defined it as not being able to distinguish pixels at a normal viewing distance
Well, if it's anything like music file bitrates, a certain (way higher than 1366x768) level of quality will be awesome, but there'll always be those pretentious people (mixed in with genuinely very sensitive people) who require/want even more. There will come a point when it will seem like e-peen waving.
Well, the Transformer has a DPI of 224. Not the 256 of the iPad 3, but within spitting distance compared to the competition. While the iPad and Macbook retina displays are excellent, the minute they slapped "Retina" branding on them, they kind of made the word meaningless since the DPI ranges from 326 of the iPhone to 220 for the MacBook Pro. What does it really mean now aside from "absurdly awesome resolution packed into a smaller than expected screen"?
Don't bother. He's just trolling this page, with a weird axe to grind against this product. It's like any time an Android tablet gets within spitting distance of the iPad, it's a mortal offense that must be punished by snarky slashdot posts.
The XX/XY sex determination system is mostly the domain of mammals. Most reptiles and birds use the ZZ/ZW where the ZZ chromosome holders are male. Some reptiles use temperature based sex determination that is considered to be the ancestor of the other forms.
I was referring to the screen resolutions of the previous generation Macbook Pros (1440x900 and 1920x1200). Other laptop makers have had niche models with resolutions and pixel densities in excess of them, but they never sold as well as the race-to-the-bottom 1366x768 laptops. Stop reading my post in the most uncharitable light possible because you think it makes you smart.
This discussion is drifting towards more and more topics, not a bad thing imo, but I'm going to address them as best I can.
anyway, what you speak of is still rather rare because it costs money (often requires lawyers because progeny and prosperity have links in our civilization)
Well, that's why there's such a push for gay marriage. If the lesbians are married, and they've acquired the sperm from a sperm bank with appropriate paperwork, they won't need a lawyer for anything, just a session with a medical professional who can carry out the "turkey-basting" all official-like. Likewise, married gay couples can adopt if they are not rich enough to afford surrogates. Adoption is another thing the fundies are blocking gay people from doing.
I know quite a few L & G couples, none have children.
happily harping about the one in one hundred thousand that happens to act the in the way they think people of an ideal world would function.
Some couples want children, some don't want children it doesn't matter if they're straight or gay. This link shows that roughly a quarter of all same sex households are raising children. And this is without widespread gay marriage or pro-adoption laws. Social conditions that would allow the widespread existence of a openly same sex household are fairly recent, so it is reasonable that as time passes, this percentage will rise as these new-fangled relationships mature.
They are rather oblivious to the fact that their culture has a negative population growth, the old-fashioned and brutal are indeed inheriting the earth right from under them. I'm talking about Spanish & Islamic cultures where men beat their wives and keep them subservient, they are the ones with the positive population growth: it is obvious though very regrettable that is the future.
This is really not involved with gay couples and children, but I'll bite. The thing is, the planet does not need population growth. We might need growth at replacement rates to keep our societies stable but certainly not much more of an increase in our population. These spanish and islamic cultures have something common to them: poverty and low education rates. When knowledge and skills become more important (such as in a post-industrial one like western civilization), a larger investment in a smaller number of offspring is more efficient than a rabbit-like pumping out of as many babies as possible before death. And it has been shown time and time again, that even in these brutal societies, if the women are educated and empowered, their birthrates will fall, preferring fewer, better quality offspring. What countries like France should do is ensure that their islamic immigrants are deeply and effectively enculturated, and ensure the islamic women especially are educated about the rights they have in france that they don't have in their homelands.
I myself come from a culture with high birthrates, low education, male dominance and poverty. My parents are both university graduates and decided that two children were enough. Because they had fewer children to spend their resources on, at every stage we were more accomplished than our paternal cousins; I went to university, and my younger sibling is well on they way. Most of our paternal cousins in the village with 8 siblings apiece have never been to university, and the few that have either failed out because of insufficient mental preparation from their parents, or ran off and gotten married and had 6 kids, like their parents before them. These cultures who seem to be "inheriting the earth from under us" in numerical terms are not going to birth any great thinkers or scientists like more measured cultures will. And if they do, it will be in spite of themselves, rather then because of it. Quality is more important than quantity.
