Of course an IT shop has never heard of hiring a psychologist or two. Man, in business you have to manipulate your customers sometimes, I think you'd have known it by now. Sometimes it even takes experts to do such manipulation. A big IT consulting shop has resources to pull it off without thinking much, so to speak. It's not always about technology, but that doesn't mean it's out of your control.
Haha, I'm an order of magnitude behind times, then. But that's a mistake I'm very happy to have made!! So they figure about a 200 sequencings, then. Shoud do it with plenty to spare, I'd think...
Sequencing is cheap and getting cheaper. In 10-15 years or so there will be no reason to use the legacy DNA tests at all. It'll be full genome sequencing, and that'll leave zero doubt -- except for how the samples were obtained, of course.
I don't think it's like a book. It's more like two books that were individually printed on a printer, and there were errors in transmission to the printer. Sometimes a letter would be changed, or deleted, etc. The "few locations" or "signature" methods won't work, I don't think. What will work is sequencing the genome, and hoping you can match the samples to relevant tissues from the twins. You can have one patch of skin that has different DNA from another patch, even if the mutations happened in the womb. Different patches of skin come from different progenitor cells, I'd think. That's but an example, of course. Everything depends on how early in the development the mutation occurred. The earlier, the better. Of course I'm no specialist, nor even an informed hobbyist, so I might be entirely off base:)
To catch those mutations, they won't be analyzing signatures, I don't think. A signature only works if you're sure that's where the mutations are. But they won't know any of that. They need to sequence the whole damn genome. That's around $50k a pop, right? The price indicates that they expect to run about 10 full sequencings per twin. That may be a bit, um, optimistic. Someone who knows this stuff please correct me if I'm wrong.
Exactly! Incremental improvement is where it's at. If your most pressing issue is antique hardware, then you only do what's necessary to get the system ported to current hardware. Run the mainframe code in an emulator if you must, but for the life of you don't redo it all from scratch while the customer is one breakdown away from a catastrophe. Once the first most pressing issue is addressed, you move on to the next one. And so on.
The "king is naked" kind of a moment is when you realize that a lot of those projects could be done in 2-3 years by a dedicated team of 30 people. We're talking about $15M in total personnel costs, assuming you pay $150k gross per person. I'd absolutely love to be in such a team and actually deliver something that makes some local government somewhere more efficient, and their employees happy with the tech. It can be done, just requires proper mindset. Of course the bureaucrats the world over will fuck it up anyway.
Look, when you're an IT consultant company, your first job is to do a discovery project that is aimed precisely at defining exactly what the project is -- in absence of proper requirements. Heck, if it's a bidding process, you must also do due diligence -- that would typically involve talking to the customer(s), talking to their employees, etc. It's your own fault, as a consulting company, if you can't deliver. You must be able to tell that the customer is too clueless to make it work. It's your fucking job.
People who act obnoxious on alcohol are just people who are crypto-obnoxious. Alcohol only exposes their flaw. I wish employers were allowed to do a violent behavior screening where employees must get drunk, and are observed to see if they get violent. I'd definitely not want to hire anyone who gets violent after drinking. It doesn't take much for them to get violent otherwise as well.
The idea that people are powerless over their addiction is a load of looney-tunes. Demonstrably so. Either you stop drinking and you're not suffering anymore, or you don't, and you remain an alcoholic. Of course a separate problem is whether you're cured as in you can keep drinking occasionally like any other person, or should you abstain forever. That is a separate issue. There are many people who can't in fact drink at all, because the feedback loop in their brain is so strong that once they resume drinking, the slide into alcoholism. But if you're not an alcoholic, but previously were, then duh you have overcome your addiction. You, not his noodly appendage.
The retards who came up with calling it a vaccine should leave the field, because they are a disgrace. It's like a freakin' birth control shot, not a vaccine, geez.
I'm similar, although I don't bother brewing my own -- making my own bread is enough:) It's very rare that I'd drink enough to feel any effects. Every couple of days I may have a bottle of beer, or a glass of wine. I like the taste, the buzz is not very pleasurable to me at all.
I'm not glad to see that people can't see that big IT consulting corporations have all, without exception, degenerated into useless hulks that can't get anything done. Show me any large project that they undertake where the goals were completely met, and the user is happy. It's in the realm of fantasy, basically. Big IT consulting is basically a scam.
It's not about the government. It's all about the useless IT consulting companies. Pretty much every single flashy consulting company billboard/AD that you see at an airport is just a way to milk the gullible and not deliver. This is an across-the-board problem. Nobody wants to fucking do their jobs. The government thinks they don't need the right people to do it, so they hire a contractor. The contractor doesn't want to do the job either, it's not their core competency (nobody knows what it is anyway), so they hire subcontractors. Subcontractors have very little vested interest in anything, and they maybe deliver, maybe not, but due to multiple layers of clueless management, it's of no use anyway. So there you go.
It's was a tiny thing. It was, demonstrably, not only not worth tracking because it did no real damage (sorry, what they got is not "real" damage), but it was so tiny it was next to impossible to track.
Basically until you have a crater and a seismic shockwave, there's nothing to worry about in real terms -- whatever effort you'd spend on those tiny pieces of debris will cost more natural resources than any losses suffered when it hits. Once you're down to a small enough object, tracking it is a net waste of resources. The smaller the size, the more of a waste it becomes.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course an IT shop has never heard of hiring a psychologist or two. Man, in business you have to manipulate your customers sometimes, I think you'd have known it by now. Sometimes it even takes experts to do such manipulation. A big IT consulting shop has resources to pull it off without thinking much, so to speak. It's not always about technology, but that doesn't mean it's out of your control.
