I'd much rather see a comparison and insight into why Asian countries are so far ahead of the relatively small and well off European nations. There must be some key cultural differences.
The Netherlands has the highest broadband penetration in the European Union. According to the OECD, in 2009 DSL was available to approximately 100 % of the population.
That means Asia isn't ahead of us - we beat South Korea (and all other Asian countries) with our figures from 2008; we probably have an even higher percentage now.
Hey that topspot is shared with Denmark =),
but in fact, according to the OECD numbers from june 2010, the top 30 broadband per inhabitant list, have 22 european and only 2 asian nations (Japan and Korea). Japan and Korea does however have some of the fastest and cheapest internet (advertised, not actual measurements) http://www.oecd.org/document/54/0,3343,en_2649_34225_38690102_1_1_1_1,00.html#Penetration
Indeed this is true for almost any substance.
Theres almost always a window between "no effect" and "toxic effect" in which "benefitial" would be the word used to describe the effect.
You can read all about the shoe issue in:
"Shoes: Comfortable piece of clothing or The Ultimate Hiding Spot!" (unfortunately nobody RTFA that concluded that they were indeed just comfortable and not a particular good for hiding stuff).
Just imagine the things I could hide in my shoes....and not in my pants/shirt/other. The posibilities are endless.
Actually there is currently a 2 man team working in a garage in Denmark to produce a rocket capable of safely taking a person into space (and presumably back somehow). They have completed small scale testing of their engine (video on the link below) and are currently building the real version.
Article in danish: http://ing.dk/artikel/98441-byggeriet-af-danmarks-stoerste-rumraket-er-begyndt
That said, there is certainly quite a bit of research that DIY biologists would be capable of performing, especially considering that they could have access to the same kind of resources that professionals do. For example, after amplifying a gene, no researcher will sequence it themselves: it's shipped of to a specialized lab that will do it, for a fee. That sequencing step requires equipment and expertise that's at a higher level than even the pros don't have.
While I still agree with you, I just want to point out that sequencing a gene is actually quite easy to do on your own simply using chain termination methods such as Sangers method.
It requires standard PCR ingredients plus dideoxy nucleotides and a gel.
It is true that many labs outsource or centralize sequencing task and that high tech equipment is available, but as is often the case, you can do with less.
Yeah that one is a bit annoying. Most of the world, Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia uses the original 900 and 1800 MHz, But apparently these were occupied in the americas and so North America and parts of South America uses 850 and 1900 MHz.
But a final bit of luck: Tri and Quad band phones got you covered there. Most modern phones are quad band phones and will serve you dutifully all around the world.
And the privacy loving people that you are, you are going to love the whole SIM card system.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd much rather see a comparison and insight into why Asian countries are so far ahead of the relatively small and well off European nations. There must be some key cultural differences.
The Netherlands has the highest broadband penetration in the European Union. According to the OECD, in 2009 DSL was available to approximately 100 % of the population.
That means Asia isn't ahead of us - we beat South Korea (and all other Asian countries) with our figures from 2008; we probably have an even higher percentage now.
Hey that topspot is shared with Denmark =), but in fact, according to the OECD numbers from june 2010, the top 30 broadband per inhabitant list, have 22 european and only 2 asian nations (Japan and Korea). Japan and Korea does however have some of the fastest and cheapest internet (advertised, not actual measurements) http://www.oecd.org/document/54/0,3343,en_2649_34225_38690102_1_1_1_1,00.html#Penetration
Yay for taking a load of earth.
Indeed this is true for almost any substance.
Theres almost always a window between "no effect" and "toxic effect" in which "benefitial" would be the word used to describe the effect.
You can read all about the shoe issue in:
"Shoes: Comfortable piece of clothing or The Ultimate Hiding Spot!" (unfortunately nobody RTFA that concluded that they were indeed just comfortable and not a particular good for hiding stuff).
Just imagine the things I could hide in my shoes....and not in my pants/shirt/other. The posibilities are endless.
Actually there is currently a 2 man team working in a garage in Denmark to produce a rocket capable of safely taking a person into space (and presumably back somehow). They have completed small scale testing of their engine (video on the link below) and are currently building the real version. Article in danish: http://ing.dk/artikel/98441-byggeriet-af-danmarks-stoerste-rumraket-er-begyndt
Also a danish team of about 8 people are participating in Googles Lunar X price: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28258165/
That said, there is certainly quite a bit of research that DIY biologists would be capable of performing, especially considering that they could have access to the same kind of resources that professionals do. For example, after amplifying a gene, no researcher will sequence it themselves: it's shipped of to a specialized lab that will do it, for a fee. That sequencing step requires equipment and expertise that's at a higher level than even the pros don't have.
While I still agree with you, I just want to point out that sequencing a gene is actually quite easy to do on your own simply using chain termination methods such as Sangers method. It requires standard PCR ingredients plus dideoxy nucleotides and a gel.
It is true that many labs outsource or centralize sequencing task and that high tech equipment is available, but as is often the case, you can do with less.
except that an overseas phone won't work here in the US, unless it's a GSM variant
Its your lucky day, pretty much all "overseas" phones are GSM phones. More than 80% of the worlds cell phones use GSM technology.
then you have to choose between T-mobile and AT&T
More luck your way: Theres a few more
*and* includes support for the US bands
Yeah that one is a bit annoying. Most of the world, Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia uses the original 900 and 1800 MHz, But apparently these were occupied in the americas and so North America and parts of South America uses 850 and 1900 MHz. But a final bit of luck: Tri and Quad band phones got you covered there. Most modern phones are quad band phones and will serve you dutifully all around the world. And the privacy loving people that you are, you are going to love the whole SIM card system.