Then your "definition" of "exclusively gay" is pretty stupid. A syringe of semen squirted up someone's vagina doesn't sound very heterosexual to me. It doesn't sound sexual at all. Yet pretty much every lesbian family is started off in this way. Rich gay couples are using surrogacy (which in no way or form involves anyone having sex, and often the egg is not even from the surrogate) now more than ever. These people certainly aren't sexing anyone of the opposite gender to fulfil their reproductive needs. No one ever made the claim that homosexual sex leads to reproduction, but rather, that reproduction is becoming more and more uncoupled from heterosexual sex thanks to contraception, surrogates, and sperm donation.
It's funny, funny that slashdotters are still so ignorant regarding things outside of their own experience. A lot of gay people procreate biologically, fucking is not the only way to introduce sperm into a vagina; for a gay man, that vagina could be a paid surrogate or a friend's, for a gay woman, that sperm could be a sperm donation or a close friend's.
You do realize that most of these manufacturers (especially Lenovo and Sony) have had laptops for sale with screen resolutions in excess of Apple's for years? It's just that most customers don't want to buy them because they're expensive. So they become little-reviewed niche products for industry professionals or rich people that don't want to buy Macs. Apple's innovation has been to make the whole customer base subsidize the costs through economies of scale, making them look both cooler and more technically capable than the other HW makers, while making these high def screens for less money, yay Apple!. They're definitely cooler, but not much more technically capable than their competitors.
However, I still can't believe that Samsung, HTC and other iPhone and iPod competitors haven't paid attention to Apple's history with their iPod. They've always put an emphasis on increasing pixel density whenever possible, so all these other HW makers needed to do to appear to be keeping up was ensure each successive generation of their product levelled up in pixel density instead of their stupid race to increase phone screen size. The people in charge of making those decisions for Samsung, Motorola and HTC should have been fired the day the retina iPhone came out for being idiots.
Thank you for having the patience and fortitude to dive through that link of stupidity and debunking it's claims. I tried to do so up the thread, but in a much more haphazard fashion.
Sony is a lot like Samsung in that they're really more like a network of affiliated companies that use the same brand. While I don't mean to disagree on why you don't patronise them, the possibility exists that other devices from other companies will use screens manufactured by them, as they seem to have a patent on this tech. Would you buy a device from Apple, Samsung or HTC using a Sony made screen?
I signed in just to say ^^, but you beat me to it. I'm pretty sure most of the comments on this page are pretty much a good motivator for any high school senior reading this not to enrol in a CompSci program if she has a vagina. Affirmative action and quotas don't work, but the hostility that comes out against women in tech is just crazy. It might never be fixed.
Engadget famously uses "percent brightness" rather than actually measuring brightness across products and using a standard nit level, meaning that devices with naturally brighter screens are disadvantaged compared to dim screened devices on their battery life tests. While I don't believe for a second the Envy would outlast the MBP (between designing the software and hardware Apple can squeeze out hours of battery life where a Windows OEM maker could only find minutes), I wouldn't use engadget's reviews for that particular point.
He also included unnamed "does" in his suit. That means either he's suing Bambi's harem of sexy wives, or he might be trolling the interwebs looking for people making comments about him he can include in the suit.
There isn't any thought behind your reply, just more prejudiced, heterophobic garbage.
Wow, amazing. Every single comment in your comment history that's not about a technical matter of some sort is either anti-gay garbage like "I don't plug male connectors into male sockets", or some anti-atheist garbage. I like how criticizing a straight person makes me "heterophobic". Everyone is entitled to their own views, but not to their own facts, and you live in a reality distortion field that would make Steve Jobs envious. I like how terse and accusative your posts have become as the people you argue with present sound arguments and you need to label them "lies" or "garbage" in order to think you "won".
And lies are like murder- it's murdering the truth.
