For another, how DNA is used and rendered into proteins, etc. is altered by chemicals that are carried along with the cell. If those are stripped away, information is lost.
Not true. The way DNA is encoded into aminoacids is a universal code which follows the same standards in animal, plant, or microorganism cells, with very few exceptions.
Isn't it so that the energy of activation is rather irrelevant once you have a reaction going, because whatever energy is added to push them over the energy hurdle is released once the molecule separates?
I suppose this means that part of the energy needed to separate the hydrogen atom from the other atoms it was clinging to was supplied by the organism that created the urea.
I wonder what would happen if we printed off 1000 copies of the RIAA's Top 10 Billboard Chart songs and gathered around the courthouse each break to sing these copyrighted songs publicly.
What you propose is more or less what torrents do, we are making thousands of copies of whatever music and films the people are interested in.
If the media companies are interested in doing business, let them come forward and offer good quality copies in convenient formats at reasonable prices. As long as they insist on maintaining their old and tired business models, they'll keep failing.
"2: A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 3: Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; 4: One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5: (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)"
you will see that it was not the intention of the church founders that priests should be celibate.
there is no way to tell how many people downloaded those songs that she uploaded
Anyhow, wouldn't those (hypothetical) downloaders be the ones to prosecute? It takes two to tango, it seems unfair to blame everything on the one person they are prosecuting.
If so much damage was caused by exponential downloading, let's see those downloaders.
So take me as something of an educated witness that an ecological degree caries with it a certain indoctrinated mindset about things. A sort of "don't question global warming" mentality. I thought science questioned everything.
Don't you think it ironic to mention this in Slashdot, of all places, where questioning something will quickly send you to -1 oblivion, while going along with the herd mentality will raise you to +5 nirvana?
Science questions everything, yes, as long as those are pertinent questions. Scientists will listen to anyone at all, but don't expect any sympathy if no results are verified.
After all, if as you say, he has no place in any serious discussion about climate change, why NOT fire him?
I'm not his boss, perhaps he has something to contribute. After all, a study on the economic impact of the alternatives is something that should always be welcome. But he is certainly not qualified to discuss the alternatives themselves.
Climatologists have already reached a very solid consensus that CO2 emissions *must* be reduced at *any* cost. The best thing Alan Carlin could do with his economic knowledge would be to investigate what is the best way to reduce CO2 emissions, not to try to outguess the experts in a specialty not his own. You don't see any papers written by climatologists comparing the differences in pricing carbon in yens versus euros, do you?
Wow, the guy has worked for the EPA for almost 40 years but because he has an MIT PhD in economics, that makes it ok?
If you look at what he published in the last forty years, you will see that almost every single work presents the "big cost" of preserving the environment. He has shown a very consistent, extremely biased point of view, that puts economics above everything else.
Alan Carlin has no place in any serious discussion about climate change.
Looking at the papers you linked to, they are all related to the economic consequences of reducing CO2 emissions. However, what RAND and others fail to mention is how much does it cost to do nothing.
Suppose that twenty or thirty years ago there existed a stronger incentive to build more economic cars. Probably GM and Chrysler wouldn't be in so deep trouble. Perhaps a significant number of workers wouldn't be unemployed.
There was one time when Chrysler seemed to be in the right path, the company was once saved by the "minivan", a more economical car than the full-sized van. What if they had kept going in the same direction, invented a still smaller car in the same format. Perhaps then it wouldn't be necessary for Fiat to rescue Chrysler.
Looking at this guy's website the first thing that seems not quite kosher is that he works for RAND corporation
I think this explains all, it seems very natural that the same "think-tank" that once proposed that a nuclear war can have a winner will also state so categorically that global warming is harmless.
Now is it worth severe economic consequences to lower the temperature
I know we shouldn't feed trolls, but I will bite. Isn't it funny how people dismiss so many rigorous physical studies that overwhelmingly indicate a close correlation between global warming and CO2 emission, yet they will readily accept some vague assumptions of economics, the "dismal science" that can't even predict market prices five minutes ahead?
If one assumes that "severe economic consequences" will result from lowering anthropogenic CO2 emissions, then those studies in economics should be much better, more precise, more accurate than the physical studies that predict the survival of a large part of humanity may be in danger if the current situation persists.
So, you object to putting a dollar sign in a company's name, but think it's OK to use the stock market symbol in a discussion that has nothing to do with the market?
