You are right that 454 made a tremendous contribution; I certainly did not mean to imply that they did not. As you correctly stated they pioneered the pyrophosphorylase coupled sequencing by synthesis technology. And this is the technology used for the Mammoth sequencing.
I just wanted to give credit to some others which have made (or will make) significant contributions. Illumina/Solexa uses a different chemistry, based on reversibly blocked, dye tagged nucleotides. Pacific Biosciences is working on a single molecule sequencing technology which could potentially achieve the $1000 human genome.
[Yes, I was involved in the arabidopsis transcriptome sequencing by 454.]
The folks at 454 Life Sciences made reconstructing a genome from lots of little pieces pretty simple by using an algorithm that looks for common fragments (ex AAGGCTTCTA and CTTCTATCTGG probably go together to form AAGGCTTCTATCTGG).
Spoken like one who has never actually tried to assemble a genome sequence. Trust me, there is absolutely nothing simple about it. And while 454 Life Sciences (now a division of Roche Diagnostics) pioneered a new technology for generating raw DNA sequence data they did not pioneer the assembly process. Sequence assembly algorithms are a long and well studied problem.
They also pretty much pioneered modern sequencing techniques.
While 454 was first to the market with a next-generation sequencing platform they are currently in heavy competition with the Illumina/Solexa platform. And then there is Pacific Bioscience due to release a platform in 2010 which could eat both their lunches.
Competition is good within a framework of law. Stealing a bunch of Rolex watches and selling them at 1/10th the price out of the trunk of your car with no legal consequences does not promote a healthy marketplace.
Try reading the case first before you decide that it is based on shaky grounds. The case has nothing to do with the "Apple hardware only" provision of the EULA. It has to do with the fact that Psystar is modifying Apple code and then redistributing it. Think about it; if they were trying to enforce the "Apple hardware only" clause they would have to sue each and every individual who purchased a Psystar. Again, the complaint alleges that Psystar is modifying code and redistributing it without a license grant to do so.
You make a valid distinction between a license for use and a license to redistribute. But then you ignore the fact that Psystar is in fact modifying and redistributing the code with no license grant to do so. And before you say it, principle of first sale does not apply; non-transferable licenses have long been recognized as valid.
First I want to make it clear that I am not "taking the city's side" but how can a post be insightful when it makes it abundantly clear that the poster never read the linked article. (Yes, I know this is/.) His home was originally entered by firefighters because of an air conditioner fire, they don't need a warrant when you ask them in to please keep your home from burning down. In the normal course of their duties the firefighters observed, in plain sight, what they reasonably believed could be hazardous materials. They contacted the appropriate authorities.
Second, Mr. Deeb was NEVER placed under arrest or even taken into police custody. He and his wife were asked to stay at a hotel (or some other location) while DEP and hazardous material crews cleared the home.
It really has nothing to do with monopoly and may not be a true "back door". Back in the day when I was doing Windows Sysadmin I had a program called NTAccess. It was not created be Microsoft and it did not need access to any "back door". It was a modified version of the of the boot floppy for the NT installer. It allowed you to rewrite the Administrator password when the original was lost. Who knows, those Microsoft technicians may have actually been using this software.
Slashdot Mirror
You are right that 454 made a tremendous contribution; I certainly did not mean to imply that they did not. As you correctly stated they pioneered the pyrophosphorylase coupled sequencing by synthesis technology. And this is the technology used for the Mammoth sequencing.
I just wanted to give credit to some others which have made (or will make) significant contributions. Illumina/Solexa uses a different chemistry, based on reversibly blocked, dye tagged nucleotides. Pacific Biosciences is working on a single molecule sequencing technology which could potentially achieve the $1000 human genome.
[Yes, I was involved in the arabidopsis transcriptome sequencing by 454.]
The folks at 454 Life Sciences made reconstructing a genome from lots of little pieces pretty simple by using an algorithm that looks for common fragments (ex AAGGCTTCTA and CTTCTATCTGG probably go together to form AAGGCTTCTATCTGG).
Spoken like one who has never actually tried to assemble a genome sequence. Trust me, there is absolutely nothing simple about it. And while 454 Life Sciences (now a division of Roche Diagnostics) pioneered a new technology for generating raw DNA sequence data they did not pioneer the assembly process. Sequence assembly algorithms are a long and well studied problem.
They also pretty much pioneered modern sequencing techniques.
While 454 was first to the market with a next-generation sequencing platform they are currently in heavy competition with the Illumina/Solexa platform. And then there is Pacific Bioscience due to release a platform in 2010 which could eat both their lunches.
Competition is good within a framework of law. Stealing a bunch of Rolex watches and selling them at 1/10th the price out of the trunk of your car with no legal consequences does not promote a healthy marketplace.
Try reading the case first before you decide that it is based on shaky grounds. The case has nothing to do with the "Apple hardware only" provision of the EULA. It has to do with the fact that Psystar is modifying Apple code and then redistributing it. Think about it; if they were trying to enforce the "Apple hardware only" clause they would have to sue each and every individual who purchased a Psystar. Again, the complaint alleges that Psystar is modifying code and redistributing it without a license grant to do so.
You make a valid distinction between a license for use and a license to redistribute. But then you ignore the fact that Psystar is in fact modifying and redistributing the code with no license grant to do so. And before you say it, principle of first sale does not apply; non-transferable licenses have long been recognized as valid.
I think you missed the part about the chemicals being discovered by firefighters he invited into his home to put out an air conditioner fire.
First I want to make it clear that I am not "taking the city's side" but how can a post be insightful when it makes it abundantly clear that the poster never read the linked article. (Yes, I know this is /.) His home was originally entered by firefighters because of an air conditioner fire, they don't need a warrant when you ask them in to please keep your home from burning down. In the normal course of their duties the firefighters observed, in plain sight, what they reasonably believed could be hazardous materials. They contacted the appropriate authorities.
Second, Mr. Deeb was NEVER placed under arrest or even taken into police custody. He and his wife were asked to stay at a hotel (or some other location) while DEP and hazardous material crews cleared the home.
It really has nothing to do with monopoly and may not be a true "back door". Back in the day when I was doing Windows Sysadmin I had a program called NTAccess. It was not created be Microsoft and it did not need access to any "back door". It was a modified version of the of the boot floppy for the NT installer. It allowed you to rewrite the Administrator password when the original was lost. Who knows, those Microsoft technicians may have actually been using this software.