It's amazing that someone so against atheists would have the nerve to say this, because the shit you've said is like genocide, if we follow your analogy. You are retreating into terse attacks because you realize that I am right, you just don't want to admit it because it's dangerous to your world view. That's OK. People don't always have to change their world view. Sometimes things change slowly, and we'll just wait for you and people like you to die (or become too senile to vote) of natural causes, and then progress will be achieved. I know people like you normally indoctrinate their children something fierce, but then, it's all part of memes fighting other memes, if Richard Dawkins is to be believed.
When your first sentence is a vicious, premeditated lie, there's no need to read anything else.
When your only rebuttal to a well thought out reply is to point out the rudeness of the initial reply (that you conveniently ignored when you thought your "logic" would convince lil' old me), it shows someone who's willing to shift goalposts in order to win arguments. That is not someone I want to engage with in discussion, because such people are not likely to engage in good faith.
FYI: Lies are not like murder, sticking the adjective "premeditated" in front of them does not somehow make them worse. That goes without say even as your continued statements on this matter show me in abundance that you are indeed a "fuckwit", and that was no lie or error on my part.
And simply writing words down doesn't make them true.
And, in fact, male-on-male sex has a much greater chance of transmitting diseases than normal sex.
You do realize that 25% of homosexual men in relationships do not engage in anal sex. Furthermore, there are these real nifty inventions called condoms, I'm sure you've heard of them, which makes anal sex just as safe as the other kind
Having seen videos in their website, it does tell that "coming out" is good.
Do you even know what "coming out" means? It doesn't mean some sort of club crawl through a dozen trashy gay nightclubs, it means being honest with yourself and those around you, and telling them you're gay/lesbian/bisexual. That's all it means, nothing more, nothing less.
That obviously encourage confused teens to engage in sexual acts they currently think would be fun.
Coming out has everything to do about being true to yourself, and NOTHING to do with any sexual acts. The fact that you could conflate the two suggests that I should not bother debating you further because you're one of those conservative fuckwits who will never learn and never change their opinions.
until you can make a man pregnant by another man, homosexuality pretty much IS a guarantee that he won't.
Did you read anything at all after my first sentence? You don't need a wife/female partner if you want a genetic child, you just need to be rich enough to afford a surrogate. Several homosexual celebrities (and countless more rich non-famous ones) have done this already. I actually think surrogacy is good because it requires the parents to be rich enough (or have a friend who is generous enough) and determined enough to pursue it, better than Billy-Bob and Jenna-May having a baby because he was wearing the condom on his finger.
Artificial insemination requires a woman to be involved, and gay men are afraid of women or else they would not be gay.
Wow. Just wow. I now realize you know nothing at all about gay people. Gay men are NOT afraid of women. They just don't want to fuck them. Do you know what happens when you meet someone interesting whom you don't want to fuck? You become friends. The stereotype of a fabulous gay man and a woman being best friends (BFFs?) is a stereotype for a reason, because it's common. There are a few gay men who don't like women at all, just like there are a few straight women who think gay men all want to steal their husbands, but in general, gay man + straight woman is like cheeto powder on fried bacon. So wrong yet so RIGHT!
Not necessarily. Headlines are a bitch to write, even when you know all about the topic (and I most certainly don't). From what I have hastily read in order to answer your question (Where's Samantha Wright, biologist and purveyor of car analogies extraordinaire, when you need her?), methylation's function in retarding transcription is just one factor. Another one is that methylation leads to the formation of heterochromatin, which is a lot more important in ways that I really should know if I want to pass my genetics final. I'm off to do some reading, have a nice day.
I am sorry if I was not clear enough, but I certainly realize what epigenetic drift is and that's what I was alluding to with my vague "things going wrong" statement.
Look up my comment. It doesn't mention changes in the underlying DNA, but talks about the expression of the genes via other methods like transcription.
Slashdot Mirror
defined it as not being able to distinguish pixels at a normal viewing distance
Well, if it's anything like music file bitrates, a certain (way higher than 1366x768) level of quality will be awesome, but there'll always be those pretentious people (mixed in with genuinely very sensitive people) who require/want even more. There will come a point when it will seem like e-peen waving.
