Not when they're randomly distributed in little uneven mounds. 40,000 of these chips would have a surface area of 6' x 16.29' when laid out in a rectangle, so to fit them all on a single-sized bed you'd need to stack them three or four layers deep. It would be more like sleeping on a bed of pine needles that stick up at odd angles. Don't worry, I've seen the "lying on a bed of nails!" videos too, and I know what you're talking about—but these would definitely be very uncomfortable unless you glued them down.
Protip: silicon is not soft. Further, it probably has, y'know, copper inputs and outputs? 40-50 thousand of those (times however many pins each chip has) poking into your supple, greasy back are also not soft.
So move the mouse every five minutes, or pretend to be reading a very long document and just scroll a bunch downward. That's still a fair amount of wiggle room!
It's basically four years of physics with little bits of biology and chemistry thrown in, followed by two years of computer science rehab to make sense of all of it. Software engineering skills are not very relevant; bad code is rampant—in fact, as if they had nothing better to do than prove that point, many important chemical simulation algorithms are still written in FORTRAN. (The other day I actually had a compile fail because g77 wasn't installed on a colleague's box. I was appalled, but only briefly.)
I'm pretty sure they're regular ol' Mus musculus. It's something of a value add situation, where the magic comes from the vaccination they received in the lab.
(Follow-up: the paper clarifies that they only tested with eight groups of ten mice each. The above estimate of "a few hundred" was a tiny bit overkill—outside of the private sector. *rimshot*)
The vaccine protects 80% of the mice injected with the deadly strain,
If they say you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette, then you have to kill a few hundred mice and rats to make a vaccine. Do your part to save the mice—force your kids to grow up to be computational chemists! (Routine simulated biology is probably on the "fifteen-to-twenty" years off range; i.e. conceivable but challenging and difficult to commercialize.)
It's got a slightly more literary scope, not just song lyrics; originally it was poetry. Also popular are malapropisms, wherein the speaker makes a comparable error, not the listener.
That seems to be the consensus among Python programmers! (There's another comment on this story from a bioinformatician who basically agrees with you, but out of experience and not expectation.) Someone's probably done a study somewhere.
Look on the bright side: they'll all be dead in fifty years, and progress will resume. The children of the eighties and nineties have relatively little interest in perpetuating their parents' dystopia.
I think they just hired on whoever made the old sci-fi magazine covers. Some poor sod with an addiction to airbrushing spheres over and over and over again, whom they finally replaced in the late nineties with his son, a man obsessed with Photoshopping spheres over and over and over again. Every now and then, a rocket, ring system, or black hole. Yee-haw.
Bemoan our lack of FTL transit and paw desperately at the sky, while our sad little mudball continues to shout itself to pieces over meaningless displays of tribalistic self-importance, treats the future as its greatest enemy, and continues to believe that such is the best course of action.
I would look it up and try to tell you... but everything's hosed from all the traffic. That information will probably come out later. Notably, sites like The Habitable Exoplanets Catalog aren't updated to include it yet.
Scientists don't yet know if Kepler-22b has a predominantly rocky, gaseous or liquid composition, but its discovery is a step closer to finding Earth-like planets.
Sure they do! Just look at the picture right next to the article! Man, who gets paid to Photoshop these spheres in front of bits of nebulae all day? That must be an interesting job.
Well, look at the percentage: only 26% of IT staff look at other peoples' data. Who wants to be the number is way, way higher amongst bureaucrats as a whole?
There are two big factors that drive gender participation in the sciences: cultural attitudes and, alas, raw biology. While women and men have the same mean for many traits such as intelligence, the standard deviation for men is wider; i.e. there are more smart men and more stupid men than smart women and stupid women. As a result, when you take a cross-section of the population at one far end or the other, you get more men in low-income situations and more men suitable for certain positions in academia. We're pretty sure this is because the two copies of the X chromosome balance each other out. A number of other traits behave similarly.
