It is actually, quite clear why nature can produce cellulose without a surface. Nature does the things it does because it handles substances at the scale of a few microns. Cellulose for example is produced in a organelle inside a cell and then secreted. By arranging these small units , it is possible to create shapes you can't easily do.
Molecular manipulation is done in cells with enzymes. Enzymes are rather sophisticated, asymmetric catalysts compared to the catalysts we use in out relatively giant test-tubes and reaction vats, where we depend heavily on random collisions between molecules to make things happen.
Think of it like this, sculpture is easier , more refined and detailed when made with a clay-knife than a with a chain-saw.
I hate such noob statements ""Nature uses life-friendly chemistry, which is nontoxic and water-based, and which does not require high heat," These are essentially teleological arguments.
Nature (the environment) uses what is available. Life evolves to survive, or it ceases to exist. Simple as that. You are a biologist, quit with the Mother Nature-Goddess Gaia worshipping nonsense.
If you haven't picked up that software versions are not decimal numbers in 2013 , you should have stopped writing software since Gerald Ford's term was over.
If you are talking about the content, i.e, the information in a book, there has NEVER been a 'real cost of the book'. It has always been, like for any information resource, dictated by how valuable the information is to a certain set of people. What value a publisher sells the book is determined by the highest price the publisher think he can sell the book at. A little thing called the 'free market' principle that seems to be lost on TFA.
If you are talking about the physical object (paper, binding etc.) , yes, e-books have reduced that cost and transferred it to electricity and bandwidth requirements. The real cost of medium through which the information is obtained has been diminished. That's one of the things progress is supposed to do. Suggesting that it is a problem is one of the moronic statements in TFA.
You are wrong. You are assuming software version numbers are numeric, following a decimal number system. They are not.
They are strings, in this case, of the format : '(major_iteration).(minor_iteration)'. Such a pseudo-numeric format is used for several other denotations. A commonly used one is the date. A less common one is chromosomal locations of your genes. To parse such a string, you must know the rules of the format.
Print this, paste it on your wall. And never whine about software version indicators of any kind ever again.
As long as information is encoded in a sequence of 2 states, it is digital - period. Any real world machine, is usually analog. The SIGNAL on the other hand, as encoded, detected and interpreted, is digital.
It does not matter that the long and short tones vary. For example, the voltage from a transistor on a chip will regularly vary over a few millivolts. The point is that , the variation doesn't encode anything. All the information is encoded in a sequence that has 2 states. Is the voltage greater than 5mV or less than 1 mV. That makes it digital.
Kindle replaces a book? All the DVB-T software that replaces television? The VoIP software that replaces a telephone? Word processors replicate functionality of pen and paper ? Heck...pretty much everything that a computer does.
That's more of an issue with how developers choose to distribute their code. And that's more of a comparision with distribution systems. The Chrome Web Store is a lot more visible, convinient and trustworthy, compared to userscripts.org, unfortunately. Everytime I install a userscript in Chrome, it shows up in the Extensions as 'wierd non-descriptive number.js'. I have to use Tampermonkey anyway to manage these decently. Hell, userscripts.org doesn't even look proper on a 1920x1080 resolution screen. Wierd fonts, too small and condensed....not exactly a professional job, compared to the Web store anyway.
The 'Opera' button is a clone of the Firefoxish and Tab Layout is Chromesque. It seems that Opera Next is a Frankenchild of the two best. And now that it is Chrome based, and thus inheriting all the new-fangled speed advantages, it seems to be go the go to browser for power users and newbies alike.
I guess what Opera is lacking is the 2 reasons why people choose browsers these days : the eco-system of Google and fervent open-sourciness of Firefox. It seems that browsers have gotten to the point where in browser performance is essentially meaningless for user-choice because both of the popular browsers are so good already. And that used to be Opera's USP back in the day. Too bad for them..
Yep, just transition to Feedly. No problems no fuss. Plus, it is truly cross platform since it has browser extensions for all major browsers, a Chrome app, iOS app, and an Android app.
Perhaps it would go down easier if we stopped calling them phones, and started calling portable communication and computation devices. THe 'phones' of today are anything BUT phones. It's like calling a desktop with a modem a phone. You could use it as one, but that is not what it is.
You Sir, want a phone? There is plenty of 20 Euro stuff out there if its really that important. And it's a lot tinier too these days.
