Jesus, I can't believe I'm falling for a piece of shit troll. Thanks a lot, now I'm wasting my time going through your bullshit. Fine. FINE. Here's a report of a Nissan Leaf catching fire. Mitsubishi has had problems with their Lithium Ion batteries overheating, it resulted in a temporary halting of the production of the model. Apparently the Dodge Ram had a hybrid for awhile (who knew?). They were designed to have a reverse power flow, so vehicles plugged in could power a building in the case of a power outage, but the battery packs overheated again. GM redesigned the Chevrolet Volt to reduce the chance of fires in an accident. There are a number of incidents with a bunch of smaller EV manufacturers outside of the US as well.
Like I said, I posted almost 20 years on the account without a problem, and now that account is trashed. Slashdot operates on a completely "hands-off" approach to administration, with no way to settle harassment, and that only works as long as you have the perfect system. As we've seen elsewhere, if you have no approach to handling harassment, harassers win.
I see, you might have a point. I thought slashdot editors with unlimited mod points take care of that.
Like I said, I don't have much evidence anymore that editors even read the site, other than whipslash's occasional community engagement. Certainly not enough to handle something of this frequency.
Despite some limitations slashdot voting system is OK in most of the cases.
I'm fine with the mod-up/mod-down system for the most part. I do think that one account shouldn't have so much power to affect another account, especially through the karma system which is easily exploited by someone with no life. That one account can karma-bomb another into useless oblivion is a design flaw that couldn't possibly be what the coders had in mind, and that's the flaw that should get fixed.
It's not usually -1 Troll or Flamebait either, it's usually Off-Topic or Redundant that gets used. Things someone could individually look at and think "Well, that's a subjective opinion. I wouldn't have gone that far myself, but maybe you could make the case for it." Something that might look innocent in isolation, but when you gather all the posts and look at them as a group, it's pretty clear what's going on.
Like I said, I posted almost 20 years on the account without a problem, and now that account is trashed. Slashdot operates on a completely "hands-off" approach to administration, with no way to settle harassment, and that only works as long as you have the perfect system. As we've seen elsewhere, if you have no approach to handling harassment, harassers win. I've had a lot of my preconceptions about communication on the Internet challenged over the last year. I used to hold Slashdot up as a gold standard of discussion, but this site has definitely taken it's lumps of late.
> This will encourage packaging to be redesigned to utilize plastics that can be processed along with compost
This will encourage manufacturers to increase the cost of the product and pass it on to the consumer.
This will encourage competitors to use different packaging not subject to the tax, thereby allowing them to undercut the ones still using high-tax packaging.
So we have been blaming the Chinese taking over all of our American jobs. Now, the Chinese don't want these garbage scavenging jobs, then my question is why don't Americans take these jobs if they are so desperately trying to win back jobs from China.
Because in the United States, we are obsessed with lowering the costs of (some) things. Americans will have a hard time doing these jobs because we don't want to pay the workers a living wage. We got used to lowering prices in the US by having goods manufactured in countries where the workers could survive on a fraction of what Americans could survive on. Have the prices on those goods dropped? Yes! They have, and they're far more affordable now than they were then. A decent quality stereo color television cost $659 in 1983, $1600+ in today's dollars. I can get a decent 50" Ultra HD 4k from Costco for $429.
Many goods are cheaper now compared to the past.. but not all things. Food is not that cheap. If anything, housing costs have gone way up in the last 30 years. So the cost of living is still pretty high compared to many other countries. If we had to employ people to sift through recycling, they would need to be paid at a certain minimum level where they can still live, and that level may be too high than people want to pay to have someone sort recycling.
Oder a Micro SD card via Amazon and you will know how much shit it goed with. It is a micro SD card inside a SD card, inside a plastic shell thing that has a certain size because it needs to big enogh to be seen in a store. That is then put in a cardboard envelope the size of Canada.
Amazon has been trying to change that, in part by trying to pressure manufacturers to cut down on the size of packages that are not going to a retail store.