M$ is only "universally recognized" or "preferred" among haters.
Well, you seem to recognize it, does this mean you hate micro$oft?
There's nothing wrong in making little jokes, even if they are lame. People say Ford is an acronym for "Fix Or Repair Daily", or Oldsmobile means "Overpriced Leisurely Driven Sedan Made Of Buick Industrial Leftover Equipment", but this does not mean they hate those companies.
You may find a joke unfunny, that's a natural reaction, different people see jokes in different ways. But complaining about a petty joke about a corporation is childish, unless youwork for that company's marketing department.
MS can be an acronym for many things. Multiple sclerosis is usually abbreviated like this, for instance. It's the initials of coach Mike Sanford and of governor Mark Sanford. Et multiple cetera.
M$, on the other hand, is almost universally recognized as an acronym for Microsoft. It's more easily distinguished, it has less entropy.
Frankly, I don't understand why people become so angry at this use of M$. Are they trying to negate the fact that Microsoft makes a lot of money? Why should the association of a dollar sign to a commercial corporation be insulting?
It's easier to understand, there is no logical reason for it to be considered offensive. M$ should be the preferred way to identify Microsoft in a short form.
you are doing nothing but pretending that your suspicions are fact
"Innocent until proven guilty" only applies to trials of people by the state. When a citizen accuses another it's "preponderance of evidence". Which way do you think evidence preponderates, did he or did he not fondle young boys?
For me, at least, his multiple settlements out of court costing him tens of millions of dollars in total is preponderance enough.
Abraham Lincoln said: "If I had six hours to chop down a tree, I'd spend the first four hours sharpening the axe".
If the edge were so important, they would cut trees with razors.
I fall more in the "agile" than in the "waterfall" methodology mindset. Usually when I start with flowcharts and schematics I get nowhere.
For me, the way to get over the block is to write one routine that works in some small detail of the project. When I get the perfect data formatting in the gizmo function I start understanding the overall project better. After a few interactions with working code I get a better grasp of the whole, then I do the needed cleanup.
I let the tree grow first, then I prune it. That's the way nature works, four billion years of evolution can't be all wrong.
educators need to get off there high horses and start being more innovative. Instead of always re-running assignment X for the past 5 years
Hmmm, no, this will not work. Think of Physics 103 - Electromagnetism. Should students learn new versions of Maxwell's equations every year?
OK, I see your point. Exercises should have different parameters. Instead of calculation the magnetic field 5 cm distant from a wire carrying 10 A, calculate the field 12 cm away from a wire carrying 7 A. But still there wouldn't be too much room for variation in many subjects.
Perhaps it would be better to admit that if a student researched enough to find an answer to the problem he has learned something about it. If copying a working solution to a problem from the internet is cheating, then I cheat all the time in my work.
The key issue would be to define "similar." The courts will define it as the same good as purchased in a store, not as the value of a different product
Good. Then I need not worry. I'm not downloading DVDs, what I'm downloading are entirely different products. A downloaded film compressed to a 700 MB AVI is different from a 4 GB film in a VOB file recorded on a DVD.
I am not and have never been a citizen of the Ottoman Empire
You would have to be at least 91 years old today to have been one.
So, why should I have to endure HATE PROPAGANDA and walk around with a target painted on my back because I am Turkish (happy now, you finally got one thing right)?
Because you are Turkish. You just glossed over the link I posted, but it's a real thing. The empire that once ruled over the land where you were born tried to impose its ways over other lands, during a period of over 500 years. People hate empires, even if those empires only exist in their minds
the HATE MOVIE I am talking about does not take place in the Ottoman Empire.
What you call a "hate" movie is what other people would call a "controversial" film, which is what its author specializes in. BTW, he won an Oscar for that what you call a "hate" movie.
Anyhow, your reaction seems typical of your region/religion. You cannot accept criticism. You jump to conclusions about anyone who says anything that could be remotely interpreted as critical to your views.
There are many films about harsh conditions on people who are prisoners in jails in the USA, yet no one calls them "hate" films. These films were not made to make anyone hate the USA, or do you think Clint Eastwood hates America?
As for the "venom at people" thing, sorry if I hurt your Turkish sensibilities, but all citizens of an empire must learn to cope with that, even if the empire hasn't existed for nearly a century.
- more expensive than more light, more policemen,...
