Well, you set the precedent. You were the one who brought up Caliphates and past Muslim violence.
Pointing out past Muslim violence in light of current Muslim violence is on topic and adds to the understanding of the current events.
Pointing out past Christian violence in light of current Muslim violence is changing the topic.
It would be relevant in a discussion of current Christian violence... but this article isn't about Christians attempting to murder Americans for practicing Freedom of Speech.
Except the Prophet Muhammad himself totally dug religious freedom, that he would draft law between him and Jews and Christians to coexist. For almost 400 years, between Muslims taking Jerusalem and the First Crusade, non-Muslims could visit the city and worshiped their religion. It's only when that stopped that sparked the First Crusade.
He used a false peace treaty to murder Jews. He also condoned using lies and deception against infidels.
But let's also look at the present - explain why Muslim countries don't have Freedom of Speech, and why Muslims are trying to kill people who insult Mohammed, in contrast to all the other religions on this planet.
There are over 1.6 billion Muslims today. How many of them do you consider threats to freedom? over 80% of Indonesia is Muslim. Is Indonesia the country a threat to freedom?
Every one who takes seriously the concept of Jihad, or is willing to support that actively or passively.
No, I don't know what specific portion of the global Muslim population falls in that category.
I'd be quite happy for them to run their own countries as they see fit... If they want to cause trouble as a foreign country, that is what War is for.
I am only speaking in terms of how my own country should protect its own essential freedoms from a hostile religion. And the first step is recognizing incompatibility between the principles of Islam and Free Speech.
Just like I said. http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
"Always remember, when comparing religious violence, it's not fair to bring up the crusades or the inquisition or the conversion by sword of native populations all over the world in reference to Christianity because that's history, but it's totally fair to bring up the caliphate in reference to Islam because history tells you what their religion believes."
Why is it rightwingers always argue with you then prove the truth of exactly what it was you were saying that they disagreed with?
Yeah, that Christians can be scary because rather than admit the nasty things their religion has done in the past so that they can change their ways to never do them again, they can just claim it wasn't their fault, the bad guys made us do it, it was justified. That's what I've learned about the religion of peace.
How many Jews got killed in the crusades and the inquisition? Was that part of recapturing from Islam? What about all those American Indians slaughtered to bring them Jesus, and in the process harvest their gold for the church?
and that's without even counting the small time pogroms continuously launched against Jews by the local clergy on eastern Europe.
For 1400 years after the start of Islam Jews in those countries paid tribute like any conquered nation, with none of this convert or die thing that worries you, while Jews in Europe lives in constant fear that the current tolerant Christian rulers would be replaced by yet another regime that wanted to convert the Christ killers, exterminate them, or both, in that order. It's no accident that Hitler and the Nazis were able to ride antisemitism nearly to victory in civilized Europe.
Since then the politics of the middle east have made killing Jews a tactic. there isn't any conversion involved, it's pure nationalism and politics, learned from the European model.
So don't try to impress me with the dangers of Islamic conversion by the sword versus the safety of Christian tolerance, on the basis of historical behavior.
Always remember, when comparing religious violence, it's not fair to bring up the crusades or the inquisition or the conversion by sword of native populations all over the world in reference to Christianity because that's history, but it's totally fair to bring up the caliphate in reference to Islam because history tells you what their religion believes.
In almost every thread now, there are racial slurs.
Well, look on the bright side. They're not posting about "thugs".
Re:Should sexist opensource projects be removed?
on
Who Owns Pre-Embryos?
·
· Score: 1
Speaking of things turning ugly in FOSS space...
Should sexist opensource developers have their projects censored or removed?
Recently an opensource game release story was removed due to the game developer's open sexism(0) and harrasment(1) of women in tech.
A story posted by the editor of the popular Phoronix linux news site about a release of an Open Source videogame was later manually removed(2). The reason cited was the game developer's unacceptable views on social issues such as gender equality (3).
The release story was titled "Xonotic-Forked ChaosEsqueAnthology Sees New Release - Phoronix" and can be accessed via the google cache(4).
With the recent inclusion of a code of conduct(5) for those wishing to contribute to the Linux Kernel some questions now need to be asked and answered about the inclusion of code from people who are known to engage in or promote socially unacceptable attitudes or harrasments of those whom the free-software movement would prefer to attract in their place:
* Are the social or political views of an author of free software relevant to that software's inherent quality?
