Why don't we just scrape some eggs into a beaker and then spray them with semen? Why do we have to go through some roundabout route to get the exact same thing. Sure the pro-lifers will say "Oh, you just killed a baby!", but think about it... We are trying to make stem cells identical to these cells. If we do get there, wouldn't those created cells have the same potential for life as the cells in the egg/semen beaker, but with MUCH MUCH more expense?
It seems a little crazy to me.
Consider this for a moment. At what point does a spider plant become two distinct organisms, vs. one organism with a shoot/node? Then think about this. What defines an organism? Is it the DNA? Is it the form? What is the difference between a cell within the human body with slightly damaged DNA vs. a zygote? What is the difference between a zygote and a blastocyst? An embryo? A fetus? A baby? At what point are identical twins two separate organisms? How are they different than taking a cell from a morula to perform genetic testing? How is a zygote containing DNA from an adult (AKA a "clone") different from pluripotent stem cells?
I'm not trying to advance any agenda. I'm just trying to get people to ask themselves these questions, because these are key to forming a scientifically based definition of human life, and by extension, one's opinion of stem cell research and abortion, without the murkiness of emotion.
The difference was that it was a capstone project for graduating from university. When you're swamped with work from half a dozen senior level classes, and you have to use a language you're unfamiliar with, along with open source mic drivers that have no documentation (in or out of code), it becomes problematic. The actual design and mathematics were easy, but implementation was a pain.
That can be tackled in a way similar to my solution for adjusting streaming audio to account for ambient noise. Yes, a new piece of "middleware" would need to be used between the live feed, and the broadcast signal, but that's not a problem. You perform a real-time calculation of the RMS on the audio, and that gives you an idea of the relative volume over the course of a broadcast. You would only need to store the last few minutes, or at most the audio since the previous commercial, to calculate an appropriate volume for the commercials, based on recent program volume.
I haven't owned a TV, nor watched one, for over five years. Well, there were a few times I watched a show with a family member while visiting them during the holidays, but does a few hours a year really count? I've been watching Hulu for about two years, and got by without any form of television shows for three years prior to that.
I grew up in a home with a TV in the living room, which everyone watched while eating dinner, and one in every bedroom since I was 12. I was so addicted to TV that any time there was one on, I became fixated on it. While courting my wife, we never watched TV, but when we visited my family my eyes and attention would glue to it, which made her quite angry and frustrated. We made it a point to not have a TV when we got married, and I don't miss it.
Why should I spend $500-$1k on a TV and recording system, plus cable/satellite when I have four older, yet very capable, computers at home? I can find and watch what I want on my computers with at least as much control as with a TV+TiVo; and since my wife and I have practically no common tastes in entertainment, we wouldn't watch anything together anyway. When we do rent a movie to watch, we just put a laptop on the coffee table, and cuddle up on the couch together.
For me, TV has gone the way of the telegraph. It's outdated, and virtually obsolete for my "needs."
It can definitely be done. In fact, about 6 years ago I was tasked with designing and coding an automatic volume control based on ambient room noise. It was not easy, believe me, but using Root Mean Square, I was able to get it to work. This ensured that the device would either be louder than the ambient sound if you wanted to use it as a public announcement system, such as in a school, or provide background music that didn't drown out conversation. The hardest part was determining the sample buffer. Do you adjust the volume based on the last second of ambient sound? The last 10 seconds? The last minute? It took some tweaking, but an optimal sample buffer was found.
Now, for a TV show, that is a bit easier. Simply get an RMS of the show before airing it, as well as the peak volume, do the same for each commercial, and adjust the commercial volume accordingly. It's not a difficult problem at all. In fact, I could probably write an application to do it all automatically within a week or two, but no more than a month. It would take sound stream input, sample the entire stream from beginning to end, then determine a relative volume for each one.
The problem hasn't been a technical one for over a decade. It's been a political one.
It's tied to the US government, but not directly. It's not a federal agency, but a non-profit corp. with the blessing of the US gov. to do what it does.
