These modified DNA strands seem to act more like the photosynthetic electron-transport system than they do optical fibers. In fact, one of the applications listed is "light harvesting in artificial photosynthetic systems." It is curious that TFA describes this as a fiber optics corollary.
Fiber optics works based on the principles that photons will reflect off of a surface given a sufficient difference in refractive index and approach angle, allowing high-bandwidth communication. This new DNA photon transport system seems to have very little resemblance. I would guess that using DNA for communication would be very slow and very low bandwidth, to the point of being practically infeasible.
I know... Python and Ruby and Java are the hot languages, and you think Perl is going the way of COBOL.
Well f*ck it - I like perl. And, there are some great reasons to use it:
1. I already know it. I learned it before Ruby was "cool".
2. It's already installed on every Linux and BSD machine. Yes, that means I can run my script on your brand new Ubuntu desktop, or your 1998 BSD server. And it'll work.
3. Great Regex support (am not saying your language de-jour doesn't, just that perl does)
4. CPAN is one of the most extensive software libraries known to mankind.
5. It really doesn't matter if you use it or not - perl is here for the long haul. Too many linux utilities depend on it. My linux box doesn't have ruby or python installed, and I haven't had any problems. Try deleting perl from yours!
So, if you are like me, you already know Perl. Maybe you don't use windows at home, but you have to use it at work. I suggest you download Strawberry Perl (or go all-out with cygwin).
Unfortunately, there does not seem to be great support for perl with.NET. So, I guess we have to stick with the Win32 CPAN modules you already know about.
But maybe, just maybe, someone will come along one day... and viola! Perl.NET!
Until that day comes, I will continue to use perl anyway, and all of you Haters out there can go $@_{s/;//g}!
Whats the difference between religions and cults? As far as I can tell they really are the same thing.
A religious cult, to the best of my understanding, shows the following features:
1) Is widely accepted to be a cult by those not involved. [like Scientology]
2) Is secretive regarding the beliefs of its members. [like Scientology]
3) Is secretive regarding the hierarchical organization of its members. [like Scientology]
To me, #3 is most concerning, and the best way to be labeled as a religious cult. Notice that almost all 'mainstream' religions are not guilty of #3 (e.g., the Catholic buck stops at the Pope), and rarely guilty of #2 (e.g., Muslims can point to the Koran), and also rarely guilty of #1.
"My dream is that a 12-year-old in Indonesia will turn out to be a prodigy, and build a cure for HIV,"
We should give David Baker credit for bringing forced child labor into the 21st century! Think about it: thousands of children, solving protein stuctures for 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, at $0.50/hour. The prescription drug companies could lay off all their bioinformaticians, outsource their drug discovery program to Indonesia, and cure cancer in one fell swoop.
Yes, sir! something should be done about spam!
And, while we're at it, someone should really do something about domain squatting.
Oh year, and what about phishing? Why isn't anyone doing anything about that!?
Seriously, guys; get on it. I'll be watching the third season of Seinfeld DVD.
Thanks for all the comments on this. We are listening attentively. Let me clarify some facts: .....
Marten
previously CEO of MySQL, now SVP at Sun
I didn't actually read any of the points - the mere fact that he posted a comment on slashdot proves that Sun is committed to open source.
When was last time Bill Gates posted a reply on slashdot?
Can we put these headlines to rest, please?
I mean the "Scientist discovers gene for [insert personality trait here]".
Some of these get pretty inane; ruthlessness, for example, is defined by behavior, and is subjective!
And don't forget: these studies are nearly meaningless, even if they are talking about something that can be defined rationally:
1. The study evaluates 'ruthlessness' based on subjects playing a game. (Not by observing reality)
2. The study involves 200 student volunteers. Not exactly a representative sample!
3. The article generalizes these dubious results to make inferences about the genetics of dictators.
4. The study has not yet been repeated to duplicate these results (A necessary step to 'prove' something)
One sees these duelling studies, some for, some against cellular phone usage...
