You aren't a mix of your parent's genes, you are a mix of your grandparent's genes. Sex cells go through a process called meiosis
whereby 1 cell splits into 4 cells, each with half the genetic content.
The mother's ovum are formed shortly after conception. A woman is born with every ovum she will ever produce, they just leave the final assembly steps for ovulation. Men form sperm throughout their lives, but these cells are all decendents from the cells that were set aside during the developmental process.
Now how is it that you are actually a combination of your grandparent's genes? Well every human actually has 2 complete sets of DNA. Even the Y chromosome. Only half are expressed at a time. During sex-cell production, all genes come into play. During Metaphase I the chromosomes pair up and swap genes.
If you think of Mendel's experiments, hybrids of a dominant and recessive gene don't express the recessive trait until the second generation. This is why.
Are you saying that the universe won't eventually die, or that its fate cannot be predicted by what we can see of the past?
Mostly that past performance is no predictor of future returns. We haven't even scratched the surface of what's out there. It's a little premature to say ANYTHING about the Universe with authority, considering that we still haven't solved a few basic problems of celestial mechanics.
For instance, the reports position of the Pioneer spacecraft is off from where all of our theories about relativity put it. Either there are other celestial bodies in our Solar System exerting influence, some of our understanding of the properties of existing bodies is incorrect, or we have to tweak relativity.
Now I would think that it would be a far more constructive use of computing time to flesh out our understanding of the Solar System around us. Some unknown here and now has a far greater chance of influencing life on Earth.
I think one guilty party we all can agree to gang up on are the UI designers. It seem that as soon as I have my users trained on how to operate windows or Mac they go off and completely frell up the interface.
Windows XP, Mac OS X, examples where a humble and simple interface has been morphed into a complex flashy system that no one can find basic stuff. I will grant you that Seniors tend to do a little better with the Fisher-Price interface of XP, but I hate playing seek and find to do basic maintenance.
OS X is an abomination to God. It's pretty and fun to watch, but it solves none of the problems of the old interface. That and can someone PLEASE tell me how to open a unix console without having to pull up the help screen first. For god's sake, I've been using Macs for years, but I feel like a complete idiot using X.
Actually management IS to blame. If you pick up a phone an call, say, Dell tech support, you have a 50% likelihood of reaching someone who hasn't been there for 6 months. Think about that. Why don't people stick around in those jobs? I'm not trying to single out Dell, I'm trying to point out that there is not a whole lot of collective experience being retained by management. They need to spend less on training and more on retention. WHY are people quitting?
The answer generally centers around working conditions. Solve that problem.
There is one deadly expection on the user's part that keeps techs from doing a good job. They want everything cheap. If folks were willing to shell out serious coin for products they would be better tested, and when problems occur companies could afford to keep people around who knew what the hell they were doing.
That said, companies need to stop slitting their own throats by trying to undercut the competition. We are in a real Marxian race for the bottom with no end in sight.
You are assuming that the Universe we are experiencing is not, in fact, a reflection of a deeper structure. Our perception of that structure at present is expanding, but at some point in time a controlling factor could take affect and reign everything back in.
I like to think of the Universe as an organism. It has a definite beginning event. The end, is not so clean cut.
Let's imagine our Universe is in fact a human being.
Now imaging you are a microcivilization who came into experience when the human was 4 years old. An entire civilization would wink in and out of existance by the time the Universe's heart beat once. If they tried to observe all of the molecules in the body, they would see a rapidly expanding organism, that seems to have at one time occupied a single point in space.
Despite the illusion, around puberty the Universe would stop growing.
Indeed, these answers to life's questions are wholly unsatisfying. I would conjecture that to limit the behavior of the Universe to themodynamic behavior is a mistake. From a signals perspective, the sample of information we have, from a single viewpoint over the space of a hundred years does not allow us to extrapolate much of anything.
While vast, our models of the Universe barely contain a fraction of an infantesimal fraction of an improbably small amount of information about the universe. Conjecturing on its beginnings and end would be like me modeling the battle of Gettysburg knowing nothing of the weaponry, artillery, and/or tactics employed by both sides. Sure I could approximate the large battles, but war is won or lost by the efforts or failings of individuals.
A well placed sniper, an ill advised deployment of cannon, or a general with disintary can all shape the outcome, but they are monsterously hard to quantify.
Cosmological theories like this remind me of the joke about the Mathematician who models a horserace by first assuming the horses are sphere moving in perfect harmonic motion.
In the universe simulation sector of Morgan Industries we have an error message that often pops up during testing, asking whether to Abort, Retry, or Ignore. The programmers are instructed to NEVER select abort.
Let's just combine all of the languages into on big happy script: GUPYERTCLPHP. Of course you run into the problem of accidentally forming the name of an ancient and forgotten demi-god if someone mispronounces it.
Masoquism is a pre-requisite for Linux desktop use. If it's an consolation, it was this much of a pain in the ass 4 years ago to run a Linux server. Now servers are cake. Some day soon, desktops will be more sensible. For now, well, duck and cover.
There is no good reason why Linux could not do this. We have scripts. Libraries to poll the hardware. Databases of tools to determine what hardware uses what driver. More GUI options than is rightfully needed.
I think rather than re-create the click-n-drool syndrome of Windows, we should build a script interface to handle hardware configuration. You can always slap a gui on top of a script. All drivers adhere to a set of standard methods, and are individually controlled by passing commands.
