The paper you are referring to mentions modifying cowpox to become virulent, not rebuilding smallpox from scratch. In fact that is not mentioned at all and that is for a reason - it cannot be done at present. Anyone who says they can rebuild it better put their money where their mouth is and do it with cawpox which is similarly sequenced. Not that they will be able at the tech level of today.
Read the paper again - it goes through how many things we do not know about how smallpox works - the proteins which nobody knows how they work, the inhibition of immune system, etc. By the way, the relationship to HIV is also of considerable interest and there is potential benefit to the humanity as a whole if we find how to study it. If being vaccinated against smallpox or having had smallpox actually confers at least some level of HIV resistance... Hmm... That is an interesting thought... To say the least...
No, You _CANNOT_ recreate smallpox from DNA sequence. Not yet. There is a world of difference between simple viruses which have been assembled in the lab like the polyo virus and a smallpox virus. In fact there is a world of difference between a SmallPox virus and Flu.
The SmallPox virus is _BIG_. It is so big that it is on the borderline to defy the common assumption that viruses are not visible under microscope. It carries a whole battery of own enzymes which are essential for the initial cycle of the infection. We have not yet learned how to build all these with the correct glycosylation (they have glycosides sticking on them same as your average eucariote protein). We are not in a position to assemble it either. If we were, we could assemble a whole eucariote cell which is not anywhere near the current science level. Same level of complexity more or less.
In 10 years we may be in a position to build it from sequence. Now - not a chance.
And why do you think it matters? The only data in the HDMI spec which need to be isochronous, jitter and delay controlled, etc is _ONE_ _WAY_. You need several _MILES_ to get jitter between the signals on the different wires worth mentioning. The two way signals which can be influenced by this and used for keying, recognition of capabilities, etc are low bandwidth and non-realtime.
The only thing that matters for one-way serial connections like DVI or HDMI is reflections from the connectors (and transmitting/receiving electronics) and noise (especially from crosstalk). For 15 feet the cable needs to be really sh*t for these to show up.
In fact, just open up a player or a computer with a HDMI in/out and look at the traces coming/going from/to the connectors. They sometimes go for up to 10cm unprotected, unscreened and in HIGH NOISE environment. Snapping a 100$ cable on top of that because it "does not deteriorate the signal" is not just stupid, it is totally bonkers.
He will do a summary judgement at 20. So the reduction to 3 is actually only if the trial goes in front of a jury.
Most patent trials do not. If the summary judgement does not go the way the defendant wants it the defendant usually caves in and licenses at that point instead of being nuked by jury assigned damages.
In any case, that is only patents. Oracle has launched a salvo of license and copyright missiles as well.
Yeah, spread as much as possible of the infectious material into an aerosol in the air... Great idea. The last thing you need to do to a potentially infectious creature is to shoot it.
China is not using the US 3-drug cocktail which will damage heart and other organs. It uses barbiturates which kill the prisoner as fast as the 3-drug and leave the organs nicely suited for harvesting. Further to this, it is a "clean brain death" so you can put the living vegetable on a ventilator for transport purposes if you want to. The only damaged organ may be liver and even that will happen if the vegetable is kept alive too long. If the liver is collected right away it will be in OK shape for transplant as well.
As far as HIV, HEP C, etc these are all tested in advance as well as the exact tissue matching.
In any case, my thoughts on the article are slightly different: "Only three? In China? You gotta be kidding"
I have seen 18 month non-compete for lowly lab grunts in private R&D companies and trainee IPR people with circa 45K pound per annum. Anything but exec.
It is legal to own. That ownership is not transferrable. It is not legal to sell, rent, loan or broadcast unless the local law explicitly grants some rights along those lines (only Germany IIRC).
They are not allocating ipv4 to anyone but new ISPs and for IPv6 transition purposes. You cannot get IPv4 if for normal use if you are an existing account holder. Even if you are eligible the most you get is 4/24s.
The difference is how the money is consumed. The fact that the money is collected via payroll is of little relevance.
In an insurance based system theoretically, you can take your money and go to a different provider as long as said provider is happy to treat you for the regulated price.