In reviewing different studies relating to cell phone type radiation and brain cancer for a course in college, the studies could be divided approximately in half. The data is not yet conclusive one way or another. For those who are concerned about the risk, there are some ways that you can reduce your risk:
1 (obvious) Talk on the cell phone less frequently.
2 (best) Place your cell phone on your belt, and use a headset. Remember, the energy waves' strength falls off rapidly with distance; having the cell phone even a short distance away from your head reduces exposure significantly.
Sometimes a genetic factor has evolutionary advantages in one context which outweigh disadvantages that may occur in another context. The classic example is Sickle-cell anemia. Here, one copy of the gene is beneficial in fighting malaria, but two copies result in a deadly condition. In this case, the A1 gene might result in some positive trait under the right conditions.
In the time it took to develop Perl 6, other programming languages have been conceived, implemented, used and abandoned.
While I am relieved that Perl 6 is finally showing signs of life, I have concerns:
1. Can Perl 6 take the place of Perl 5?
Perl 5 is integral to Unix/Linux systems; it is pretty much taken for granted. To switch to Perl 6 seems like a monumental task. It seems more likely that those wishing to use Perl 6 will have it installed along with Perl 5 (not instead of).
2. Did it take too long?
Perl 6 received a fair amount of hype when the project began. With no realistic timetable publicly announced, it seems that people forgot or gave up on it. In fact, in that time Python has become very popular; I wonder if it has taken some of the 'market share' that would have otherwise gone to Perl 6.
3. Is it any good?
Perl 6 was supposed to be the "community's" rewrite of Perl 5. The word 'community', when it comes to programming language design, is a bit concerning.... It almost sounds like a euphemism for 'committee'. And that makes me shudder. I once heard the expression "A camel is a horse designed by committee." And I can think of a few programming languages that go along with that saying (No offense to camels).
Either way, I will download it. I will use it. I will see if it's any good. And, despite all of the issues, I am glad it's finally here!
The IdeaPads have a new feature: Face Recognition. The idea is that the user can sit in front of the computer and log into Windows Vista without entering the password.
This raises the question: could one just hold up a photograph of the user to log in?
The neocortex is incredibly complex; not even small neuronal networks are well understood. To suggest that a computer can accurately simulate them is ridiculous.
It behaves exactly like its biological counterpart.
That is technically impossible, considering the behavior of the mammalian brain is not well understood at any level. Even intracellular processes are still under investigation; how synapses are regulated, interactions between neurons, and higher level functioning are still matters of great contention.
Even if these processes were well understood, our simulation methods are not sufficient to accurately represent the massively parallel structure of a brain.
I have never received a flu shot, nor have I been immunized against 'cold' viruses, strep, or a multitude of other pathogens that I come into contact with on a regular basis. I do not need technology to survive in the face of these pathogens. Antibiotics can speed recovery, but I probably will not die without them. Vaccines only protect me from a small fraction of these diseases.
The reason that I do not become deathly ill every year is mostly due to my immune system, which has been evolving for thousands of years to cope with all of the exposure. While I admit that it doesn't provide complete protection from every illness, it does pretty well for most; my ancestors from 10-20 thousand years ago would probably not survive very long in a modern city, due to their different immune systems.
I believe that our ancestors from 10-50 thousand years ago are considered to be the same species as we are. There have, nevertheless, been evolutionary changes; a prime example is disease resistance. Our ancient ancestors (despite being of the same species) could not have survived the kind of regular exposure to a variety of modern pathogens.
Obviously, by definition, skilled hackers can get the tools they need without google's help (or despite google's measures).
I think this is a great move by Google anyway. The hackers I find annoying are the 'script kiddies'; these kids (or immature adults) can too easily find programs that waste my bandwidth, hitting my server to find obvious holes, looking for very outdated software; in general, banging their heads against my firewall. If a 'real' hacker wants to waste his time, he could probably find some exploits even for updated and patched server software. But I know there are bigger fish to fry (ie banks, microsoft, cnn, etc).