* Should the beliefs of an opensource developer weigh when when evaluating whether a piece of opensource software is worthy of any publicity or public notice?
* Should men with unpopular or "forbidden" views be excised from the opensource movement and "not allowed" to contribute, in a manner similar to that which is done in employment?
* Has the free/opensource software movement changed in these respects since its founding? If so is this a positive change?
* Should there be gatekeepers to opensource that decide who may and who may not contribute. Should abusive developers be "blackballed" to maintain proper social order and controls?
You want kids? Adopt. The world is full of kids who need families. You want to reproduce your own little genetic sample? Get over yourself. Your genes are well enough represented in the human genetic pool. In fact, if your judgement is that bad that you'd sink like 20 grand a shot on the iffy chance of an IVF being successful, that's a good argument that your particular genetic combo should NOT be reproduced.
The biggest danger to driving, drivers and pedestrians is the cell phone.
Folks walk out into traffic staring at the samsung. Go 10 blocks in Manhattan, you will get at least a dozen of these folks. No spatial awareness at all. In public.
I saw a guy holding a cell phone conversation on speaker while bicycling yesterday.
The guy who doesn't move from the light when it goes green didn't stall his manual, he's texting.
Left Lane blocker ? contractor or housewife in huge SUV/Pickup...62 in a 70...ON THE PHONE.
Really, just close your eyes instead and go lalalalalalaaa
They also tend to rely heavily on advertising and faux patriotism to sell the Korean designed, Mexican manufactured cars in the US because Ford/Chevrolet is 'Merican.
What's the name of the worst Jeep model produced in the last two decades, a 2007 newly designed car that it was so bad Chrysler considered not releasing at all? Jeep Patriot of course. I kid you not.
Not to mention the early 90s Chrysler prototype racer supposedly powered by cutting edge technology, which was introduced with vast fanfare and hype but vanished silently and invisibly “due to egos in senior management wishing to lay claim to the program, poor engineering decisions..., and corporate politics” http://www.allpar.com/model/pa... (and was actually built in Britain, ironically).
If you're driving a monstrosity of a truck, you have a damned high duty of care to make sure that monstrosity is not putting others in harm's way.
Spoken like someone who's never driven anything with more than 4 wheels. Driving a semi (hell, even a body job) in the city is a massive pain in the ass. Try and keep that safe braking distance all you like - it's going to be nothing more than a massive gap that gets filled every six seconds by a little four wheeler darting in front of you. People think "Ooh, a space! I can save 30 seconds on my commute with that!" instead of "Ooh, that's the space that will be filled by 45,000 lbs of truck if shit goes sideways... I don't think I want to be there." Most drivers in North America have no respect for the physics of a large vehicle. People will cut off semis and then jump on the brakes without a second thought. Then they get all pissed off, horrified, and self righteous when it ends in an accident and some bonehead winds up with their trunk folded into their fucking glove box - "Oh! Those big trucks just need to keep their distance and this wouldn't happen!" But it's all a joke. People treat semis like they're just big cars that can stop and turn on a dime, same as any small passenger vehicle. They're not passenger vehicles. Fact is you don't ever want to tangle with one (because you will lose, not "might" lose) and the best way to ensure that it never happens is to give them the space they need. It's really not much different than boxing with wildlife - if you walked up to a bear and spit in its face, people would think you were an idiot (and they'd be right), but you can cut off a semi to within spitting distance and somehow HE'S the asshole at fault when you wind up smeared across the freeway. People need to be responsible for their own safety too.
Can't count the number of times I've seen a four wheeler zip into the space in front of a semi then stand on the brakes to keep from hitting the car in front. Haven't seen a semi squish one yet, but I've seen them end up wagging their tails many times.
I rather like this one, a thermal storage solution.
Note that they don't tell you what the efficiency or capacity are. As you store more power, they lose more energy. Fairly worthless. It also incorporates a special and expensive engine. Fail, fail.
Putting air into and out of bladders under deep water is a very simple method,
No, no it isn't. First, air-based storage is always horribly lossy due to loss of the thermal energy; your above example tries to solve this with technology and argon, but it is thus complex and runs at high pressures and will be prone to failure. Second, the bladders will have to be replaced regularly, because under deep water is not a comfortable environment for them.
as is moving water up and down hills.