In Sweden you originally could, then you could not, then you had again "patient choice" in the early 90-es, then you could not and so on. Now you see it, now you do not depending on how "social" is the current party in power. However the option to HAVE this is present and it is an inherent part of the "insurance" style system. That is what the original law of 1946 intended to.
Similarly, theoretically, you can set up a private clinic, pass a few regs and as long as you are happy to treat patients for the amount of money spec-ed by the insurance you can charge that to the national health insurance. AFAIK in Sweden presently, this is mostly theory (but the law actually allows it). In most other EU countries it is the practice and the norm.
UK is a take it or leave it with no such option. NHS is state funded and the option of taking your treatment money and going elsewhere is not available even in theory. Some people tried that one by going to France during the worst years of NHS under Blair. They even sued the UK in the EU court. The end-result is that you can now apply to the NHS itself to have your treatment elsewhere which is from the realm of "yeah, right, not that this will ever happen".
That is the fundamental difference between the rest of EU and the UK.
Sweden is a mandatory health insurance country. National Health Insurance act of 1946 implemented since 1955.
It tried to do "national health care budget" in the 1980-es by adding extra funding different from insurance into the health budget. This resulted in a spectacular UK style fiasco with waiting lists, failing care and so on. It fixed some of it by going back to closer to the original system in the early 90-es only to have that axed on "we are not so far right" grounds and fail again. It is now looking to go back to where it started.
Out of all examples that mandatory health insurance works and should not be spoiled by budgetary injections it is probably the best one because you have a system that is mandatory insurance by law and a long set of data on how it fails when it is not executed as intended.
By the way - do some reading before calling other people idiots.
It was a German idea originally from immediately after WW2 (1949 or so). USA conservatives copied it after it was adopted by all of Western Europe sans UK. In any case, that is how the medical system in all of Europe except UK works nowdays.
I have lived in the US, in a country with a regulated mandatory medical insurance (Bulgaria - it reformed to medical insurance from "socialist health for all") and in the UK which is the last remaining developed country worldwide with "pure socialist" style health system. Trust me, mandatory regulated insurance with regulated costings is exactly what you want and what you need if you want a working health system. We have yet to invent anything better.
The pre-Obama US system is broken - in the absense of regulatory oversight it is guaranteed to inflate costs while using doctors which are kept awake only by drugs at the end of a 30+ hour shift (I have friends who work in US A&E/ER so I know this first hand). So is the "socialist" UK one. You end up waiting 12+ months for treatment and receiving letters asking if you are still alive (I keep one of these as an example on why it is broken). What Obama did is the step in the right direction.
In any case - on article main subject:
1. I am not surprised. 2. That is why I run my mail server (with my mail dating back to 1999) till this day and it physically located where 3rd parties cannot access it. 3. That is why any data of any significance that leaves my systems (offsite backups,etc) is always encrypted AES256. I still keep a couple of Via C7s operational in my house for this exact reason - they can encrypt at up to 100Mbit/s "free of charge".
Kind'a. It prevents Apple using the software commercially within its business methods and business strategy.
Apple is a known "patents at dawn" company. That does not fit the GPLv3 mutual assured destruction patent clauses.
So while other companies can use GPLv3 commercially, Apple cannot do so. It will be in violation of the license the next time it tries to lob a patent nuke which is something it does on a regular basis.
Unfortunately, Apple is not alone here. Nearly all big companies are in the same position and they will follow suit. While I understand RMS aims and ideas here, that is really not the way. GPL should not be a replacement for court, legislation and enforcement.
That is what is the key factor in determining how much funding you get. The chart gives a good initial estimate of the likelihood for a site to produce a cited paper.
One comment however - the method used is skewed slightly against Russian and Chinese. These two countries still have a significant amount of stuff published in their native language journals and those tend to get less than average citations from abroad.
It is also surprising that places crippled by war and sanctions around ex Ugoslavia still deliver top science while cough cough some of their well off neighbours do not. It also shows the _REAL_ amount of innovation going on the Indian subcontinent. Good graph for slapping anyone talking about exporting research there.
