arresting innocent people. That's why they use the method of payment for the train to determine what degree of suspicion to place on people. 'Real' criminals arn't usually kind enough to sign their own names, so they simply suspect anyone who is old-fasioned enough to use cash. Therefore, they must be harassing people innocent of any crime or rational suspicion of crime in order to find out who, on their lists of 'suspects', deserves that suspicion.
Since prejudices are so common, it is sometimes useful to ask - when dealing with privacy issues - what you would think of this happening - in secret, until the parties were asked - in the former USSR. If your perception of the severity of the act changes, ask yourself why.
On the cbc.. I know it has bias (look at my original post).. all I was saying is that their bias seems not to be pro-government. Rather, it is somewhat anti-government at times. The only news I can stand is the News Hour on PBS and BBC World.
On canada's status party-wise.. yes, we have been a single-party state for a while now, but I'm not sure if that is the fault of the right or the left... I'm positive the Liberals have done what they can to divide and conquer the opposition, but I'm also sure that the division on the right can also be attributed to the parties on the right. If the alliance had really wanted a united right, they could have told their members to join the pc, and vice-versa.
The CBC is government funded, but the 'government' dosen't decide what programming to air, what bias to have in news broadcasts, etc. This is written into the structure of the cbc... parliament, or the prime minister (I can't remember which) the director (though most prime ministers/parliaments inherit the director and never get an opportunity to appoint a new one); everything else is decided within the cbc. There is an ombusman for public complaints.. there are explicit laws against any government intereference with the _content_ of the broadcasts, political commercials during election time are split between all major (5+ ) parties and not towards the governing party, etc.
All this would be moot if the broadcasts were biased towards the state.. which they arn't. Look at the coverage of cbc news towards issues such as the tainted blood inquiery, the apec protests/aftermath, the 'shawinigate' shite, etc. If anything, the cbc has been more critical of the governing party/government than the other major tv network news, ctv.
I agree with most of what you said - another nature show on the wonders of the three-toed sloth is nice, but not 'vital'. It's just that you're forgetting about some - recent - programming on pbs which I have enver seen on commercial networks. Frontline did a show on the Drug War recently that really taught me alot about the full history of the drug war (i.e. that treatment programs had been tried during Nixon's time in office because of high rates of heroin use in the military, and that they did seem to have a large positive effect). Another frontline program on the vietnam war did something that no tlc program would do - it gave the history of foreign interaction with vietnam since the end of the second world war, allowing the viewer to place the american involvement there in a much fuller context.
Anyway, PBS still does some really important stuff that no other network wants to do.
Nuclear reactions, emission-less fuel systems - they're both the same... Genius A figures the science/technology behind one potentially helpful technology, and Genius B finds out how to use that technology to further the cause of war. If G.B. can.
I don't know much at all about database operations, but the poster three previous (to this post) said that suns wern't better when speed was required, or the number of users was 5000. Rather, it was designed for a high volume of small jobs (like webserving or running small scripts, I would guess). Thus, the sun wouldn't even be designed for an use like Oracle hosting _if_ speed/scalability in DB hosting is a high-calculation/speed_needing task. Though, I really don't know what I'm talking about. Just doing my part to alter further the s/n ratio on./ .
as I read it, at least, was to encourage asteroid detection. The say at one point that t"Because an asteroid could be deflected without anyone on Earth realising, the devastation could be made to look natural.
; at the end of the article, they mention that "But the more asteroids we know about, they harder it would be for a country to find one and use it as a weapon."
Put that together, and you have another incentive for asteriod detection research. Oh, and the group that's studying this is 'the astronomer pressure group Spaceguard UK'. QED.
If it had been a nuclear submarine \snip\ most of eastern China would now be a puddle of glass...If nothing else, I have to say that this is impressive - you not only _know_ what the Chinese government would do if this situation were somehow contorted to involve a nuclear submarine, but you also know that the US would decide the most appropriate response would be to kill ~500m people! You've good connections.
yeah you're a troll, but for those who haven't read the article (which, incidentally, was posted here earlier today..).. the article is total bs. it takes a few quotes from a book that linus wrote where he puts mach down. since osx is already out, and there's actual current news about it, they invent stories to start flamewars, making them edgy. so long as you click a few more banners...
I took the main accusation to be that the company was misrepresenting their status, the problems being worked on by the distributed clients, and the eventual goals of the cancer research. Being for-profit is not, in itself, bad; being for-profit while waving a non-profit banner, though, is.