I wish everyone would RTFA. Or even read the entire summary, instead of skimming the first half. >95% of the comments thus far have completely missed what you pointed out, Ryuuzaki. The issue is what to test, not what is considered a passing result. Do they give a bye to the paper clips and rulers, or do they test all the contents to ensure that everything is safe? Sure, rulers are generally considered safe, but if some hysterical parent of an injured child asks "did you test everything in this kit?" and the commission says "we tested 85% of the contents," do you really think that people are going to care what items fell in the untested 15%? They will focus on the fact that the kit wasn't tested in its entirety.
I think the question really comes down to: Where do we draw the line at making exceptions? When you allow one exception in the testing system, why not make another? And another? Where do you draw the line between "commonly known to be safe" and "considered safe by some, but not enough"? This isn't about determining what is safe or not. It's about determining what should be tested.
The timing of this bill was crucial to keeping key NASA personal and contractors from being laid off.
I've found that if you want to keep an organization personal, you can't have many contractors in it. Permanent employees tend to be more invested in the organization, which fosters a more personal culture. Contractors have a tendency to come and go, and act more like vendors than members.
You still have to concentrate to dictate messages, and that's a deadly distraction. It's basically equivalent to having two alcoholic drinks before driving. I don't understand the underlying neurological processes, but for some reason, most conversation within a car don't cause anywhere near this level of distraction. Screaming kids, or a fight with the spouse, is another matter. Both should be illegal as well. Maybe the threat of going to juvie for a night will get the little monsters to shut their traps. Same with the wife. 8^)
I was thinking of putting something in the cars that would do the same thing. Maybe some sort of material could be put under the car's body panels that would block cell signals when the car is moving. Perhaps there is a material that when given the faintest of charges, acts like a faraday cage. That wouldn't cause jamming interference, which would have a huge spillover effect. However, I'm sure that cell phone antennae would become common after market add-ons, which would be tethered to a repeater within the car, creating a sort of "tunnel" for cell signals to pass through.
I like your solution better. Sure, hacking the phone to bypass the feature wouldn't be too hard, but it would put a stop to 90% of the idiots out there.
There was a news story several years ago about a fire that destroyed a family's patio, and damaged their house. The fire department couldn't figure out how it started, but then they discovered the dog's glass water bowl about ten feet from where the fire started. They tested their theory, and sure enough, the owners were filling the glass bowl with water at just the right time, and putting it in just the right place, that it magnified the afternoon sunlight into a spot that set fire to weather-treated wood boards.
I'm in the same boat. Sure, I can purchase the game, connect to the internet, and register it, then never connect again. However, I still have to deal with the bloat that Steam adds (which may be small, but is still bloat). Also, there is the issue of reinstalls and resales. I still play the original 1993 Colonization for a few weeks each year. Steam adds another level of complexity to the whole issue. I also refuse to "license" a game unless it's an MMO. This is a single-player game with a multi-player component. Therefore, I refuse to purchase this game (or license it, however you choose to label it).
Wow... you don't want to put a resource embargo on Japan. That has a tendency to cause problems, like Pearl Harbor. Most of Japan's exports require rare earths. Without them, their economy will likely tank. Are the Chinese really this nuts? This isn't war, yet, and Japan doesn't have much of a military, but still. It's like the two were turning up the heat, from 22 C to 23, then 24, and now China just cranks it up to 93. Maybe I'm overestimating the escalation here, but wow... Is this captain really as valuable as an Austrian Archduke?
You probably look at people in disgust when you hear them use profanity when you are out and about, as if you are so much better than they are. Give me a break, get off your high horse.
I don't look down on a person if I hear them use profanity, but there certainly was a time that I would suffer from sensations of nausea when I heard someone use profanity. Now, the words and phrases stick out like bold font in print, but I no longer feel nauseated.
To answer your other (implied) questions, I haven't used profanity to vent anger, or physical pain. The worst I have done is use (mostly) benign phrase, such as "Oh, come on!" when someone cuts me off in traffic, or a loud grunt/scream (sans actual words) when I dropped something heavy on my foot.
