One problem seems to be with relatively low doses of radiation, that it's not so much the level that is dangerous, but the change in doses. There was some research in the fauna living in the immediate environment of Tchernobyl, and it showed that animals living all the time on site had a nearly normal rate of genetic defects, while in animals that live only a limited time on site like migratory birds, the defect rate was much higher. So even though migratory birds had on average only a fraction of the exposition than on site animals, the effects are much stronger, albeit it contradicts current theories which link the defect rate to the total exposition. Purely speculative, but maybe the sudden surge of radiation in the environment of Fukushima (which might have had spikes much higher than.1 rem) has caused the defects?
Because right now he is doing what you demand: He's researching the topic. He had probably waded already through a bunch of specs and documentations and explaining the differences between LCD and eInk, and now he is here to collect reports of personal experience. If you don't want to share yours, so be it. I prefer the eInk based eReaders right now. Setting them to landscape mode lets me read PDFs just fine, it's always two screens per page. And for normal eBooks they are marvellous, for the reasons stated above: You can read them at the pool or in bed, they are easy to read, and you can carry a whole bookshelf worth of books within 170 g of hardware. The battery stays longer than a whole vacation. As long as you use it solely as a book reader, the space limits of a few GBytes like the Kindle has, are no problem - one GByte of text equals to about 500,000 pages, and there are enough tools to manage an off-reader library of books if the need arises.
Evolution - if left to function - would probably find a way to convey the benefits of this gene without the downside eventually.
Evolution has already found the solution: Let those with only one mutated allel of CFTR enjoy the advantages, and if those with two mutated copies develop cystic fibrosis, so what? The mutated version has already benefitted enough others, so it's not a big deal for the species.
The problem with "lets have Evolution do the work" is that Evolution is not ethical, and Evolution doesn't care for the individual, when it benefits the whole species. We humans care for individuals, mainly if we ourself are the said individual, to a lesser grade if it is a close relative.
And that's my gripe with the concept of ethical gene mutation.
It will make us either uniform: It's risky to be an outsider in the society, and most parents don't want their children to become outsiders. So they will basicly choose the gene makeup à la mode, whatever is in vogue when they get pregnant. You will be able to determine the age of anybody just by looking at their genetic code, because most people will closely match the type that was preferred during the times of their embryonic phase, the same way you can determine the construction time of a car by looking at the typical design and technical features.
Or it will split the species Homo sapiens sapiens into subspecies as envisioned by Aldous Huxley. The parents (with more or less obvious pressure by the society as a whole) will choose the genetic makeup of their children depending on their planned future place in life. We get a genetic elite, modified to be fit for the ruling class, we get several ranks of drone classes, fit for their jobs, but without any chance or ability to become someone else.
In both cases, we will rob future individuals of their right to be individuals. They will be streamlined and optimized for what the parents (with helpful input of the society) considers best, and differently than us, who had the chance to get out of the predetermined life concepts our parents envisioned for us, will be less and less able to become actually individuums.
Atomic clocks aren't based on radioactive decay. Just because they have "atom" in their name doesn't mean they are nuclear, e.g. based on a phenomenon in the atom core. Instead atomic clocks are based on the properties of the electron shells around the atom core. (Or to put it that way: atomic clocks are based on electromagnetics, not on the strong or the weak interaction.)
I never understood the whole "antibacterial" hype. If you broadly and indiscriminately use an antibiotic (and if it is antibacterial, it is an antibiotic per definitionem), all you get are strains of immune bacteria. I am pretty sure that in the average american household, there are more bacteria immune to Triclosan per cubic feet than New York has inhabitants.
The main problem with "nothing like Spain" and similar comparitions is that Spain paid abouth 10% interest when it hat only a tenth of today's debt. Today, Spain pays 7%. And the U.S. during the Reaganomics had to pay up to 11.75% (Oct 1984) interest on their debts, while the total debt was only a fraction of today. Maybe we have a serious case of Yogi Berra here: In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice, they aren't.
To flip the issue, had Windows or OS-X cost $0.00 and 'GNU+Linux' cost, say, $20, the school would have gone w/ the unliberated software.
As if that would ever happen. I agree with RMS: The fact, that a mature OS like GNU/Linux, which runs on about every old hardware you throw it on, and a complete set of tools and application running on the OS, can be had for $0 is a direct result of "free as in speech". Only because the code is free and it is secured that all subsequent development stays free to, there is such a large and vibrant developer community constantly improving upon GNU/Linux and the whole chain of tools, applications and distributions. So if you care for "free as in beer", you should support "free as in speech".