The efficiency is not great, but it's a lot better than anything based on compressing gases.
Then there are flywheels and fixed volume compressed air storage.
Well, compressed air storage is still stupid, but flywheels are cool, and applicable ones have been around for at least a decade, see Beacon Power. So yay, we found the viable alternative to used batteries! That took a really long time.
The truth is that used batteries are an excellent way to add more storage capacity, since they're just lying around anyway.
Efficiency wise, you can't beat flywheels, surprising to the novice who is accustomed to trying to improve batteries. . Not so good for vehicles which hate to carry around a blast shield around them for when they explode, but if you're talking about stationary installations, flywheels are the bomb (haha).
They need windows to watch whales, but not windows to see where they are flying?
Yes. The Klingon Bird of Prey has flight sensors integrated into its design to allow it to fly, it's reasonable to assume it doesn't have whale sensors integrated into its cargo bay.
And how much care tending did they actually do between hauling ass to the Sun and back to Earth?
Seeing as how they only traveled in time with one round trip, this question is senseless. Instead you should ask what would Mr. Scott want to plan for? Would he want to verify the whales are safe after beamup? Yes. If the sensors inside showed the whale in distress would he want to at least make a visual account of it? Yes. Would the transparent tank be better for them to have if the time travel jump failed and they were stranded? Yep.
Wouldn't an actual hatch into the area be more appropriate...
Why don't you go into a little more detail here? Produce a diagram for showing that they could have safely cut a hole between decks without, say, cutting through main power lines or something and that it would have been done in roughly the same amount of time. Bonus points if you can show us their parts manifest that shows they had the hatch already pre-fabbed and the metal for the walls ready to be installed for just such a purpose.
It's like if someone from the 1800s wrote a science fiction story about someone from the 21st century going back to their time and expecting them to be experts with the slide rule and Morris code.
Heck, it's like someone from the 21st century being fluent in the name of things like "Morse code".:D
That's what they mean by transparent aluminum? Spinel (familiar to all the former rock and lapidary nerd kids)? That's like calling clay "insulating aluminum".
But the question is what happens to it when it does break. You don't want a bunch of extra shards of material being added as projectiles in a collision. One of the features of safety glass is that when it breaks there aren't (or many) pointy edges created.
but that's why windshields, which aren't tempered, have that plastic layer to keep shards from flying. much like those screen protectors they sell now which are gorilla glass laminated on plastic. Boy, when those shatter and you peel the shards off the plastic, those are mighty sharp.
Every phone seems to have this same issue, but it is not the phones fault. It's the fault of what the owner installs on it. My wifes galaxy mega was great at first, but now that she has all these stupid games installed it is buggy and needs to be restarted regularly.
I vote for stupid stuff. My Droid M works fine for two or three days after reboot but gradually gets slower and slower until the touch screen no longer responds.
But I don't play games, and the only games on the device are the bloatware installed by the carrier. I suspect that the device's entire problem is related to bloat.
I'm not experienced inside my phone's OS much, but in the past I've hacked up installations of CP/M, etc. so it's not like I'm incompetent; so are there tools I can use to find out which app blows up my phone? Or eats the battery? Or seizes the screen and won't relinquish it?
The phones are stable. It's the junk you put on them that make them unstable.
If an OS lets the apps make it unstable, then the OS (and phone) is bad. A well configured OS shouldn't allow instability caused by apps.
In the interests of stability, I have removed everything from my phone, including the phone capability, so now it just runs the OS. It's much more stable.
Every phone seems to have this same issue, but it is not the phones fault. It's the fault of what the owner installs on it. My wifes galaxy mega was great at first, but now that she has all these stupid games installed it is buggy and needs to be restarted regularly.
But isn't that supposed to be one of Apple's big points; curated apps? Nothing that breaks the machine?
ah, you're just confusing randomization as a means of controlling nuisance factors, with the formal significance level of the result about the factor of interest. you are confused; these are different concepts. to wit, randomization certainly does not involve testing "all the independent variables". trying to randomize this way is a waste of time at best, and would probably fuck up your experiment.
it is worth recalling, at times like this, that the last person to speak to me with such a combination of ignorance and certitude was found dead three days later from profuse rectal bleeding.