The cultural issues are much more complex. One (the reality), the academic culture is not very well-suited to the traditional socialized setting of women (who prefer to collaborate more rather than maintaining complete independence) and indeed the competitive nature of publishing is responsible for women not generally remaining in science long enough to get doctorates or professorships. Two (the expectation), girls are still not regularly raised with the same focus on their development as intellectuals, and so by the time college is available to them they only see it as an instrument for supporting their careers, and not integral to the direction of their lives (a consistent statistical aberration arises when computer scientists and mathematicians reproduce). Three (the reflection), culture still doesn't have a lot of strong images of women in these fields in it (movies, books, shows), since culture's primary function is to reflect the current state of things, and it is notoriously bad at being inspirational unless it's regurgitating a biography—also there's not much culture about computer sciencists, engineers, and mathematicians in the first place.
At the same time, this last cultural reason is driving male participation in academia down. With (toxic) exceptions like Gregory House, there aren't many male heroes left in culture that are clearly defined as having an intelligent upbringing; there are no astronauts in the sky and no Shakespeareans captaining the Enterprise. What smart protagonists do remain are morally ambiguous characters, like House, that are more interesting from a literary perspective but have some pretty bad effects on society when viewed in reflection. Instead, boys in the United States are being raised solely by action heroes, and disappearing straight into the military or business; the popularity of hip-hop culture caused a similar (but much more rapid) disaster for middle-class blacks a few years ago.
The outcome of all this is that my university's first-year computing courses have more than 50% female attendance in class sizes of over a hundred students, and our second-year computing courses have about 20% female attendance in class sizes of no more than thirty.
Slashdot Mirror
For the answer to this week's word puzzle, see pg. 46.
Not when they're randomly distributed in little uneven mounds. 40,000 of these chips would have a surface area of 6' x 16.29' when laid out in a rectangle, so to fit them all on a single-sized bed you'd need to stack them three or four layers deep. It would be more like sleeping on a bed of pine needles that stick up at odd angles. Don't worry, I've seen the "lying on a bed of nails!" videos too, and I know what you're talking about—but these would definitely be very uncomfortable unless you glued them down.
Protip: silicon is not soft. Further, it probably has, y'know, copper inputs and outputs? 40-50 thousand of those (times however many pins each chip has) poking into your supple, greasy back are also not soft.
My god, man! The answer was staring us in the face this entire time!
It's as if they aren't even trying any more.
So move the mouse every five minutes, or pretend to be reading a very long document and just scroll a bunch downward. That's still a fair amount of wiggle room!
"Potentially quite a bit" and "significantly, but only in the private sector."
It's basically four years of physics with little bits of biology and chemistry thrown in, followed by two years of computer science rehab to make sense of all of it. Software engineering skills are not very relevant; bad code is rampant—in fact, as if they had nothing better to do than prove that point, many important chemical simulation algorithms are still written in FORTRAN. (The other day I actually had a compile fail because g77 wasn't installed on a colleague's box. I was appalled, but only briefly.)
I'm pretty sure they're regular ol' Mus musculus. It's something of a value add situation, where the magic comes from the vaccination they received in the lab.
(Follow-up: the paper clarifies that they only tested with eight groups of ten mice each. The above estimate of "a few hundred" was a tiny bit overkill—outside of the private sector. *rimshot*)
Not really:
The vaccine protects 80% of the mice injected with the deadly strain,
If they say you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette, then you have to kill a few hundred mice and rats to make a vaccine. Do your part to save the mice—force your kids to grow up to be computational chemists! (Routine simulated biology is probably on the "fifteen-to-twenty" years off range; i.e. conceivable but challenging and difficult to commercialize.)
It's got a slightly more literary scope, not just song lyrics; originally it was poetry. Also popular are malapropisms, wherein the speaker makes a comparable error, not the listener.
You had me at "one of five ridiculous novelty prints." Where does one apply to be a mammoth? Is there a BSD convention nearby?