A bait does nothing different than the real prey would do. In fact a bait tries to look and to behave as close as possible to the original prey. If you feel endangered if someone who looks like a woman and behaves like a woman is present, you might be at the wrong place. The only difference between bait and prey is when you feel enclined to bite into a bait, then you are on the hook. In this case it's not a woman who might be to shy to report you, or don't know how to fend of your inapprobriate advances. In this case handcuffs will click if you do something you shouldn't have done to begin with.
It creates a minefield for male hackers if women are present? Do you even believe what you write here? Indeed, if you can't behave if women are present, you shouldn't go where women are. It would be better for everyone.
No, I don't. Please read the post again. I was actually contradicting the previous post which showed a strong belief into the intelligence of the market. What I said is that, even if in the long run Wall Street will put the money will be with successful companies which actually provide something useful, in the short run, there can be very bad trades, and there is no warranty that the markets will learn from bad decisions, the next trade can have bad effects again to everyone, inclusive the traders.
Taxing won't work. Instead of outright selling shares, I will give them to you as a security for the money you give to me, which in turn I will lend out and getting other shares as security. You in turn will give my shares to someone else as security for the money he lends to you. Only if you demand your money back I'll be forced to finalize the trade, and I'll do it with whoever has my shares right now as security.
Instead of hundreds of HFTs, we have only a single one, which will be taxed with $0.01 per share. But we have hundreds of High Frequency Borrowings.
It's just the "law of the great numbers fallacy" in disguise. Yes, long term the coin will flip to each side with about the same rate. But for the next coin flip, it's 50%, whatever the current rates are. Each coin flip is completely independent from all the coin flips that happened in the past.
Yes, long term, Wall Street will funnel investments to the right companies, and if you calculate an average over all trades you will find that with 99.% certainity it works. But the next trade is more or less random chance, and with random chance, it will produce a negative outcome. That means each trade can be bad, and just because you had a long sequence of bad trades, it doesn't mean the next one will not be bad too.
The concept of government is flawed, but it is the least of all flawed concepts we tried so far. We know that the countries with weak or no governments are the one with the least growth, with the least stability, with the least individual freedom, with the least accountability. Whatever complaint you bring against governments in general, we know that in general the alternatives are worse. That's why goverments arise again and again, and if the official goverment breaks, local inofficial governments like gangs of thugs or cliques pop up like mushrooms after a rain.
The problem with all this Randism is that it doesn't account for failure. If the bank where I put my savings fail, my savings are gone, even though I didn't made an error in judgement when I put my money there long ago. If I don't have the resources to diversify my savings enough to put them into different banks, and if not only a single bank but a whole system of banks fails, I lose. Regulation is not primarily about infringment on individual freedom and trade, it is about limiting the effect an error, a fraud, or a failure have on innocent bystanders. Regulations are not primarily about control, they are about the containment of catastrophical events. And moreso: Disincentives are also just another type of regulation. Laws forbidding fraud, murder or theft are regulation. And courts upholding contracts and a police enforcing the court decisions are the judictive and the executive branch of those laws and regulations.
No. If free eBooks are a big part of the sheer numbers, then so be it. Why throw them out of the statistics? If you want to know the revenue from paper books compared with the revenue from eBooks, you are looking at the wrong statistics. And even then there is a problem: You would have to remove the revenue from selling recyclable paper from the paper book sales, because the paper and ink are not part of the eBook sales.
It's a fine example of where socialism breeds it's own suicide by providing for everyone regardless of the effort they make.
Why is that socialism? The U.S., which cannot be accused of being too socialist, has the same problem, while the pretty socialist Finland does not. Don't blame every social failure on Socialism, it's just a cheap excuse not to do anything about it!
The main issue I have with ePub->MOBI conversion so far is that sometimes the page breaks stay as they were in ePub, which makes reading them awkward in Kindle - you often have an ePub-page converted to one and a half page in MOBI. I am thinking about an perl script to fix that, but for now, I was too lazy.
But that's not bilingualism as studied in the paper. There they compare children who grow up bilingual with those, who learn only one language before they get to school. If you spoke seven languages before turning seven, it would be more interesting in this case.
It is similar, but the problem arising is that one of the main distribution chains for Microsoft products in Germany is Metro AG with their computer stores Saturn and MediaMarkt. There definitely would be confusion, if Metro AG is supposed to sell Metro UI based tablets.