Slashdot Mirror
Neat-o! Sounds like news for nerds, and I'm a nerd! great!
, and also notes: "At O'Reilly, we just published our first bioinformatics book last week, Learning Bioinformatics Computer Skills, by Cynthia Gibas and Per Jambeck,
Good to get the word out, I guess.. for me, and O'Reilly..
and it immediately rocketed to the top of the Amazon Computer bestseller list.
Um... do you want a medal?
This definitely appears to be a new area for the computer industry that's just starting to hit people's radar big time.
Because you published the book? Oh, because the book has done well for all of a week. Right.
I've also made the point to VCs looking at distributed computation startups that what I see on sites like slashdot is a lot of movement by hackers towards new and interesting problems.
Wait.. I read slashdot.. hackers, apparently, read slashdot.. I'm just like a hacker! That's a good thing, I think! Thanks for the free compliment! btw, what's the book cost?
And science looks a lot more interesting than some of the business computing that's been front and center the past couple of years. And the Biological Open Source Computing Conference I spoke at last year was definitely popping with ideas and excitement.
OPEN SOURCE!!! GOOD!!!! OPEN GOOD OPEN GOOD GOOD GOPENOD GOOOOOD
Unfortunately, this year's conference is in Copenhagen, right before the O'Reilly open source convention, but I definitely urge slashdotters to check out this area.
The O'Reilly open source convention, eh? Is that free? No? What's the cost for that?
Demand for perl expertise is especially high.
Um.. at the open source convention, the Biological Open Source Computing Conference, slashdot, at O'Reilly, or at Newsweek? I'm getting confused...
Linus has,in fact,grown,and explosively-JonKatz
All this aside, the technology itself is a better solution than all other current solutions combined: single reactors can have high levels of output, the reaction produces no long-term radioactive waste and the reactors themselves require only 50 years to become safe, there is no risk of meltdown/explosion, and the reaction itself is simply a fusion of dutireum (sp?) (H30) and plasma, meaning that the oceans themselves are the only fuel needed.
Linus has,in fact,grown,and explosively-JonKatz
Ah, they're keeping at it.
nice loop there..
The cynic might say linux toasters are great at taking prepared dough, but a few of them burn it quickly
so long as it was solely for the 'evil' gene in phb's
unlike me, the station gets it's cd's for free from the record companies - why is the $$$ I pay in cd costs different that the $$$ the station pays in licensing costs?
"...Will the ISPs cave in?" Yes, they will. But its gonna be interesting to see where this goes. "
Where, in that, does taco do anything like what you describe?
You're assuming those who get music of the free services won't consiously support the artists they listen to most. I'm also from Nova Scotia; a local band (the sycamores) both sells cds and gives away mp3s on their website. I first listened to the mp3s; I now listen their cds. By asking these services to be stopped, you're asking people to abbridge their right to use that which they have bought for their own ends, in order to protect a third party. Unless the free services actually do harm to the third party (musicians, that is), you should not be so eager to end trading. And, were you to have followed the news, you would know - music sales have risen every year since napster and it's breathren have been around.
I work at a college radio station. The munificant record companies have given us the right to play anything in their many catalogues (essentially any shrink-wrapped cd is ok to play on-air). The have, thus, given myself and the other progammers there the right to share many songs with many people, one at a time. Why, I ask you, is this form of music sharing any diffferent on a basic level than swapping mp3s or .mov's?
So long as the pm has a loyal majority and party, however, I do admit - it is _very_ difficult to place much restraint on his actions. But, it is good to remember that danger to society comes not from potential, but from practice.
The system as it is has some advantages, as well, in terms of accountablility: daily question period - only really effective when the pm shows up, but non-attendance is notices quickly in the press, which leads to the real utility - it is a ~2 hour period where, unrestrained by most potential limits to speech; mp's can't be charged with libel while in parliament; the only real rules that can be used are the rules of conduct. What this creates is a time when any dirty laundry can be aired, without reprecussions on the critic. Further, the public sees this (watch cpac. it's slow, but it can be very interesting. it's not like there's anything good on cbc! though pbs might be another matter :) ), meaning that the vital tool - public opinion - can be used any day in which parliament is in session. And it is that - an informed public - that is the greatest safeguard against any overly strong powers. The perfect system (for fun, someday, look at the actual constitution of the ussr. It's a read more stirring than the declaration of independance or the bill of rights) can always be twisted, but as long as people are given a chance to head off any unhelpful leader, they can bring in the courts to full effect, which is the true most powerful tool in place to inhibit real problems. But, I ramble again... a bit like the guy who said ...