I would be very interested if an iPhone user put forth one feature that the iPhone has, and Android is incapable of doing. I have not found a single thing an Android user would have to envy iPhone users for. This is partly because the iPhone is a phone, and Android is an operating system that comes installed on phones that run the whole gamut from cheap and flimsily-built knockoffs to high-end cutting edge powerhouses.
There is always an Android phone out there that fits your bill. There is however, only one iPhone.
It's hard to say how the 'High School' thing works. In India , you go to what is called a 'Higher Secodary School' at ages 10-15. Then, we learnt GW-BASIC.
It's not that hard. The only difference being that the Indian system uses 10^ odd numbers, more often primes, as a reference.
And thus : 10^0,1,2,3,5,7 all have names - 10^5 being a lakh and 10^7 being a crore. A complete list is rather interesting, showing that the system predates Western mathematical formulations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_large_numbers and having pecularities like bodhisattva ( or ) —10^37218383881977644441306597687849648128.
You gotta ask...why 10^37218383881977644441306597687849648128?!
That's Francis Crick's interpretation of it. The most popular usage of the term is, however, this : Biémont, Christian; Vieira, C (2006). "Genetics: Junk DNA as an evolutionary force". Nature 443 (7111): 521–4
It's a frozen accident during early attempts to clone genes. When you were cloning genes, you got lots and lots of other non-coding regions into your test-tubes and bacteria that you weren't interested in. Hence , it was called 'junk DNA'. Hence, you know that 'junk DNA' that you get when you try to clone something? Most of the genome is made of that stuff.
It was by no means a statement on the importance of that DNA.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft has already released several applications for Android, as is evidenced here https://play.google.com/store/apps/developer?id=Microsoft+Corporation. I still cannot find any thing for Microsoft Office, except maybe Onenote.
MSN Messenger for Android was released in 2012.
It is actually, quite clear why nature can produce cellulose without a surface. Nature does the things it does because it handles substances at the scale of a few microns. Cellulose for example is produced in a organelle inside a cell and then secreted. By arranging these small units , it is possible to create shapes you can't easily do.
Molecular manipulation is done in cells with enzymes. Enzymes are rather sophisticated, asymmetric catalysts compared to the catalysts we use in out relatively giant test-tubes and reaction vats, where we depend heavily on random collisions between molecules to make things happen.
Think of it like this, sculpture is easier , more refined and detailed when made with a clay-knife than a with a chain-saw.
I hate such noob statements ""Nature uses life-friendly chemistry, which is nontoxic and water-based, and which does not require high heat," These are essentially teleological arguments.
Nature (the environment) uses what is available. Life evolves to survive, or it ceases to exist. Simple as that. You are a biologist, quit with the Mother Nature-Goddess Gaia worshipping nonsense.
If you haven't picked up that software versions are not decimal numbers in 2013 , you should have stopped writing software since Gerald Ford's term was over.
If you are talking about the content, i.e, the information in a book, there has NEVER been a 'real cost of the book'. It has always been, like for any information resource, dictated by how valuable the information is to a certain set of people. What value a publisher sells the book is determined by the highest price the publisher think he can sell the book at. A little thing called the 'free market' principle that seems to be lost on TFA.
If you are talking about the physical object (paper, binding etc.) , yes, e-books have reduced that cost and transferred it to electricity and bandwidth requirements. The real cost of medium through which the information is obtained has been diminished. That's one of the things progress is supposed to do. Suggesting that it is a problem is one of the moronic statements in TFA.
You are wrong. You are assuming software version numbers are numeric, following a decimal number system. They are not.
They are strings, in this case, of the format : '(major_iteration).(minor_iteration)'. Such a pseudo-numeric format is used for several other denotations. A commonly used one is the date. A less common one is chromosomal locations of your genes. To parse such a string, you must know the rules of the format.
Print this, paste it on your wall. And never whine about software version indicators of any kind ever again.
As long as information is encoded in a sequence of 2 states, it is digital - period. Any real world machine, is usually analog. The SIGNAL on the other hand, as encoded, detected and interpreted, is digital.
It does not matter that the long and short tones vary. For example, the voltage from a transistor on a chip will regularly vary over a few millivolts. The point is that , the variation doesn't encode anything. All the information is encoded in a sequence that has 2 states. Is the voltage greater than 5mV or less than 1 mV. That makes it digital.
