Can you tell me any biological difference between clones and twins?
Twins are produced naturally at the same time. Clones are produced from cells not intended for reproduction, and there are unknown consequences to this. It's entirely possible that a human produced through cloning will have severe developmental problems, even beyond simple genetic errors.
That is my argument against cloning -- that we simply don't know enough at this point to say that it's safe. It's hugely irresponsible to produce damaged children through these early experiments.
Once we know a lot more, I would personally have no problem with cloning.
I think Enterprise rocks. DS9 was my favorite Star Trek series, and Enterprise is climbing rapidly.
What I especially like about Enterprise is that it's interesting watching the humans do their thing while being the "clueless newbies" on the block.
I also particularly like the way they've handled the Vulcans. It really shows how one dimensional the Vulcans have been in previous episodes. At their best, they are cool toward humans, and at their worse (e.g., the Starship captain) they are downright rude jerks. It's interesting seeing that the Vulcans have done some growing in the later centuries as well.
The characters are still learning their role, but so far, I really like the show.
The only thing negative is that they've embraced time travel plots. I hate time travel plots. There are very few plots that require time travel, and couldn't be rewritten without it. RM101's rule: All time travel episodes suck*.
*Well, except for the original series' City on the Edge of Forever where Kirk, Spock and McCoy go back to the 1930s. But that's the exception that proves the rule.
Have you investigated what educational software does or does not run under the various solutions for running Windows apps on Linux?
That's totally irrelevent. Whatever the software is, it's going to run better on Windows.
Microsoft doesn't care about providing a platform for educational software; they want the kids to be hooked on their proprietary operating system and applications.
Well, duh. Microsoft cares about providing a product that people want. Red Hat cares about providing a product that people want. McDonalds cares about providing a product that people want. Ford cares about providing a product that people want. If you want to characterize "creating something that people want" as attempting to "hook" them on it, that's your choice, but it's ludicrous.
So this action can hardly be called an act of restitution for anti-competitive behavior.
Considering it costs them a huge amount of money and provides something useful to a large number of people, I would say it is an act of restitution. Yes, even software costs them money, because a great majority of these schools would have had to purchase Windows.
The point is that the schools WANT Windows, and don't want Linux. God forbid that Microsoft supply them what they want, rather than what a bunch of zealots think they should have.
And when Microsoft viciously declines, it will give more fuel to their anti-competetive practices.
They won't have to. The schools themselves will viciously decline. Why anyone thinks that schools are just begging for Linux is beyond my comprehension. Does it occur to anyone that if they wanted it, they can install it anytime they want?
Does Red Hat think the schools just sit around and take whatever people give? In order for this Red Hat deal to mean anything, the schools have to WANT Linux. Why would they want it? What educational software that they use is going to be work on it?
Once again, it has to be pointed out: People use applications, not operating systems.
People can whine all they want about Microsoft, but it doesn't change the fact that Windows is the industry standard operating system. Schools are a lot better off having something useful, than some empty political gesture that will gather dust in the corner.
Anyway, back to my Red Cross story, they wanted me to go through these two Excel spreadsheets of volunteers to weed out duplicates and it looked like a dauntingly tedious process,
Of course, you could have just merged the two lists in Excel, sorted them, and then written a VB program to delete the duplicates. What, 2 minutes work?
Just because you don't know how to use a tool doesn't mean it's a bad tool.
Proof that if you are determined to find things to criticize, you will find them, even if you have to twist the facts.
military tribunals for immigrants
Illegal immigrants, in certain cases.
holding 1000s of people with no charges for months
Holding people for a variety of charges, most often being in the country illegally.
expanded wiretap provisions
Which are still approved by a judge, and were reasonable expansions of law. Such as having a wiretap applied to an individual, and not to a particular phone (pretty stupid in an era of disposable phones).
removal of lawer-client privileges
The ability to monitor lawyer-client conversations in very narrowly defined cases, such as a clear and present danger of planning terrorist attacks, and the information gained cannot be used against the prisoner.
attack on Oregon's right-to-die provision (where's State's Rights when Conservatives disagree with what those idiot voters wanted?) - attack on California medicinal pot distrubution centers (see above)
You may agree with these laws, but it is definitely in the interest of the federal government to protect citizens if local laws do not provide those protections. A good example is the South in the 1960s and the civil rights of blacks. Should the South have just been allowed to ignore the lynchings of blacks because of State Rights?
