or you could telefile an extension, if you do it by phone it's free (though you're supposed to estimate how much tax you'll owe and pay it, which you can do via credit card for some nominal fee. I think it's a buck. If that's significant digits to the amount you think you owe less the amount you've already paid then you can probably get away with saying you estimated lower, but hey, IANA(T)L)
I personally think that I don't care about this particular issue. They can all fight it out themselves. *however* Has anyone else noticed that the amazon site format, at least as of a week ago, does not make it clear that one is buying from someone other than amazon.
I watched my partner make that mistake, and since we were planning on paying with an amazon gift certificate (not to mention that the S&H charged by the used bookstore was *significantly* greater than that charged by amazon) this was a problem. Fortunately a nice email to the two parties (amazon and the third party used bookseller) straightened it out.
It may be "common knowledge", but it's knowledge that no biology teacher of mine ever let slip, nor does it seem to be obviously available on the web (I did look). Not only that, but I know that the egg industry destroys (for animal feed, etc) around half the baby chicks they get because they are male (and thus don't lay eggs). Since they already incubate the eggs in incubators (the term you want) it would seem trivial to, if the temperature really could be adjusted to ensure the sex of the chicks, adjust the temperature appropriately and stop losing money on about half their chicks.
Do you have any references? Or is this just an urban (rural?) legend?
(if not, I know something you could patent and sell to the egg industry;) )
I believe I dealt with this in my original post, however, the point I made was that I don't think (modulo the age of the genetic material that is causing dolly the sheep to be having old age problems before her time) that there's any logical reason to believe that the result of taking two ova from two clones (or one from a clone and one from an 'original') is going to be significantly different than the result of taking two ova from one person.
Each ovum has an X chromosome. Each spermatozoa has an X xor Y chromosome. The only determiner of sex in baby mammals (and in birds afaik, as well) is which, of set (X,Y) chromosome the fertilizing spermatozoa carries. XX = female, XY = male (okay, this occasionally breaks, creating humans with XXY, XYY, etc combinations. If you want to know more, I highly recommend google.
For a clone, the *only* determiner of sex is the sex of the original cell, which will *always* be the same sex as the original donor.
There is evidence that temperature (as well as the amount of time between coitus and ovulation, and a few other things) affects the likelihood that a particular ovum will be fertilized by X-bearing or Y-bearing sperm in humans, and I suppose a similar thing could happen with chickens, but while I know of many lower animals (amphibians are, I believe, the highest order animals that do this) change sex in response to environmental change, I know of no birds or mammals that do so.
So two people with the same DNA will obvious not be reproducing in the usual way.
There have been experimental techniques involving fusing the genetic material in two ovum, and if this was used to produce offspring that had the same genetic-mother (or genetic-father, if a similar technique could be used for sperm, but that problem is more complex) then what would happen would depend largely on the genetic specifics of the person(s) involved. But the same thing could be done with two ova from a (non cloned) woman, so...
Except that I've noticed the same trend -- of otherwise similar IDE and SCSI drives, used essentially the same way -- the IDEs have a higher failure rate. But I've only noticed this in small scale (i.e. 20 servers, half IDE and half SCSI) and with one manufacturer (and I believe all of them were the same drive, as well, but it might have been two or three different drives that were all manufactured within a few months of eachother).
My theory was that when manufacturer QA'd the the drives, the ones that were perfect or close-to got to be SCSIs and the other ones that passed got to be IDEs. This makes a certain amount of sense, since most people who need serious reliability go for SCSI. IDE is generally used for desktop applications, where 24x7 reliability isn't really a factor, and while restoring from backup (you *do* have backups, right?) is a PITA, it's probably not going to lose you several million dollars of revenue, or whatever. Not to mention that, arguably, the stress on a workstation drive will be lower than that on a server (personally, I think the power cycling might negate this, not to mention that anyone with half a brain has their servers on conditioned power, whereas one cannot say the same about workstations, esspecially home ones) so failure rate for marginal drives might still be lower, and one desktop user isn't likely to ever sue you for one crashed drive, where there is that possibility if a significant percentage of server drives fail prematurely in a company's server farm.
But I have no evidence to back me up on this one. I didn't really care that much (all I cared about was: don't use the IDEs for the servers!)
Another theory might be that the SCSIs are made at a different plant and thus the QA or something else is causing them to ultimately be of higher quality.
