No, not that. Just more breadth in the science that says "we believe this hypothesis is correct because it is exclusive for testable reasons x,y, and z".
An "testable" reason, for example might be a "working with DNA from Mayan mummy #abc (IIRC the Mayans are considered a lost civilization, right?) that has been dated to X hundred years b.c. was found to have the same markers as related to the steppe people from Siberia etc." combined with "these markers are unique because...." where the "because" is fairly exclusive in terms of the genetics involved, that is, something along the lines of "the Steppe peoples and their mummies (pun intended) all have Gene xyz variants, and almost no or no other peoples and their mummies have that unique genetic signature"
Very interesting articles, and no, in advance I am not a geneticist.
What I find interesting about this article isn't in the science -- it's in the data as reported. So they gathered Native American folks together and performed some very advanced genetic analysis -- which in essence leads to the conclusion that "all folks in the group have certain genetic markers", and the closer you get to the so called "Bering land bridge" (heck, coulda been ice and canoes too....), the more genetically alike the people are. Okay, I'll buy that. Considering that the Inuit peoples, etc. are even now visually related to the folks from the step areas of northern China and Siberia than say, the native folks from Columbia. Who are more related to each other and the folks just north than say, I am [my ancestry is such that I'm one of those blue eyed migrant mutt imports from northern European countries who emigrated to what is now the US in the 17th and 18th centuries ]. What I don't see is evidence that says "all ancient peoples from all cultures including dead ones" (Mayan, etc.) share this same gene pool and no one else. Or that the folks from the Steppes of east Asia aren't themselves migrants at the same time and from the same gene pool as folks that arrived in the Americas at some distant point in the past.
My point is, the science seems interesting...but the explanation of the data is not exclusive nor conclusive regarding other possible genetically analyzable possibilities. So the jury will still be out until at some point in the future, until all of the other plausible possibilities have been ruled out.
Actually, the ruling requires the RIAA to open up about the COST of the downloaded songs, not the PRICE.
This is an interesting ruling to me because I guess the claim is that the RIAA companies are providing the music to some of the services at around seventy cents per download "wholesale", but we all know that their actual cost is much lower. Their cost was incurred by the production of the music and it's marketing, but the cost of downloading the music is born by the folks at each end of the wire, i.e. the person who shared the file and the person who downloaded it. The existence of the music on a shared drive doesn't even prove that a cost of downloading was incurred. So the rulings on this part of the trial are interesting in terms of not just this lawsuit but others which may follow.
The previous reported *cough* fact that hell has frozen over, while technically correct, did not extend to the Siberian peninsula, which, in fact, was already as cold as hell -- and while Steve Ballmer's heart is reportedly that cold where M$ and money is concerned, the fact that an M$ operating system run data center may open a new hole in the polar Siberian ice may also indeed induce a thaw in the netherworld as well.
Which proves my theory that the purveyors of M$ may in fact be minions of.....
This is a good thing why? Don't we really want to find better ways to harvestexisting methane sources for fuel? Because natural gas AKA methane is really useful for conversion into all sorts of things like say, hydrogen, conversion to LNG as a vehicle fuel, etc. with --if my understanding is correct, essentially no net increase in greenhouse emissions because instead of the release into the atmosphere it's being converted into something more environmentally friendly AKA carbon dioxide, which, although still a greenhouse gas, is useful for growing things like trees?
I also wonder about a much more profound and simple to ask question that may have no answer: is global warming more related to ozone destruction or carbon pollution?
I rarely dispute statistics but I really didn't like your post much. Yes, 2.4 million people die in the US each year. Well, given that 99% of the population of the earth is under the age of 100, if 1% die each year, then at least 66 million people should die per year. Tragedy, no?
No, the real tragedy is that because of wars and the necessity to maintain arms, we can't spend 25% of the national budget on things like curing malaria, septicemia, and even just simple stuff like diarrhea, or building the type of infrastructure in 3rd world countries to but the death rate of young people under the age of 25 to an acceptable amount.