In the case of right-to-die, there is a very real danger of corrupting the medical industry by putting doctors in the position of having to be both preserving life and taking life. Everyone has the right to die. You've always had that right. But you don't have the right to screw up my medical care by creating a conflict of interest on the part of doctors. I happen to agree with this position.
Same with drug use. You can make the case that allowing states to legalize drugs creates an environment that endangers the citizens of that state; the so-called tyranny of the majority. It would be the same thing if say Texas decided to legalize drinking and driving. I happen to disagree with this position when it comes to medicinal use of marijauna, but I understand the reasoning.
In short, maybe you should become a little more educated, and a little less knee-jerk.
Well, to be fair he didn't ask if it was possible to inflict enough punishment, he asked if he could get a fair trial. It's actually kind of a difficult question to answer. It's like asking whether a Nazi war criminal can get a fair trial. I believe that many accused war criminals were pronounced "not guilty", however, so it's clearly possible even when emotions are high.
If we ever did catch him, we would probably not just charge him for the 9/11 bombing, but a slew of the other terrorist bombings that he is responsible for (and, in fact, has admitted to). The question of a "fair trial" is academic. The man is guilty of innumerable crimes against humanity.
Of course, to many people a "fair trial" is defined as finding him non-guilty by reason of the US is evil. I don't know if the original poster feels that way or not, but it's frightening to think that there are people out there who think that.
Notice that the article is in the Yahoo finance section. If you are an investor, then you would be interested in what stocks would likely be affected by this development.
This inturn makes it compatable and operable between the offical standard.
Man, my interns only fetch coffee and occasionally do some copying. Where do I get these interns that are able to design wireless networks? Come to think of it, where do I get Clinton-style interns?
Perhaps a biologist can answer a question I've had about this, which is also related I suppose to Chemotherapy.
What is the difference between a cancer cell and a "normal" cell? Why would radiation therapy tend to kill cancer cells faster than normal cells? The article mentions that they are concerned that normal cells might be affected, but they don't explain why it would favor cancer cells in the first place.
Because the ending of the last movie of the old ones had left no sensible possibility to create any sequels, Mr. Lucas will have the innovative and cunning idea of creating prequels.
So since we already have sequels to these movies, does that mean the next three are going to be episode -2, -1 and 0? Maybe he will just renumber them again.:)
You're in luck -- X11 has had the SHAPE extension for at least 15 years. I don't know if it's supported in XFREE86, however. My AIX desktop 5 years ago (?) had it, though. It was kind of amusing have a true circular window for a clock, but I have to say that it wasn't all the exciting.
Supposedly the byproduct of the reaction is water, which sounds good in principle. But where the does water go? Do you need to have a reservior for the water, or am I going to stand up with a wet lap after a long plane trip?
This is what is happening in Transmeta, great, innovative tech, let down by the company that created it.
The technology is innovative, granted, but I fail to see what's so great about it and why the company would be at fault for it's failing. It's slow, and simply not that much better than competing solutions. How did the "company" let it down? Not all innovative experiments pay off, and Transmeta is failing because of a bad idea.
Now, you might say that the company is not targeting Crusoe at the right markets (such as the embedded market), but to tell you the truth, we don't know that they haven't tried.
Re:IBM Instrumentation Computer was 68000 based.
on
Intel 4004 Turns 30
·
· Score: 2
My memory of it is REALLY fuzzy. I had a lot of projects on the burners, and it was just one hunk of hardware among many that were floating around. It was a curiosity because it was from IBM and a prototype, which is the reason I remember it at all.
That said, yes, it was around 1983/84. I do remember that it was rather bulky, perhaps like a cash register, but I don't recall any membrane keys, sensor inputs, etc. It's entirely possible that they took a unit like that and created the prototype from it? On the other hand, I might just not remember the membrane keys.