Not sure what you're saying, but me and my rectum are outa here.
Being stuck on any planet is a bad idea. Down at the bottom of a gravity well. We need to engineer ourselves to better tolerate space conditions and live in orbital habitats. And by the time we're engineered in such a way, we'd probably be better described as "hardware".
I mean, tolerance of cold temperatures, high radiation, vacuum, lack of oxygen, gravity, liquid water.... Everything you'd need to be at home in space. And then you're hardware. And interchangeable parts would be cool. If your eye offends you, you pluck it out. (And put in a new one.)
--PM
If we haven't got the brains not to make the planet we evolved on hostile to our life form, I don't think we're going to have the brains to fix up other planets so that they become good places for us to live.
That definitely explains why conservatives are falling behind the curve of such wonderful advances like, electrocution, nuclear weapons, and chemical warfare. And don't forget plastics and genetically modified crops. Conservatives must HATE those. What a bunch of luddites!
Naw, they're too busy hating solar power, wind power, tidal power, and anything else that doesn't inflate coal and oil profits.
2. Not only did the splicing technique not work very often (28 / 86 embryos), but it also created lots of off-target mutations in other parts of the DNA. Both of these results were not expected.
Wrong. They only tested 54 of the embryo's afterward. 28/54 is a 51.8% success rate.
The off-target mutations in the remaining 26 embryos was not only expected, it was predicted about 16 years ago, when we first started experimenting with retroviral splicing vectors.
No, they went on to say only "a fraction" of the 28 successfully fixed the defect.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, you set the precedent. You were the one who brought up Caliphates and past Muslim violence.
Pointing out past Muslim violence in light of current Muslim violence is on topic and adds to the understanding of the current events.
Pointing out past Christian violence in light of current Muslim violence is changing the topic.
It would be relevant in a discussion of current Christian violence ... but this article isn't about Christians attempting to murder Americans for practicing Freedom of Speech.
Except the Prophet Muhammad himself totally dug religious freedom, that he would draft law between him and Jews and Christians to coexist. For almost 400 years, between Muslims taking Jerusalem and the First Crusade, non-Muslims could visit the city and worshiped their religion. It's only when that stopped that sparked the First Crusade.
He used a false peace treaty to murder Jews. He also condoned using lies and deception against infidels.
But let's also look at the present - explain why Muslim countries don't have Freedom of Speech, and why Muslims are trying to kill people who insult Mohammed, in contrast to all the other religions on this planet.
There are over 1.6 billion Muslims today. How many of them do you consider threats to freedom? over 80% of Indonesia is Muslim. Is Indonesia the country a threat to freedom?
Every one who takes seriously the concept of Jihad, or is willing to support that actively or passively.
No, I don't know what specific portion of the global Muslim population falls in that category.
I'd be quite happy for them to run their own countries as they see fit ... If they want to cause trouble as a foreign country, that is what War is for.
I am only speaking in terms of how my own country should protect its own essential freedoms from a hostile religion. And the first step is recognizing incompatibility between the principles of Islam and Free Speech.
Just like I said. http://slashdot.org/comments.p... "Always remember, when comparing religious violence, it's not fair to bring up the crusades or the inquisition or the conversion by sword of native populations all over the world in reference to Christianity because that's history, but it's totally fair to bring up the caliphate in reference to Islam because history tells you what their religion believes." Why is it rightwingers always argue with you then prove the truth of exactly what it was you were saying that they disagreed with?
Yeah, that Christians can be scary because rather than admit the nasty things their religion has done in the past so that they can change their ways to never do them again, they can just claim it wasn't their fault, the bad guys made us do it, it was justified. That's what I've learned about the religion of peace.
How many Jews got killed in the crusades and the inquisition? Was that part of recapturing from Islam? What about all those American Indians slaughtered to bring them Jesus, and in the process harvest their gold for the church?
and that's without even counting the small time pogroms continuously launched against Jews by the local clergy on eastern Europe.
