At the expense of mutually assured destruction, no doubt. Remember the debt ceiling debate a few months ago? Remember when new debt couldn't be issued to fund spending in excess of tax revenue, so the Treasury Dept. started looting government pension funds? Good times...
Ah yes, quartering of troops - the one complaint about King George in the Declaration of Independence for which American's have no analogous complaints today.
I'm only reading this because I thought the article was about Milfware. Suddenly I'm less interested.
On a related note, good thing there's no -1 "not funny" mod...
My view is that this generic protest against greed would be more effective with better focus. I would support a protest with the goal applying existing laws to Wall Street. Obama claims that Wall Street hasn't done anything illegal, but that is a lie. Unfortunately, it is not widely recognized that the law has been systematically broken, as the mainstream media are owned by the 0.1%. Alternative media and protests are a step in the right direction. If these protests cause people to wonder about the endless cycle of fraud between regulators and bankers, or to wonder whom the existence of the Federal Reserve actually benefits, then they are a success. I generally agree with the following blog post on this topic [market-ticker.org].
http://www.market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=195649
My nerdy kid would be bored in a normal school. Instead he's doing a language immersion program, which keeps him interested, and encourages social interaction as well. Sports are good for that too, as a few others have mentioned. One risk with really smart kids is burnout, so there should be plenty of time for fun stuff.
You're correct of course, which is why I put wanted criminal in quotes. The point is that even if he were a wanted criminal, it wouldn't change anything. He'd still deserve a fair trial before he was executed. That's due process. A hit list is the opposite.
What battlefield? Did we declare war on Yemen? Do you have information on that drone strike that others don't have? How do you know there was a battle? Murdering a US citizen is OK as long as he's a "wanted criminal"? Where is your respect for the constitution?
sir timothy, thy headline stands out as a true beacon of nerdy-ness in a sea of news for nerds. gaze on proudly at thy screen, o noble warrior, and ponder whither thine own universe or ye olde nefarious existence might stand tall as the universe's slowest possible Turing machine.
Not me. Ads for drugs work. Who's going to tell his doctor about his limp virile member if he doesn't know that a treatment exists? Also, not all doctors are aware of all potential therapies, and some doctors are offered luxurious gifts by pharmaceutical companies in order to prescribe or recommend a particular drug over its alternatives. Patient education can overcome this conflict of interest, which is just advertising that you don't see. Sometimes you must ask for treatment in order to receive it. You can't always assume that your doctor knows or cares what's best for you.
In peer review of journal articles, names are on the articles, but the reviewer's identity is secret. Often it's possible to guess the identity of the reviewer though. As a prospective reviewer, you're offered an abstract, and you decide whether reviewing it is worth your time. Usually, you know the people who wrote the article, and you can make an educated guess about whether or not they can support their claims. Believe it or not, this information is helpful to those reviewers who are only interested in the advancement of science. Further, especially in smaller fields, if the author were not known, it would be easy to guess by the collection of techniques and the arguments presented. Moreover, results are usually presented at conferences before publication anyway, so removing names and affiliations would have little effect, and would serve to reduce transparency. It's not a racial thing, in my experience. If there's treachery, it tends toward slamming a rival in a review and then publishing his or her results.
A fine, though debatable point: the study in Science does not suggest that grant applications are not treated on merit. In fact, racial identity is not known by the grant reviewers on study section. Further, the article mentioned that previous studies at top schools did not show this bias. One possibility (which I do not necessarily advocate) that was not discussed by the article, is that their 'controls' for institutional quality, quality of educational institutions attended, etc., are not ideal for use as a control. For many years, both undergraduate and graduate programs in the biomedical field have used different standards of admittance for blacks and whites/Asians. A less qualified black person can take the place of a more qualified white person. I'm not saying this is bad - it's simply a fact, and it shouldn't' be ignored. This can also take place in hiring decisions. Thus, a black person can have a CV which appears identical to a white person's CV, but the merit required to achieve it can be substantially less. The opposite would happen if quotas were enforced in the NBA - Doug Gottlieb might make a team, but he'd never get mentioned with Bird or Nowitzki as a great player, and the overall quality of the league might go down. It's interesting that the study found different conclusions for blacks and Latinos.
IBM has been working fast and furious ever since Kwabena Boahen showed them a chip (that actually was based on neural architecture) that matched the performance of their massive Blue Brain cluster, but used something like 5-10 W. Sounds like they're still playing catch-up.
http://science.slashdot.org/story/07/02/13/0159220/Building-a-Silicon-Brain
I've heard that in China, sometimes richer people drive cars while poorer people ride bicycles. If a car hits a bike rider, the bike rider can sue for damages. Thus, it can be advantageous, and it's allegedly common, for a car driver to accidentally hit a biker, back up, and run him over again to finish him off. I wonder if and when some company (maybe Google, maybe not) will have cars that do this.