US T-Mobile is very different from T-Mob elsewhere. They use their own architecture and do things differently from the rest of the T-Mob franchises. This does not mean better - just different.
This means that the LPG tank in my car and the extra set of injectors on the inlet manifold is a _VERY_ prudent investment.
However, if any enforcement of this resolution is to happen I am going to think 10 times before flying UK-US or any other route between security council countries. Nothing personal, just business....
First, it is not. French law is Napoleonic law and it is extremely strict on the concept of "innocent until proven guilty". The Blair style playing fast and lose with it and declaring all management guilty until proven innocent in an H&S case as per UK H&S legislation is impossible there. No comment who exactly sponsored Blair to push that one.
Second, for the time being the charge is mostly a formality. This allows resources to continue to be allocated to the case. Otherwise it would have had to go on the cold case shelf. This way the French government can subsidize the search for the black boxes without getting into the usual Boeing vs Airbus or Air France vs the rest of the world subsidies debate. Granted the money in this case is 20-30M so it is a fraction of the usual sums discussed in the context of Airbus or Air France subsidies, but it is money none the less. Additionally, there are resources you cannot buy officially with money like military vessel involvement. This allows these resources to continue being allocated to the case.
Hollywood has shown no interest in marketing it when it is done right for both Sci Fi and Fantasy. So while sometimes someone gets something right, it does not get even a fraction of the credit it deserves.
Two examples:
1. StarDust. An excellent movie that did not get even a fraction of the marketing and any of the awards Hollywood hands out to all kinds of cr*p. 2. GATTACA. Same, with the difference that it at least got some nominations. No Hollywood award though and once again a laughable marketing budget.
This means that you do not know how to shop with a kid.
I used to do all of the shopping with the older kid from the age of 2.5 to around 5-ish and I do it sometimes with his sister (now 2y 7m). None of them ever needed an electronic pacifier at the checkout because by that time they were totally knackered from _HELPING_ me to shop. The only screaming toddler cases I have ever had was the older one disagreeing what fish we are going to buy this time. None of them was ever restrained in a shop. They are always totally selfpropelled. And we are not talking compliant "ragdoll cat" style kids. We are talking kids one of which has been officially declared "out of control, suspected ADHD" and his headmaster wanted him psychiatrically evaluated.
It is difficult, more exhausting on the parent, you cannot stop in front of any counter for more than 1 minute, there is no browsing whatsover and you shop like a realtime OS: hard cut-off if a task does not complete in time before the kid gets bored. However the overall result is that you have _NO_ problem in a shop with a kid and by the end they are so knackered that they will stand still or sit for 10 minutes at the checkout.
No, general lack of computer hygiene which is not limited to parenting. EVERY user should have his own account and for mobile devices whoever has to have one should have his own.
I would never hand off junior a device where I am logged in. No WAY. Neither will he hand me back a device on which he is logged in without logging out first.
That is also one of the reasons why none of the iPhone/Pad/PodTouch devices or Android tablets are going to make my "media toy" shopping list any time soon. On their own most of them are too expensive to hand to a kid or to use occasionally on the sofa or table instead of a netbook (unless you are sh***ing money). As a shared device they totally suck rocks because they have no per-user settings.
They will simply peer closer to the edge and agree with the ISP that their traffic does not count towards any quotas. They already do it in places.
The ISPs will similarly move their service closer to the edge. A secondary effect will be that "magic box" traffic solutions that require all traffic to be dragged across them will become less and less popular. Ditto for any all-encompassing traffic management superframeworks native to specific network technologies.
IMO that is actually quite good for the Internet in general because it will go back to its pre-telco-bought-the-ISP age highly distributed form where a natural (or man-caused) disaster will have very little consequences.
Slashdot Mirror
No boom today, boom tomorrow, there will always be a boom tomorrow.
Damn, someone needs to put the things into perspective here...
The paper you are referring to mentions modifying cowpox to become virulent, not rebuilding smallpox from scratch. In fact that is not mentioned at all and that is for a reason - it cannot be done at present. Anyone who says they can rebuild it better put their money where their mouth is and do it with cawpox which is similarly sequenced. Not that they will be able at the tech level of today.