This sounds all well and good, but what I don't understand is how they address the individual pixels. If I read this correctly, they are spraying the light emitting pixels onto the sheet. But how are they getting the power to each pixel? Are they spraying wires on as well?
The Z80 had an additional 80 instructions. In an 8-bit CPU, that's a lot of additional instructions.
That many? Well, my brain is starting to overheat from having to dredge up memories from that long ago, so it's entirely possible that I'm forgetting a lot of instructions.:)
Wow, how did that perform (comparatively) to the x86 based PC?
To be honest, I don't think I even powered it on, much less ran performance comparisons. Not to mention that just about everything was written in assembly in those days, so benchmarking was a task of rewriting a (normally trivial) program for each processor. Also remember that this was before the official launch of any sort of IBM PC, so I didn't have an 8086 system to compare it with.
My memory is fuzzy, but at the time it was kind of a curiosity of what IBM wanted to do with it.
After the launch, we all felt that IBM rejected it because they didn't want to compete with their expensive mini-computers.:) (we were 68K snobs, of course). The real reason is probably that porting CP/M software from 8080/Z80 to 8086 was a much easier task than to the 68000 particularly because of the byte ordering issues.
Slashdot Mirror
Can you tell me any biological difference between clones and twins?
Twins are produced naturally at the same time. Clones are produced from cells not intended for reproduction, and there are unknown consequences to this. It's entirely possible that a human produced through cloning will have severe developmental problems, even beyond simple genetic errors.
That is my argument against cloning -- that we simply don't know enough at this point to say that it's safe. It's hugely irresponsible to produce damaged children through these early experiments.
Once we know a lot more, I would personally have no problem with cloning.
I think Enterprise rocks. DS9 was my favorite Star Trek series, and Enterprise is climbing rapidly.
What I especially like about Enterprise is that it's interesting watching the humans do their thing while being the "clueless newbies" on the block.
I also particularly like the way they've handled the Vulcans. It really shows how one dimensional the Vulcans have been in previous episodes. At their best, they are cool toward humans, and at their worse (e.g., the Starship captain) they are downright rude jerks. It's interesting seeing that the Vulcans have done some growing in the later centuries as well.
The characters are still learning their role, but so far, I really like the show.
The only thing negative is that they've embraced time travel plots. I hate time travel plots. There are very few plots that require time travel, and couldn't be rewritten without it. RM101's rule: All time travel episodes suck*.
*Well, except for the original series' City on the Edge of Forever where Kirk, Spock and McCoy go back to the 1930s. But that's the exception that proves the rule.
Have you investigated what educational software does or does not run under the various solutions for running Windows apps on Linux?
That's totally irrelevent. Whatever the software is, it's going to run better on Windows.
Microsoft doesn't care about providing a platform for educational software; they want the kids to be hooked on their proprietary operating system and applications.
Well, duh. Microsoft cares about providing a product that people want. Red Hat cares about providing a product that people want. McDonalds cares about providing a product that people want. Ford cares about providing a product that people want. If you want to characterize "creating something that people want" as attempting to "hook" them on it, that's your choice, but it's ludicrous.
So this action can hardly be called an act of restitution for anti-competitive behavior.
Considering it costs them a huge amount of money and provides something useful to a large number of people, I would say it is an act of restitution. Yes, even software costs them money, because a great majority of these schools would have had to purchase Windows.
The point is that the schools WANT Windows, and don't want Linux. God forbid that Microsoft supply them what they want, rather than what a bunch of zealots think they should have.
So how is the Justice Department going to justify not accepting Red Hat's offer?
Sheesh, perhaps because Linux is useless for classrooms, and the schools don't want it?
Screw what the schools actually want, we'll just force Linux down their throat and make them like it, right?
And when Microsoft viciously declines, it will give more fuel to their anti-competetive practices.
They won't have to. The schools themselves will viciously decline. Why anyone thinks that schools are just begging for Linux is beyond my comprehension. Does it occur to anyone that if they wanted it, they can install it anytime they want?