Well clearly you're correct, but the use tax is nothing new, and it only became fashionable to enforce after the Internet made it practical (not that mail order catalogs are entirely impractical) for larger numbers of people to order a greater diversity of products from vendors located in other states. The notion of a qualified purchaser, and the current efforts to force the local tax-collecting burden onto Amazon, was intended to force compliance with this law when there is no other way to force compliance. It's not a good law. It's ambiguous, unenforceable, and its asymmetric regulatory and monetary burdens violate my basic ideals of equity and justice. Same with porn. When I was a kid, we didn't have no Internet, and my only source of porn was an old stack of magazines buried under a rock on a trash-lined portion of street that us kids called Dead Man's Curve. Nobody knew who left them there, but we all appreciated it. Sure, somebody probably broke the law. Same thing now, but plenty of kids get to illegally look at much better porn now thanks to the Internet. Also, mattack2, sorry to be a jerk - it wasn't my intent, and my sarcasm doesn't translate well online. Usually it doesn't translate well to real conversation either, but hey, I'm a nerd. I'd never use the phrase insensitive clod for the purposes of serious criticism.
They claim success in 9 of 10 clinical trials. I also would like to see those trials, but that's what conferences and papers are for. Why not a simpler experiment first - shine some light in some ears and see if it gets perceived. Also - photosensitive proteins, not photoreceptors - I see no claims that OPN3 gets assembled into anything resembling a functional photoreceptor, even if their "therapy" assumes it. A good analogy might be green fluorescent protein (GFP). Upon expression in the CNS, it reacts with light, it can stain particular types of neurons for identification or recording purposes, but it typically has no demonstrable physiological effect. Thus, the presence of a photosensitive protein does not necessarily mean that light has any physiological effect.
Slashdot Mirror
Facebook isn't looking to prove that MikeB0lton is a terrorist - they just want him to deny it.
I know there's a snarky response to this, but I'm not sure if it should involve sewer rats or Bangladesh ;)
At the expense of mutually assured destruction, no doubt. Remember the debt ceiling debate a few months ago? Remember when new debt couldn't be issued to fund spending in excess of tax revenue, so the Treasury Dept. started looting government pension funds? Good times...
Ah yes, quartering of troops - the one complaint about King George in the Declaration of Independence for which American's have no analogous complaints today.
I'm only reading this because I thought the article was about Milfware. Suddenly I'm less interested. On a related note, good thing there's no -1 "not funny" mod...
My view is that this generic protest against greed would be more effective with better focus. I would support a protest with the goal applying existing laws to Wall Street. Obama claims that Wall Street hasn't done anything illegal, but that is a lie. Unfortunately, it is not widely recognized that the law has been systematically broken, as the mainstream media are owned by the 0.1%. Alternative media and protests are a step in the right direction. If these protests cause people to wonder about the endless cycle of fraud between regulators and bankers, or to wonder whom the existence of the Federal Reserve actually benefits, then they are a success. I generally agree with the following blog post on this topic [market-ticker.org]. http://www.market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=195649
My nerdy kid would be bored in a normal school. Instead he's doing a language immersion program, which keeps him interested, and encourages social interaction as well. Sports are good for that too, as a few others have mentioned. One risk with really smart kids is burnout, so there should be plenty of time for fun stuff.
You're correct of course, which is why I put wanted criminal in quotes. The point is that even if he were a wanted criminal, it wouldn't change anything. He'd still deserve a fair trial before he was executed. That's due process. A hit list is the opposite.
What battlefield? Did we declare war on Yemen? Do you have information on that drone strike that others don't have? How do you know there was a battle? Murdering a US citizen is OK as long as he's a "wanted criminal"? Where is your respect for the constitution?
Well, "we" did just assassinate an American citizen without due process of law... Just saying.
Don't worry, they'll probably only use it to track people on the terrorist watch list.
sir timothy, thy headline stands out as a true beacon of nerdy-ness in a sea of news for nerds. gaze on proudly at thy screen, o noble warrior, and ponder whither thine own universe or ye olde nefarious existence might stand tall as the universe's slowest possible Turing machine.
Did they mention anything about donkeys?
You probably needed your extended warranty because Best Buy opened your new laptop.
Well said sir, but I might have spelled it 'corporate asshattery'
Since the invention of money?
