Well if they did, then why is Elop ditching the whole "platform"? Ovi store was growing at a really nice pace (3 million daily downloads a few months ago, now over 4 million daily downloads). If they already had a nice UI for Symbian ready, then why didn't he just go for it instead of this WP7 and destroying OVI approach?
Symbian three years ago offered more functionality than any other mobile OS offers even today. I'm having such a hard time understanding why these 1500+ developers couldn't come up with a more touch friendly eye candy possessing UI layer. They all deserve to be axed.
The number of cores or their speed doesn't matter at the moment. For example look at Nokia. Their phones tend to have much slower CPUs, but because of better software they run just as fast as the latest & greatest from Samsung etc. I think number of cores and speed will only become a selling point once smartphones become our only computers that we just dock to our keyboard/display terminals at home.
Why so much success in arresting some guy who had sex with a broken condom, but no success what so ever in arresting a pedophile rapist like Roman Polanski?
I'm watching too (obviously). As usual I was right. Now I just want to hear about its phylogeny. If it wasn't related to other bacteria they would have said it already (and not call it bacterium to begin with). Anyways super cool!
I'm looking very forward to this announcement! Perhaps arsenic replaces phosphorus in this microbe's DNA backbone? That would be way cool! Then even more interesting would be, how this little fellow compares phylogenetically to archaea and bacteria (my wild guess is that its 16S and 23S rDNA sequences will much resemble those of proteobacteria). Or maybe it'll have no ribosomes (and doesn't show protein synthesis) at all? Perhaps it's the first cellular RNA lifeform discovered! That would be the sweetest thing ever, as it would pretty much "prove" RNA world hypothesis correct!
Probably not. Different viruses have different protein coats, and antibodies are very specific on what they attach themselves onto. Should we manage to find a way around this problem (creating specific antibodies for other virions), the next problem would be an even bigger one. Common cold is a positive sense ssRNA virus meaning that its genome is a single stranded piece (or pieces, can't remember) of RNA that functions directly as mRNA for making proteins. Herpes viruses are dsDNA viruses meaning that their genomes consist of a piece of dual stranded DNA. This "virus-crushing machinery (TFA used this word)" that the antibody activates would probably be of no use towards this kind of molecules. It might be of useful for the +ssRNA hepatitis viruses (but HVB is dsDNA virus) and HIV (AIDS IS NOT A VIRUS, BUT A STATE) which genome is also +ssRNA molecule, but I doubt this very much. It all depends on the mode of action of this "virus-crushing machinery". I'm guessing it means RNAse (stuff that breaks RNA molecules). At least HIV would probably be safe, because it becomes dsDNA (and part of your genome) very quickly once it has entered a cell.
That people are this stupid in such great numbers. FFS I could have done the math (and I assume all my classmates as well) back in 2nd or 3rd grade. How do these idiots manage to survive?
There are 2 kinds of species concepts: theoretical and operation-based. Probably most known theoretical species concepts are: biological species concept (species is a group of organisms that can potentially reproduce within), evolutionary species concept (species in an entity that consists of organisms that withhold their identity from other entities in time and space, and which have their own evolutionary history and fate) and ecological species concept (species consists of organisms that share the same niche). All of them describe macroworld really well. However none of them apply to the microworld (mostly because they assume only vertical gene transfer (inheritance) but with prokaryotes horizontal gene transfer via conjugation, transformation and transduction is much more common). For bacteria and archaea we use operation-based species concept called phenetic species concept. We've decided that a PhSC species is a monophyletic group of cells that share many phenotypic and genotypic properties (for example 70 % DNA-DNA-hybridization, > 98.6 % rDNA sequence similarity, > 95 % average nucleotide identity and 5 Celsius delta Thermal denaturation midpoint). If we applied PhSC to mammals then for example everything between humans and lemurs would be of same species.
The study doesn't take into account bacteria, archaea nor unicellular eukaryotes. That's where by far most of biodiversity (species count and number of genes and metabolic pathways) and biomass (carbon and nutrients) lie. Typical macroworld arrogance:(
We haven't looked under deep ocean? Actually we have. Turns out that it's mostly archaea down there (from 0.1 m down to at least 800 m of sediment). This (in part) lead to estimation that at least in Oceans there are even more archaea than bacteria.
Sauce:
Lipp, J. S., Morono, Y., Inagaki, F., Hinrichs, K. 2008: Significant contribution of Archaea to extant biomass in marine subsurface sediments. - Nature 454: 991-994
What goes for atmospheric micro-organisms. It's a good way of dispersal but so far no endogenic atmospheric micro-organisms have been discovered.