But the fact is, most of the world still lives within a few percentage points of totalitarianism where the bullet is equal to the rule of law.
US death rate wise, catch a clue -- most of the fatalities due to heart disease, etc. are also related to smoking or flat out old age. Many of the accidental deaths are due to alcohol or other forms of substance abuse. I.e. culturally and individually allowable forms of slow or accidental suicide by another name. But worldwide? the most common ways to die are still by disease or by belonging to a weaker group when the rampages begin.
General agreement. But there's a certain level of completion required before something should be called beta, and in my book this one was too early because it requires a trust level of the users doing the beta that Noscript provides, where out of the box Firefox 3.0 doesn't. So I have to make my machine less safe than if I was using the old buggy version -- which, even with it's flaws -- with NoScript was more safe.
So as a "senior" level, I would have voted against beta status until at least that plug in writer had an opportunity to register their plug in (and update if necessary) as workable with 3.X before releasing. Because I'll bet it's a registration type thing as opposed to plug-in recoding, and registration type stuff takes minutes to do and only a short amount of time to test. And I don't have egg on my face in the mean time.
They can have my debugging reports and my attention when NoScript works but not before. Because -- catch a clue, I haven't got a single virus or malware infestation from a site protected by NoScript, and I can even see who the off-site advertising providers are for the sites I go to and selectively deny them the ability to run scripts on the content pages I read.
I'm not going to open up my machine beforehand -- I have too much experience with companies like M$ to trust them with unblockable JavaScript, etc. not counting the other bad guys out there.
Actually I am a senior level developer for a rather large company. And we don't release until our code works with the known interfaces to our systems and those interfaces have had a chance to be tested against the new code. Basically, the logic is "first do no harm", and releasing even a beta that doesn't work with the known top interfaces (I mean, we're talking NoScript here, not some obscure plug in!!) says to me that this is more of a "late alpha".
Think of it like this: You're the Mozilla marketing organization, and you want good press for your new 'beta' release. Would you a) rather see a/. posting like mine, or b) contact the NoScript coders, etc. and give them an opportunity to get their plugins ready, and have the/. post say "great job guys, it even works with the major plug ins like Noscript, FireFTP, Firebug, etc. More Plugins compatible with FireFox 3.X beta to be released soon..."
Well, us professional coders go for the 2nd every time. 'ts why we get paid to be senior -- because we can think farther ahead.
None of the valued plugins such as NoScript, etc. work with it, and I already started getting errors. This is not beta-ready until the most important plug ins work with it, and it doesn't throw bogus errors in code that was already validated in all of the browser steps (CSS, JavaScript, cookies, etc.) required for a modern web 2.0 application to function.
It may be fast, but it's not safe. Uninstalling now.
If I am understanding what this leans means, then the FSF can park this particular license where the sun doesn't shine as far as I'm concerned. Users do not have the right to know how an application is coded, because in the internet world, the user is the enemy. If I code the "GoshThisIsSuperDuper" web application suite and have 100 NGO's etc. that use my code (even using the "powered by GTISD" icon on their web site -- and then they have to turn over my code, and it gets hacked after the fact by a malicious user, opening all my other companies, etc. to the same vulnerabilities?
Thanks but no thanks. I'll stick with regular GPL v2.0 or v3.0 depending on what I need to do, thank you very much. Or -- if the situation warrants it, go closed source. Because there is nothing that forces me to have open code in my applications at all.
By ponying up their own cash, they are putting a gun to the heads of virtually every US telco, because it basically says to them "Google's got bandwidth of our own that doesn't pay you one red cent. So we don't have to play ball with any of you."
But if a telco chooses to "play nice" and open their network to the OCA based, presumably uber-cool handset and applications, folks may just stay with an existing provider and then both Google and the Wireless provider both get to make buckets of $$$.
Hmmm. Mozilla 2.X is dozens of times more secure than in the early days in spite of ever increasing attempts to hack it, runs ever newer versions of the JavaScript engine, ties in Flash, Silverlight, XML, and still manages to be agile enough to be my browser of choice (granted, I'm stuck in WinXX land for a while still at work) And is fundamentally beholden to no-one in terms of trying to monopolize the net?