I'm still working the problem of venting anger. I used to say more accusatory phrases in anger, such as "What is wrong with you?! Are you a complete moron, or just a masterful actor?!" I've found that such outbursts of anger don't help me or the person I am angry with. One day I hope to eliminate all my expressions of anger, including the annoyed sigh. That will probably take a few decades.
You'd be surprised what aspects of your character and behavior you can change if you truly put your mind to it.
Shooting things with laser until they stop moving cools them? I guess its for more than cooking now.
When I shot the neighbor's cat, with my CO2 laser, until it stopped moving, it cooled down. It dropped from 101.5 degrees F, to about 63 degrees F (ambient temperature at the coolest part of that night) . It took several hours, but it cooled down.
[disclaimer] The above statement was purely jest. I have never shot anything with a laser, and have never intentionally harmed an animal. Any agency that is sniffing my packets will not find the stench of wrongdoing here. Just the stench of a bad joke.
This is rather insightful. I wonder the same thing. Profanity and sexuality are considered inappropriate for children to observe, yet we consider violence to be acceptable? None of them are acceptable!
I was in HS when South Park first began. There was this one occasion where I was fixing the computer of a family, and their 8 and 9 year old children were watching the show. Sure, I enjoyed the show, and watched it on a regular basis. At that time, I was a very different person than I am now. Spewing out profanity was second nature to me (but next month will be 10 years since I uttered a profane word). Yet even I was shocked and stunned at the lack of parenting. The parents knew very well what their kids were watching, because the kids were watching it right there in the living room while the parents were about, doing what parents do.
My nephew who is only 4 years old, lists South Park and Family Guy among his favorite shows, right along with Sponge Bob and Dora. Unfortunately, my sister is quite possibly the most selfish and arrogant person to walk this planet, so I don't dare to criticize what she allows my nephew to watch, lest I end up with a black eye and slashed tires. All I can do is try to be a positive influence on my nephew, and provide an example of what a normal and stable life is.
Did the parent just violate a copyright? I'm not trying to be a troll. I genuinely wonder if wholesale copy/paste of articles would be considered copyright infringement.
They didn't break into his garage, they were invited in by his grandmother.
That still sounds like breaking in to me. Maybe not from a literal point of view, but if they approached his grandmother rather than approaching him directly, and stating what their intent was, then in spirit it is breaking in. If I remember correctly, they came to his house as his wife was leaving, and she turned them away, saying that she wasn't comfortable with them messing with his game, without him being present. They then returned and asked the grandmother for entry, rather than waiting for him to return? That's breaking in, IMO.
Watch the movie. In short, when you get to the 256th board (or 255th, I forget), you are able to play for about 5 seconds. Then Mario simply dies for no good reason, and the game goes all buggy with random sprites and such. What he wrote was a quote from the movie.
Marriage is hard. In fact, it's harder than many contents. Just look at Lance Armstrong. It was easier for him to win 7 consecutive Tour de France titles than for him to be married. His cycling career was very successful, while his marriage was a failure.
Indeed. If anything I think the kid needed that lesson. If he cut himself with scissors, I'm sure his father would have come running. He was four years of age, and wanted his father to come wipe is butt. At some point, a kid needs to understand that he's not the center of the universe, and he can do some things on his own. At some point, you have to let a baby cry itself to sleep, and at some point, a kid needs to wipe his own butt.
I'm certain that it's with without the patch, and with the kill screen intact. I saw the movie, and the fact that the game had to play 100% original was a major sticking point that caused Wiebe's first record to be rejected. The board he got was from someone who has a beef with the organization that maintains game records. The record keeping body even went so far as to break into Wiebe's garage to look at the board. There was nothing wrong with his record, whatsoever, yet they rejected his record by virtue of his associating with the wrong person. Based on this knowledge, I am certain that it was without the patch.