Leaving aside the question of "how do you drop bombs in zero-gee."
This was the only part of the scene that I liked, taking advantage of the artificial gravity every ship, large or small, has. The bombing bays have gravity, so all you need is to the bombing bay facing where you want the bombs to go, drop the bombs, and they keep their momentum.
Granted, the whole idea of this bombing run was dumb dumb dumb, but I thought that was interesting.
Why even bother with suicide missions, simply have a droid drive the ship. Or build FTL torpedoes. As impressive as the scene was, it invalidated pretty much everything we have learned about space battle tactics and strategy from the other movies. That’s one thing people disliked about the new Disney movies.
You're right. Why wouldn't they do that? Why didn't they do that in the past? This is something that has never made sense, not in the originals, not in the prequels, not in the new movies. It SHOULD be something that has always been usable, ever since Han warned us in episode 4 about the dangers of hitting things if you're not careful with FTL jumps. The only reason why we accepted it is that we just never asked the question. Well, The Last Jedi opens Pandora's Box. You're not stuffing everything back in that box now that the question has been brought up. Unfortunately, it immediately brings up some OTHER plot holes that are hard to explain, like why the First Order ships couldn't just FTL jump a slight distance ahead to cut off retreat. Ugh. I liked the 'chase of attrition,' but it didn't make any logical sense.
Imagine starting off for vacation. A little bell goes off telling you there is a flat tire. Do you not go on vacation? Do you call a man to get your family back on the road? Jesus fucking Christ.
I call AAA, because that's why I have the service in the first place, and no matter what it's going to require a real change with a real tire. I don't have any sort of tire wrench in my car, and.... you know, the emergency tire that comes in the car is NOT for long distance use. It's just strong enough to get your car to a shop to get a real replacement. I have no idea if that was the case 30 years ago, but the emergency tire that comes with cars these days is weak and will not last long.
I strongly recommend How Star Wars was saved in the edit. It even shows some of the Star Wars rough cut that was so poorly received before reediting. It shows a number of the editing tricks used to tighten things and how to even rewrite parts of the movie.
I'll just say... Marcia Lucas was a fucking genius. That's why she won an Academy Award for Best Editing on Star Wars.
Me? I mean, sure, I could probably do it if given instructions, but I sure don't carry the tools around with me, nor am I interested in doing so and spending the afternoon getting proficient. I just have better things to do with my time.
I built my own furniture, mechanical toys, a semi-analog synthesizer, made my own soap, created my own pants and shirts, fixed almost everything on my bike, bred a special new kind of mint, saved a kind if melon from extinction, invented a new kind of bonbon/chocolate, know my way around quantum field theory, and came up with the most effective type of (neuro-)psychotherapy known to man
You sound like a guy who has a ridiculous amount of time on his hands!
The article is dismissive of the direction this is heading, but in a world where 99% of the people using a mobile device simply have no ability to manage digital security, you just can't continue to allow people to install something from anywhere.
I'm not really sure why not, considering the vast majority of people, including just about everyone who doesn't know what they're doing, already don't know how to just install something from anywhere. That's a feature that has to be unlocked in the developer options, otherwise it's just going to go through the play store and not allow side loading. It's not like we've reached this situation where average every day users are just loading apps from random websites. That's not happening. It's a solution that is in search of a problem, which makes me think the aim of all of this is not exactly what is being presented to us.
I would take NHL rules over NBA any day. NBA is boring, the same 2 teams make it to the finals every year.
I really want basketball to switch from free-throw shooting to a hockey-style penalty box.
The reason that hockey can do this yet basketball could not is that in basketball you can really just shoot over the defense if you're left alone, and there's not a lot that the defense could do about that -- there will always be someone left uncovered in basketball. But in hockey, defensemen can still form a front to help block shots, you're not flipping the puck over everyone (I know technically that can happen, but the odds of success are far less than they would be in basketball). So a power play would lead to a lot of scoring because leaving a guy uncovered is pretty much death. Certainly it would involve MUCH more scoring than the current free-throw system. I'm not saying that it couldn't be done, but it would be a major change of the game, and make refereeing much more important when it's already way way too important as it is.