So far as broadcast control goes, I worry less about the Prime Minister than I do about the CRTC, and the considerable power concentrated there in terms of broadcasting licences (the best example is the long and hard try to get an urban radio station in Toronto), what is 'proper' content on the airwaves (read: censorship (I can't say 'fuck' on the air at 2pm on the radio in halifax. That's because of the CRTC. Oh, and sex is too mature for anyone who listens to radio between ~6am and ~9pm...)), and so forth.. I ramble, so I'll finish .. If the PM has a hand in crtc policy, I'm even more worried about his power.. if not, I'll seperate the two entities and treat them as such.
They are arresting innocent people. That's why they use the method of payment for the train to determine what degree of suspicion to place on people. 'Real' criminals arn't usually kind enough to sign their own names, so they simply suspect anyone who is old-fasioned enough to use cash. Therefore, they must be harassing people innocent of any crime or rational suspicion of crime in order to find out who, on their lists of 'suspects', deserves that suspicion.
Since prejudices are so common, it is sometimes useful to ask - when dealing with privacy issues - what you would think of this happening - in secret, until the parties were asked - in the former USSR. If your perception of the severity of the act changes, ask yourself why.
On canada's status party-wise.. yes, we have been a single-party state for a while now, but I'm not sure if that is the fault of the right or the left... I'm positive the Liberals have done what they can to divide and conquer the opposition, but I'm also sure that the division on the right can also be attributed to the parties on the right. If the alliance had really wanted a united right, they could have told their members to join the pc, and vice-versa.
offtopic test..yeah
offtopic test...
The CBC is government funded, but the 'government' dosen't decide what programming to air, what bias to have in news broadcasts, etc. This is written into the structure of the cbc... parliament, or the prime minister (I can't remember which) the director (though most prime ministers/parliaments inherit the director and never get an opportunity to appoint a new one); everything else is decided within the cbc. There is an ombusman for public complaints.. there are explicit laws against any government intereference with the _content_ of the broadcasts, political commercials during election time are split between all major (5+ ) parties and not towards the governing party, etc.
All this would be moot if the broadcasts were biased towards the state.. which they arn't. Look at the coverage of cbc news towards issues such as the tainted blood inquiery, the apec protests/aftermath, the 'shawinigate' shite, etc. If anything, the cbc has been more critical of the governing party/government than the other major tv network news, ctv.
Anyway, PBS still does some really important stuff that no other network wants to do.
What do you think?
Nuclear reactions, emission-less fuel systems - they're both the same... Genius A figures the science/technology behind one potentially helpful technology, and Genius B finds out how to use that technology to further the cause of war. If G.B. can.
I don't know much at all about database operations, but the poster three previous (to this post) said that suns wern't better when speed was required, or the number of users was 5000. Rather, it was designed for a high volume of small jobs (like webserving or running small scripts, I would guess). Thus, the sun wouldn't even be designed for an use like Oracle hosting _if_ speed/scalability in DB hosting is a high-calculation/speed_needing task. Though, I really don't know what I'm talking about. Just doing my part to alter further the s/n ratio on ./ .
Put that together, and you have another incentive for asteriod detection research. Oh, and the group that's studying this is 'the astronomer pressure group Spaceguard UK'. QED.
If it had been a nuclear submarine \snip\ most of eastern China would now be a puddle of glass ...If nothing else, I have to say that this is impressive - you not only _know_ what the Chinese government would do if this situation were somehow contorted to involve a nuclear submarine, but you also know that the US would decide the most appropriate response would be to kill ~500m people! You've good connections.
yeah you're a troll, but for those who haven't read the article (which, incidentally, was posted here earlier today..) .. the article is total bs. it takes a few quotes from a book that linus wrote where he puts mach down. since osx is already out, and there's actual current news about it, they invent stories to start flamewars, making them edgy. so long as you click a few more banners...
I took the main accusation to be that the company was misrepresenting their status, the problems being worked on by the distributed clients, and the eventual goals of the cancer research. Being for-profit is not, in itself, bad; being for-profit while waving a non-profit banner, though, is.