Slashdot Mirror
Why don't we just scrape some eggs into a beaker and then spray them with semen? Why do we have to go through some roundabout route to get the exact same thing. Sure the pro-lifers will say "Oh, you just killed a baby!", but think about it... We are trying to make stem cells identical to these cells. If we do get there, wouldn't those created cells have the same potential for life as the cells in the egg/semen beaker, but with MUCH MUCH more expense? It seems a little crazy to me.
Consider this for a moment. At what point does a spider plant become two distinct organisms, vs. one organism with a shoot/node? Then think about this. What defines an organism? Is it the DNA? Is it the form? What is the difference between a cell within the human body with slightly damaged DNA vs. a zygote? What is the difference between a zygote and a blastocyst? An embryo? A fetus? A baby? At what point are identical twins two separate organisms? How are they different than taking a cell from a morula to perform genetic testing? How is a zygote containing DNA from an adult (AKA a "clone") different from pluripotent stem cells?
I'm not trying to advance any agenda. I'm just trying to get people to ask themselves these questions, because these are key to forming a scientifically based definition of human life, and by extension, one's opinion of stem cell research and abortion, without the murkiness of emotion.
The difference was that it was a capstone project for graduating from university. When you're swamped with work from half a dozen senior level classes, and you have to use a language you're unfamiliar with, along with open source mic drivers that have no documentation (in or out of code), it becomes problematic. The actual design and mathematics were easy, but implementation was a pain.
That can be tackled in a way similar to my solution for adjusting streaming audio to account for ambient noise. Yes, a new piece of "middleware" would need to be used between the live feed, and the broadcast signal, but that's not a problem. You perform a real-time calculation of the RMS on the audio, and that gives you an idea of the relative volume over the course of a broadcast. You would only need to store the last few minutes, or at most the audio since the previous commercial, to calculate an appropriate volume for the commercials, based on recent program volume.
I haven't owned a TV, nor watched one, for over five years. Well, there were a few times I watched a show with a family member while visiting them during the holidays, but does a few hours a year really count? I've been watching Hulu for about two years, and got by without any form of television shows for three years prior to that.
I grew up in a home with a TV in the living room, which everyone watched while eating dinner, and one in every bedroom since I was 12. I was so addicted to TV that any time there was one on, I became fixated on it. While courting my wife, we never watched TV, but when we visited my family my eyes and attention would glue to it, which made her quite angry and frustrated. We made it a point to not have a TV when we got married, and I don't miss it.
Why should I spend $500-$1k on a TV and recording system, plus cable/satellite when I have four older, yet very capable, computers at home? I can find and watch what I want on my computers with at least as much control as with a TV+TiVo; and since my wife and I have practically no common tastes in entertainment, we wouldn't watch anything together anyway. When we do rent a movie to watch, we just put a laptop on the coffee table, and cuddle up on the couch together.
For me, TV has gone the way of the telegraph. It's outdated, and virtually obsolete for my "needs."
It can definitely be done. In fact, about 6 years ago I was tasked with designing and coding an automatic volume control based on ambient room noise. It was not easy, believe me, but using Root Mean Square, I was able to get it to work. This ensured that the device would either be louder than the ambient sound if you wanted to use it as a public announcement system, such as in a school, or provide background music that didn't drown out conversation. The hardest part was determining the sample buffer. Do you adjust the volume based on the last second of ambient sound? The last 10 seconds? The last minute? It took some tweaking, but an optimal sample buffer was found.
Now, for a TV show, that is a bit easier. Simply get an RMS of the show before airing it, as well as the peak volume, do the same for each commercial, and adjust the commercial volume accordingly. It's not a difficult problem at all. In fact, I could probably write an application to do it all automatically within a week or two, but no more than a month. It would take sound stream input, sample the entire stream from beginning to end, then determine a relative volume for each one.
The problem hasn't been a technical one for over a decade. It's been a political one.
It's tied to the US government, but not directly. It's not a federal agency, but a non-profit corp. with the blessing of the US gov. to do what it does.