Shouldn't that mean that either the players play according to the rules or change the rules? Saying that "The refs can't call the rules as the players play and that's just how it is" seems a bit silly to me. I'd be happy if they would start calling traveling and palming again.
Having played and later refereed; the ref's job is to control the game without inserting themselves into it. If you make every ticky tacky call the game stops being the game. Call the big ones, penalize the flagrant, but let the players play the game. The players understand the bounds beyond the rules and generally stay within them; when they don't they get called for it.
This seems to work just fine for MLB, your mileage may vary as to whether this works for the NFL, and it is entirely broken in the NBA, such that with the latter, who the refereeing crew is for the night has become a popular fan metagame, considered to be very indicative of the success/failure of various teams. The NBA, more than any other sport I can think of, has a "dark cloud of suspicion" over it with distrust of the refereeing. It's made even worse by there being two different rulesets that referees tend to enforce -- one fairly relaxed set of rules that are applied to "superstars" (like the Kevin Jameses of the various teams), and another much harder set applied to everyone else. They allow the superstars to get away with more things that would be called fouls if anyone else did it.
the machine isn't going to be able to decide if the batsman went around (since there is no hard and fast rule for that, it's left to the umpire's discretion).
Anything that has a fuzzy rule can easily be modified so that it's a hard and fast rule. I know what Wikipedia says the (lack of rule) is, but the practice that I've seen actually used seems to be "does the bat cross the front of the plate." It wouldn't be hard to just make that "the rule" such that a camera could easily detect and enforce it.
The solution is to shut down professional sports. Sports are games for children to play.
Sure, as long as we can "shut down" all the other games and entertainment "for children" that adults partake in, like cartoons (anime and western) and computer games.
I think lumping YouTube and Netflix into the same statement isn't the right thing argument to make. Netflix is a subscription video service where YouTube is there to host advertising (with user generated content there to attract the eyeballs for the advertisers).
Youtube has been trying to get into the subscription video service market as well. They are really pushing their Youtube Red service if you aren't a subscriber.
All true enough. But if the works get cogged up and it just becomes frustrating and impossible to deal with, people may just choose to drop all of it, Netflix, streaming, Internet... all of the home connections, just fucking drop 'em. Do your internet at work and on mobile. Fuck the rest.
One can dream, but people are too addicted to content at home. High-speed internet, streaming, TV, all of that. It would take much MUCH worse than we've speculated could happen to convince people to just drop the whole thing and walk away.
We could always go back to Netflix's dvd and bluray rentals, which I love, but every time I suggest that could still be an enjoyable experience people call me grandpa and say I'm living in the last century.
If I cant stream netflix, or the price goes up a a little bit for my internet, I am likely to actually cancel Comcast.
What if it's Netflix that raises its rates? I think if that happens, more people are likely to cancel Netflix instead of Comcast, even though it's Comcast's extortion that resulted in rate raises.
Word from their employees on Facebook have let us know that in a meeting they had yesterday, Comcast is going to add 30% in our area now that they can. If you don't like it they will take the 30% off and drop you to 10Mb/3Mb. You now have to pay for the fast lane. Sickens me that Net Neutrality is gone!! The prices were already TOO HIGH!
I agree that the prices are too high, but that didn't really have anything to do with Net Neutrality. With or without Net Neutrality, there was nothing to stop Comcast from raising its rates on you. It has more to do with the monopoly (sometimes duopoly) position that Comcast has, which is the real problem here -- it's what allows Comcast to not have to care about what the customer thinks, what prevents customers from getting sick of the company and going elsewhere.
Net Neutrality was a band-aid to cover the wound that is the lack of free market choices in the broadband market.
Paper bags? How did people survive before plastic bags were invented?
Their dogs just pooped all over the place and no one cleaned it up, that's how it was done way in the past. Paper bags are one option, biodegradable bags like BioBags are probably a better option.
