Let's get over the "poor Rosie", shall we? It's just stupid. Go read the 1968 Double Helix. Nobody fucked her over. She died from an illness, and Watson himself acknowledges that she was a solid experimentalist. She was also an occasional bitch:)
Unfortunately, most multi-cell batteries do cell management wrong and are unable to isolate dead cells. A typical "dead" battery has one bad cell, with other cells having more than another lifetime of reasonable performance ahead of them. Most laptop and power tool batteries will work completely satisfactorily if you merely break up the cells and apply proper cell and charge management that is able to extract charge from and impart charge to each cell independent of other cells.
Most "dead" batteries that people throw away are good - except for one cell.
the best known account of her, from a professional colleague says stuff like this
Well, if you insist on picking up such bits, then it's your problem. The book is available online and you can certainly see for yourself what Watson wrote. His account of Rosy is mostly factual. The fact is that she was as stubborn and hard to deal with as she was brilliant. Her work was recognized by Watson in spite of his objectified view of women. Again, I find no problem with such descriptions since they are factual if not very productive. If you don't like such facts, too bad.
The Double Helix was written I think shortly after Rosie had passed away, in the 1960's. That book gives her all the recognition that's called for, I think, and is, again, fairly factual as to what was going on. If people decide not to read a short, first-person account of how the structure of DNA was found, it's their own problem. Nobody's hiding Rosie's memory from anyone. People just decide to ignore it.
I think that the hullaballoo about Rosie Franklin is really getting out of hand. Fucking Watson himself wrote in The Double Helix:
In 1958, Rosalind Franklin died at the early age of thirty-seven. Since my initial impressions of her, both scientific and personal (as recorded in the early pages of this book), were often wrong, I want to say something here about her achievements. The X-ray work she did at King's is increasingly regarded as superb. The sorting out of the A and B forms, by itself, would have made her reputation; even better was her 1952 demonstration, using Patterson superposition methods, that the phosphate groups must be on the outside of the DNA molecule. Later, when she moved to Bemal's lab, she took up work on tobacco mosaic virus and quickly extended our qualitative ideas about helical construction into a precise quantitative picture, definitely establishing the essential helical parameters and locating the ribonucleic chain halfway out from the central axis.
Because I was then teaching in the States, I did not see her as often as did Francis, to whom she frequently came for advice or when she had done something very pretty, to be sure he agreed with her reasoning. By then all traces of our early bickering were forgotten, and we both came to appreciate greatly her personal honesty and generosity, realizing years too late the struggles that the intelligent woman faces to be accepted by a scientific world which often regards women as mere diversions from serious thinking. Rosalind's exemplary courage and integrity were apparent to all when, knowing she was mortally ill, she did not complain but continued working on a high level until a few weeks before her death.
Yes, he wrote it back in 1968. So lets just stop with the "poor forgotten Rosie". I mean Watson himself mentioned her often in his book, and wrote those paragraphs (amongs others) about her. Yes, she was right and she was a good experimentalist. Nobody forgot about her, expect idiots who don't read books. Double Helix is less than a 100 pages long, and is an easy read. How much simpler could it be to read about it all from a first-hand account? Anyone who has anything but the most passing interest in the history of determination of DNA's structure would have heard about her! It's in fact hard to miss her.
For everyone who doesn't know what's going on with R.F. these days: full-retard pseudo-feminists got a hold of her and are using her memory for their own devices. Fuck them.
That line is repeated over and over but it's IMHO very much misleading. There are hundreds of thousands of eggs available at the time the first period rolls over. It's not as if they just disappear at a ratio of roughly a thousand eggs lost per every ovulation. Nothing gets depleted, AFAIK. A woman simply doesn't ovulate as often, and eventually she doesn't ovulate at all. Plenty of eggs are still there, IIRC.
I agree about Chicago. I drove there at 70mph, with everyone pretty much ignoring the 55mph speed limit. Heck, you'd be a major nuisance if you went at 55mph!
That's true, but the differences are really negligible. What's not-quite-a-factor-of-two here? Not much. Only matters for actuarial tables. I would worry about order of magnitude differences.
I find it not only hard to believe, but it's bullshit to start with. Vehicles definitely won't get best MPG at 35mph, because the torque converter is not usually locked out at such speeds and the fuel economy is easily 5-10mpg worse than when you hit 45mph. Then, at 45mph your RPMs might well be a bit too low and maintaining any power output at such speed will happen in the most inefficient operating regime for the engine, unless the transmission downshifts. For most cars the sweet spot will be around 50-55mph I'd think.
Shit, I'm still working with a legacy codebase that uses a linker like that. Heck, Zilog is still offering those linkers with their development systems.