For 1400 years after the start of Islam Jews in those countries paid tribute like any conquered nation, with none of this convert or die thing that worries you, while Jews in Europe lives in constant fear that the current tolerant Christian rulers would be replaced by yet another regime that wanted to convert the Christ killers, exterminate them, or both, in that order. It's no accident that Hitler and the Nazis were able to ride antisemitism nearly to victory in civilized Europe.
Since then the politics of the middle east have made killing Jews a tactic. there isn't any conversion involved, it's pure nationalism and politics, learned from the European model.
So don't try to impress me with the dangers of Islamic conversion by the sword versus the safety of Christian tolerance, on the basis of historical behavior.
Always remember, when comparing religious violence, it's not fair to bring up the crusades or the inquisition or the conversion by sword of native populations all over the world in reference to Christianity because that's history, but it's totally fair to bring up the caliphate in reference to Islam because history tells you what their religion believes.
Silly Muslims. They have defend the prophet laws instead of stems your ground laws.
In almost every thread now, there are racial slurs.
Well, look on the bright side. They're not posting about "thugs".
Speaking of things turning ugly in FOSS space... Should sexist opensource developers have their projects censored or removed?
Recently an opensource game release story was removed due to the game developer's open sexism(0) and harrasment(1) of women in tech.
A story posted by the editor of the popular Phoronix linux news site about a release of an Open Source videogame was later manually removed(2). The reason cited was the game developer's unacceptable views on social issues such as gender equality (3).
The release story was titled "Xonotic-Forked ChaosEsqueAnthology Sees New Release - Phoronix" and can be accessed via the google cache(4).
With the recent inclusion of a code of conduct(5) for those wishing to contribute to the Linux Kernel some questions now need to be asked and answered about the inclusion of code from people who are known to engage in or promote socially unacceptable attitudes or harrasments of those whom the free-software movement would prefer to attract in their place:
* Are the social or political views of an author of free software relevant to that software's inherent quality? * Should the beliefs of an opensource developer weigh when when evaluating whether a piece of opensource software is worthy of any publicity or public notice? * Should men with unpopular or "forbidden" views be excised from the opensource movement and "not allowed" to contribute, in a manner similar to that which is done in employment? * Has the free/opensource software movement changed in these respects since its founding? If so is this a positive change? * Should there be gatekeepers to opensource that decide who may and who may not contribute. Should abusive developers be "blackballed" to maintain proper social order and controls?
and
* What are the consequences of not doing this
Citations: (0) Past related incident: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=1310 (1) http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/... (2) Removed story URL: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.p... (3) http://www.phoronix.com/forums... "Fortunately, the article has been removed now." "Thanks everybody for speaking up." (4) https://webcache.googleusercon... (5) Linux "Code of Conflict" http://whatwillweuse.com/fodde...
sheldon, amy told me to tell you to unblock her sexts.
You want kids? Adopt. The world is full of kids who need families. You want to reproduce your own little genetic sample? Get over yourself. Your genes are well enough represented in the human genetic pool. In fact, if your judgement is that bad that you'd sink like 20 grand a shot on the iffy chance of an IVF being successful, that's a good argument that your particular genetic combo should NOT be reproduced.
The biggest danger to driving, drivers and pedestrians is the cell phone. Folks walk out into traffic staring at the samsung. Go 10 blocks in Manhattan, you will get at least a dozen of these folks. No spatial awareness at all. In public. I saw a guy holding a cell phone conversation on speaker while bicycling yesterday. The guy who doesn't move from the light when it goes green didn't stall his manual, he's texting. Left Lane blocker ? contractor or housewife in huge SUV/Pickup...62 in a 70...ON THE PHONE. Really, just close your eyes instead and go lalalalalalaaa
http://www.cartalk.com/blogs/d...
They also tend to rely heavily on advertising and faux patriotism to sell the Korean designed, Mexican manufactured cars in the US because Ford/Chevrolet is 'Merican.
What's the name of the worst Jeep model produced in the last two decades, a 2007 newly designed car that it was so bad Chrysler considered not releasing at all? Jeep Patriot of course. I kid you not.
Not to mention the early 90s Chrysler prototype racer supposedly powered by cutting edge technology, which was introduced with vast fanfare and hype but vanished silently and invisibly “due to egos in senior management wishing to lay claim to the program, poor engineering decisions ..., and corporate politics” http://www.allpar.com/model/pa... (and was actually built in Britain, ironically).