Well, the Transformer has a DPI of 224. Not the 256 of the iPad 3, but within spitting distance compared to the competition. While the iPad and Macbook retina displays are excellent, the minute they slapped "Retina" branding on them, they kind of made the word meaningless since the DPI ranges from 326 of the iPhone to 220 for the MacBook Pro. What does it really mean now aside from "absurdly awesome resolution packed into a smaller than expected screen"?
This guy is trolling the page looking for any little (inaccurate) objection.
Don't bother. He's just trolling this page, with a weird axe to grind against this product. It's like any time an Android tablet gets within spitting distance of the iPad, it's a mortal offense that must be punished by snarky slashdot posts.
The XX/XY sex determination system is mostly the domain of mammals. Most reptiles and birds use the ZZ/ZW where the ZZ chromosome holders are male. Some reptiles use temperature based sex determination that is considered to be the ancestor of the other forms.
I was referring to the screen resolutions of the previous generation Macbook Pros (1440x900 and 1920x1200). Other laptop makers have had niche models with resolutions and pixel densities in excess of them, but they never sold as well as the race-to-the-bottom 1366x768 laptops. Stop reading my post in the most uncharitable light possible because you think it makes you smart.
This discussion is drifting towards more and more topics, not a bad thing imo, but I'm going to address them as best I can.
anyway, what you speak of is still rather rare because it costs money (often requires lawyers because progeny and prosperity have links in our civilization)
Well, that's why there's such a push for gay marriage. If the lesbians are married, and they've acquired the sperm from a sperm bank with appropriate paperwork, they won't need a lawyer for anything, just a session with a medical professional who can carry out the "turkey-basting" all official-like. Likewise, married gay couples can adopt if they are not rich enough to afford surrogates. Adoption is another thing the fundies are blocking gay people from doing.
I know quite a few L & G couples, none have children.
happily harping about the one in one hundred thousand that happens to act the in the way they think people of an ideal world would function.
Some couples want children, some don't want children it doesn't matter if they're straight or gay. This link shows that roughly a quarter of all same sex households are raising children. And this is without widespread gay marriage or pro-adoption laws. Social conditions that would allow the widespread existence of a openly same sex household are fairly recent, so it is reasonable that as time passes, this percentage will rise as these new-fangled relationships mature.
They are rather oblivious to the fact that their culture has a negative population growth, the old-fashioned and brutal are indeed inheriting the earth right from under them. I'm talking about Spanish & Islamic cultures where men beat their wives and keep them subservient, they are the ones with the positive population growth: it is obvious though very regrettable that is the future.
This is really not involved with gay couples and children, but I'll bite. The thing is, the planet does not need population growth. We might need growth at replacement rates to keep our societies stable but certainly not much more of an increase in our population. These spanish and islamic cultures have something common to them: poverty and low education rates. When knowledge and skills become more important (such as in a post-industrial one like western civilization), a larger investment in a smaller number of offspring is more efficient than a rabbit-like pumping out of as many babies as possible before death. And it has been shown time and time again, that even in these brutal societies, if the women are educated and empowered, their birthrates will fall, preferring fewer, better quality offspring. What countries like France should do is ensure that their islamic immigrants are deeply and effectively enculturated, and ensure the islamic women especially are educated about the rights they have in france that they don't have in their homelands.
I myself come from a culture with high birthrates, low education, male dominance and poverty. My parents are both university graduates and decided that two children were enough. Because they had fewer children to spend their resources on, at every stage we were more accomplished than our paternal cousins; I went to university, and my younger sibling is well on they way. Most of our paternal cousins in the village with 8 siblings apiece have never been to university, and the few that have either failed out because of insufficient mental preparation from their parents, or ran off and gotten married and had 6 kids, like their parents before them. These cultures who seem to be "inheriting the earth from under us" in numerical terms are not going to birth any great thinkers or scientists like more measured cultures will. And if they do, it will be in spite of themselves, rather then because of it. Quality is more important than quantity.