Kindle replaces a book?
All the DVB-T software that replaces television?
The VoIP software that replaces a telephone?
Word processors replicate functionality of pen and paper ?
Heck...pretty much everything that a computer does.
That's more of an issue with how developers choose to distribute their code. And that's more of a comparision with distribution systems. The Chrome Web Store is a lot more visible, convinient and trustworthy, compared to userscripts.org, unfortunately.
Everytime I install a userscript in Chrome, it shows up in the Extensions as 'wierd non-descriptive number.js'. I have to use Tampermonkey anyway to manage these decently.
Hell, userscripts.org doesn't even look proper on a 1920x1080 resolution screen. Wierd fonts, too small and condensed....not exactly a professional job, compared to the Web store anyway.
A sincere question out of curiosity : Why not Chrome?
The 'Opera' button is a clone of the Firefoxish and Tab Layout is Chromesque. It seems that Opera Next is a Frankenchild of the two best. And now that it is Chrome based, and thus inheriting all the new-fangled speed advantages, it seems to be go the go to browser for power users and newbies alike.
I guess what Opera is lacking is the 2 reasons why people choose browsers these days : the eco-system of Google and fervent open-sourciness of Firefox. It seems that browsers have gotten to the point where in browser performance is essentially meaningless for user-choice because both of the popular browsers are so good already. And that used to be Opera's USP back in the day. Too bad for them..
Microsoft did good by users, and Google is doing the suing.
I believe 90% of Slashdot is having a 'Christian Scientist with appendicitis' moment.
Yep, just transition to Feedly. No problems no fuss. Plus, it is truly cross platform since it has browser extensions for all major browsers, a Chrome app, iOS app, and an Android app.
I think I am covered.
Also, why should I go hunt when all the food is coming to me anyway.
Not everyone on Windows is a drooling idiot, some people just have other priorities.
OpenSource: QTiplot http://soft.proindependent.com/qtiplot.html uses Python as its scriptiing language
Prop: OriginPro http://www.originlab.com/ - can use C , LabsTalk and has its own C-based X-functions.
Admittedly, they are geared towards scientific data analysis, but have powerful graphing and programming capabilities.
Perhaps it would go down easier if we stopped calling them phones, and started calling portable communication and computation devices. THe 'phones' of today are anything BUT phones. It's like calling a desktop with a modem a phone. You could use it as one, but that is not what it is.
You Sir, want a phone? There is plenty of 20 Euro stuff out there if its really that important. And it's a lot tinier too these days.
I would be very interested if an iPhone user put forth one feature that the iPhone has, and Android is incapable of doing. I have not found a single thing an Android user would have to envy iPhone users for. This is partly because the iPhone is a phone, and Android is an operating system that comes installed on phones that run the whole gamut from cheap and flimsily-built knockoffs to high-end cutting edge powerhouses.
There is always an Android phone out there that fits your bill. There is however, only one iPhone.
It's hard to say how the 'High School' thing works. In India , you go to what is called a 'Higher Secodary School' at ages 10-15. Then, we learnt GW-BASIC.
wrong as hell.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/kerfuffle
It's not that hard. The only difference being that the Indian system uses 10^ odd numbers, more often primes, as a reference.
And thus : 10^0,1,2,3,5,7 all have names - 10^5 being a lakh and 10^7 being a crore. A complete list is rather interesting, showing that the system predates Western mathematical formulations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_large_numbers and having pecularities like bodhisattva ( or ) —10^37218383881977644441306597687849648128.
You gotta ask...why 10^37218383881977644441306597687849648128?!
Obligatory "a-country-which-I think-it-underdeveloped-and-full-of-poor-naked-children-is-thinking-of-beating-us-at-hi-tech-stuff-zOMG!" troll.
That's Francis Crick's interpretation of it. The most popular usage of the term is, however, this : Biémont, Christian; Vieira, C (2006). "Genetics: Junk DNA as an evolutionary force". Nature 443 (7111): 521–4
It's a frozen accident during early attempts to clone genes. When you were cloning genes, you got lots and lots of other non-coding regions into your test-tubes and bacteria that you weren't interested in. Hence , it was called 'junk DNA'. Hence, you know that 'junk DNA' that you get when you try to clone something? Most of the genome is made of that stuff.
It was by no means a statement on the importance of that DNA.
? Have you heard of Directed evolution ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed_evolution