If you're driving a monstrosity of a truck, you have a damned high duty of care to make sure that monstrosity is not putting others in harm's way.
Spoken like someone who's never driven anything with more than 4 wheels. Driving a semi (hell, even a body job) in the city is a massive pain in the ass. Try and keep that safe braking distance all you like - it's going to be nothing more than a massive gap that gets filled every six seconds by a little four wheeler darting in front of you. People think "Ooh, a space! I can save 30 seconds on my commute with that!" instead of "Ooh, that's the space that will be filled by 45,000 lbs of truck if shit goes sideways... I don't think I want to be there." Most drivers in North America have no respect for the physics of a large vehicle. People will cut off semis and then jump on the brakes without a second thought. Then they get all pissed off, horrified, and self righteous when it ends in an accident and some bonehead winds up with their trunk folded into their fucking glove box - "Oh! Those big trucks just need to keep their distance and this wouldn't happen!" But it's all a joke. People treat semis like they're just big cars that can stop and turn on a dime, same as any small passenger vehicle. They're not passenger vehicles. Fact is you don't ever want to tangle with one (because you will lose, not "might" lose) and the best way to ensure that it never happens is to give them the space they need. It's really not much different than boxing with wildlife - if you walked up to a bear and spit in its face, people would think you were an idiot (and they'd be right), but you can cut off a semi to within spitting distance and somehow HE'S the asshole at fault when you wind up smeared across the freeway. People need to be responsible for their own safety too.
Can't count the number of times I've seen a four wheeler zip into the space in front of a semi then stand on the brakes to keep from hitting the car in front. Haven't seen a semi squish one yet, but I've seen them end up wagging their tails many times.
I rather like this one, a thermal storage solution.
Note that they don't tell you what the efficiency or capacity are. As you store more power, they lose more energy. Fairly worthless. It also incorporates a special and expensive engine. Fail, fail.
Putting air into and out of bladders under deep water is a very simple method,
No, no it isn't. First, air-based storage is always horribly lossy due to loss of the thermal energy; your above example tries to solve this with technology and argon, but it is thus complex and runs at high pressures and will be prone to failure. Second, the bladders will have to be replaced regularly, because under deep water is not a comfortable environment for them.
as is moving water up and down hills.
The efficiency is not great, but it's a lot better than anything based on compressing gases.
Then there are flywheels and fixed volume compressed air storage.
Well, compressed air storage is still stupid, but flywheels are cool, and applicable ones have been around for at least a decade, see Beacon Power. So yay, we found the viable alternative to used batteries! That took a really long time.
The truth is that used batteries are an excellent way to add more storage capacity, since they're just lying around anyway.
Efficiency wise, you can't beat flywheels, surprising to the novice who is accustomed to trying to improve batteries. . Not so good for vehicles which hate to carry around a blast shield around them for when they explode, but if you're talking about stationary installations, flywheels are the bomb (haha).
They need windows to watch whales, but not windows to see where they are flying?
Yes. The Klingon Bird of Prey has flight sensors integrated into its design to allow it to fly, it's reasonable to assume it doesn't have whale sensors integrated into its cargo bay.
And how much care tending did they actually do between hauling ass to the Sun and back to Earth?
Seeing as how they only traveled in time with one round trip, this question is senseless. Instead you should ask what would Mr. Scott want to plan for? Would he want to verify the whales are safe after beamup? Yes. If the sensors inside showed the whale in distress would he want to at least make a visual account of it? Yes. Would the transparent tank be better for them to have if the time travel jump failed and they were stranded? Yep.
Wouldn't an actual hatch into the area be more appropriate...
Why don't you go into a little more detail here? Produce a diagram for showing that they could have safely cut a hole between decks without, say, cutting through main power lines or something and that it would have been done in roughly the same amount of time. Bonus points if you can show us their parts manifest that shows they had the hatch already pre-fabbed and the metal for the walls ready to be installed for just such a purpose.
Just use the Jefferies tubes.
"Replicator, generate me some Earth cash. USA. Early 1980's, mixed denominations. Oh, and some tea, Earl Grey, hot."
Dammit computer, you should know I meant separate containers.
It's like if someone from the 1800s wrote a science fiction story about someone from the 21st century going back to their time and expecting them to be experts with the slide rule and Morris code.