Then your "definition" of "exclusively gay" is pretty stupid. A syringe of semen squirted up someone's vagina doesn't sound very heterosexual to me. It doesn't sound sexual at all. Yet pretty much every lesbian family is started off in this way. Rich gay couples are using surrogacy (which in no way or form involves anyone having sex, and often the egg is not even from the surrogate) now more than ever. These people certainly aren't sexing anyone of the opposite gender to fulfil their reproductive needs. No one ever made the claim that homosexual sex leads to reproduction, but rather, that reproduction is becoming more and more uncoupled from heterosexual sex thanks to contraception, surrogates, and sperm donation.
It's funny, funny that slashdotters are still so ignorant regarding things outside of their own experience. A lot of gay people procreate biologically, fucking is not the only way to introduce sperm into a vagina; for a gay man, that vagina could be a paid surrogate or a friend's, for a gay woman, that sperm could be a sperm donation or a close friend's.
Actually Liu Yang assisted in the manual docking. But the guy in charge was Liu Wang. I am not making this up.
You do realize that most of these manufacturers (especially Lenovo and Sony) have had laptops for sale with screen resolutions in excess of Apple's for years? It's just that most customers don't want to buy them because they're expensive. So they become little-reviewed niche products for industry professionals or rich people that don't want to buy Macs. Apple's innovation has been to make the whole customer base subsidize the costs through economies of scale, making them look both cooler and more technically capable than the other HW makers, while making these high def screens for less money, yay Apple!. They're definitely cooler, but not much more technically capable than their competitors.
However, I still can't believe that Samsung, HTC and other iPhone and iPod competitors haven't paid attention to Apple's history with their iPod. They've always put an emphasis on increasing pixel density whenever possible, so all these other HW makers needed to do to appear to be keeping up was ensure each successive generation of their product levelled up in pixel density instead of their stupid race to increase phone screen size. The people in charge of making those decisions for Samsung, Motorola and HTC should have been fired the day the retina iPhone came out for being idiots.
Thank you for having the patience and fortitude to dive through that link of stupidity and debunking it's claims. I tried to do so up the thread, but in a much more haphazard fashion.
Sony is a lot like Samsung in that they're really more like a network of affiliated companies that use the same brand. While I don't mean to disagree on why you don't patronise them, the possibility exists that other devices from other companies will use screens manufactured by them, as they seem to have a patent on this tech. Would you buy a device from Apple, Samsung or HTC using a Sony made screen?
I signed in just to say ^^, but you beat me to it. I'm pretty sure most of the comments on this page are pretty much a good motivator for any high school senior reading this not to enrol in a CompSci program if she has a vagina. Affirmative action and quotas don't work, but the hostility that comes out against women in tech is just crazy. It might never be fixed.
Not sure why people get so butthurt over what other people do with their free time.
Amen! This is an incredibly common reflex, found in all walks of life, and in relation to almost any area of human behaviour imaginable.
Engadget famously uses "percent brightness" rather than actually measuring brightness across products and using a standard nit level, meaning that devices with naturally brighter screens are disadvantaged compared to dim screened devices on their battery life tests. While I don't believe for a second the Envy would outlast the MBP (between designing the software and hardware Apple can squeeze out hours of battery life where a Windows OEM maker could only find minutes), I wouldn't use engadget's reviews for that particular point.
He also included unnamed "does" in his suit. That means either he's suing Bambi's harem of sexy wives, or he might be trolling the interwebs looking for people making comments about him he can include in the suit.
There isn't any thought behind your reply, just more prejudiced, heterophobic garbage.
Wow, amazing. Every single comment in your comment history that's not about a technical matter of some sort is either anti-gay garbage like "I don't plug male connectors into male sockets", or some anti-atheist garbage. I like how criticizing a straight person makes me "heterophobic". Everyone is entitled to their own views, but not to their own facts, and you live in a reality distortion field that would make Steve Jobs envious. I like how terse and accusative your posts have become as the people you argue with present sound arguments and you need to label them "lies" or "garbage" in order to think you "won".
