Any decent IRC client can connect to any number of networks. You can also use bitlbee to access IM networks as if they were IRC networks. IRC clients are more powerful than IM clients, generally coming with scripting, so this approach is very useful.
Then what produces cannabigerivarinic acid from divarinic acid? Good vibes? THC synthesis is a pathway, miss one step and the whole thing doesn't work.
I'm googling, and I don't see a damn thing that proves me wrong. In fact it boggles the mind to consider exactly what sort of evidence you think would prove that a trichrome is an absolute requirement for THC synthesis. You are claiming to have proved a negative. You are claiming that Lydon's failed in vitro synthesis completely exhausted all possibilities for synthesizing THC in vitro. It's always possible that he missed one key enzyme he didn't know about, so you can never be sure that it is impossible. That's the problem with making absolute claims in science.
But I'm googling with your search terms, and I don't see any indication that Lydon even tried an in vitro synthesis with recombinant enzymes. Did he? What's the reference?
The means of production belong to society as a whole. You are able to amass capital only because of the good will of the people, and if capitalism hurts the people, we're well within our rights to reallocate those resources. No one has an inherent right to control more resources than he can actually use himself. You may call this confiscatory, I consider individual monopolies over large quantities of wealth confiscatory. The needs of the many do outweigh the needs of the few.
Ah, so because we have capitalism today no other economic organisation is possible or even concievable? Because it doesn't work that way today, it can never be made to work that way?
FWIW though, my employment is grant funded. Nobody has to take a personal risk in order to make discoveries that benefit all of society. Myself, my employer, my employers employer, and the people who decide which grants to fund are all paid salaries.
There's a big difference between "knowing about" enzymes and having a sequence cloned. You're going to have to do better than name dropping here. Refer me to a paper, I don't even care if it's peer reviewed given the subject matter, where they describe the cannabis biosynthetic pathway with cDNA sequences for all the enzymes involved dated more than 5 years ago. You can't, because the aromatic prenyltransferase that starts it all was only cloned a couple years ago. Give me a break.
Guess what - if they didn't put up the money to fund your company
You mean if they didn't withhold resources from serving a productive purpose unless they got a cut. All investors do is own, and there is no productive value to ownership. There should be no reward for ownership. Labor creates. Labor is what we should reward, in proportion to its productivity.
So I can keep the product of my labor, and you can keep the product of your labor. As it is today, investors get a cut of my labor for doing nothing but sitting on their asses. That's wrong.
Now I'm sure you'll come back and say that small business owners work very hard. That's great and they should be well compensated for it. But that's actual work, and there's no reason that valuable work needs to be tied to ownership in any way.
Yes, if you like coffee drink it black so you can taste the coffee. If you don't like coffee why drink it at all? Adding milk and sugar to coffee just covers up the flavors of bad coffee. If you really want astronauts to drink good coffee, you need to figure out how to grind coffee beans in zero G, steep and filter them.
Please, the enzymes that synthesize THC have only been known for a couple years now. Some of them were named decades ago, but only recently have we had actual sequences we could use to do some genetic engineering.
Catch up with current research my ass. You don't even understand the 30 year old research you're referring to.
Why does that "someone" have to be an owner with totalitarian control over the means of production and no ones interest in mind except his own, instead of a democratically run council with the interests of the public as their first priority?
There's something perverse in the very idea that one should have to risk everything they own in order to provide services to the community. That's your first hint that there's something seriously wrong with this economic system.
And when those who provide, create and actually work refuse to give those who are lazy and do nothing the fruits of their efforts what then?
I don't know. What do you think productive laborers should do about parasitic capitalists?
There's a word for those who work solely for the benefit of others with little to no practical choice but to do so. Slaves.
There's another word for that, employees. The choice in most cases is to sell your labor to someone for less than it is worth, or starve. The only other option is to become the exploiter and make a profit off of the labor of others.
Centromeres play a very important role in DNA synthesis. Does that mean they're required for DNA synthesis? No, we can synthesize DNA in test tubes with synthetic enzymes just fine. Same goes for THC synthesis.
Yes, cannabis has ben optimized by millenia of natural selection and decades of human selection. No, synthetic biology isn't going to be able to compete with that level of efficiency. But it doesn't have to necessarily. Put it in something easy to grow, and crank the expression levels of the required proteins really high, and there's no reason to expect you wouldn't see cannabinoid synthesis.
No, you need certain enzymes to produce THC. Enzymes which happen to live in certain structures in Cannabis. The same enzymes would produce THC just as readily in a tube as in a trichome, and there's no reason to expect they wouldn't if transfected into algae.
No, there are no valid uses for DRM. If your audience isn't willing to step up and fund your work because they love it and want it to continue, then whatever is lost couldn't have been of much value anyway. Much of our greatest cultural heritage was created in a time before DRM, and before copyright. We have more ways than ever to patronize the arts. We don't need artificial scarcity.
Slashdot Mirror
Any decent IRC client can connect to any number of networks. You can also use bitlbee to access IM networks as if they were IRC networks. IRC clients are more powerful than IM clients, generally coming with scripting, so this approach is very useful.
If only there were some way to connect a keyboard to a device that does not have one.
"The planet is fine. The people are fucked!" -George Carlin
The worst part of it all is that he's exactly right.
Then what produces cannabigerivarinic acid from divarinic acid? Good vibes? THC synthesis is a pathway, miss one step and the whole thing doesn't work.