That seems to be the consensus among Python programmers! (There's another comment on this story from a bioinformatician who basically agrees with you, but out of experience and not expectation.) Someone's probably done a study somewhere.
Look on the bright side: they'll all be dead in fifty years, and progress will resume. The children of the eighties and nineties have relatively little interest in perpetuating their parents' dystopia.
Not a whole lot. Clocks will just mean less to the world around us. Like DST, only moreso.
I think they just hired on whoever made the old sci-fi magazine covers. Some poor sod with an addiction to airbrushing spheres over and over and over again, whom they finally replaced in the late nineties with his son, a man obsessed with Photoshopping spheres over and over and over again. Every now and then, a rocket, ring system, or black hole. Yee-haw.
(Also, state the obvious to farm karma.)
It's hard to see how their talents would apply. What are they going to do, lobby for c to be relaxed?
Bemoan our lack of FTL transit and paw desperately at the sky, while our sad little mudball continues to shout itself to pieces over meaningless displays of tribalistic self-importance, treats the future as its greatest enemy, and continues to believe that such is the best course of action.
I would look it up and try to tell you... but everything's hosed from all the traffic. That information will probably come out later. Notably, sites like The Habitable Exoplanets Catalog aren't updated to include it yet.
Scientists don't yet know if Kepler-22b has a predominantly rocky, gaseous or liquid composition, but its discovery is a step closer to finding Earth-like planets.
Sure they do! Just look at the picture right next to the article! Man, who gets paid to Photoshop these spheres in front of bits of nebulae all day? That must be an interesting job.
Well, look at the percentage: only 26% of IT staff look at other peoples' data. Who wants to be the number is way, way higher amongst bureaucrats as a whole?
theres about 60 minutes in an hour
About sixty? Now I'm scared.
There are two big factors that drive gender participation in the sciences: cultural attitudes and, alas, raw biology. While women and men have the same mean for many traits such as intelligence, the standard deviation for men is wider; i.e. there are more smart men and more stupid men than smart women and stupid women. As a result, when you take a cross-section of the population at one far end or the other, you get more men in low-income situations and more men suitable for certain positions in academia. We're pretty sure this is because the two copies of the X chromosome balance each other out. A number of other traits behave similarly.
The cultural issues are much more complex. One (the reality), the academic culture is not very well-suited to the traditional socialized setting of women (who prefer to collaborate more rather than maintaining complete independence) and indeed the competitive nature of publishing is responsible for women not generally remaining in science long enough to get doctorates or professorships. Two (the expectation), girls are still not regularly raised with the same focus on their development as intellectuals, and so by the time college is available to them they only see it as an instrument for supporting their careers, and not integral to the direction of their lives (a consistent statistical aberration arises when computer scientists and mathematicians reproduce). Three (the reflection), culture still doesn't have a lot of strong images of women in these fields in it (movies, books, shows), since culture's primary function is to reflect the current state of things, and it is notoriously bad at being inspirational unless it's regurgitating a biography—also there's not much culture about computer sciencists, engineers, and mathematicians in the first place.
At the same time, this last cultural reason is driving male participation in academia down. With (toxic) exceptions like Gregory House, there aren't many male heroes left in culture that are clearly defined as having an intelligent upbringing; there are no astronauts in the sky and no Shakespeareans captaining the Enterprise. What smart protagonists do remain are morally ambiguous characters, like House, that are more interesting from a literary perspective but have some pretty bad effects on society when viewed in reflection. Instead, boys in the United States are being raised solely by action heroes, and disappearing straight into the military or business; the popularity of hip-hop culture caused a similar (but much more rapid) disaster for middle-class blacks a few years ago.
The outcome of all this is that my university's first-year computing courses have more than 50% female attendance in class sizes of over a hundred students, and our second-year computing courses have about 20% female attendance in class sizes of no more than thirty.