Haha, I'm an order of magnitude behind times, then. But that's a mistake I'm very happy to have made!! So they figure about a 200 sequencings, then. Shoud do it with plenty to spare, I'd think...
Killer meteorite over Russia. Yeah, sure. In your dreams.
Sequencing is cheap and getting cheaper. In 10-15 years or so there will be no reason to use the legacy DNA tests at all. It'll be full genome sequencing, and that'll leave zero doubt -- except for how the samples were obtained, of course.
I think that the price indicates they expect to run, about 20 sequencings in total, and I think that's a bit optimistic of them.
I don't think it's like a book. It's more like two books that were individually printed on a printer, and there were errors in transmission to the printer. Sometimes a letter would be changed, or deleted, etc. The "few locations" or "signature" methods won't work, I don't think. What will work is sequencing the genome, and hoping you can match the samples to relevant tissues from the twins. You can have one patch of skin that has different DNA from another patch, even if the mutations happened in the womb. Different patches of skin come from different progenitor cells, I'd think. That's but an example, of course. Everything depends on how early in the development the mutation occurred. The earlier, the better. Of course I'm no specialist, nor even an informed hobbyist, so I might be entirely off base :)
To catch those mutations, they won't be analyzing signatures, I don't think. A signature only works if you're sure that's where the mutations are. But they won't know any of that. They need to sequence the whole damn genome. That's around $50k a pop, right? The price indicates that they expect to run about 10 full sequencings per twin. That may be a bit, um, optimistic. Someone who knows this stuff please correct me if I'm wrong.
Exactly! Incremental improvement is where it's at. If your most pressing issue is antique hardware, then you only do what's necessary to get the system ported to current hardware. Run the mainframe code in an emulator if you must, but for the life of you don't redo it all from scratch while the customer is one breakdown away from a catastrophe. Once the first most pressing issue is addressed, you move on to the next one. And so on.
The "king is naked" kind of a moment is when you realize that a lot of those projects could be done in 2-3 years by a dedicated team of 30 people. We're talking about $15M in total personnel costs, assuming you pay $150k gross per person. I'd absolutely love to be in such a team and actually deliver something that makes some local government somewhere more efficient, and their employees happy with the tech. It can be done, just requires proper mindset. Of course the bureaucrats the world over will fuck it up anyway.
Just because it works for you doesn't make it not bullshit. It's bullshit because it doesn't work for a majority of people.
Look, when you're an IT consultant company, your first job is to do a discovery project that is aimed precisely at defining exactly what the project is -- in absence of proper requirements. Heck, if it's a bidding process, you must also do due diligence -- that would typically involve talking to the customer(s), talking to their employees, etc. It's your own fault, as a consulting company, if you can't deliver. You must be able to tell that the customer is too clueless to make it work. It's your fucking job.
Sorry, you're wrong. The FDA didn't ban it.
People who act obnoxious on alcohol are just people who are crypto-obnoxious. Alcohol only exposes their flaw. I wish employers were allowed to do a violent behavior screening where employees must get drunk, and are observed to see if they get violent. I'd definitely not want to hire anyone who gets violent after drinking. It doesn't take much for them to get violent otherwise as well.
The idea that people are powerless over their addiction is a load of looney-tunes. Demonstrably so. Either you stop drinking and you're not suffering anymore, or you don't, and you remain an alcoholic. Of course a separate problem is whether you're cured as in you can keep drinking occasionally like any other person, or should you abstain forever. That is a separate issue. There are many people who can't in fact drink at all, because the feedback loop in their brain is so strong that once they resume drinking, the slide into alcoholism. But if you're not an alcoholic, but previously were, then duh you have overcome your addiction. You, not his noodly appendage.
And who the heck said that science literacy == being able to spout facts? You made it up, dear AC.
The retards who came up with calling it a vaccine should leave the field, because they are a disgrace. It's like a freakin' birth control shot, not a vaccine, geez.
Sorry, but calling this vaccine is an overstatement. It's like a birth control injection. Good for a relatively short period.
I'm similar, although I don't bother brewing my own -- making my own bread is enough :) It's very rare that I'd drink enough to feel any effects. Every couple of days I may have a bottle of beer, or a glass of wine. I like the taste, the buzz is not very pleasurable to me at all.
This, a hundred times! YES!
I don't think you ever had any of the good stuff, then.
One word: bullshit.
I'm not glad to see that people can't see that big IT consulting corporations have all, without exception, degenerated into useless hulks that can't get anything done. Show me any large project that they undertake where the goals were completely met, and the user is happy. It's in the realm of fantasy, basically. Big IT consulting is basically a scam.
It's not about the government. It's all about the useless IT consulting companies. Pretty much every single flashy consulting company billboard/AD that you see at an airport is just a way to milk the gullible and not deliver. This is an across-the-board problem. Nobody wants to fucking do their jobs. The government thinks they don't need the right people to do it, so they hire a contractor. The contractor doesn't want to do the job either, it's not their core competency (nobody knows what it is anyway), so they hire subcontractors. Subcontractors have very little vested interest in anything, and they maybe deliver, maybe not, but due to multiple layers of clueless management, it's of no use anyway. So there you go.
Exactly. If there's no crater and no seismic shockwave, it's of no concern. Life goes on. Enjoy the fireworks when they happen.
It's was a tiny thing. It was, demonstrably, not only not worth tracking because it did no real damage (sorry, what they got is not "real" damage), but it was so tiny it was next to impossible to track.
Basically until you have a crater and a seismic shockwave, there's nothing to worry about in real terms -- whatever effort you'd spend on those tiny pieces of debris will cost more natural resources than any losses suffered when it hits. Once you're down to a small enough object, tracking it is a net waste of resources. The smaller the size, the more of a waste it becomes.