I realize that a lot of the underpinnings are already in place. I say it's time to stop layering concrete on the foundation, and lets start building structure.
Slashdot Mirror
You aren't a mix of your parent's genes, you are a mix of your grandparent's genes. Sex cells go through a process called meiosis whereby 1 cell splits into 4 cells, each with half the genetic content.
The mother's ovum are formed shortly after conception. A woman is born with every ovum she will ever produce, they just leave the final assembly steps for ovulation. Men form sperm throughout their lives, but these cells are all decendents from the cells that were set aside during the developmental process.
Now how is it that you are actually a combination of your grandparent's genes? Well every human actually has 2 complete sets of DNA. Even the Y chromosome. Only half are expressed at a time. During sex-cell production, all genes come into play. During Metaphase I the chromosomes pair up and swap genes.
If you think of Mendel's experiments, hybrids of a dominant and recessive gene don't express the recessive trait until the second generation. This is why.
My thanks for the folks with the constructive suggestions. The rest of you can kiss my ass as usual.
Okay, okay, if the re-joining takes place beyond the first few cell division they become conjoined twins.
* - All things being equal.
State inspection found that the only problem with that car was a loose nut behind the wheel.
I resemble that remark!
Mostly that past performance is no predictor of future returns. We haven't even scratched the surface of what's out there. It's a little premature to say ANYTHING about the Universe with authority, considering that we still haven't solved a few basic problems of celestial mechanics.
For instance, the reports position of the Pioneer spacecraft is off from where all of our theories about relativity put it. Either there are other celestial bodies in our Solar System exerting influence, some of our understanding of the properties of existing bodies is incorrect, or we have to tweak relativity.
Now I would think that it would be a far more constructive use of computing time to flesh out our understanding of the Solar System around us. Some unknown here and now has a far greater chance of influencing life on Earth.
Great. So now that I'm and idiot, does someone care to enlighten me?
Windows XP, Mac OS X, examples where a humble and simple interface has been morphed into a complex flashy system that no one can find basic stuff. I will grant you that Seniors tend to do a little better with the Fisher-Price interface of XP, but I hate playing seek and find to do basic maintenance.
OS X is an abomination to God. It's pretty and fun to watch, but it solves none of the problems of the old interface. That and can someone PLEASE tell me how to open a unix console without having to pull up the help screen first. For god's sake, I've been using Macs for years, but I feel like a complete idiot using X.
It is one thing to be a know it all. True wisdom requires a respect of the unknowing.
Hmmm, customer Karma? Who will Meta-Moderate?
The answer generally centers around working conditions. Solve that problem.
That said, companies need to stop slitting their own throats by trying to undercut the competition. We are in a real Marxian race for the bottom with no end in sight.
I will usually just simlink the web folder to their account. I'll explain the whole mess, and 2 weeks later they forget again.
Sisyphous at least had the satisfaction of pushing the rock up the hill.
Read The Machine Stops by E. M. Forster. Written in 1909, it sure describes the Internet to a T.
Then I've been in Bizaro slashdot since high school...
I like to think of the Universe as an organism. It has a definite beginning event. The end, is not so clean cut.
Let's imagine our Universe is in fact a human being.
Now imaging you are a microcivilization who came into experience when the human was 4 years old. An entire civilization would wink in and out of existance by the time the Universe's heart beat once. If they tried to observe all of the molecules in the body, they would see a rapidly expanding organism, that seems to have at one time occupied a single point in space.
Despite the illusion, around puberty the Universe would stop growing.
That's not the universe, that's threads on Slashdot.
While vast, our models of the Universe barely contain a fraction of an infantesimal fraction of an improbably small amount of information about the universe. Conjecturing on its beginnings and end would be like me modeling the battle of Gettysburg knowing nothing of the weaponry, artillery, and/or tactics employed by both sides. Sure I could approximate the large battles, but war is won or lost by the efforts or failings of individuals.
A well placed sniper, an ill advised deployment of cannon, or a general with disintary can all shape the outcome, but they are monsterously hard to quantify.
Cosmological theories like this remind me of the joke about the Mathematician who models a horserace by first assuming the horses are sphere moving in perfect harmonic motion.
In the universe simulation sector of Morgan Industries we have an error message that often pops up during testing, asking whether to Abort, Retry, or Ignore. The programmers are instructed to NEVER select abort.
Let's just combine all of the languages into on big happy script: GUPYERTCLPHP. Of course you run into the problem of accidentally forming the name of an ancient and forgotten demi-god if someone mispronounces it.
In New Jersey it's tic-tack-toe with a mole, and you play whack-a-chicken.
As a developer, did you ever get the chance to work in that crazy penny scheme from Office Space?
Masoquism is a pre-requisite for Linux desktop use. If it's an consolation, it was this much of a pain in the ass 4 years ago to run a Linux server. Now servers are cake. Some day soon, desktops will be more sensible. For now, well, duck and cover.
Better idea: just use TCL.
There is no good reason why Linux could not do this. We have scripts. Libraries to poll the hardware. Databases of tools to determine what hardware uses what driver. More GUI options than is rightfully needed.
I think rather than re-create the click-n-drool syndrome of Windows, we should build a script interface to handle hardware configuration. You can always slap a gui on top of a script. All drivers adhere to a set of standard methods, and are individually controlled by passing commands.
I realize that a lot of the underpinnings are already in place. I say it's time to stop layering concrete on the foundation, and lets start building structure.