Where did the state say this? The word "impractical" appears nowhere in TFA. What they're doing is still absurd, but that's no reason to misquote them.
"By contrast, if the hypothalamus is impacted testosterone and estrogen levels may significantly decrease or increase, all of which would effect sexual and reproductive success."
Sexual and reproductive success will be brought about by significant changes in testosterone and estrogen levels.
"Damage to sperm can result in infertility or effect the sex ratio of offspring."
There would be no sex ratio of offspring at all without sperm damage.
"alterations and reductions in testosterone levels can effect the sexual orientation"
Offspring would be asexual were it not for alterations and reductions in testosterone levels.
"Reductions in testosterone would effect male sexual functioning and fertility"
Bullshit.
"Stress will effect fertility in women"
So if you're trying to conceive, stage a wedding disaster.
"Therefore, it can be predicted normal fetal development (Joseph 2000c), would be effected by reduced gravity (Ma et al., 2008; Ronca 2003)."
So that's why all our kids are messed up down here.
"It is now well established that cellular structure, morphology, and genetic expression may be abnormally effected in microgravity and that the cytoskeleton and microtubules are gravity sensitive and may be grossly altered (Crawford-Young 2006; Ma et al., 2008; Ronca 2003)."
OK, you got lucky with that one because it makes sense both ways.
"Microgravity has a significant impact on both cell shape and cytoskeleton (Crawford-Young 2006). Cells show signs of changes in the nucleus and in cell shape, and cells which form layers become disorganized, such that the layers do not develop normally. This would include the brain, the outer coating of which consists of 6 layers, and effect the embroyonic neural tube which is also layered and becomes the brain (Joseph 1982, 1999a, 2000c)."
I think that says ultimately the brain is brought about by microgravity.
"Prolonged and chronic stress would effect the mother, fetus, infant and child"
Exactly when do they appear out of nowhere?
"However, it is not just the human female on Mars, but the fertility of the men which may be effected by radiation."
That's a lot to bring about, but I think radiation is up to the challenge.
"Sperm production can be profoundly reduced and effected by radiation"
Brought about, reduced, brought about, reduced,... hey, men don't need radiation for that.
Just re-mount most of the windows slightly shimmed to a random angle. Besides scattering the reflected sunlight, the building's reflection of the neighborhood would look sweet!
You're just jealous because I got J. J. Abrams to follow me around all day shaking and smacking my head to make every moment of my life as exciting as a space jump onto a drilling platform.
Now try that with a live audio feed. What would you use for the profile? Perhaps a crowd mic mix, but then your profile includes ALL of the crowd sounds and not just the horns, so you'd end up removing the desirable sounds as well and the rest would sound like a small section of burbly aliens.
But I don't agree with the notch filter approach either. Natural sounds aren't confined to individual notches of frequencies, so you can't expect to "notch out" the sound of these horns any more effectively than you could remove a tree from an image by erasing all pixels that have a specific green hue.
Check out the angle of the shadow cast by the truss... This must have been projected from somewhere in the crowd. Somebody snuck in a prototype of their miniaturized laser projector.
Hint, on a clear night, if they were continuously shining it, that beam would be rather visible from the ground or the sky.
From personal experience with sky pointing on a clear night with a green laser pointer from Think Geek, the beam is highly visible when viewed nearly parallel to its path, but it becomes nearly impossible to see as you approach a perpendicular viewing angle. Other people around me could see what I was pointing at in the sky, but they could not see the beam as close to the ground as I could because they were viewing that section of it more perpendicularly than I was.
Someone could probably explain this more scientifically than I can here, but my guess is it has to do with the fact that when I'm viewing the entire length of the beam into the sky, I have all those millions of dust particles through miles of air reflecting it back for me to see, whereas if the beam is crossing my view from one side to another, I'm only seeing a short section of it, which maybe only has a few hundred dust particles being illuminated, and only a small fraction of which are scattering photons in my particular direction (as opposed to straight back to the beam source).
Therefore, I doubt that an aircraft pilot flying and looking horizontally would be able to see any ground-to-air beam before they got to it. A helicopter pilot would need to hover near intersection with the beam and then look parallel to its path to see it. An airplane pilot would need to do a nose-dive toward the beam source or a steep climb towards its destination.
Isn't that what's going on here? When a my brain imagines something that isn't really there, it draws on my memory of things I have seen throughout my life.
If you give a computer a huge memory of images and the ability to apply them towards creating a scene it has never "seen" before, you have given it an imagination.