So why should I complain -- given that I haven't concentrated on the code bloat or other problems myself? (my Open source stuff is in other areas) So if the complaint is that the "little engine that could" survive has grown up to be the "big engine that has to carry the world", maybe we as a collective whole ought to get off our butts and help fix things (volunteers for refactoring the code, anyone?) rather than being the global b---- and moan community.
--as me first puts on the fireproof pajamas for the obligatory anti-PHP flamewar sure to follow--
How many of those are small, MySQL driven LAMP-3 setups -- you know, the kind that power millions of websites? Where a decent amount of care setting up Linux, Apache, MySQL, and the final P [whether that is Perl, Php or Python -- the three in the acronym above] good coding practices make the necessity of a separate firewall basically moot.
If you buy off on having a lunar rover capable of that amount of movement, you have a rover capable of placing experiments and perhaps returning to a "lunar depot drop-off site". Meanwhile I just think it would be cool to have webcams (pointable perhaps?) or webcams and other linked experimental "stuff" near some of the original Apollo sites, and more than one location has all sorts of interesting scientific implications in terms of radio telescopy (sans an interfering atmosphere... (?)
How about building a lunar rover capable of wandering over the lunar surface and placing a number of linked web cams at the various Apollo sites and a transmitting web server (or servers) nearby?
450 celsius is plenty of heat to permanently power a balanced "scientific station" building" i.e. by using heat pipe type of arrangements to both cool the exterior of the station and provide power (probably using a modified binary/rankine cycle engine, there is absolutely no reason why a major research installation couldn't be landed and set up -- except that without testing on the ground it would be rather difficult to land the station and set it up correctly (which could presumably be done at some point with robotic rovers).
When something has moving parts -- like a rover would -- it is much more difficult to properly insulate and lubricate the parts away from the heat. So do the firs things first: put a probe down to figure out as much of the array of conditions on Venus that can possibly be reproduced here on planet earth for scientific / technical testing here on terra firma.
Pardon my ignorance, but I also assume that I am in the vast group of/. readers who have no idea what difference the scan rate will make in actual scientific research. I don't really care about how scan tips are made, most of the humor attempts seem flat, and through it all I am asking myself "faster speed must equal ability to do more science, but what's in it for the rest of the world other than a curious factoid. It's kinda like the research that shows that in certain weird cases, scientists are able to slow the speed of light down so profoundly that they can make something go faster than the slowed light transmission rate. Seems cool, but what's the effect on the real world?
Because in the mean time this all seems about as useful to us as the scientific research that was ostensibly to figure out why some men get belly button fuzz and some don't. [slight pot belly, body hair in the navel region, and cotton shirts]. Would someone please explain why a STM is important as the rest of the story?
My question is, why would the DOJ be pushing unless there was a monied interest (Diebold, etc.) pushing behind the scenes. Because -- though I am traditionally a Republican in terms of most voting patterns, neither the Clinton nor Bush White House regimes ever seemed to be truly interested in battling corporate co-opting and corruption of the American political processes.
Like others, though, I think that SCOTUS will prevail, because ultimately if the federal government becomes overpoweringly strong, there may be a second secessionary movement where many of the states tell the currently empowered federal government to go to hell and start over.
With all the useful bells and whistles they can cram into the thing. Because Google has a habit, like Apple, of hiring very clever people who use the technology themselves -- and working out the kinks indoors before they foist a mess off on the rest of the world.
Consider, the newest CSS specifications for mobile are almost in recommendation form. So I as awise developer using the mobile specs can develop useful apps -- that perhaps don't have to be hosted on a single provider's app stack.
What I guess I am say is if Dvorak and Cringeley were put on the short list of beta users and they were impressed, then folks like me might actually be ready to buy when the thing is released to the wild.