Actually, the article quotes him as saying "We are close to being able to find Earth-like planets", not that we are close to finding one. The actual quote is a lot easier to make an educated guess about. We can figure out that we need X telescope resolution, Y processing technology, Z other technology and/or techniquest, and we have X-n telescope resolution, etc, and we can more-or-less reasonably project how long it will take us to get to n amount of technology. Thus we can make a reasonably educated guess as to how long it will take us to have the technology to actually find such planets.
"A society made up of a bunch of money-hungry-but-too-lazy-to-get-off-their-asses-a nd-earn-some-money assholes is responsible for this"
Consider your first statement, and the fact that the vast majority people for any reasonable definition of society you could be using here (unless you are postulating that spammers come from their own society) not only have never spammed but also earn their own livings. Then you may see why I found this post so damn funny.
This is impressive. Apparently they're getting better. Eight years ago it took me (at fifteen) less than two weeks to trash two mil-spec GRiDs. More-or-less accidently, too (at least, I wasn't trying to trash them).
Not to mention that the average cop, at least, has both the physical power and authority to defend himself. Given that over half of people of any given race are women and children (not that there aren't individuals in both those groups who *can* physically defend themselves, but on the whole...), not to mention people who are disabled, elderly, etc it's fair to assume that the majority of folks of any given race are not nearly as equipped to defend themselves as a cop who probably has a gun as well.
Actually, in some districts one can get arrested for smoking if one is under 18.
One can also get kicked out of public school for doing the same off school property outside of school hours.
We live in weird country.
Re:Man, where's the "%" key...?
on
Virtual Keyboard
·
· Score: 2
but chances are you know (if you spend any real amount of time typing on a regular basis, which I expect is probably the case for the majority of slashdot readers) *about* where the key for various 'odd' characters is. Then you just feel around a bit, sort of a tactile version of hunt and peck.
Chances are, if you use the key enough that this is annoying to you after the first few weeks, you use it enough that you'll remember it next time.
As a new sysadmin, several years ago, I was tasked to set up a dns server. I had some issue with it (don't recall what) and went to search for 'named' -- and got a heck of a lot of pet sites (as in, what is your pet named?).... but don't even ask what I got when I searched for BIND.
so that those of us who have to secure boxes can test against it -- not just the boxes with the OS (or app) in question -- but other, related things too (i.e. someone find an exploit in one flavor of unix, vendor releases patch, I look and go "I wonder if it works for this other varient" and check)
Yeah, most of us could code it up if we wanted to, but contrary to popular belief, admins actually do work (well, the good ones)
okay, sending something that is likely to *kill* you is possible (though unlikely) with snail-mail and not with email (unless they perfected that 'exploding monitor' virus recently and it hasn't hit/. yet;) )
other than that, I'm inclined to agree about the hysteria.
You know, just because MS is showing some clue doesn't mean they still don't suck (though I'll grant that Sun and Oracle suck as well -- and if they were in MS's position they'd probably suck more)
but yes, I'm inclined to agree with you in this case, MS is being better behaved, and a better 'corporate citizen' or however you wish to put it
I still don't think a national ID card (for anyone) is useful or wise
Um, I don't think that counts as circumvention. Potentially breach-of-license, but that's the user's responsibility (if part of the license agreement is "Thou shalt not break this CD into little bits with a hammer" you're not allowed to sue the hammer company if you do, and neither is microsoft)
I have a very serious question, why do the people who hijacked the planes *have* to be tools of someone else's plan?
A gedanken experiment, if you will: take a group of roughly 20 people, who have motivation (motivation is the hard part in this, really -- it's also the part that isn't really contested, there's no argument that these people weren't motivated by *something* -- though what we do not know for sure) to spend several years of their lives working towards this plan to hurt the U.S. whilst killing themselves. Now, how difficult, really, would it be to get commercial pilot training, to learn hand to hand combat in tight spaces and then to buy twenty coach plane tickets on four different flights?
The plan isn't so difficult, nor is it incredibly resource consuming.
I'm not saying that it didn't involve more people (there's certainly evidence coming to light that it did, though the extent of that involvement is unclear) but I fail to see why it *had* to. Several people have said that this would have required Bin Laden's (or someone else's) underwriting, but for what?
Slashdot Mirror
or you could telefile an extension, if you do it by phone it's free (though you're supposed to estimate how much tax you'll owe and pay it, which you can do via credit card for some nominal fee. I think it's a buck. If that's significant digits to the amount you think you owe less the amount you've already paid then you can probably get away with saying you estimated lower, but hey, IANA(T)L)
Info on irs.gov
I personally think that I don't care about this particular issue. They can all fight it out themselves. *however* Has anyone else noticed that the amazon site format, at least as of a week ago, does not make it clear that one is buying from someone other than amazon.