Heck, it's like someone from the 21st century being fluent in the name of things like "Morse code". :D
This scode is so good I want more scode!
What's wrong with poly(methyl methacrylate)? That at least may be made from dead plants, dinosaurs, and whales - helps them feel more at home!
Dissolves in several common solvents, including chloroform. don't ask how i found out.
Explosive reactive armor bulletproof vests. An idea whose time has come.
That's what they mean by transparent aluminum? Spinel (familiar to all the former rock and lapidary nerd kids)? That's like calling clay "insulating aluminum".
But the question is what happens to it when it does break. You don't want a bunch of extra shards of material being added as projectiles in a collision. One of the features of safety glass is that when it breaks there aren't (or many) pointy edges created.
but that's why windshields, which aren't tempered, have that plastic layer to keep shards from flying. much like those screen protectors they sell now which are gorilla glass laminated on plastic. Boy, when those shatter and you peel the shards off the plastic, those are mighty sharp.
Every phone seems to have this same issue, but it is not the phones fault. It's the fault of what the owner installs on it. My wifes galaxy mega was great at first, but now that she has all these stupid games installed it is buggy and needs to be restarted regularly.
I vote for stupid stuff. My Droid M works fine for two or three days after reboot but gradually gets slower and slower until the touch screen no longer responds.
But I don't play games, and the only games on the device are the bloatware installed by the carrier. I suspect that the device's entire problem is related to bloat.
I'm not experienced inside my phone's OS much, but in the past I've hacked up installations of CP/M, etc. so it's not like I'm incompetent; so are there tools I can use to find out which app blows up my phone? Or eats the battery? Or seizes the screen and won't relinquish it?
The phones are stable. It's the junk you put on them that make them unstable.
If an OS lets the apps make it unstable, then the OS (and phone) is bad. A well configured OS shouldn't allow instability caused by apps.
In the interests of stability, I have removed everything from my phone, including the phone capability, so now it just runs the OS. It's much more stable.
Every phone seems to have this same issue, but it is not the phones fault. It's the fault of what the owner installs on it. My wifes galaxy mega was great at first, but now that she has all these stupid games installed it is buggy and needs to be restarted regularly.
But isn't that supposed to be one of Apple's big points; curated apps? Nothing that breaks the machine?
ah, you're just confusing randomization as a means of controlling nuisance factors, with the formal significance level of the result about the factor of interest. you are confused; these are different concepts. to wit, randomization certainly does not involve testing "all the independent variables". trying to randomize this way is a waste of time at best, and would probably fuck up your experiment.
it is worth recalling, at times like this, that the last person to speak to me with such a combination of ignorance and certitude was found dead three days later from profuse rectal bleeding.
Not sure what you're saying, but me and my rectum are outa here.
Being stuck on any planet is a bad idea. Down at the bottom of a gravity well. We need to engineer ourselves to better tolerate space conditions and live in orbital habitats. And by the time we're engineered in such a way, we'd probably be better described as "hardware".
I mean, tolerance of cold temperatures, high radiation, vacuum, lack of oxygen, gravity, liquid water.... Everything you'd need to be at home in space. And then you're hardware. And interchangeable parts would be cool. If your eye offends you, you pluck it out. (And put in a new one.)
--PM
If we haven't got the brains not to make the planet we evolved on hostile to our life form, I don't think we're going to have the brains to fix up other planets so that they become good places for us to live.
That definitely explains why conservatives are falling behind the curve of such wonderful advances like, electrocution, nuclear weapons, and chemical warfare. And don't forget plastics and genetically modified crops. Conservatives must HATE those. What a bunch of luddites!
Naw, they're too busy hating solar power, wind power, tidal power, and anything else that doesn't inflate coal and oil profits.
2. Not only did the splicing technique not work very often (28 / 86 embryos), but it also created lots of off-target mutations in other parts of the DNA. Both of these results were not expected.
Wrong. They only tested 54 of the embryo's afterward. 28/54 is a 51.8% success rate.
The off-target mutations in the remaining 26 embryos was not only expected, it was predicted about 16 years ago, when we first started experimenting with retroviral splicing vectors.
No, they went on to say only "a fraction" of the 28 successfully fixed the defect.