And lies are like murder- it's murdering the truth.
It's amazing that someone so against atheists would have the nerve to say this, because the shit you've said is like genocide, if we follow your analogy. You are retreating into terse attacks because you realize that I am right, you just don't want to admit it because it's dangerous to your world view. That's OK. People don't always have to change their world view. Sometimes things change slowly, and we'll just wait for you and people like you to die (or become too senile to vote) of natural causes, and then progress will be achieved. I know people like you normally indoctrinate their children something fierce, but then, it's all part of memes fighting other memes, if Richard Dawkins is to be believed.
When your first sentence is a vicious, premeditated lie, there's no need to read anything else.
When your only rebuttal to a well thought out reply is to point out the rudeness of the initial reply (that you conveniently ignored when you thought your "logic" would convince lil' old me), it shows someone who's willing to shift goalposts in order to win arguments. That is not someone I want to engage with in discussion, because such people are not likely to engage in good faith.
FYI: Lies are not like murder, sticking the adjective "premeditated" in front of them does not somehow make them worse. That goes without say even as your continued statements on this matter show me in abundance that you are indeed a "fuckwit", and that was no lie or error on my part.
How so? Simply claiming "bullshit" doesn't do.
And simply writing words down doesn't make them true.
And, in fact, male-on-male sex has a much greater chance of transmitting diseases than normal sex.
You do realize that 25% of homosexual men in relationships do not engage in anal sex. Furthermore, there are these real nifty inventions called condoms, I'm sure you've heard of them, which makes anal sex just as safe as the other kind
Having seen videos in their website, it does tell that "coming out" is good.
Do you even know what "coming out" means? It doesn't mean some sort of club crawl through a dozen trashy gay nightclubs, it means being honest with yourself and those around you, and telling them you're gay/lesbian/bisexual. That's all it means, nothing more, nothing less.
That obviously encourage confused teens to engage in sexual acts they currently think would be fun.
Coming out has everything to do about being true to yourself, and NOTHING to do with any sexual acts. The fact that you could conflate the two suggests that I should not bother debating you further because you're one of those conservative fuckwits who will never learn and never change their opinions.
until you can make a man pregnant by another man, homosexuality pretty much IS a guarantee that he won't.
Did you read anything at all after my first sentence? You don't need a wife/female partner if you want a genetic child, you just need to be rich enough to afford a surrogate. Several homosexual celebrities (and countless more rich non-famous ones) have done this already. I actually think surrogacy is good because it requires the parents to be rich enough (or have a friend who is generous enough) and determined enough to pursue it, better than Billy-Bob and Jenna-May having a baby because he was wearing the condom on his finger.
Artificial insemination requires a woman to be involved, and gay men are afraid of women or else they would not be gay.
Wow. Just wow. I now realize you know nothing at all about gay people. Gay men are NOT afraid of women. They just don't want to fuck them. Do you know what happens when you meet someone interesting whom you don't want to fuck? You become friends. The stereotype of a fabulous gay man and a woman being best friends (BFFs?) is a stereotype for a reason, because it's common. There are a few gay men who don't like women at all, just like there are a few straight women who think gay men all want to steal their husbands, but in general, gay man + straight woman is like cheeto powder on fried bacon. So wrong yet so RIGHT!
TFA is a news fluff piece. The abstract of the actual paper they are referring to does not include that bit of dogma
Not necessarily. Headlines are a bitch to write, even when you know all about the topic (and I most certainly don't). From what I have hastily read in order to answer your question (Where's Samantha Wright, biologist and purveyor of car analogies extraordinaire, when you need her?), methylation's function in retarding transcription is just one factor. Another one is that methylation leads to the formation of heterochromatin, which is a lot more important in ways that I really should know if I want to pass my genetics final. I'm off to do some reading, have a nice day.
I am sorry if I was not clear enough, but I certainly realize what epigenetic drift is and that's what I was alluding to with my vague "things going wrong" statement.
Look up my comment. It doesn't mention changes in the underlying DNA, but talks about the expression of the genes via other methods like transcription.