The bearings, ECUs, door hinges and brake discs can all be done in an under hour each, but I don't know how much a dealership will bill for each of them. Of course the diagnostic time must be accounted for as well. The window door motor can be anywhere between 15 minutes and a couple hours, depending on how much of a clusterfuck is the design (I shudder). Transmissions and steering columns can be quite drawn out. Never mind the price of the parts, of course.
I've yet to visit a regular US university library that requires any form of ID to enter to access the open stacks. Sure, if you need access to things from the non-open repository, you will need an ID.
This works quite well indeed: most of the authors, in spite of being busy, also like their egos to be stroked just a bit, every so often. Such requests a nice ego strokers.
Chiefly it was a matter of five people: Maurice Wilkins, Rosalind Franklin, Linus Pauling, Francis Crick, and me.
Heck, he writes about Rosie a bit. She was supposedly a hot chick, if she only knew how to dress. Yeah, that's a stereotypical male view of women, but hey, at least we learn that much about her.
What will happen when this collides with Apple and Google deliberately creating encryption that they themselves cannot break?
Nothing much. They'll provide as much assistance as they can: they'll instruct the judge that the extent of assistance available is "Sorry, it can't be done. By anyone."
So, let's see, what's better: a Linux kernel or some barely working "micro" TCP implementation on a microcontroller of some sort? I'll take linux any day, thank you.
I think that's just nitpicking. As far as everyday language use is concerned, men don't normally have breasts. It's as simple as that. Yeah, there's enough gland tissue there that can be made to grow etc., but it's mostly immaterial other than men getting breast cancer. Still, in normal, everyday use of the language, we all know that women have breasts, and men don't.
Regarding the person from yahoo rejecting my email - I can confirm that's not the case. I set up a yahoo account for my self, brand new, and can't email it.
Yahoo isn't looking at whether one person is rejecting the mail, the yahoo blacklisting is an aggregate process. Most likely your IPs were used by a spammer or an open relay or an owned host before, and were source of spam reported by multiple Yahoo users. Now you've got the broken goods.
Slashdot Mirror
Can confirm.
Between an H-1 nonimmigrant and a citizen there's a permanent resident...
Let's get over the "poor Rosie", shall we? It's just stupid. Go read the 1968 Double Helix. Nobody fucked her over. She died from an illness, and Watson himself acknowledges that she was a solid experimentalist. She was also an occasional bitch :)
Unfortunately, most multi-cell batteries do cell management wrong and are unable to isolate dead cells. A typical "dead" battery has one bad cell, with other cells having more than another lifetime of reasonable performance ahead of them. Most laptop and power tool batteries will work completely satisfactorily if you merely break up the cells and apply proper cell and charge management that is able to extract charge from and impart charge to each cell independent of other cells.
Most "dead" batteries that people throw away are good - except for one cell.
only to see that employee steal 100 million from the bank
That'd be less than many a bank's top honchos stole from the customers in the 1st decade of this century, so I'd say game on.
the best known account of her, from a professional colleague says stuff like this
Well, if you insist on picking up such bits, then it's your problem. The book is available online and you can certainly see for yourself what Watson wrote. His account of Rosy is mostly factual. The fact is that she was as stubborn and hard to deal with as she was brilliant. Her work was recognized by Watson in spite of his objectified view of women. Again, I find no problem with such descriptions since they are factual if not very productive. If you don't like such facts, too bad.
The Double Helix was written I think shortly after Rosie had passed away, in the 1960's. That book gives her all the recognition that's called for, I think, and is, again, fairly factual as to what was going on. If people decide not to read a short, first-person account of how the structure of DNA was found, it's their own problem. Nobody's hiding Rosie's memory from anyone. People just decide to ignore it.
I think that the hullaballoo about Rosie Franklin is really getting out of hand. Fucking Watson himself wrote in The Double Helix:
In 1958, Rosalind Franklin died at the early age of thirty-seven. Since my initial impressions of her, both scientific and personal (as recorded in the early pages of this book), were often wrong, I want to say something here about her achievements. The X-ray work she did at King's is increasingly regarded as superb. The sorting out of the A and B forms, by itself, would have made her reputation; even better was her 1952 demonstration, using Patterson superposition methods, that the phosphate groups must be on the outside of the DNA molecule. Later, when she moved to Bemal's lab, she took up work on tobacco mosaic virus and quickly extended our qualitative ideas about helical construction into a precise quantitative picture, definitely establishing the essential helical parameters and locating the ribonucleic chain halfway out from the central axis.
Because I was then teaching in the States, I did not see her as often as did Francis, to whom she frequently came for advice or when she had done something very pretty, to be sure he agreed with her reasoning. By then all traces of our early bickering were forgotten, and we both came to appreciate greatly her personal honesty and generosity, realizing years too late the struggles that the intelligent woman faces to be accepted by a scientific world which often regards women as mere diversions from serious thinking. Rosalind's exemplary courage and integrity were apparent to all when, knowing she was mortally ill, she did not complain but continued working on a high level until a few weeks before her death.