How's that? Do you mean that the cost of a camera, spread out over its useful life, plus the cost of a monitoring center where hundreds of cameras are watched is higher than paying a crew of officers to have someone stand 24/7 where every camera is located?
Seems even better than mummification for preserving the dead
It probably wouldn't work for anything bigger than a termite. When I was a kid I had a tarantula encased in acrylic resin. After a year or so, the spider body started shrinking and in the end there was only a dust-filled hole in the plastic.
Even if it was totally encased in the plastic and isolated from the outside, the tarantula had enough bacteria in its guts to decompose it.
Slashdot Mirror
Not true. The way DNA is encoded into aminoacids is a universal code which follows the same standards in animal, plant, or microorganism cells, with very few exceptions.
I suppose this means that part of the energy needed to separate the hydrogen atom from the other atoms it was clinging to was supplied by the organism that created the urea.
What do you mean? I think we are pretty well trained right now!
What you propose is more or less what torrents do, we are making thousands of copies of whatever music and films the people are interested in.
If the media companies are interested in doing business, let them come forward and offer good quality copies in convenient formats at reasonable prices. As long as they insist on maintaining their old and tired business models, they'll keep failing.
There is some controversy about that. The copyright on the Bible could expire in a few decades.
If you look into 1 Timothy, chapter 3 -
"2: A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
3: Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
4: One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
5: (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)"
you will see that it was not the intention of the church founders that priests should be celibate.
Anyhow, wouldn't those (hypothetical) downloaders be the ones to prosecute? It takes two to tango, it seems unfair to blame everything on the one person they are prosecuting.
If so much damage was caused by exponential downloading, let's see those downloaders.
Don't you think it ironic to mention this in Slashdot, of all places, where questioning something will quickly send you to -1 oblivion, while going along with the herd mentality will raise you to +5 nirvana?
Science questions everything, yes, as long as those are pertinent questions. Scientists will listen to anyone at all, but don't expect any sympathy if no results are verified.
I'm not his boss, perhaps he has something to contribute. After all, a study on the economic impact of the alternatives is something that should always be welcome. But he is certainly not qualified to discuss the alternatives themselves.
Climatologists have already reached a very solid consensus that CO2 emissions *must* be reduced at *any* cost. The best thing Alan Carlin could do with his economic knowledge would be to investigate what is the best way to reduce CO2 emissions, not to try to outguess the experts in a specialty not his own. You don't see any papers written by climatologists comparing the differences in pricing carbon in yens versus euros, do you?
If you look at what he published in the last forty years, you will see that almost every single work presents the "big cost" of preserving the environment. He has shown a very consistent, extremely biased point of view, that puts economics above everything else.
Alan Carlin has no place in any serious discussion about climate change.
Looking at the papers you linked to, they are all related to the economic consequences of reducing CO2 emissions. However, what RAND and others fail to mention is how much does it cost to do nothing.
Suppose that twenty or thirty years ago there existed a stronger incentive to build more economic cars. Probably GM and Chrysler wouldn't be in so deep trouble. Perhaps a significant number of workers wouldn't be unemployed.
There was one time when Chrysler seemed to be in the right path, the company was once saved by the "minivan", a more economical car than the full-sized van. What if they had kept going in the same direction, invented a still smaller car in the same format. Perhaps then it wouldn't be necessary for Fiat to rescue Chrysler.
Looking at this guy's website the first thing that seems not quite kosher is that he works for RAND corporation
I think this explains all, it seems very natural that the same "think-tank" that once proposed that a nuclear war can have a winner will also state so categorically that global warming is harmless.
That's the same organization that gets so much funding from the oil industry they opened a branch in the Persian gulf.
I know we shouldn't feed trolls, but I will bite. Isn't it funny how people dismiss so many rigorous physical studies that overwhelmingly indicate a close correlation between global warming and CO2 emission, yet they will readily accept some vague assumptions of economics, the "dismal science" that can't even predict market prices five minutes ahead?
If one assumes that "severe economic consequences" will result from lowering anthropogenic CO2 emissions, then those studies in economics should be much better, more precise, more accurate than the physical studies that predict the survival of a large part of humanity may be in danger if the current situation persists.
So, you object to putting a dollar sign in a company's name, but think it's OK to use the stock market symbol in a discussion that has nothing to do with the market?
Well, you seem to recognize it, does this mean you hate micro$oft?