Where those who know can post the details of an alleged patent infringement case, where the rest of us can basically provide prior art ammunition for the defendants in any litigation... Let's see whose patent portfolio wins in that circumstance, because I highly doubt the trolls will come out on top.
They are already working on an MS treatment where they basically take a person's own white blood cells and then modify them to go after the myelin-reactive white blood cells. Which means that they must have a way of identifying them -- so the question becomes, can a treatment be developed which basically attracts the myelin reactive cells only into the femtolaser scanning field where thay can be nuked, without killing off the rest of the immune system.
But I'm not good enough at immunology to know if once killed, the MS causing cells would be gone or if the bone marrow would simply repopulate the count again later.
Slashdot Mirror
An "testable" reason, for example might be a "working with DNA from Mayan mummy #abc (IIRC the Mayans are considered a lost civilization, right?) that has been dated to X hundred years b.c. was found to have the same markers as related to the steppe people from Siberia etc." combined with "these markers are unique because...." where the "because" is fairly exclusive in terms of the genetics involved, that is, something along the lines of "the Steppe peoples and their mummies (pun intended) all have Gene xyz variants, and almost no or no other peoples and their mummies have that unique genetic signature"
What I find interesting about this article isn't in the science -- it's in the data as reported. So they gathered Native American folks together and performed some very advanced genetic analysis -- which in essence leads to the conclusion that "all folks in the group have certain genetic markers", and the closer you get to the so called "Bering land bridge" (heck, coulda been ice and canoes too....), the more genetically alike the people are. Okay, I'll buy that. Considering that the Inuit peoples, etc. are even now visually related to the folks from the step areas of northern China and Siberia than say, the native folks from Columbia. Who are more related to each other and the folks just north than say, I am [my ancestry is such that I'm one of those blue eyed migrant mutt imports from northern European countries who emigrated to what is now the US in the 17th and 18th centuries ]. What I don't see is evidence that says "all ancient peoples from all cultures including dead ones" (Mayan, etc.) share this same gene pool and no one else. Or that the folks from the Steppes of east Asia aren't themselves migrants at the same time and from the same gene pool as folks that arrived in the Americas at some distant point in the past.
My point is, the science seems interesting...but the explanation of the data is not exclusive nor conclusive regarding other possible genetically analyzable possibilities. So the jury will still be out until at some point in the future, until all of the other plausible possibilities have been ruled out.
This is an interesting ruling to me because I guess the claim is that the RIAA companies are providing the music to some of the services at around seventy cents per download "wholesale", but we all know that their actual cost is much lower. Their cost was incurred by the production of the music and it's marketing, but the cost of downloading the music is born by the folks at each end of the wire, i.e. the person who shared the file and the person who downloaded it. The existence of the music on a shared drive doesn't even prove that a cost of downloading was incurred. So the rulings on this part of the trial are interesting in terms of not just this lawsuit but others which may follow.
Which proves my theory that the purveyors of M$ may in fact be minions of.....
***poof* ice chill....
I also wonder about a much more profound and simple to ask question that may have no answer: is global warming more related to ozone destruction or carbon pollution?
No, the real tragedy is that because of wars and the necessity to maintain arms, we can't spend 25% of the national budget on things like curing malaria, septicemia, and even just simple stuff like diarrhea, or building the type of infrastructure in 3rd world countries to but the death rate of young people under the age of 25 to an acceptable amount.
But the fact is, most of the world still lives within a few percentage points of totalitarianism where the bullet is equal to the rule of law.
US death rate wise, catch a clue -- most of the fatalities due to heart disease, etc. are also related to smoking or flat out old age. Many of the accidental deaths are due to alcohol or other forms of substance abuse. I.e. culturally and individually allowable forms of slow or accidental suicide by another name. But worldwide? the most common ways to die are still by disease or by belonging to a weaker group when the rampages begin.
Huh? and this is an honest question because you lost me there....
How do I file bugs in the new version when the Firefox 3.0 overwrites the old version 's DLLs, and I don't see the errors in 2.X
Of course, I could try to send the bug reports in via IE, Opera, or Safari....