I watched my partner make that mistake, and since we were planning on paying with an amazon gift certificate (not to mention that the S&H charged by the used bookstore was *significantly* greater than that charged by amazon) this was a problem. Fortunately a nice email to the two parties (amazon and the third party used bookseller) straightened it out.
Can you say "Bait and switch", though.
neat! I didn't know that!
(actually, I think I did and forgot, but..)
It may be "common knowledge", but it's knowledge that no biology teacher of mine ever let slip, nor does it seem to be obviously available on the web (I did look). Not only that, but I know that the egg industry destroys (for animal feed, etc) around half the baby chicks they get because they are male (and thus don't lay eggs). Since they already incubate the eggs in incubators (the term you want) it would seem trivial to, if the temperature really could be adjusted to ensure the sex of the chicks, adjust the temperature appropriately and stop losing money on about half their chicks.
;) )
Do you have any references? Or is this just an urban (rural?) legend?
(if not, I know something you could patent and sell to the egg industry
I believe I dealt with this in my original post, however, the point I made was that I don't think (modulo the age of the genetic material that is causing dolly the sheep to be having old age problems before her time) that there's any logical reason to believe that the result of taking two ova from two clones (or one from a clone and one from an 'original') is going to be significantly different than the result of taking two ova from one person.
*shrug* IANARG (I am not a research geneticist)
ech. been there, done that, too.
But I try very hard not to sleep in the server rooms (I am not always sucessful, but it's been a good six or eight months since I last did)
Eh, no.
Each ovum has an X chromosome. Each spermatozoa has an X xor Y chromosome. The only determiner of sex in baby mammals (and in birds afaik, as well) is which, of set (X,Y) chromosome the fertilizing spermatozoa carries. XX = female, XY = male (okay, this occasionally breaks, creating humans with XXY, XYY, etc combinations. If you want to know more, I highly recommend google.
For a clone, the *only* determiner of sex is the sex of the original cell, which will *always* be the same sex as the original donor.
There is evidence that temperature (as well as the amount of time between coitus and ovulation, and a few other things) affects the likelihood that a particular ovum will be fertilized by X-bearing or Y-bearing sperm in humans, and I suppose a similar thing could happen with chickens, but while I know of many lower animals (amphibians are, I believe, the highest order animals that do this) change sex in response to environmental change, I know of no birds or mammals that do so.
So two people with the same DNA will obvious not be reproducing in the usual way.
There have been experimental techniques involving fusing the genetic material in two ovum, and if this was used to produce offspring that had the same genetic-mother (or genetic-father, if a similar technique could be used for sperm, but that problem is more complex) then what would happen would depend largely on the genetic specifics of the person(s) involved. But the same thing could be done with two ova from a (non cloned) woman, so...
Try feeding a doughnut to a hyperactive four year old and get back to me.
Except that I've noticed the same trend -- of otherwise similar IDE and SCSI drives, used essentially the same way -- the IDEs have a higher failure rate. But I've only noticed this in small scale (i.e. 20 servers, half IDE and half SCSI) and with one manufacturer (and I believe all of them were the same drive, as well, but it might have been two or three different drives that were all manufactured within a few months of eachother).
My theory was that when manufacturer QA'd the the drives, the ones that were perfect or close-to got to be SCSIs and the other ones that passed got to be IDEs. This makes a certain amount of sense, since most people who need serious reliability go for SCSI. IDE is generally used for desktop applications, where 24x7 reliability isn't really a factor, and while restoring from backup (you *do* have backups, right?) is a PITA, it's probably not going to lose you several million dollars of revenue, or whatever. Not to mention that, arguably, the stress on a workstation drive will be lower than that on a server (personally, I think the power cycling might negate this, not to mention that anyone with half a brain has their servers on conditioned power, whereas one cannot say the same about workstations, esspecially home ones) so failure rate for marginal drives might still be lower, and one desktop user isn't likely to ever sue you for one crashed drive, where there is that possibility if a significant percentage of server drives fail prematurely in a company's server farm.
But I have no evidence to back me up on this one. I didn't really care that much (all I cared about was: don't use the IDEs for the servers!)
Another theory might be that the SCSIs are made at a different plant and thus the QA or something else is causing them to ultimately be of higher quality.
*shrug*
what's even worse -- I have been known to wake up from a deep sleep in a panic because the fans suddenly go quiet (due to electrical failure).
sad but true
Actually, the article quotes him as saying "We are close to being able to find Earth-like planets", not that we are close to finding one. The actual quote is a lot easier to make an educated guess about. We can figure out that we need X telescope resolution, Y processing technology, Z other technology and/or techniquest, and we have X-n telescope resolution, etc, and we can more-or-less reasonably project how long it will take us to get to n amount of technology. Thus we can make a reasonably educated guess as to how long it will take us to have the technology to actually find such planets.