Read the paper again - it goes through how many things we do not know about how smallpox works - the proteins which nobody knows how they work, the inhibition of immune system, etc. By the way, the relationship to HIV is also of considerable interest and there is potential benefit to the humanity as a whole if we find how to study it. If being vaccinated against smallpox or having had smallpox actually confers at least some level of HIV resistance... Hmm... That is an interesting thought... To say the least...
No, You _CANNOT_ recreate smallpox from DNA sequence. Not yet. There is a world of difference between simple viruses which have been assembled in the lab like the polyo virus and a smallpox virus. In fact there is a world of difference between a SmallPox virus and Flu.
The SmallPox virus is _BIG_. It is so big that it is on the borderline to defy the common assumption that viruses are not visible under microscope. It carries a whole battery of own enzymes which are essential for the initial cycle of the infection. We have not yet learned how to build all these with the correct glycosylation (they have glycosides sticking on them same as your average eucariote protein). We are not in a position to assemble it either. If we were, we could assemble a whole eucariote cell which is not anywhere near the current science level. Same level of complexity more or less.
In 10 years we may be in a position to build it from sequence. Now - not a chance.
And why do you think it matters? The only data in the HDMI spec which need to be isochronous, jitter and delay controlled, etc is _ONE_ _WAY_. You need several _MILES_ to get jitter between the signals on the different wires worth mentioning. The two way signals which can be influenced by this and used for keying, recognition of capabilities, etc are low bandwidth and non-realtime.
The only thing that matters for one-way serial connections like DVI or HDMI is reflections from the connectors (and transmitting/receiving electronics) and noise (especially from crosstalk). For 15 feet the cable needs to be really sh*t for these to show up.
In fact, just open up a player or a computer with a HDMI in/out and look at the traces coming/going from/to the connectors. They sometimes go for up to 10cm unprotected, unscreened and in HIGH NOISE environment. Snapping a 100$ cable on top of that because it "does not deteriorate the signal" is not just stupid, it is totally bonkers.
He will do a summary judgement at 20. So the reduction to 3 is actually only if the trial goes in front of a jury.
Most patent trials do not. If the summary judgement does not go the way the defendant wants it the defendant usually caves in and licenses at that point instead of being nuked by jury assigned damages.
In any case, that is only patents. Oracle has launched a salvo of license and copyright missiles as well.
Yeah, spread as much as possible of the infectious material into an aerosol in the air... Great idea. The last thing you need to do to a potentially infectious creature is to shoot it.
China is not using the US 3-drug cocktail which will damage heart and other organs. It uses barbiturates which kill the prisoner as fast as the 3-drug and leave the organs nicely suited for harvesting. Further to this, it is a "clean brain death" so you can put the living vegetable on a ventilator for transport purposes if you want to. The only damaged organ may be liver and even that will happen if the vegetable is kept alive too long. If the liver is collected right away it will be in OK shape for transplant as well.
As far as HIV, HEP C, etc these are all tested in advance as well as the exact tissue matching.
In any case, my thoughts on the article are slightly different: "Only three? In China? You gotta be kidding"
I have seen 18 month non-compete for lowly lab grunts in private R&D companies and trainee IPR people with circa 45K pound per annum. Anything but exec.
It is legal to own. That ownership is not transferrable. It is not legal to sell, rent, loan or broadcast unless the local law explicitly grants some rights along those lines (only Germany IIRC).
Read the EULA.
Poor albert... Or lucky albert. Depends on the perspective...
http://www.apnic.net/publications/news/2011/final-8
They are not allocating ipv4 to anyone but new ISPs and for IPv6 transition purposes. You cannot get IPv4 if for normal use if you are an existing account holder. Even if you are eligible the most you get is 4 /24s.
This gives a whole new dimension to the old "give me the remote". Just imagine this with two kids in the house (and they need not be Dash and Violet).
The difference is how the money is consumed. The fact that the money is collected via payroll is of little relevance.