While I do keep my software patched and updated, not everyone does. So, some kid can easily search google for a program to take advantage, without even knowing what he's doing. It's too easy; it's giving him the tools on a silver platter.
The problem with the flu is the same as the common cold; the virus mutates too quickly for scientists to create a vaccine. Molecular biologists are making great advancements in understanding the genetics of pathology - advancements are occurring at such a phenomenal rate that even studies from a few years ago are considered out of date.
The media is unfortunately oblivious to the reality of virology; announcing that the bird flu or SARS or some other pandemic will decimate the population in the near future gets great ratings. Unfortunately, it is not the scientists who are releasing these stories. It is reporters, editors, publishers, with no real understanding of medicine, genetics, pathology, or virology.
Many of the common criticisms of Open XML involve internal inconsistencies and breaks from traditional/standard formats (wikipedia). These include currency formats, language issues, etc. Not all of the problems have simple fixes, and for such a complex standard, it may take a lot of work to iron out the issues.
A journalist should be allowed to write a review on a book, and be paid for it.
A professor should be able to publish an article interpreting the newest published literature.
A Harry Potter junkie should be able to write a book analyzing the lexicon in the novels.
It's a double standard; the journalist and professor are safe, but the Harry Potter fan gets sued.
Going through legal channels is important, but until this makes its way through the courts (which could take a while), I don't think Comcast users are completely helpless.
What we really need is some clever client-side programming. A p2p client (or standard) that does some clever encryption, sends data hidden through other streams, etc. I'm not a network programming guru, but it seems like these programs can (or should) keep a step ahead of whatever recognition software that gets through the approval process for comcast servers.
...drawing up a code of ethics to prevent human abuse of robots-and vice versa.
Is this a serious issue in South Korea? I am no robotics expert, but I did read a lot of Asimov, and I'm not sure we are quite to that point yet. What we currently call "machine intelligence" is not quite up to the intelligence level of a cockroach. It is more pattern matching and optimization than anything; not much room for ethical standards.
There are several very interesting optimization algorithms based on swarm behavior, such as particle swarm optimization and ant colony optimization. These methods have a similar ability for non-linear optimization (and pattern recognition) as neural networks.
Slashdot Mirror
These modified DNA strands seem to act more like the photosynthetic electron-transport system than they do optical fibers. In fact, one of the applications listed is "light harvesting in artificial photosynthetic systems." It is curious that TFA describes this as a fiber optics corollary.
Fiber optics works based on the principles that photons will reflect off of a surface given a sufficient difference in refractive index and approach angle, allowing high-bandwidth communication. This new DNA photon transport system seems to have very little resemblance. I would guess that using DNA for communication would be very slow and very low bandwidth, to the point of being practically infeasible.
No. People who run as root all the time are either n00bs or morons.
Good point... Better make that:
sudo rm -rf /
I know... Python and Ruby and Java are the hot languages, and you think Perl is going the way of COBOL. Well f*ck it - I like perl. And, there are some great reasons to use it:
.NET. So, I guess we have to stick with the Win32 CPAN modules you already know about.
1. I already know it. I learned it before Ruby was "cool".
2. It's already installed on every Linux and BSD machine. Yes, that means I can run my script on your brand new Ubuntu desktop, or your 1998 BSD server. And it'll work.
3. Great Regex support (am not saying your language de-jour doesn't, just that perl does)
4. CPAN is one of the most extensive software libraries known to mankind.
5. It really doesn't matter if you use it or not - perl is here for the long haul. Too many linux utilities depend on it. My linux box doesn't have ruby or python installed, and I haven't had any problems. Try deleting perl from yours!
So, if you are like me, you already know Perl. Maybe you don't use windows at home, but you have to use it at work. I suggest you download Strawberry Perl (or go all-out with cygwin).
Unfortunately, there does not seem to be great support for perl with
But maybe, just maybe, someone will come along one day... and viola! Perl.NET!