Slashdot Mirror
One problem seems to be with relatively low doses of radiation, that it's not so much the level that is dangerous, but the change in doses. There was some research in the fauna living in the immediate environment of Tchernobyl, and it showed that animals living all the time on site had a nearly normal rate of genetic defects, while in animals that live only a limited time on site like migratory birds, the defect rate was much higher. So even though migratory birds had on average only a fraction of the exposition than on site animals, the effects are much stronger, albeit it contradicts current theories which link the defect rate to the total exposition. .1 rem) has caused the defects?
Purely speculative, but maybe the sudden surge of radiation in the environment of Fukushima (which might have had spikes much higher than
Because right now he is doing what you demand: He's researching the topic. He had probably waded already through a bunch of specs and documentations and explaining the differences between LCD and eInk, and now he is here to collect reports of personal experience. If you don't want to share yours, so be it.
I prefer the eInk based eReaders right now. Setting them to landscape mode lets me read PDFs just fine, it's always two screens per page. And for normal eBooks they are marvellous, for the reasons stated above: You can read them at the pool or in bed, they are easy to read, and you can carry a whole bookshelf worth of books within 170 g of hardware. The battery stays longer than a whole vacation. As long as you use it solely as a book reader, the space limits of a few GBytes like the Kindle has, are no problem - one GByte of text equals to about 500,000 pages, and there are enough tools to manage an off-reader library of books if the need arises.
Evolution - if left to function - would probably find a way to convey the benefits of this gene without the downside eventually.
Evolution has already found the solution: Let those with only one mutated allel of CFTR enjoy the advantages, and if those with two mutated copies develop cystic fibrosis, so what? The mutated version has already benefitted enough others, so it's not a big deal for the species.
The problem with "lets have Evolution do the work" is that Evolution is not ethical, and Evolution doesn't care for the individual, when it benefits the whole species. We humans care for individuals, mainly if we ourself are the said individual, to a lesser grade if it is a close relative.
And that's my gripe with the concept of ethical gene mutation.
It will make us either uniform: It's risky to be an outsider in the society, and most parents don't want their children to become outsiders. So they will basicly choose the gene makeup à la mode, whatever is in vogue when they get pregnant. You will be able to determine the age of anybody just by looking at their genetic code, because most people will closely match the type that was preferred during the times of their embryonic phase, the same way you can determine the construction time of a car by looking at the typical design and technical features.
Or it will split the species Homo sapiens sapiens into subspecies as envisioned by Aldous Huxley. The parents (with more or less obvious pressure by the society as a whole) will choose the genetic makeup of their children depending on their planned future place in life. We get a genetic elite, modified to be fit for the ruling class, we get several ranks of drone classes, fit for their jobs, but without any chance or ability to become someone else.
In both cases, we will rob future individuals of their right to be individuals. They will be streamlined and optimized for what the parents (with helpful input of the society) considers best, and differently than us, who had the chance to get out of the predetermined life concepts our parents envisioned for us, will be less and less able to become actually individuums.
... which is a quote from Isaac Asimov.
Atomic clocks aren't based on radioactive decay. Just because they have "atom" in their name doesn't mean they are nuclear, e.g. based on a phenomenon in the atom core. Instead atomic clocks are based on the properties of the electron shells around the atom core.
(Or to put it that way: atomic clocks are based on electromagnetics, not on the strong or the weak interaction.)
I never understood the whole "antibacterial" hype. If you broadly and indiscriminately use an antibiotic (and if it is antibacterial, it is an antibiotic per definitionem), all you get are strains of immune bacteria. I am pretty sure that in the average american household, there are more bacteria immune to Triclosan per cubic feet than New York has inhabitants.
The main problem with "nothing like Spain" and similar comparitions is that Spain paid abouth 10% interest when it hat only a tenth of today's debt. Today, Spain pays 7%. And the U.S. during the Reaganomics had to pay up to 11.75% (Oct 1984) interest on their debts, while the total debt was only a fraction of today.
Maybe we have a serious case of Yogi Berra here: In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice, they aren't.
To flip the issue, had Windows or OS-X cost $0.00 and 'GNU+Linux' cost, say, $20, the school would have gone w/ the unliberated software.
As if that would ever happen. I agree with RMS: The fact, that a mature OS like GNU/Linux, which runs on about every old hardware you throw it on, and a complete set of tools and application running on the OS, can be had for $0 is a direct result of "free as in speech". Only because the code is free and it is secured that all subsequent development stays free to, there is such a large and vibrant developer community constantly improving upon GNU/Linux and the whole chain of tools, applications and distributions.
So if you care for "free as in beer", you should support "free as in speech".