Yes ha ha. But still Why would it do this? I can actually think of some ways but I wouldn't neccessarily expect cancer.
Cancer is basically what happens when a mistake is made in DNA replication, coupled with some way of propagating that mistake without bound. IE, most mistakes or mutations just make a cell inert/dead. It's cleaned out, and a healthy cell replaces it. But sometimes a tumor suppression gene that regulates cell replication is what is affected, and if DNA repair genes are also hit by a mutation, cancer can develop. It's something that requires several 'mistakes' to happen in order, but if enough mistakes happen, eventually they can line up just in the right way to cause this condition.
I'm not really sure why CRISPR specifically vulnerable to this, unless it just creates a lot of errors in gene editing. Reading through this, it sounds like healthy cells often fight off CRISPR changes by either repairing CRISPR's splice or by killing the cell. This makes CRISPR inefficient -- only a small minority of cells that CRISPR operates on will have their DNA successfully edited. The cells that survive the edit do so because that gene that is normally counteracting the CRISPR edits is deficient in those cells. Well, that gene deficiency is also a leading cause of cancer because the cell's "kill it or fix it" mechanism is broken. So when CRISPR edits a bunch of cells, and the cells respond by dying off except for the cells with the gene deficiency, then yes, you've treated the disease that CRISPR was intended to prevent, but you did it by increasing the proportion of cells that have a cancer (and other bad things) weakness.
Websites were done decades ago, using nothing but hardware? Are you a fucked-up moron in real life, or do you just play one on slashdot?
This is one of the very few times when you can say "It's a great achievement. You're doing X... but on the Internet!" and actually have it be justified.
I am an evangelical christian kook, he is more likely the antichrist than a messenger from Skydaddy.
Well, at least you're honest and willing to stick with your moral beliefs. I wish I could say the same of the FRC's chairman who uses amazing mental contorsions to justify his wholehearted support.
Slashdot Mirror
Jesus, I can't believe I'm falling for a piece of shit troll. Thanks a lot, now I'm wasting my time going through your bullshit.
Fine. FINE.
Here's a report of a Nissan Leaf catching fire.
Mitsubishi has had problems with their Lithium Ion batteries overheating, it resulted in a temporary halting of the production of the model.
Apparently the Dodge Ram had a hybrid for awhile (who knew?). They were designed to have a reverse power flow, so vehicles plugged in could power a building in the case of a power outage, but the battery packs overheated again.
GM redesigned the Chevrolet Volt to reduce the chance of fires in an accident.
There are a number of incidents with a bunch of smaller EV manufacturers outside of the US as well.
Like I said, I posted almost 20 years on the account without a problem, and now that account is trashed. Slashdot operates on a completely "hands-off" approach to administration, with no way to settle harassment, and that only works as long as you have the perfect system. As we've seen elsewhere, if you have no approach to handling harassment, harassers win.
I see, you might have a point. I thought slashdot editors with unlimited mod points take care of that.
Like I said, I don't have much evidence anymore that editors even read the site, other than whipslash's occasional community engagement. Certainly not enough to handle something of this frequency.
Despite some limitations slashdot voting system is OK in most of the cases.
I'm fine with the mod-up/mod-down system for the most part. I do think that one account shouldn't have so much power to affect another account, especially through the karma system which is easily exploited by someone with no life. That one account can karma-bomb another into useless oblivion is a design flaw that couldn't possibly be what the coders had in mind, and that's the flaw that should get fixed.
It's not usually -1 Troll or Flamebait either, it's usually Off-Topic or Redundant that gets used. Things someone could individually look at and think "Well, that's a subjective opinion. I wouldn't have gone that far myself, but maybe you could make the case for it." Something that might look innocent in isolation, but when you gather all the posts and look at them as a group, it's pretty clear what's going on.