"A society made up of a bunch of money-hungry-but-too-lazy-to-get-off-their-asses-a nd-earn-some-money assholes is responsible for this"
Consider your first statement, and the fact that the vast majority people for any reasonable definition of society you could be using here (unless you are postulating that spammers come from their own society) not only have never spammed but also earn their own livings. Then you may see why I found this post so damn funny.
This is impressive. Apparently they're getting better. Eight years ago it took me (at fifteen) less than two weeks to trash two mil-spec GRiDs. More-or-less accidently, too (at least, I wasn't trying to trash them).
Not to mention that the average cop, at least, has both the physical power and authority to defend himself. Given that over half of people of any given race are women and children (not that there aren't individuals in both those groups who *can* physically defend themselves, but on the whole...), not to mention people who are disabled, elderly, etc it's fair to assume that the majority of folks of any given race are not nearly as equipped to defend themselves as a cop who probably has a gun as well.
And that's before legal concerns.
Prostitutes..well, that one I can't defend.
Actually, in some districts one can get arrested for smoking if one is under 18.
One can also get kicked out of public school for doing the same off school property outside of school hours.
We live in weird country.
but chances are you know (if you spend any real amount of time typing on a regular basis, which I expect is probably the case for the majority of slashdot readers) *about* where the key for various 'odd' characters is. Then you just feel around a bit, sort of a tactile version of hunt and peck.
Chances are, if you use the key enough that this is annoying to you after the first few weeks, you use it enough that you'll remember it next time.
As a new sysadmin, several years ago, I was tasked to set up a dns server. I had some issue with it (don't recall what) and went to search for 'named' -- and got a heck of a lot of pet sites (as in, what is your pet named?) .... but don't even ask what I got when I searched for BIND.
:P
Oh my. I was underage at the time, too
so that those of us who have to secure boxes can test against it -- not just the boxes with the OS (or app) in question -- but other, related things too (i.e. someone find an exploit in one flavor of unix, vendor releases patch, I look and go "I wonder if it works for this other varient" and check)
Yeah, most of us could code it up if we wanted to, but contrary to popular belief, admins actually do work (well, the good ones)
conversation piece
esspecially if you build a beowulf cluster of them
(sorry)
okay, sending something that is likely to *kill* you is possible (though unlikely) with snail-mail and not with email (unless they perfected that 'exploding monitor' virus recently and it hasn't hit /. yet ;) )
other than that, I'm inclined to agree about the hysteria.
You know, I find myself wishing that there were a few wiggen children around -- I think the current situations (all of them) might benefit ;)
You know, just because MS is showing some clue doesn't mean they still don't suck (though I'll grant that Sun and Oracle suck as well -- and if they were in MS's position they'd probably suck more)
but yes, I'm inclined to agree with you in this case, MS is being better behaved, and a better 'corporate citizen' or however you wish to put it
I still don't think a national ID card (for anyone) is useful or wise
by definition antisocial people are unapologetically antisocial (in the more classic definition)
And the fact that nifty technology is used to clean up after a tragedy does not make it non-nifty. I'm sorry you can't separate the two ideas.
Um, I don't think that counts as circumvention. Potentially breach-of-license, but that's the user's responsibility (if part of the license agreement is "Thou shalt not break this CD into little bits with a hammer" you're not allowed to sue the hammer company if you do, and neither is microsoft)
> I have no toleranse for stupidity.
Please tell me that was meant to be ironic.
I have a very serious question, why do the people who hijacked the planes *have* to be tools of someone else's plan?
A gedanken experiment, if you will: take a group of roughly 20 people, who have motivation (motivation is the hard part in this, really -- it's also the part that isn't really contested, there's no argument that these people weren't motivated by *something* -- though what we do not know for sure) to spend several years of their lives working towards this plan to hurt the U.S. whilst killing themselves. Now, how difficult, really, would it be to get commercial pilot training, to learn hand to hand combat in tight spaces and then to buy twenty coach plane tickets on four different flights?
The plan isn't so difficult, nor is it incredibly resource consuming.
I'm not saying that it didn't involve more people (there's certainly evidence coming to light that it did, though the extent of that involvement is unclear) but I fail to see why it *had* to. Several people have said that this would have required Bin Laden's (or someone else's) underwriting, but for what?
What am I missing here?