Until that day comes, I will continue to use perl anyway, and all of you Haters out there can go $@_{s/;//g}!
A religious cult, to the best of my understanding, shows the following features:
1) Is widely accepted to be a cult by those not involved. [like Scientology]
2) Is secretive regarding the beliefs of its members. [like Scientology]
3) Is secretive regarding the hierarchical organization of its members. [like Scientology]
To me, #3 is most concerning, and the best way to be labeled as a religious cult. Notice that almost all 'mainstream' religions are not guilty of #3 (e.g., the Catholic buck stops at the Pope), and rarely guilty of #2 (e.g., Muslims can point to the Koran), and also rarely guilty of #1.
We should give David Baker credit for bringing forced child labor into the 21st century! Think about it: thousands of children, solving protein stuctures for 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, at $0.50/hour. The prescription drug companies could lay off all their bioinformaticians, outsource their drug discovery program to Indonesia, and cure cancer in one fell swoop.
Yes, sir! something should be done about spam!
And, while we're at it, someone should really do something about domain squatting.
Oh year, and what about phishing? Why isn't anyone doing anything about that!?
Seriously, guys; get on it. I'll be watching the third season of Seinfeld DVD.
I didn't actually read any of the points - the mere fact that he posted a comment on slashdot proves that Sun is committed to open source.
When was last time Bill Gates posted a reply on slashdot?
Nothing new here; this has been an issue for decades. For some amusing anecdotes about passive-aggressive/aggressive IT guys, see the BOFH articles.
Can we put these headlines to rest, please?
I mean the "Scientist discovers gene for [insert personality trait here]".
Some of these get pretty inane; ruthlessness, for example, is defined by behavior, and is subjective!
And don't forget: these studies are nearly meaningless, even if they are talking about something that can be defined rationally:
1. The study evaluates 'ruthlessness' based on subjects playing a game. (Not by observing reality)
2. The study involves 200 student volunteers. Not exactly a representative sample!
3. The article generalizes these dubious results to make inferences about the genetics of dictators.
4. The study has not yet been repeated to duplicate these results (A necessary step to 'prove' something)
1 (obvious) Talk on the cell phone less frequently.
2 (best) Place your cell phone on your belt, and use a headset. Remember, the energy waves' strength falls off rapidly with distance; having the cell phone even a short distance away from your head reduces exposure significantly.
Sometimes a genetic factor has evolutionary advantages in one context which outweigh disadvantages that may occur in another context. The classic example is Sickle-cell anemia. Here, one copy of the gene is beneficial in fighting malaria, but two copies result in a deadly condition. In this case, the A1 gene might result in some positive trait under the right conditions.
In the time it took to develop Perl 6, other programming languages have been conceived, implemented, used and abandoned.
While I am relieved that Perl 6 is finally showing signs of life, I have concerns:
1. Can Perl 6 take the place of Perl 5?
Perl 5 is integral to Unix/Linux systems; it is pretty much taken for granted. To switch to Perl 6 seems like a monumental task. It seems more likely that those wishing to use Perl 6 will have it installed along with Perl 5 (not instead of).
2. Did it take too long?
Perl 6 received a fair amount of hype when the project began. With no realistic timetable publicly announced, it seems that people forgot or gave up on it. In fact, in that time Python has become very popular; I wonder if it has taken some of the 'market share' that would have otherwise gone to Perl 6.
3. Is it any good?
Perl 6 was supposed to be the "community's" rewrite of Perl 5. The word 'community', when it comes to programming language design, is a bit concerning.... It almost sounds like a euphemism for 'committee'. And that makes me shudder. I once heard the expression "A camel is a horse designed by committee." And I can think of a few programming languages that go along with that saying (No offense to camels).
Either way, I will download it. I will use it. I will see if it's any good. And, despite all of the issues, I am glad it's finally here!
The IdeaPads have a new feature: Face Recognition. The idea is that the user can sit in front of the computer and log into Windows Vista without entering the password.