I wish everyone would RTFA. Or even read the entire summary, instead of skimming the first half. >95% of the comments thus far have completely missed what you pointed out, Ryuuzaki. The issue is what to test, not what is considered a passing result. Do they give a bye to the paper clips and rulers, or do they test all the contents to ensure that everything is safe? Sure, rulers are generally considered safe, but if some hysterical parent of an injured child asks "did you test everything in this kit?" and the commission says "we tested 85% of the contents," do you really think that people are going to care what items fell in the untested 15%? They will focus on the fact that the kit wasn't tested in its entirety.
I think the question really comes down to: Where do we draw the line at making exceptions? When you allow one exception in the testing system, why not make another? And another? Where do you draw the line between "commonly known to be safe" and "considered safe by some, but not enough"? This isn't about determining what is safe or not. It's about determining what should be tested.
The timing of this bill was crucial to keeping key NASA personal and contractors from being laid off.
I've found that if you want to keep an organization personal, you can't have many contractors in it. Permanent employees tend to be more invested in the organization, which fosters a more personal culture. Contractors have a tendency to come and go, and act more like vendors than members.
Was this survey performed outside a movie theatre after a showing of Avatar by any chance?
You still have to concentrate to dictate messages, and that's a deadly distraction. It's basically equivalent to having two alcoholic drinks before driving. I don't understand the underlying neurological processes, but for some reason, most conversation within a car don't cause anywhere near this level of distraction. Screaming kids, or a fight with the spouse, is another matter. Both should be illegal as well. Maybe the threat of going to juvie for a night will get the little monsters to shut their traps. Same with the wife. 8^)
I was thinking of putting something in the cars that would do the same thing. Maybe some sort of material could be put under the car's body panels that would block cell signals when the car is moving. Perhaps there is a material that when given the faintest of charges, acts like a faraday cage. That wouldn't cause jamming interference, which would have a huge spillover effect. However, I'm sure that cell phone antennae would become common after market add-ons, which would be tethered to a repeater within the car, creating a sort of "tunnel" for cell signals to pass through.
I like your solution better. Sure, hacking the phone to bypass the feature wouldn't be too hard, but it would put a stop to 90% of the idiots out there.
There was a news story several years ago about a fire that destroyed a family's patio, and damaged their house. The fire department couldn't figure out how it started, but then they discovered the dog's glass water bowl about ten feet from where the fire started. They tested their theory, and sure enough, the owners were filling the glass bowl with water at just the right time, and putting it in just the right place, that it magnified the afternoon sunlight into a spot that set fire to weather-treated wood boards.
I'm in the same boat. Sure, I can purchase the game, connect to the internet, and register it, then never connect again. However, I still have to deal with the bloat that Steam adds (which may be small, but is still bloat). Also, there is the issue of reinstalls and resales. I still play the original 1993 Colonization for a few weeks each year. Steam adds another level of complexity to the whole issue. I also refuse to "license" a game unless it's an MMO. This is a single-player game with a multi-player component. Therefore, I refuse to purchase this game (or license it, however you choose to label it).
Wow... you don't want to put a resource embargo on Japan. That has a tendency to cause problems, like Pearl Harbor. Most of Japan's exports require rare earths. Without them, their economy will likely tank. Are the Chinese really this nuts? This isn't war, yet, and Japan doesn't have much of a military, but still. It's like the two were turning up the heat, from 22 C to 23, then 24, and now China just cranks it up to 93. Maybe I'm overestimating the escalation here, but wow... Is this captain really as valuable as an Austrian Archduke?
You probably look at people in disgust when you hear them use profanity when you are out and about, as if you are so much better than they are. Give me a break, get off your high horse.
I don't look down on a person if I hear them use profanity, but there certainly was a time that I would suffer from sensations of nausea when I heard someone use profanity. Now, the words and phrases stick out like bold font in print, but I no longer feel nauseated.
To answer your other (implied) questions, I haven't used profanity to vent anger, or physical pain. The worst I have done is use (mostly) benign phrase, such as "Oh, come on!" when someone cuts me off in traffic, or a loud grunt/scream (sans actual words) when I dropped something heavy on my foot.