Yes, he wrote it back in 1968. So lets just stop with the "poor forgotten Rosie". I mean Watson himself mentioned her often in his book, and wrote those paragraphs (amongs others) about her. Yes, she was right and she was a good experimentalist. Nobody forgot about her, expect idiots who don't read books. Double Helix is less than a 100 pages long, and is an easy read. How much simpler could it be to read about it all from a first-hand account? Anyone who has anything but the most passing interest in the history of determination of DNA's structure would have heard about her! It's in fact hard to miss her.
For everyone who doesn't know what's going on with R.F. these days: full-retard pseudo-feminists got a hold of her and are using her memory for their own devices. Fuck them.
> the depletion of eggs is the showstopper
That line is repeated over and over but it's IMHO very much misleading. There are hundreds of thousands of eggs available at the time the first period rolls over. It's not as if they just disappear at a ratio of roughly a thousand eggs lost per every ovulation. Nothing gets depleted, AFAIK. A woman simply doesn't ovulate as often, and eventually she doesn't ovulate at all. Plenty of eggs are still there, IIRC.
Nope. I merely want a free app to be, well, free. If it has paid-for content, then it's not free, duh. Let's not devalue the word.
The way it seems to work is this: The executable is free. The content is billed in $0.99 increments :)
I agree about Chicago. I drove there at 70mph, with everyone pretty much ignoring the 55mph speed limit. Heck, you'd be a major nuisance if you went at 55mph!
That's true, but the differences are really negligible. What's not-quite-a-factor-of-two here? Not much. Only matters for actuarial tables. I would worry about order of magnitude differences.
I find it not only hard to believe, but it's bullshit to start with. Vehicles definitely won't get best MPG at 35mph, because the torque converter is not usually locked out at such speeds and the fuel economy is easily 5-10mpg worse than when you hit 45mph. Then, at 45mph your RPMs might well be a bit too low and maintaining any power output at such speed will happen in the most inefficient operating regime for the engine, unless the transmission downshifts. For most cars the sweet spot will be around 50-55mph I'd think.
Menopause is merely the state of a female having depleted their supply of eggs
/facepalm
Just stop.
Shit, I'm still working with a legacy codebase that uses a linker like that. Heck, Zilog is still offering those linkers with their development systems.
The bearings, ECUs, door hinges and brake discs can all be done in an under hour each, but I don't know how much a dealership will bill for each of them. Of course the diagnostic time must be accounted for as well. The window door motor can be anywhere between 15 minutes and a couple hours, depending on how much of a clusterfuck is the design (I shudder). Transmissions and steering columns can be quite drawn out. Never mind the price of the parts, of course.
IOW: OUCH.
I've yet to visit a regular US university library that requires any form of ID to enter to access the open stacks. Sure, if you need access to things from the non-open repository, you will need an ID.
This works quite well indeed: most of the authors, in spite of being busy, also like their egos to be stroked just a bit, every so often. Such requests a nice ego strokers.
To many scientists his gravest offense was not crediting Rosalind Franklin with helping him deduce the structure of DNA.
That seems to be a silly accusation. In his 1968 book "The Double Helix", the following is said on page 4:
Chiefly it was a matter of five people: Maurice Wilkins, Rosalind Franklin, Linus Pauling, Francis Crick, and me.
Heck, he writes about Rosie a bit. She was supposedly a hot chick, if she only knew how to dress. Yeah, that's a stereotypical male view of women, but hey, at least we learn that much about her.
What will happen when this collides with Apple and Google deliberately creating encryption that they themselves cannot break?
Nothing much. They'll provide as much assistance as they can: they'll instruct the judge that the extent of assistance available is "Sorry, it can't be done. By anyone."
Not at all. I merely pointed out that a piece of one's body can be gender-specific (sexual), no matter what function it has.
So, let's see, what's better: a Linux kernel or some barely working "micro" TCP implementation on a microcontroller of some sort? I'll take linux any day, thank you.
I think that's just nitpicking. As far as everyday language use is concerned, men don't normally have breasts. It's as simple as that. Yeah, there's enough gland tissue there that can be made to grow etc., but it's mostly immaterial other than men getting breast cancer. Still, in normal, everyday use of the language, we all know that women have breasts, and men don't.
You've had those IP addresses for 2 years without problems so it probably is not a pre-existing issue with the IP addresses.
OK, I didn't notice that. I think Yahoo is simply overzealous and they treat all Comcast subscriber IPs as spammy.
Regarding the person from yahoo rejecting my email - I can confirm that's not the case. I set up a yahoo account for my self, brand new, and can't email it.
Yahoo isn't looking at whether one person is rejecting the mail, the yahoo blacklisting is an aggregate process. Most likely your IPs were used by a spammer or an open relay or an owned host before, and were source of spam reported by multiple Yahoo users. Now you've got the broken goods.