Presuming to know what's good for homosexuals, inadvertently pregnant women and people who want to have sex without getting pregnant and then forcing those views upon them through a large, well organized, well resourced church is not exhibiting humility. An approach imbued with humility would go alone the lines of - I think these things are true, but I might be wrong, so I'll exercise caution and be mindful of contrary opinions. Depending on context, 'pride', 'egotism' or 'arrogance' would serve as opposites to 'humility'. This chap appears to exhibit at least two of the three. I've never met him though, so I'm not sure about the first one.
>First of all, that's not true, it takes time to wash the existing salt out of your body. But once your salt level is low, you collapse and there are all sorts of bad things that result. This happens on sports fields all the time, when people on a low salt diet sweat out whatever salt it left, then collapse.
>Second, you've missed the entire point of the article, which is about chronic high salt consumption, not emergency events. If chronic high salt consumption was such a problem, it would have shown up in the epidemiological evidence, which it hasn't. What we have here is a mechanism identified in mice, that if it were the whole story, would show up in the epidemiological evidence, but it doesn't. So it's not the whole story and may or may not be none of the story.
Mouse models are great for getting your foot in the door of yet-to-be-formed hypotheses. By they're being shown to be less that effective for confirming hypotheses about what happens in human disease.
By all means use mouse models to explore the space and work out what is going on, but don't draw conclusions about humans until you've moved to experiment on humans. Jumping to conclusions about humans based on mice experiments is a common mistake and this paper makes that mistake.
These finding are contradicted by the epidemiological evidence. The hazards of low salt are immediate and deadly. The hazards of high salt are hard to detect. The chances that there are other variables at work are high. Just because you have a pathway, it doesn't mean you've identified all the regulatory mechanisms.
>Then they would cut the drive out of the notebook/largepad market.
But add to the desktop/server/reliable computer market. If I were asked to pay $50 more for an SSD in a desktop box with a powerfail protection backup battery and better power conditioning due to the extra space for filter components and I would open my wallet.
Some serial programmed ones do. But none of the parallel flash chips I've designed into circuits work that way. An SSD's SATA interface only works in blocks though, so even though the underlying chips might be word writable, the interface doesn't let you do that.
The low level transistor structure of flash chips are always bit by bit programmable and block eraseable, so it's always the interface that dictates the size of the write unit.
You can write individual words in a flash chip. It takes longer to write than read because you have to force a bunch of electrons through an insulator.
If you want to write over existing data, you have to erase the block it is in, because you can only erase whole blocks, but there is nothing to stop you incrementally writing to unused parts of a block.
>Flash memory is accessed in blocks and only blocks. Even if you need to write to a single bit, the entire block that that bit resides in needs to be re-written. This means before you can write, the entire block has to be read and stored temporary ram. If power is interrupted during a write operation then there is a very good chance the entire block will be lost because the contents of the flash controller's ram will be lost.
You are wrong.
Flash it written word by word. The size of the word depends on the chip. Flash is *erased* a block at a time.
That is what makes flash more efficient than EEPROM, the block erase plane.
>space is at an extreme premium in those drives. So put them in a desktop drive form. The first thing I do with SSDs is put them in one of those adaptors to make them fit in a normal drive tray.
The hammer they wrote for that particular nail is fine, but the claims in the story are plain silly. Particularly this bit (my emphasis):
"but the shift from clock frequency to multiple cores has stifled the rate at which hardware allows software to scale. (Basically, Amdahl's Law.) The simplest approach to dealing with this is sharding"
I suspect any cop would just stare at you blankly while sipping his coffee or chewing his/her doughnut. That or they would work out an excuse to beat you up and arrest you for resisting arrest.
Slashdot Mirror
The usual one.
Presuming to know what's good for homosexuals, inadvertently pregnant women and people who want to have sex without getting pregnant and then forcing those views upon them through a large, well organized, well resourced church is not exhibiting humility. An approach imbued with humility would go alone the lines of - I think these things are true, but I might be wrong, so I'll exercise caution and be mindful of contrary opinions. Depending on context, 'pride', 'egotism' or 'arrogance' would serve as opposites to 'humility'. This chap appears to exhibit at least two of the three. I've never met him though, so I'm not sure about the first one.