I'm googling, and I don't see a damn thing that proves me wrong. In fact it boggles the mind to consider exactly what sort of evidence you think would prove that a trichrome is an absolute requirement for THC synthesis. You are claiming to have proved a negative. You are claiming that Lydon's failed in vitro synthesis completely exhausted all possibilities for synthesizing THC in vitro. It's always possible that he missed one key enzyme he didn't know about, so you can never be sure that it is impossible. That's the problem with making absolute claims in science.
But I'm googling with your search terms, and I don't see any indication that Lydon even tried an in vitro synthesis with recombinant enzymes. Did he? What's the reference?
The means of production belong to society as a whole. You are able to amass capital only because of the good will of the people, and if capitalism hurts the people, we're well within our rights to reallocate those resources. No one has an inherent right to control more resources than he can actually use himself. You may call this confiscatory, I consider individual monopolies over large quantities of wealth confiscatory. The needs of the many do outweigh the needs of the few.
Ah, so because we have capitalism today no other economic organisation is possible or even concievable? Because it doesn't work that way today, it can never be made to work that way?
FWIW though, my employment is grant funded. Nobody has to take a personal risk in order to make discoveries that benefit all of society. Myself, my employer, my employers employer, and the people who decide which grants to fund are all paid salaries.
There's a big difference between "knowing about" enzymes and having a sequence cloned. You're going to have to do better than name dropping here. Refer me to a paper, I don't even care if it's peer reviewed given the subject matter, where they describe the cannabis biosynthetic pathway with cDNA sequences for all the enzymes involved dated more than 5 years ago. You can't, because the aromatic prenyltransferase that starts it all was only cloned a couple years ago. Give me a break.
Guess what - if they didn't put up the money to fund your company
You mean if they didn't withhold resources from serving a productive purpose unless they got a cut. All investors do is own, and there is no productive value to ownership. There should be no reward for ownership. Labor creates. Labor is what we should reward, in proportion to its productivity.
Patch the security hole on the Windows image.
The constitution restricts nothing. It grants powers to the government. Anything not explicitly granted is prohibited.
So I can keep the product of my labor, and you can keep the product of your labor. As it is today, investors get a cut of my labor for doing nothing but sitting on their asses. That's wrong.
Now I'm sure you'll come back and say that small business owners work very hard. That's great and they should be well compensated for it. But that's actual work, and there's no reason that valuable work needs to be tied to ownership in any way.
What? Set the machine to PXE boot. Boot a tiny linux distro that dds the Windows image to the hard disk. Restart all the machines. You're done.
That doesn't answer the question of why we should require people to take huge personal risks in order to provide services to the public.
Yes, if you like coffee drink it black so you can taste the coffee. If you don't like coffee why drink it at all? Adding milk and sugar to coffee just covers up the flavors of bad coffee. If you really want astronauts to drink good coffee, you need to figure out how to grind coffee beans in zero G, steep and filter them.
Please, the enzymes that synthesize THC have only been known for a couple years now. Some of them were named decades ago, but only recently have we had actual sequences we could use to do some genetic engineering.
Catch up with current research my ass. You don't even understand the 30 year old research you're referring to.
Why does that "someone" have to be an owner with totalitarian control over the means of production and no ones interest in mind except his own, instead of a democratically run council with the interests of the public as their first priority?
There's something perverse in the very idea that one should have to risk everything they own in order to provide services to the community. That's your first hint that there's something seriously wrong with this economic system.
Italics fail. I'll preview this time.
So you seize all the factories from the EVIL factory owners who built them.
How many factory owners do you think as much as lifted a hammer to build their factory? I'm guessing zero.
It's the natural result of rewarding people for being better at what they do than others are.
No, it's the natural result of rewarding people for having more.
So you seize all the factories from the EVIL factory owners who built them. /i>
How many factory owners do you think as much as lifted a hammer to build their factory? I'm guessing zero.
It's the natural result of rewarding people for being better at what they do than others are.
No, it's the natural result of rewarding people for having more.
And when those who provide, create and actually work refuse to give those who are lazy and do nothing the fruits of their efforts what then?
I don't know. What do you think productive laborers should do about parasitic capitalists?
There's a word for those who work solely for the benefit of others with little to no practical choice but to do so. Slaves.
There's another word for that, employees. The choice in most cases is to sell your labor to someone for less than it is worth, or starve. The only other option is to become the exploiter and make a profit off of the labor of others.
Centromeres play a very important role in DNA synthesis. Does that mean they're required for DNA synthesis? No, we can synthesize DNA in test tubes with synthetic enzymes just fine. Same goes for THC synthesis.
Yes, cannabis has ben optimized by millenia of natural selection and decades of human selection. No, synthetic biology isn't going to be able to compete with that level of efficiency. But it doesn't have to necessarily. Put it in something easy to grow, and crank the expression levels of the required proteins really high, and there's no reason to expect you wouldn't see cannabinoid synthesis.
You need certain structures to produce THC
No, you need certain enzymes to produce THC. Enzymes which happen to live in certain structures in Cannabis. The same enzymes would produce THC just as readily in a tube as in a trichome, and there's no reason to expect they wouldn't if transfected into algae.
There is a significant band in the middle of people who will pirate if it's easy and buy if it's not.
It's always easier to pirate than buy, so this band is not significant. It's negligible.
Non-perfect DRM still performs it's function of increasing the number of people who pay for the product.
Non-perfect DRM drives paying customers into piracy, not the other way around.
No, there are no valid uses for DRM. If your audience isn't willing to step up and fund your work because they love it and want it to continue, then whatever is lost couldn't have been of much value anyway. Much of our greatest cultural heritage was created in a time before DRM, and before copyright. We have more ways than ever to patronize the arts. We don't need artificial scarcity.