Like I said, I posted almost 20 years on the account without a problem, and now that account is trashed. Slashdot operates on a completely "hands-off" approach to administration, with no way to settle harassment, and that only works as long as you have the perfect system. As we've seen elsewhere, if you have no approach to handling harassment, harassers win. I've had a lot of my preconceptions about communication on the Internet challenged over the last year. I used to hold Slashdot up as a gold standard of discussion, but this site has definitely taken it's lumps of late.
> This will encourage packaging to be redesigned to utilize plastics that can be processed along with compost
This will encourage manufacturers to increase the cost of the product and pass it on to the consumer.
This will encourage competitors to use different packaging not subject to the tax, thereby allowing them to undercut the ones still using high-tax packaging.
So we have been blaming the Chinese taking over all of our American jobs. Now, the Chinese don't want these garbage scavenging jobs, then my question is why don't Americans take these jobs if they are so desperately trying to win back jobs from China.
Because in the United States, we are obsessed with lowering the costs of (some) things. Americans will have a hard time doing these jobs because we don't want to pay the workers a living wage. We got used to lowering prices in the US by having goods manufactured in countries where the workers could survive on a fraction of what Americans could survive on. Have the prices on those goods dropped? Yes! They have, and they're far more affordable now than they were then. A decent quality stereo color television cost $659 in 1983, $1600+ in today's dollars. I can get a decent 50" Ultra HD 4k from Costco for $429.
Many goods are cheaper now compared to the past.. but not all things. Food is not that cheap. If anything, housing costs have gone way up in the last 30 years. So the cost of living is still pretty high compared to many other countries. If we had to employ people to sift through recycling, they would need to be paid at a certain minimum level where they can still live, and that level may be too high than people want to pay to have someone sort recycling.
Oder a Micro SD card via Amazon and you will know how much shit it goed with. It is a micro SD card inside a SD card, inside a plastic shell thing that has a certain size because it needs to big enogh to be seen in a store. That is then put in a cardboard envelope the size of Canada.
Amazon has been trying to change that, in part by trying to pressure manufacturers to cut down on the size of packages that are not going to a retail store.
Leaving aside the question of "how do you drop bombs in zero-gee."
This was the only part of the scene that I liked, taking advantage of the artificial gravity every ship, large or small, has. The bombing bays have gravity, so all you need is to the bombing bay facing where you want the bombs to go, drop the bombs, and they keep their momentum.
Granted, the whole idea of this bombing run was dumb dumb dumb, but I thought that was interesting.
Why even bother with suicide missions, simply have a droid drive the ship. Or build FTL torpedoes. As impressive as the scene was, it invalidated pretty much everything we have learned about space battle tactics and strategy from the other movies. That’s one thing people disliked about the new Disney movies.
You're right. Why wouldn't they do that? Why didn't they do that in the past? This is something that has never made sense, not in the originals, not in the prequels, not in the new movies. It SHOULD be something that has always been usable, ever since Han warned us in episode 4 about the dangers of hitting things if you're not careful with FTL jumps. The only reason why we accepted it is that we just never asked the question. Well, The Last Jedi opens Pandora's Box. You're not stuffing everything back in that box now that the question has been brought up. Unfortunately, it immediately brings up some OTHER plot holes that are hard to explain, like why the First Order ships couldn't just FTL jump a slight distance ahead to cut off retreat. Ugh. I liked the 'chase of attrition,' but it didn't make any logical sense.
Imagine starting off for vacation. A little bell goes off telling you there is a flat tire. Do you not go on vacation? Do you call a man to get your family back on the road? Jesus fucking Christ.
I call AAA, because that's why I have the service in the first place, and no matter what it's going to require a real change with a real tire. I don't have any sort of tire wrench in my car, and.... you know, the emergency tire that comes in the car is NOT for long distance use. It's just strong enough to get your car to a shop to get a real replacement. I have no idea if that was the case 30 years ago, but the emergency tire that comes with cars these days is weak and will not last long.
I strongly recommend How Star Wars was saved in the edit. It even shows some of the Star Wars rough cut that was so poorly received before reediting. It shows a number of the editing tricks used to tighten things and how to even rewrite parts of the movie.