Not me. Ads for drugs work. Who's going to tell his doctor about his limp virile member if he doesn't know that a treatment exists? Also, not all doctors are aware of all potential therapies, and some doctors are offered luxurious gifts by pharmaceutical companies in order to prescribe or recommend a particular drug over its alternatives. Patient education can overcome this conflict of interest, which is just advertising that you don't see. Sometimes you must ask for treatment in order to receive it. You can't always assume that your doctor knows or cares what's best for you.
In peer review of journal articles, names are on the articles, but the reviewer's identity is secret. Often it's possible to guess the identity of the reviewer though. As a prospective reviewer, you're offered an abstract, and you decide whether reviewing it is worth your time. Usually, you know the people who wrote the article, and you can make an educated guess about whether or not they can support their claims. Believe it or not, this information is helpful to those reviewers who are only interested in the advancement of science. Further, especially in smaller fields, if the author were not known, it would be easy to guess by the collection of techniques and the arguments presented. Moreover, results are usually presented at conferences before publication anyway, so removing names and affiliations would have little effect, and would serve to reduce transparency. It's not a racial thing, in my experience. If there's treachery, it tends toward slamming a rival in a review and then publishing his or her results.
A fine, though debatable point: the study in Science does not suggest that grant applications are not treated on merit. In fact, racial identity is not known by the grant reviewers on study section. Further, the article mentioned that previous studies at top schools did not show this bias. One possibility (which I do not necessarily advocate) that was not discussed by the article, is that their 'controls' for institutional quality, quality of educational institutions attended, etc., are not ideal for use as a control. For many years, both undergraduate and graduate programs in the biomedical field have used different standards of admittance for blacks and whites/Asians. A less qualified black person can take the place of a more qualified white person. I'm not saying this is bad - it's simply a fact, and it shouldn't' be ignored. This can also take place in hiring decisions. Thus, a black person can have a CV which appears identical to a white person's CV, but the merit required to achieve it can be substantially less. The opposite would happen if quotas were enforced in the NBA - Doug Gottlieb might make a team, but he'd never get mentioned with Bird or Nowitzki as a great player, and the overall quality of the league might go down. It's interesting that the study found different conclusions for blacks and Latinos.
IBM has been working fast and furious ever since Kwabena Boahen showed them a chip (that actually was based on neural architecture) that matched the performance of their massive Blue Brain cluster, but used something like 5-10 W. Sounds like they're still playing catch-up. http://science.slashdot.org/story/07/02/13/0159220/Building-a-Silicon-Brain
The only real statistics are bits. Also, 70% of statistics are made-up.
I've heard that in China, sometimes richer people drive cars while poorer people ride bicycles. If a car hits a bike rider, the bike rider can sue for damages. Thus, it can be advantageous, and it's allegedly common, for a car driver to accidentally hit a biker, back up, and run him over again to finish him off. I wonder if and when some company (maybe Google, maybe not) will have cars that do this.
Well clearly you're correct, but the use tax is nothing new, and it only became fashionable to enforce after the Internet made it practical (not that mail order catalogs are entirely impractical) for larger numbers of people to order a greater diversity of products from vendors located in other states. The notion of a qualified purchaser, and the current efforts to force the local tax-collecting burden onto Amazon, was intended to force compliance with this law when there is no other way to force compliance. It's not a good law. It's ambiguous, unenforceable, and its asymmetric regulatory and monetary burdens violate my basic ideals of equity and justice. Same with porn. When I was a kid, we didn't have no Internet, and my only source of porn was an old stack of magazines buried under a rock on a trash-lined portion of street that us kids called Dead Man's Curve. Nobody knew who left them there, but we all appreciated it. Sure, somebody probably broke the law. Same thing now, but plenty of kids get to illegally look at much better porn now thanks to the Internet. Also, mattack2, sorry to be a jerk - it wasn't my intent, and my sarcasm doesn't translate well online. Usually it doesn't translate well to real conversation either, but hey, I'm a nerd. I'd never use the phrase insensitive clod for the purposes of serious criticism.
They claim success in 9 of 10 clinical trials. I also would like to see those trials, but that's what conferences and papers are for. Why not a simpler experiment first - shine some light in some ears and see if it gets perceived. Also - photosensitive proteins, not photoreceptors - I see no claims that OPN3 gets assembled into anything resembling a functional photoreceptor, even if their "therapy" assumes it. A good analogy might be green fluorescent protein (GFP). Upon expression in the CNS, it reacts with light, it can stain particular types of neurons for identification or recording purposes, but it typically has no demonstrable physiological effect. Thus, the presence of a photosensitive protein does not necessarily mean that light has any physiological effect.
I am not a "qualified purchaser", you insensitive clod.