Re:Read it! That was taken way out of context.
on
Google's Evil NDA
·
· Score: 1
The "mentioning" and "implying" verbs have the proper tense for the subject to which they pertain: "articles, advertising, publicity or other matter". They use the same tense as "relating" because they pertain to the same subject.
It sounds like many people are misreading this as saying "Participant agrees to not mention or imply the name of Google", which is clearly incorrect.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow... Not a tool, just incompetent at searching. Thanks for being informative and not too harsh. :)
Where did the state say this? The word "impractical" appears nowhere in TFA. What they're doing is still absurd, but that's no reason to misquote them.
...was a time traveler!
AL: *singing away inside booth*
TIM: Al! Can you hear me?
AL: I can hear you...
TIM: Think about that.
Sexual and reproductive success will be brought about by significant changes in testosterone and estrogen levels.
There would be no sex ratio of offspring at all without sperm damage.
Offspring would be asexual were it not for alterations and reductions in testosterone levels.
Bullshit.
So if you're trying to conceive, stage a wedding disaster.
So that's why all our kids are messed up down here.
OK, you got lucky with that one because it makes sense both ways.
I think that says ultimately the brain is brought about by microgravity.
Exactly when do they appear out of nowhere?
That's a lot to bring about, but I think radiation is up to the challenge.
Brought about, reduced, brought about, reduced, ... hey, men don't need radiation for that.
Just re-mount most of the windows slightly shimmed to a random angle. Besides scattering the reflected sunlight, the building's reflection of the neighborhood would look sweet!
...any argument about the misunderstanding of the equal sign from someone who misuses the word "is".
From TFV: "One of the bigger issues is, is that..."
You're just jealous because I got J. J. Abrams to follow me around all day shaking and smacking my head to make every moment of my life as exciting as a space jump onto a drilling platform.
They'll learn the difference rather quickly when they plug the 100W powered cable into their laptop's NIC.
If a patient is undergoing telesurgery, that "kill switch" could turn out to be aptly named.
Now try that with a live audio feed. What would you use for the profile? Perhaps a crowd mic mix, but then your profile includes ALL of the crowd sounds and not just the horns, so you'd end up removing the desirable sounds as well and the rest would sound like a small section of burbly aliens.
But I don't agree with the notch filter approach either. Natural sounds aren't confined to individual notches of frequencies, so you can't expect to "notch out" the sound of these horns any more effectively than you could remove a tree from an image by erasing all pixels that have a specific green hue.
He should have quoted that prophecy in lolcat to better match the rest of his "article".
This biker got photographed at least 53 times.
(Although he might have been aware of that...)
Does "the TFA" say anything about RAS syndrome?
Check out the angle of the shadow cast by the truss... This must have been projected from somewhere in the crowd. Somebody snuck in a prototype of their miniaturized laser projector.
Yeah, but reading would be a bitch. "Get that damn cursor out of my way!"
I'd rather have no cursor at all until I somehow signal that I want to interact with the screen at the current point of my gaze.
Senator Stevens? Is that you?
And when the 4,294,967,297th world wants in? Then what???
From personal experience with sky pointing on a clear night with a green laser pointer from Think Geek, the beam is highly visible when viewed nearly parallel to its path, but it becomes nearly impossible to see as you approach a perpendicular viewing angle. Other people around me could see what I was pointing at in the sky, but they could not see the beam as close to the ground as I could because they were viewing that section of it more perpendicularly than I was.
Someone could probably explain this more scientifically than I can here, but my guess is it has to do with the fact that when I'm viewing the entire length of the beam into the sky, I have all those millions of dust particles through miles of air reflecting it back for me to see, whereas if the beam is crossing my view from one side to another, I'm only seeing a short section of it, which maybe only has a few hundred dust particles being illuminated, and only a small fraction of which are scattering photons in my particular direction (as opposed to straight back to the beam source).
Therefore, I doubt that an aircraft pilot flying and looking horizontally would be able to see any ground-to-air beam before they got to it. A helicopter pilot would need to hover near intersection with the beam and then look parallel to its path to see it. An airplane pilot would need to do a nose-dive toward the beam source or a steep climb towards its destination.
...and it's bigger than my watch.
...Imagination.
Isn't that what's going on here? When a my brain imagines something that isn't really there, it draws on my memory of things I have seen throughout my life.
If you give a computer a huge memory of images and the ability to apply them towards creating a scene it has never "seen" before, you have given it an imagination.
The "mentioning" and "implying" verbs have the proper tense for the subject to which they pertain: "articles, advertising, publicity or other matter". They use the same tense as "relating" because they pertain to the same subject.
It sounds like many people are misreading this as saying "Participant agrees to not mention or imply the name of Google", which is clearly incorrect.