So as a "senior" level, I would have voted against beta status until at least that plug in writer had an opportunity to register their plug in (and update if necessary) as workable with 3.X before releasing. Because I'll bet it's a registration type thing as opposed to plug-in recoding, and registration type stuff takes minutes to do and only a short amount of time to test. And I don't have egg on my face in the mean time.
I'm not going to open up my machine beforehand -- I have too much experience with companies like M$ to trust them with unblockable JavaScript, etc. not counting the other bad guys out there.
Think of it like this: You're the Mozilla marketing organization, and you want good press for your new 'beta' release. Would you a) rather see a
Well, us professional coders go for the 2nd every time. 'ts why we get paid to be senior -- because we can think farther ahead.
It may be fast, but it's not safe. Uninstalling now.
Thanks but no thanks. I'll stick with regular GPL v2.0 or v3.0 depending on what I need to do, thank you very much. Or -- if the situation warrants it, go closed source. Because there is nothing that forces me to have open code in my applications at all.
But if a telco chooses to "play nice" and open their network to the OCA based, presumably uber-cool handset and applications, folks may just stay with an existing provider and then both Google and the Wireless provider both get to make buckets of $$$.
oops. Missed that in my quick perusal, shoulda rtfa.
So why should I complain -- given that I haven't concentrated on the code bloat or other problems myself? (my Open source stuff is in other areas) So if the complaint is that the "little engine that could" survive has grown up to be the "big engine that has to carry the world", maybe we as a collective whole ought to get off our butts and help fix things (volunteers for refactoring the code, anyone?) rather than being the global b---- and moan community.
But it's cool nonetheless, and much more fun than just plain road noise.
How many of those are small, MySQL driven LAMP-3 setups -- you know, the kind that power millions of websites? Where a decent amount of care setting up Linux, Apache, MySQL, and the final P [whether that is Perl, Php or Python -- the three in the acronym above] good coding practices make the necessity of a separate firewall basically moot.
If you buy off on having a lunar rover capable of that amount of movement, you have a rover capable of placing experiments and perhaps returning to a "lunar depot drop-off site". Meanwhile I just think it would be cool to have webcams (pointable perhaps?) or webcams and other linked experimental "stuff" near some of the original Apollo sites, and more than one location has all sorts of interesting scientific implications in terms of radio telescopy (sans an interfering atmosphere... (?)
And a good practice run...
How about building a lunar rover capable of wandering over the lunar surface and placing a number of linked web cams at the various Apollo sites and a transmitting web server (or servers) nearby?
When something has moving parts -- like a rover would -- it is much more difficult to properly insulate and lubricate the parts away from the heat. So do the firs things first: put a probe down to figure out as much of the array of conditions on Venus that can possibly be reproduced here on planet earth for scientific / technical testing here on terra firma.
Because in the mean time this all seems about as useful to us as the scientific research that was ostensibly to figure out why some men get belly button fuzz and some don't. [slight pot belly, body hair in the navel region, and cotton shirts]. Would someone please explain why a STM is important as the rest of the story?
Like others, though, I think that SCOTUS will prevail, because ultimately if the federal government becomes overpoweringly strong, there may be a second secessionary movement where many of the states tell the currently empowered federal government to go to hell and start over.
Consider, the newest CSS specifications for mobile are almost in recommendation form. So I as awise developer using the mobile specs can develop useful apps -- that perhaps don't have to be hosted on a single provider's app stack.
What I guess I am say is if Dvorak and Cringeley were put on the short list of beta users and they were impressed, then folks like me might actually be ready to buy when the thing is released to the wild.
Where those who know can post the details of an alleged patent infringement case, where the rest of us can basically provide prior art ammunition for the defendants in any litigation... Let's see whose patent portfolio wins in that circumstance, because I highly doubt the trolls will come out on top.
But I'm not good enough at immunology to know if once killed, the MS causing cells would be gone or if the bone marrow would simply repopulate the count again later.