Slashdot Mirror


User: nickorr

nickorr's activity in the archive.

Stories
0
Comments
4
First seen
Last seen
Profile
(view on slashdot.org)

Comments · 4

  1. Re:While... on BusinessWeek on Opening Apple's iTunes DRM · · Score: 1

    I don't directly, I tried to search for it, but didn't find it. There were some articles a while back in fairly major journals about how all of the parts of the iPod are just off the shelf bits (including the OS) and it took apple to have the brain to put it together. Well that was the spin the writer put on it anyway.

    I'm sure if you could dig up the list of copyright info for the ipod, it would be there.

    Oh hang on : PortalPlayer. Do a google on them and see what you find.

  2. some retailers do discount on Finding Holiday Discounts on iPods? · · Score: 1

    I know here in Oz, that most retailers don't discount, and I never really asked why, I assumed it was just them going for higher margins. However I know that streetwise software does. They've always got good discounts on all the apple stuff.

  3. Re:A question on Genome · · Score: 1

    I would love to know how much of this figure is actually used to differentiate one person from another. For example, I've read that there seems to be a lot of genes that don't have a function. Then there are whole swathes of genes to determine our physical makeup (ie build all our internal organs.) Once you factor out all of this, how much is left??

    5, 10, 20, or 0.01. That would surely reduce the number a little?

  4. Re:How does this mock religion? on Planet Gattaca · · Score: 1

    Given all of the reasoning against life forming, why would it form? It isn't like there are billions of puddles of goo in the universe solely devoted to mixing amino acids. And to argue that it could happen over billions of years isn't an answer. I'll say it again, all of that has to happen *at the same time*. So what if a gene happens to be formed? That's a far cry from the complex formulas that life requires.

    You can't argue against this logic by saying the chances of it happenning are are too slim. That by itself isn't an argument.

    I myself are very much a scientist, but I try my best not to disparage relgious beliefs, they have their place. However when you argue with this logic, you are using scientific logic (and principles) to prove your point. Following your logic however does not lead (scientifically) to your conclusion that it couldn't happen.