This raises the question: could one just hold up a photograph of the user to log in?
That is technically impossible, considering the behavior of the mammalian brain is not well understood at any level. Even intracellular processes are still under investigation; how synapses are regulated, interactions between neurons, and higher level functioning are still matters of great contention.
Even if these processes were well understood, our simulation methods are not sufficient to accurately represent the massively parallel structure of a brain.
I have never received a flu shot, nor have I been immunized against 'cold' viruses, strep, or a multitude of other pathogens that I come into contact with on a regular basis. I do not need technology to survive in the face of these pathogens. Antibiotics can speed recovery, but I probably will not die without them. Vaccines only protect me from a small fraction of these diseases.
The reason that I do not become deathly ill every year is mostly due to my immune system, which has been evolving for thousands of years to cope with all of the exposure. While I admit that it doesn't provide complete protection from every illness, it does pretty well for most; my ancestors from 10-20 thousand years ago would probably not survive very long in a modern city, due to their different immune systems.
I believe that our ancestors from 10-50 thousand years ago are considered to be the same species as we are. There have, nevertheless, been evolutionary changes; a prime example is disease resistance. Our ancient ancestors (despite being of the same species) could not have survived the kind of regular exposure to a variety of modern pathogens.
use www.time.gov
Obviously, by definition, skilled hackers can get the tools they need without google's help (or despite google's measures).
I think this is a great move by Google anyway. The hackers I find annoying are the 'script kiddies'; these kids (or immature adults) can too easily find programs that waste my bandwidth, hitting my server to find obvious holes, looking for very outdated software; in general, banging their heads against my firewall. If a 'real' hacker wants to waste his time, he could probably find some exploits even for updated and patched server software. But I know there are bigger fish to fry (ie banks, microsoft, cnn, etc).
While I do keep my software patched and updated, not everyone does. So, some kid can easily search google for a program to take advantage, without even knowing what he's doing. It's too easy; it's giving him the tools on a silver platter.
The problem with the flu is the same as the common cold; the virus mutates too quickly for scientists to create a vaccine. Molecular biologists are making great advancements in understanding the genetics of pathology - advancements are occurring at such a phenomenal rate that even studies from a few years ago are considered out of date.
The media is unfortunately oblivious to the reality of virology; announcing that the bird flu or SARS or some other pandemic will decimate the population in the near future gets great ratings. Unfortunately, it is not the scientists who are releasing these stories. It is reporters, editors, publishers, with no real understanding of medicine, genetics, pathology, or virology.
Many of the common criticisms of Open XML involve internal inconsistencies and breaks from traditional/standard formats (wikipedia). These include currency formats, language issues, etc. Not all of the problems have simple fixes, and for such a complex standard, it may take a lot of work to iron out the issues.
A journalist should be allowed to write a review on a book, and be paid for it.
A professor should be able to publish an article interpreting the newest published literature.
A Harry Potter junkie should be able to write a book analyzing the lexicon in the novels.
It's a double standard; the journalist and professor are safe, but the Harry Potter fan gets sued.
Going through legal channels is important, but until this makes its way through the courts (which could take a while), I don't think Comcast users are completely helpless.
What we really need is some clever client-side programming. A p2p client (or standard) that does some clever encryption, sends data hidden through other streams, etc. I'm not a network programming guru, but it seems like these programs can (or should) keep a step ahead of whatever recognition software that gets through the approval process for comcast servers.
Is this a serious issue in South Korea? I am no robotics expert, but I did read a lot of Asimov, and I'm not sure we are quite to that point yet. What we currently call "machine intelligence" is not quite up to the intelligence level of a cockroach. It is more pattern matching and optimization than anything; not much room for ethical standards.
There are several very interesting optimization algorithms based on swarm behavior, such as particle swarm optimization and ant colony optimization. These methods have a similar ability for non-linear optimization (and pattern recognition) as neural networks.