I'm still working the problem of venting anger. I used to say more accusatory phrases in anger, such as "What is wrong with you?! Are you a complete moron, or just a masterful actor?!" I've found that such outbursts of anger don't help me or the person I am angry with. One day I hope to eliminate all my expressions of anger, including the annoyed sigh. That will probably take a few decades.
You'd be surprised what aspects of your character and behavior you can change if you truly put your mind to it.
Shooting things with laser until they stop moving cools them? I guess its for more than cooking now.
When I shot the neighbor's cat, with my CO2 laser, until it stopped moving, it cooled down. It dropped from 101.5 degrees F, to about 63 degrees F (ambient temperature at the coolest part of that night) . It took several hours, but it cooled down.
[disclaimer] The above statement was purely jest. I have never shot anything with a laser, and have never intentionally harmed an animal. Any agency that is sniffing my packets will not find the stench of wrongdoing here. Just the stench of a bad joke.
This is rather insightful. I wonder the same thing. Profanity and sexuality are considered inappropriate for children to observe, yet we consider violence to be acceptable? None of them are acceptable!
I was in HS when South Park first began. There was this one occasion where I was fixing the computer of a family, and their 8 and 9 year old children were watching the show. Sure, I enjoyed the show, and watched it on a regular basis. At that time, I was a very different person than I am now. Spewing out profanity was second nature to me (but next month will be 10 years since I uttered a profane word). Yet even I was shocked and stunned at the lack of parenting. The parents knew very well what their kids were watching, because the kids were watching it right there in the living room while the parents were about, doing what parents do.
My nephew who is only 4 years old, lists South Park and Family Guy among his favorite shows, right along with Sponge Bob and Dora. Unfortunately, my sister is quite possibly the most selfish and arrogant person to walk this planet, so I don't dare to criticize what she allows my nephew to watch, lest I end up with a black eye and slashed tires. All I can do is try to be a positive influence on my nephew, and provide an example of what a normal and stable life is.
Did the parent just violate a copyright? I'm not trying to be a troll. I genuinely wonder if wholesale copy/paste of articles would be considered copyright infringement.
They didn't break into his garage, they were invited in by his grandmother.
That still sounds like breaking in to me. Maybe not from a literal point of view, but if they approached his grandmother rather than approaching him directly, and stating what their intent was, then in spirit it is breaking in. If I remember correctly, they came to his house as his wife was leaving, and she turned them away, saying that she wasn't comfortable with them messing with his game, without him being present. They then returned and asked the grandmother for entry, rather than waiting for him to return? That's breaking in, IMO.
Watch the movie. In short, when you get to the 256th board (or 255th, I forget), you are able to play for about 5 seconds. Then Mario simply dies for no good reason, and the game goes all buggy with random sprites and such. What he wrote was a quote from the movie.
Marriage is hard. In fact, it's harder than many contents. Just look at Lance Armstrong. It was easier for him to win 7 consecutive Tour de France titles than for him to be married. His cycling career was very successful, while his marriage was a failure.
Indeed. If anything I think the kid needed that lesson. If he cut himself with scissors, I'm sure his father would have come running. He was four years of age, and wanted his father to come wipe is butt. At some point, a kid needs to understand that he's not the center of the universe, and he can do some things on his own. At some point, you have to let a baby cry itself to sleep, and at some point, a kid needs to wipe his own butt.
I'm certain that it's with without the patch, and with the kill screen intact. I saw the movie, and the fact that the game had to play 100% original was a major sticking point that caused Wiebe's first record to be rejected. The board he got was from someone who has a beef with the organization that maintains game records. The record keeping body even went so far as to break into Wiebe's garage to look at the board. There was nothing wrong with his record, whatsoever, yet they rejected his record by virtue of his associating with the wrong person. Based on this knowledge, I am certain that it was without the patch.
I watched that movie on Hulu a couple months back. It is probably still on there, if it hasn't expired. Check it out.