I'll just say... Marcia Lucas was a fucking genius. That's why she won an Academy Award for Best Editing on Star Wars.
Seriously... who cannot change a tire?
Me? I mean, sure, I could probably do it if given instructions, but I sure don't carry the tools around with me, nor am I interested in doing so and spending the afternoon getting proficient. I just have better things to do with my time.
I built my own furniture, mechanical toys, a semi-analog synthesizer, made my own soap, created my own pants and shirts, fixed almost everything on my bike, bred a special new kind of mint, saved a kind if melon from extinction, invented a new kind of bonbon/chocolate, know my way around quantum field theory, and came up with the most effective type of (neuro-)psychotherapy known to man
You sound like a guy who has a ridiculous amount of time on his hands!
The article is dismissive of the direction this is heading, but in a world where 99% of the people using a mobile device simply have no ability to manage digital security, you just can't continue to allow people to install something from anywhere.
I'm not really sure why not, considering the vast majority of people, including just about everyone who doesn't know what they're doing, already don't know how to just install something from anywhere. That's a feature that has to be unlocked in the developer options, otherwise it's just going to go through the play store and not allow side loading. It's not like we've reached this situation where average every day users are just loading apps from random websites. That's not happening. It's a solution that is in search of a problem, which makes me think the aim of all of this is not exactly what is being presented to us.
I would take NHL rules over NBA any day. NBA is boring, the same 2 teams make it to the finals every year.
I really want basketball to switch from free-throw shooting to a hockey-style penalty box.
The reason that hockey can do this yet basketball could not is that in basketball you can really just shoot over the defense if you're left alone, and there's not a lot that the defense could do about that -- there will always be someone left uncovered in basketball. But in hockey, defensemen can still form a front to help block shots, you're not flipping the puck over everyone (I know technically that can happen, but the odds of success are far less than they would be in basketball). So a power play would lead to a lot of scoring because leaving a guy uncovered is pretty much death. Certainly it would involve MUCH more scoring than the current free-throw system. I'm not saying that it couldn't be done, but it would be a major change of the game, and make refereeing much more important when it's already way way too important as it is.
Shouldn't that mean that either the players play according to the rules or change the rules? Saying that "The refs can't call the rules as the players play and that's just how it is" seems a bit silly to me. I'd be happy if they would start calling traveling and palming again.
Having played and later refereed; the ref's job is to control the game without inserting themselves into it. If you make every ticky tacky call the game stops being the game. Call the big ones, penalize the flagrant, but let the players play the game. The players understand the bounds beyond the rules and generally stay within them; when they don't they get called for it.
This seems to work just fine for MLB, your mileage may vary as to whether this works for the NFL, and it is entirely broken in the NBA, such that with the latter, who the refereeing crew is for the night has become a popular fan metagame, considered to be very indicative of the success/failure of various teams. The NBA, more than any other sport I can think of, has a "dark cloud of suspicion" over it with distrust of the refereeing. It's made even worse by there being two different rulesets that referees tend to enforce -- one fairly relaxed set of rules that are applied to "superstars" (like the Kevin Jameses of the various teams), and another much harder set applied to everyone else. They allow the superstars to get away with more things that would be called fouls if anyone else did it.
the machine isn't going to be able to decide if the batsman went around (since there is no hard and fast rule for that, it's left to the umpire's discretion).
Anything that has a fuzzy rule can easily be modified so that it's a hard and fast rule. I know what Wikipedia says the (lack of rule) is, but the practice that I've seen actually used seems to be "does the bat cross the front of the plate." It wouldn't be hard to just make that "the rule" such that a camera could easily detect and enforce it.
The solution is to shut down professional sports. Sports are games for children to play.
Sure, as long as we can "shut down" all the other games and entertainment "for children" that adults partake in, like cartoons (anime and western) and computer games.
I think lumping YouTube and Netflix into the same statement isn't the right thing argument to make. Netflix is a subscription video service where YouTube is there to host advertising (with user generated content there to attract the eyeballs for the advertisers).