If you spent over 40 billion EUR in R&D (like Nokia) I'm sure you'd sue as well if you thought that somebody was stealing your innovation (like Apple). Thankfully this isn't about "mind share" but actual merits. Nokia just might end up killing Apple's mobile ventures. As a Finn I'm totally rooting for Nokia because they make up a large chunk of our nation's GDP.
I've been taught the Finnish version of what went down. It's pretty much what those English wikipedia articles say.
In short:
1. Soviet Union wanted to exchange land so they could better protect St. Petersburg from hostilities.
2. Finland declined because some military aces thought that exchange would be strategically very bad for future defence.
3. Soviet Union claimed that Finland attacked it (Shelling of Mainila).
4. Soviet Union attacked Finland with 1 million men, 3000 tanks and 4000 air planes.
5. Finland had 350 000 men, 30 tanks and 100 air planes.
5. Soviet Union totally failed to make any real progress.
6. Soviet Union lost some 150 000 soldiers in 3-4 months.
7. Meanwhile Finland lost some 25 000 soldiers.
8. Stalin was pissed off and launched a super massive attack that broke Finland's first line of defence (see 2.).
9. It was apparent that nobody was going to aid Finland (thanks a lot the world).
10. Peace negations (Soviet Union had leverage).
11. Moscow treaty.
Here they teach that after the attack Kremlin's aim was total occupation. I don't know if that's true. However I recognize that Finland was EPIC in this war and Russians failed 100%.
Keep in mind that Soviet Union couldn't even invade Finland even thou they tried twice (one of the main reasons why Hitler decided to invade Soviet Union later on).
Apple vs. Google? Really? The way I see it is Nokia vs. Samsung, Apple, HTC, Motorola, Palm & SE as that is how sales go. Nokia takes about 1/2 of the cake and the rest share the remaining half.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe the conservative gene was identified a few years ago already..
Well if they did, then why is Elop ditching the whole "platform"? Ovi store was growing at a really nice pace (3 million daily downloads a few months ago, now over 4 million daily downloads). If they already had a nice UI for Symbian ready, then why didn't he just go for it instead of this WP7 and destroying OVI approach?
Symbian three years ago offered more functionality than any other mobile OS offers even today. I'm having such a hard time understanding why these 1500+ developers couldn't come up with a more touch friendly eye candy possessing UI layer. They all deserve to be axed.
The number of cores or their speed doesn't matter at the moment. For example look at Nokia. Their phones tend to have much slower CPUs, but because of better software they run just as fast as the latest & greatest from Samsung etc. I think number of cores and speed will only become a selling point once smartphones become our only computers that we just dock to our keyboard/display terminals at home.
Why so much success in arresting some guy who had sex with a broken condom, but no success what so ever in arresting a pedophile rapist like Roman Polanski?
According to the paper about 11% of its DNA/RNA backbone stuff is made of AsO4(3-) instead of PO4(3-) after enrichment culturing.
It substitutes phosphorus with arsenic, BUT it's not like it's entire DNA backbone (or m/t/rRNAs/proteins) is phosphorus free.
Looks like I was right on the proteobacteria part too. w00t!
I'm watching too (obviously). As usual I was right. Now I just want to hear about its phylogeny. If it wasn't related to other bacteria they would have said it already (and not call it bacterium to begin with). Anyways super cool!
Maybe it gets by with proton motive force alone?
I'm looking very forward to this announcement! Perhaps arsenic replaces phosphorus in this microbe's DNA backbone? That would be way cool! Then even more interesting would be, how this little fellow compares phylogenetically to archaea and bacteria (my wild guess is that its 16S and 23S rDNA sequences will much resemble those of proteobacteria). Or maybe it'll have no ribosomes (and doesn't show protein synthesis) at all? Perhaps it's the first cellular RNA lifeform discovered! That would be the sweetest thing ever, as it would pretty much "prove" RNA world hypothesis correct!
"The new biosphere is all bacteria, as you might expect"
Actually that is very unexpected! Archaea dominate in oceans and sediments, not bacteria. This find is very surprising!