A bait does nothing different than the real prey would do. In fact a bait tries to look and to behave as close as possible to the original prey. If you feel endangered if someone who looks like a woman and behaves like a woman is present, you might be at the wrong place. The only difference between bait and prey is when you feel enclined to bite into a bait, then you are on the hook. In this case it's not a woman who might be to shy to report you, or don't know how to fend of your inapprobriate advances. In this case handcuffs will click if you do something you shouldn't have done to begin with.
It creates a minefield for male hackers if women are present? Do you even believe what you write here? Indeed, if you can't behave if women are present, you shouldn't go where women are. It would be better for everyone.
No, I don't. Please read the post again. I was actually contradicting the previous post which showed a strong belief into the intelligence of the market.
What I said is that, even if in the long run Wall Street will put the money will be with successful companies which actually provide something useful, in the short run, there can be very bad trades, and there is no warranty that the markets will learn from bad decisions, the next trade can have bad effects again to everyone, inclusive the traders.
Taxing won't work. Instead of outright selling shares, I will give them to you as a security for the money you give to me, which in turn I will lend out and getting other shares as security. You in turn will give my shares to someone else as security for the money he lends to you. Only if you demand your money back I'll be forced to finalize the trade, and I'll do it with whoever has my shares right now as security.
Instead of hundreds of HFTs, we have only a single one, which will be taxed with $0.01 per share. But we have hundreds of High Frequency Borrowings.
It's just the "law of the great numbers fallacy" in disguise. Yes, long term the coin will flip to each side with about the same rate. But for the next coin flip, it's 50%, whatever the current rates are. Each coin flip is completely independent from all the coin flips that happened in the past.
Yes, long term, Wall Street will funnel investments to the right companies, and if you calculate an average over all trades you will find that with 99.% certainity it works. But the next trade is more or less random chance, and with random chance, it will produce a negative outcome. That means each trade can be bad, and just because you had a long sequence of bad trades, it doesn't mean the next one will not be bad too.
The concept of government is flawed, but it is the least of all flawed concepts we tried so far. We know that the countries with weak or no governments are the one with the least growth, with the least stability, with the least individual freedom, with the least accountability.
Whatever complaint you bring against governments in general, we know that in general the alternatives are worse. That's why goverments arise again and again, and if the official goverment breaks, local inofficial governments like gangs of thugs or cliques pop up like mushrooms after a rain.
The problem with all this Randism is that it doesn't account for failure. If the bank where I put my savings fail, my savings are gone, even though I didn't made an error in judgement when I put my money there long ago. If I don't have the resources to diversify my savings enough to put them into different banks, and if not only a single bank but a whole system of banks fails, I lose. Regulation is not primarily about infringment on individual freedom and trade, it is about limiting the effect an error, a fraud, or a failure have on innocent bystanders. Regulations are not primarily about control, they are about the containment of catastrophical events. And moreso: Disincentives are also just another type of regulation. Laws forbidding fraud, murder or theft are regulation. And courts upholding contracts and a police enforcing the court decisions are the judictive and the executive branch of those laws and regulations.
Of course, but compared to about every other Western country, they are the least socialist.
No. If free eBooks are a big part of the sheer numbers, then so be it. Why throw them out of the statistics? If you want to know the revenue from paper books compared with the revenue from eBooks, you are looking at the wrong statistics. And even then there is a problem: You would have to remove the revenue from selling recyclable paper from the paper book sales, because the paper and ink are not part of the eBook sales.
It's a fine example of where socialism breeds it's own suicide by providing for everyone regardless of the effort they make.
Why is that socialism? The U.S., which cannot be accused of being too socialist, has the same problem, while the pretty socialist Finland does not. Don't blame every social failure on Socialism, it's just a cheap excuse not to do anything about it!
The main issue I have with ePub->MOBI conversion so far is that sometimes the page breaks stay as they were in ePub, which makes reading them awkward in Kindle - you often have an ePub-page converted to one and a half page in MOBI.
I am thinking about an perl script to fix that, but for now, I was too lazy.
So you are quadrolingual in the terms of the paper.
But that's not bilingualism as studied in the paper. There they compare children who grow up bilingual with those, who learn only one language before they get to school. If you spoke seven languages before turning seven, it would be more interesting in this case.
If this gets any hobbier, it might reach the point, where it becomes the hobbiest thing of them all.
It's bare-faced or bald-faced lie. "bold-faced" is a neo-logism which messes up bold typeface with bald (shaven) face.
It is similar, but the problem arising is that one of the main distribution chains for Microsoft products in Germany is Metro AG with their computer stores Saturn and MediaMarkt. There definitely would be confusion, if Metro AG is supposed to sell Metro UI based tablets.
Because Metro AG is supposed to sell via their computer store chains Saturn and MediaMarkt Metro UI based tablets.