Youtube has been trying to get into the subscription video service market as well. They are really pushing their Youtube Red service if you aren't a subscriber.
All true enough. But if the works get cogged up and it just becomes frustrating and impossible to deal with, people may just choose to drop all of it, Netflix, streaming, Internet... all of the home connections, just fucking drop 'em. Do your internet at work and on mobile. Fuck the rest.
One can dream, but people are too addicted to content at home. High-speed internet, streaming, TV, all of that. It would take much MUCH worse than we've speculated could happen to convince people to just drop the whole thing and walk away.
We could always go back to Netflix's dvd and bluray rentals, which I love, but every time I suggest that could still be an enjoyable experience people call me grandpa and say I'm living in the last century.
If I cant stream netflix, or the price goes up a a little bit for my internet, I am likely to actually cancel Comcast.
What if it's Netflix that raises its rates?
I think if that happens, more people are likely to cancel Netflix instead of Comcast, even though it's Comcast's extortion that resulted in rate raises.
Word from their employees on Facebook have let us know that in a meeting they had yesterday, Comcast is going to add 30% in our area now that they can. If you don't like it they will take the 30% off and drop you to 10Mb/3Mb. You now have to pay for the fast lane. Sickens me that Net Neutrality is gone!! The prices were already TOO HIGH!
I agree that the prices are too high, but that didn't really have anything to do with Net Neutrality. With or without Net Neutrality, there was nothing to stop Comcast from raising its rates on you. It has more to do with the monopoly (sometimes duopoly) position that Comcast has, which is the real problem here -- it's what allows Comcast to not have to care about what the customer thinks, what prevents customers from getting sick of the company and going elsewhere.
Net Neutrality was a band-aid to cover the wound that is the lack of free market choices in the broadband market.
It costs pennies versus the money that they can extort from the end services.
Paper bags? How did people survive before plastic bags were invented?
Their dogs just pooped all over the place and no one cleaned it up, that's how it was done way in the past.
Paper bags are one option, biodegradable bags like BioBags are probably a better option.
Yes ha ha. But still Why would it do this? I can actually think of some ways but I wouldn't neccessarily expect cancer.
Cancer is basically what happens when a mistake is made in DNA replication, coupled with some way of propagating that mistake without bound. IE, most mistakes or mutations just make a cell inert/dead. It's cleaned out, and a healthy cell replaces it. But sometimes a tumor suppression gene that regulates cell replication is what is affected, and if DNA repair genes are also hit by a mutation, cancer can develop. It's something that requires several 'mistakes' to happen in order, but if enough mistakes happen, eventually they can line up just in the right way to cause this condition.
I'm not really sure why CRISPR specifically vulnerable to this, unless it just creates a lot of errors in gene editing. Reading through this, it sounds like healthy cells often fight off CRISPR changes by either repairing CRISPR's splice or by killing the cell. This makes CRISPR inefficient -- only a small minority of cells that CRISPR operates on will have their DNA successfully edited. The cells that survive the edit do so because that gene that is normally counteracting the CRISPR edits is deficient in those cells. Well, that gene deficiency is also a leading cause of cancer because the cell's "kill it or fix it" mechanism is broken. So when CRISPR edits a bunch of cells, and the cells respond by dying off except for the cells with the gene deficiency, then yes, you've treated the disease that CRISPR was intended to prevent, but you did it by increasing the proportion of cells that have a cancer (and other bad things) weakness.
(Obviously a very oversimplified explanation).
Websites were done decades ago, using nothing but hardware? Are you a fucked-up moron in real life, or do you just play one on slashdot?
This is one of the very few times when you can say "It's a great achievement. You're doing X... but on the Internet!" and actually have it be justified.
I am an evangelical christian kook, he is more likely the antichrist than a messenger from Skydaddy.
Well, at least you're honest and willing to stick with your moral beliefs. I wish I could say the same of the FRC's chairman who uses amazing mental contorsions to justify his wholehearted support.