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1014074107
Probably not. Different viruses have different protein coats, and antibodies are very specific on what they attach themselves onto. Should we manage to find a way around this problem (creating specific antibodies for other virions), the next problem would be an even bigger one. Common cold is a positive sense ssRNA virus meaning that its genome is a single stranded piece (or pieces, can't remember) of RNA that functions directly as mRNA for making proteins. Herpes viruses are dsDNA viruses meaning that their genomes consist of a piece of dual stranded DNA. This "virus-crushing machinery (TFA used this word)" that the antibody activates would probably be of no use towards this kind of molecules. It might be of useful for the +ssRNA hepatitis viruses (but HVB is dsDNA virus) and HIV (AIDS IS NOT A VIRUS, BUT A STATE) which genome is also +ssRNA molecule, but I doubt this very much. It all depends on the mode of action of this "virus-crushing machinery". I'm guessing it means RNAse (stuff that breaks RNA molecules). At least HIV would probably be safe, because it becomes dsDNA (and part of your genome) very quickly once it has entered a cell.
That people are this stupid in such great numbers. FFS I could have done the math (and I assume all my classmates as well) back in 2nd or 3rd grade. How do these idiots manage to survive?
like this
There are 2 kinds of species concepts: theoretical and operation-based. Probably most known theoretical species concepts are: biological species concept (species is a group of organisms that can potentially reproduce within), evolutionary species concept (species in an entity that consists of organisms that withhold their identity from other entities in time and space, and which have their own evolutionary history and fate) and ecological species concept (species consists of organisms that share the same niche). All of them describe macroworld really well. However none of them apply to the microworld (mostly because they assume only vertical gene transfer (inheritance) but with prokaryotes horizontal gene transfer via conjugation, transformation and transduction is much more common). For bacteria and archaea we use operation-based species concept called phenetic species concept. We've decided that a PhSC species is a monophyletic group of cells that share many phenotypic and genotypic properties (for example 70 % DNA-DNA-hybridization, > 98.6 % rDNA sequence similarity, > 95 % average nucleotide identity and 5 Celsius delta Thermal denaturation midpoint). If we applied PhSC to mammals then for example everything between humans and lemurs would be of same species.
The study doesn't take into account bacteria, archaea nor unicellular eukaryotes. That's where by far most of biodiversity (species count and number of genes and metabolic pathways) and biomass (carbon and nutrients) lie. Typical macroworld arrogance :(
It's more like that they made a .iso image of some cd and then burned that to another cd and it played just fine in the cd-player.
That is some bad math right there. 210 km zone close to surface is a lot more than 210 zone close to core. ;)
We haven't looked under deep ocean? Actually we have. Turns out that it's mostly archaea down there (from 0.1 m down to at least 800 m of sediment). This (in part) lead to estimation that at least in Oceans there are even more archaea than bacteria.
Sauce:
Lipp, J. S., Morono, Y., Inagaki, F., Hinrichs, K. 2008: Significant contribution of Archaea to extant biomass in marine subsurface sediments. - Nature 454: 991-994
What goes for atmospheric micro-organisms. It's a good way of dispersal but so far no endogenic atmospheric micro-organisms have been discovered.
If you spent over 40 billion EUR in R&D (like Nokia) I'm sure you'd sue as well if you thought that somebody was stealing your innovation (like Apple). Thankfully this isn't about "mind share" but actual merits. Nokia just might end up killing Apple's mobile ventures. As a Finn I'm totally rooting for Nokia because they make up a large chunk of our nation's GDP.
I've been taught the Finnish version of what went down. It's pretty much what those English wikipedia articles say. In short: 1. Soviet Union wanted to exchange land so they could better protect St. Petersburg from hostilities. 2. Finland declined because some military aces thought that exchange would be strategically very bad for future defence. 3. Soviet Union claimed that Finland attacked it (Shelling of Mainila). 4. Soviet Union attacked Finland with 1 million men, 3000 tanks and 4000 air planes. 5. Finland had 350 000 men, 30 tanks and 100 air planes. 5. Soviet Union totally failed to make any real progress. 6. Soviet Union lost some 150 000 soldiers in 3-4 months. 7. Meanwhile Finland lost some 25 000 soldiers. 8. Stalin was pissed off and launched a super massive attack that broke Finland's first line of defence (see 2.). 9. It was apparent that nobody was going to aid Finland (thanks a lot the world). 10. Peace negations (Soviet Union had leverage). 11. Moscow treaty. Here they teach that after the attack Kremlin's aim was total occupation. I don't know if that's true. However I recognize that Finland was EPIC in this war and Russians failed 100%.
Keep in mind that Soviet Union couldn't even invade Finland even thou they tried twice (one of the main reasons why Hitler decided to invade Soviet Union later on).
Apple vs. Google? Really? The way I see it is Nokia vs. Samsung, Apple, HTC, Motorola, Palm & SE as that is how sales go. Nokia takes about 1/2 of the cake and the rest share the remaining half.