There's nothing wrong in making little jokes, even if they are lame. People say Ford is an acronym for "Fix Or Repair Daily", or Oldsmobile means "Overpriced Leisurely Driven Sedan Made Of Buick Industrial Leftover Equipment", but this does not mean they hate those companies.
You may find a joke unfunny, that's a natural reaction, different people see jokes in different ways. But complaining about a petty joke about a corporation is childish, unless youwork for that company's marketing department.
MS can be an acronym for many things. Multiple sclerosis is usually abbreviated like this, for instance. It's the initials of coach Mike Sanford and of governor Mark Sanford. Et multiple cetera.
M$, on the other hand, is almost universally recognized as an acronym for Microsoft. It's more easily distinguished, it has less entropy.
Frankly, I don't understand why people become so angry at this use of M$. Are they trying to negate the fact that Microsoft makes a lot of money? Why should the association of a dollar sign to a commercial corporation be insulting?
It's easier to understand, there is no logical reason for it to be considered offensive. M$ should be the preferred way to identify Microsoft in a short form.
"Innocent until proven guilty" only applies to trials of people by the state. When a citizen accuses another it's "preponderance of evidence". Which way do you think evidence preponderates, did he or did he not fondle young boys?
For me, at least, his multiple settlements out of court costing him tens of millions of dollars in total is preponderance enough.
If the edge were so important, they would cut trees with razors.
I fall more in the "agile" than in the "waterfall" methodology mindset. Usually when I start with flowcharts and schematics I get nowhere.
For me, the way to get over the block is to write one routine that works in some small detail of the project. When I get the perfect data formatting in the gizmo function I start understanding the overall project better. After a few interactions with working code I get a better grasp of the whole, then I do the needed cleanup.
I let the tree grow first, then I prune it. That's the way nature works, four billion years of evolution can't be all wrong.
Hmmm, no, this will not work. Think of Physics 103 - Electromagnetism. Should students learn new versions of Maxwell's equations every year?
OK, I see your point. Exercises should have different parameters. Instead of calculation the magnetic field 5 cm distant from a wire carrying 10 A, calculate the field 12 cm away from a wire carrying 7 A. But still there wouldn't be too much room for variation in many subjects.
Perhaps it would be better to admit that if a student researched enough to find an answer to the problem he has learned something about it. If copying a working solution to a problem from the internet is cheating, then I cheat all the time in my work.
Good. Then I need not worry. I'm not downloading DVDs, what I'm downloading are entirely different products. A downloaded film compressed to a 700 MB AVI is different from a 4 GB film in a VOB file recorded on a DVD.
Is it possible to set the purchase price at zero? I declare that everyone who downloads from my torrent is buying from me at the price of $0.00.
You would have to be at least 91 years old today to have been one.
Because you are Turkish. You just glossed over the link I posted, but it's a real thing. The empire that once ruled over the land where you were born tried to impose its ways over other lands, during a period of over 500 years. People hate empires, even if those empires only exist in their minds
What you call a "hate" movie is what other people would call a "controversial" film, which is what its author specializes in. BTW, he won an Oscar for that what you call a "hate" movie.
Anyhow, your reaction seems typical of your region/religion. You cannot accept criticism. You jump to conclusions about anyone who says anything that could be remotely interpreted as critical to your views.
There are many films about harsh conditions on people who are prisoners in jails in the USA, yet no one calls them "hate" films. These films were not made to make anyone hate the USA, or do you think Clint Eastwood hates America?
Well, at least I know how to put proper quotes in my post, so people won't have to copy and paste the address in the browser.
I recommend you start some research in a field where you seem to be sorely lacking
As for the "venom at people" thing, sorry if I hurt your Turkish sensibilities, but all citizens of an empire must learn to cope with that, even if the empire hasn't existed for nearly a century.
How's that? Do you mean that the cost of a camera, spread out over its useful life, plus the cost of a monitoring center where hundreds of cameras are watched is higher than paying a crew of officers to have someone stand 24/7 where every camera is located?
If there's one place where "pound in the ass" is what you get in prisons, it's Turkey
It probably wouldn't work for anything bigger than a termite. When I was a kid I had a tarantula encased in acrylic resin. After a year or so, the spider body started shrinking and in the end there was only a dust-filled hole in the plastic.
Even if it was totally encased in the plastic and isolated from the outside, the tarantula had enough bacteria in its guts to decompose it.