In an insurance based system theoretically, you can take your money and go to a different provider as long as said provider is happy to treat you for the regulated price.
In Sweden you originally could, then you could not, then you had again "patient choice" in the early 90-es, then you could not and so on. Now you see it, now you do not depending on how "social" is the current party in power. However the option to HAVE this is present and it is an inherent part of the "insurance" style system. That is what the original law of 1946 intended to.
Similarly, theoretically, you can set up a private clinic, pass a few regs and as long as you are happy to treat patients for the amount of money spec-ed by the insurance you can charge that to the national health insurance. AFAIK in Sweden presently, this is mostly theory (but the law actually allows it). In most other EU countries it is the practice and the norm.
UK is a take it or leave it with no such option. NHS is state funded and the option of taking your treatment money and going elsewhere is not available even in theory. Some people tried that one by going to France during the worst years of NHS under Blair. They even sued the UK in the EU court. The end-result is that you can now apply to the NHS itself to have your treatment elsewhere which is from the realm of "yeah, right, not that this will ever happen".
That is the fundamental difference between the rest of EU and the UK.
Anyway, this is all hugely OT.
Sweden is a mandatory health insurance country. National Health Insurance act of 1946 implemented since 1955.
It tried to do "national health care budget" in the 1980-es by adding extra funding different from insurance into the health budget. This resulted in a spectacular UK style fiasco with waiting lists, failing care and so on. It fixed some of it by going back to closer to the original system in the early 90-es only to have that axed on "we are not so far right" grounds and fail again. It is now looking to go back to where it started.
Out of all examples that mandatory health insurance works and should not be spoiled by budgetary injections it is probably the best one because you have a system that is mandatory insurance by law and a long set of data on how it fails when it is not executed as intended.
By the way - do some reading before calling other people idiots.
It was a German idea originally from immediately after WW2 (1949 or so). USA conservatives copied it after it was adopted by all of Western Europe sans UK. In any case, that is how the medical system in all of Europe except UK works nowdays.
I have lived in the US, in a country with a regulated mandatory medical insurance (Bulgaria - it reformed to medical insurance from "socialist health for all") and in the UK which is the last remaining developed country worldwide with "pure socialist" style health system. Trust me, mandatory regulated insurance with regulated costings is exactly what you want and what you need if you want a working health system. We have yet to invent anything better.
The pre-Obama US system is broken - in the absense of regulatory oversight it is guaranteed to inflate costs while using doctors which are kept awake only by drugs at the end of a 30+ hour shift (I have friends who work in US A&E/ER so I know this first hand). So is the "socialist" UK one. You end up waiting 12+ months for treatment and receiving letters asking if you are still alive (I keep one of these as an example on why it is broken). What Obama did is the step in the right direction.
In any case - on article main subject:
1. I am not surprised.
2. That is why I run my mail server (with my mail dating back to 1999) till this day and it physically located where 3rd parties cannot access it.
3. That is why any data of any significance that leaves my systems (offsite backups,etc) is always encrypted AES256. I still keep a couple of Via C7s operational in my house for this exact reason - they can encrypt at up to 100Mbit/s "free of charge".
Kind'a. It prevents Apple using the software commercially within its business methods and business strategy.
Apple is a known "patents at dawn" company. That does not fit the GPLv3 mutual assured destruction patent clauses.
So while other companies can use GPLv3 commercially, Apple cannot do so. It will be in violation of the license the next time it tries to lob a patent nuke which is something it does on a regular basis.
Unfortunately, Apple is not alone here. Nearly all big companies are in the same position and they will follow suit. While I understand RMS aims and ideas here, that is really not the way. GPL should not be a replacement for court, legislation and enforcement.
Quoting an old Russian joke (from one of their best stand-up comedians):
An American University is a strange entity where Russian professors teach Chinese students a technical discipline in English language.
I would not say so.
That is what is the key factor in determining how much funding you get. The chart gives a good initial estimate of the likelihood for a site to produce a cited paper.
One comment however - the method used is skewed slightly against Russian and Chinese. These two countries still have a significant amount of stuff published in their native language journals and those tend to get less than average citations from abroad.