This - " He is well-known for his humility"
and this - "espouses church teachings on homosexuality, abortion and contraception."
are not compatible.
espouses church teachings on homosexuality, abortion and contraception
So nothing important is going to change then? Or am i misreading that?
Well people could choose to stop with the religion thing in response.
>First of all, that's not true, it takes time to wash the existing salt out of your body.
But once your salt level is low, you collapse and there are all sorts of bad things that result. This happens on sports fields all the time, when people on a low salt diet sweat out whatever salt it left, then collapse.
>Second, you've missed the entire point of the article, which is about chronic high salt consumption, not emergency events.
If chronic high salt consumption was such a problem, it would have shown up in the epidemiological evidence, which it hasn't. What we have here is a mechanism identified in mice, that if it were the whole story, would show up in the epidemiological evidence, but it doesn't. So it's not the whole story and may or may not be none of the story.
Mouse models are great for getting your foot in the door of yet-to-be-formed hypotheses.
By they're being shown to be less that effective for confirming hypotheses about what happens in human disease.
By all means use mouse models to explore the space and work out what is going on, but don't draw conclusions about humans until you've moved to experiment on humans. Jumping to conclusions about humans based on mice experiments is a common mistake and this paper makes that mistake.
What makes you think the RDA is a rationally derived value?
These finding are contradicted by the epidemiological evidence. The hazards of low salt are immediate and deadly. The hazards of high salt are hard to detect. The chances that there are other variables at work are high. Just because you have a pathway, it doesn't mean you've identified all the regulatory mechanisms.
>Then they would cut the drive out of the notebook/largepad market.
But add to the desktop/server/reliable computer market. If I were asked to pay $50 more for an SSD in a desktop box with a powerfail protection backup battery and better power conditioning due to the extra space for filter components and I would open my wallet.
>building your own gun using never-before-tested techniques is bound to result in some unfortunate mishaps before all the kinks are worked out.
That's how gun technology got developed in the first place.
Some serial programmed ones do. But none of the parallel flash chips I've designed into circuits work that way. An SSD's SATA interface only works in blocks though, so even though the underlying chips might be word writable, the interface doesn't let you do that.
The low level transistor structure of flash chips are always bit by bit programmable and block eraseable, so it's always the interface that dictates the size of the write unit.
It's usually around 50%-60% of the market price.
You can write individual words in a flash chip.
It takes longer to write than read because you have to force a bunch of electrons through an insulator.
If you want to write over existing data, you have to erase the block it is in, because you can only erase whole blocks, but there is nothing to stop you incrementally writing to unused parts of a block.
>Flash memory is accessed in blocks and only blocks. Even if you need to write to a single bit, the entire block that that bit resides in needs to be re-written. This means before you can write, the entire block has to be read and stored temporary ram. If power is interrupted during a write operation then there is a very good chance the entire block will be lost because the contents of the flash controller's ram will be lost.
You are wrong.
Flash it written word by word. The size of the word depends on the chip.
Flash is *erased* a block at a time.
That is what makes flash more efficient than EEPROM, the block erase plane.
>yet nearly all computers sold today are portables
What I really want is a potable computer, so I can drink it if I get thirsty.
My employee discount beats any $2 price difference.
MLC == Intel. But they were the good ones.
>space is at an extreme premium in those drives.
So put them in a desktop drive form. The first thing I do with SSDs is put them in one of those adaptors to make them fit in a normal drive tray.
It wold be great if they told you about the feature so you could make an informed purchasing decision.
It's written in Perl, so you know it's easy to maintain
Ha ha. Good one!
HURG: Hurg of Unix Replacing Genodes
The hammer they wrote for that particular nail is fine, but the claims in the story are plain silly. Particularly this bit (my emphasis):
"but the shift from clock frequency to multiple cores has stifled the rate at which hardware allows software to scale. (Basically, Amdahl's Law.) The simplest approach to dealing with this is sharding"
This is ludicrous. Paraphrasing: "We do databases, so we'll say that the solution to scaling parallel software resides in databases".
The applications for parallel processing are many and diverse. Databases are relevant to only some of them.
>Only guys drink coffee?
Yes, in my experience, women drink Frappacinos.
>Is it already time to reach out to the cops?
I suspect any cop would just stare at you blankly while sipping his coffee or chewing his/her doughnut.
That or they would work out an excuse to beat you up and arrest you for resisting arrest.
Cops are not equipped to deal with these things.