It is also surprising that places crippled by war and sanctions around ex Ugoslavia still deliver top science while cough cough some of their well off neighbours do not. It also shows the _REAL_ amount of innovation going on the Indian subcontinent. Good graph for slapping anyone talking about exporting research there.
US T-Mobile is very different from T-Mob elsewhere. They use their own architecture and do things differently from the rest of the T-Mob franchises. This does not mean better - just different.
This means that the LPG tank in my car and the extra set of injectors on the inlet manifold is a _VERY_ prudent investment.
However, if any enforcement of this resolution is to happen I am going to think 10 times before flying UK-US or any other route between security council countries. Nothing personal, just business....
First, it is not. French law is Napoleonic law and it is extremely strict on the concept of "innocent until proven guilty". The Blair style playing fast and lose with it and declaring all management guilty until proven innocent in an H&S case as per UK H&S legislation is impossible there. No comment who exactly sponsored Blair to push that one.
Second, for the time being the charge is mostly a formality. This allows resources to continue to be allocated to the case. Otherwise it would have had to go on the cold case shelf. This way the French government can subsidize the search for the black boxes without getting into the usual Boeing vs Airbus or Air France vs the rest of the world subsidies debate. Granted the money in this case is 20-30M so it is a fraction of the usual sums discussed in the context of Airbus or Air France subsidies, but it is money none the less. Additionally, there are resources you cannot buy officially with money like military vessel involvement. This allows these resources to continue being allocated to the case.
Hollywood has shown no interest in marketing it when it is done right for both Sci Fi and Fantasy. So while sometimes someone gets something right, it does not get even a fraction of the credit it deserves.
Two examples:
1. StarDust. An excellent movie that did not get even a fraction of the marketing and any of the awards Hollywood hands out to all kinds of cr*p.
2. GATTACA. Same, with the difference that it at least got some nominations. No Hollywood award though and once again a laughable marketing budget.
The list of course can be continued...
This means that you do not know how to shop with a kid.
I used to do all of the shopping with the older kid from the age of 2.5 to around 5-ish and I do it sometimes with his sister (now 2y 7m). None of them ever needed an electronic pacifier at the checkout because by that time they were totally knackered from _HELPING_ me to shop. The only screaming toddler cases I have ever had was the older one disagreeing what fish we are going to buy this time. None of them was ever restrained in a shop. They are always totally selfpropelled. And we are not talking compliant "ragdoll cat" style kids. We are talking kids one of which has been officially declared "out of control, suspected ADHD" and his headmaster wanted him psychiatrically evaluated.
It is difficult, more exhausting on the parent, you cannot stop in front of any counter for more than 1 minute, there is no browsing whatsover and you shop like a realtime OS: hard cut-off if a task does not complete in time before the kid gets bored. However the overall result is that you have _NO_ problem in a shop with a kid and by the end they are so knackered that they will stand still or sit for 10 minutes at the checkout.
No, general lack of computer hygiene which is not limited to parenting. EVERY user should have his own account and for mobile devices whoever has to have one should have his own.
I would never hand off junior a device where I am logged in. No WAY. Neither will he hand me back a device on which he is logged in without logging out first.
That is also one of the reasons why none of the iPhone/Pad/PodTouch devices or Android tablets are going to make my "media toy" shopping list any time soon. On their own most of them are too expensive to hand to a kid or to use occasionally on the sofa or table instead of a netbook (unless you are sh***ing money). As a shared device they totally suck rocks because they have no per-user settings.
No they will not.
They will simply peer closer to the edge and agree with the ISP that their traffic does not count towards any quotas. They already do it in places.
The ISPs will similarly move their service closer to the edge. A secondary effect will be that "magic box" traffic solutions that require all traffic to be dragged across them will become less and less popular. Ditto for any all-encompassing traffic management superframeworks native to specific network technologies.
IMO that is actually quite good for the Internet in general because it will go back to its pre-telco-bought-the-ISP age highly distributed form where a natural (or man-caused) disaster will have very little consequences.