Does Red Hat think the schools just sit around and take whatever people give? In order for this Red Hat deal to mean anything, the schools have to WANT Linux. Why would they want it? What educational software that they use is going to be work on it?
Once again, it has to be pointed out: People use applications, not operating systems.
People can whine all they want about Microsoft, but it doesn't change the fact that Windows is the industry standard operating system. Schools are a lot better off having something useful, than some empty political gesture that will gather dust in the corner.
Anyway, back to my Red Cross story, they wanted me to go through these two Excel spreadsheets of volunteers to weed out duplicates and it looked like a dauntingly tedious process,
Of course, you could have just merged the two lists in Excel, sorted them, and then written a VB program to delete the duplicates. What, 2 minutes work?
Just because you don't know how to use a tool doesn't mean it's a bad tool.
Proof that if you are determined to find things to criticize, you will find them, even if you have to twist the facts.
military tribunals for immigrants
Illegal immigrants, in certain cases.
holding 1000s of people with no charges for months
Holding people for a variety of charges, most often being in the country illegally.
expanded wiretap provisions
Which are still approved by a judge, and were reasonable expansions of law. Such as having a wiretap applied to an individual, and not to a particular phone (pretty stupid in an era of disposable phones).
removal of lawer-client privileges
The ability to monitor lawyer-client conversations in very narrowly defined cases, such as a clear and present danger of planning terrorist attacks, and the information gained cannot be used against the prisoner.
attack on Oregon's right-to-die provision (where's State's Rights when Conservatives disagree with what those idiot voters wanted?) - attack on California medicinal pot distrubution centers (see above)
You may agree with these laws, but it is definitely in the interest of the federal government to protect citizens if local laws do not provide those protections. A good example is the South in the 1960s and the civil rights of blacks. Should the South have just been allowed to ignore the lynchings of blacks because of State Rights?
In the case of right-to-die, there is a very real danger of corrupting the medical industry by putting doctors in the position of having to be both preserving life and taking life. Everyone has the right to die. You've always had that right. But you don't have the right to screw up my medical care by creating a conflict of interest on the part of doctors. I happen to agree with this position.
Same with drug use. You can make the case that allowing states to legalize drugs creates an environment that endangers the citizens of that state; the so-called tyranny of the majority. It would be the same thing if say Texas decided to legalize drinking and driving. I happen to disagree with this position when it comes to medicinal use of marijauna, but I understand the reasoning.
In short, maybe you should become a little more educated, and a little less knee-jerk.
How does this mean there were fair trials?
All it means is that the trials were not automatic "guilty" verdicts if you were on trial for Nazi war crimes.
Well, to be fair he didn't ask if it was possible to inflict enough punishment, he asked if he could get a fair trial. It's actually kind of a difficult question to answer. It's like asking whether a Nazi war criminal can get a fair trial. I believe that many accused war criminals were pronounced "not guilty", however, so it's clearly possible even when emotions are high.
If we ever did catch him, we would probably not just charge him for the 9/11 bombing, but a slew of the other terrorist bombings that he is responsible for (and, in fact, has admitted to). The question of a "fair trial" is academic. The man is guilty of innumerable crimes against humanity.
Of course, to many people a "fair trial" is defined as finding him non-guilty by reason of the US is evil. I don't know if the original poster feels that way or not, but it's frightening to think that there are people out there who think that.
Notice that the article is in the Yahoo finance section. If you are an investor, then you would be interested in what stocks would likely be affected by this development.
This inturn makes it compatable and operable between the offical standard.
Man, my interns only fetch coffee and occasionally do some copying. Where do I get these interns that are able to design wireless networks? Come to think of it, where do I get Clinton-style interns?
Perhaps a biologist can answer a question I've had about this, which is also related I suppose to Chemotherapy.
What is the difference between a cancer cell and a "normal" cell? Why would radiation therapy tend to kill cancer cells faster than normal cells? The article mentions that they are concerned that normal cells might be affected, but they don't explain why it would favor cancer cells in the first place.
When you have to go to the lengths of thinking in conspiracies, that should be a signal to you that your thought processes have gone out of control.
Bush won. He won by every measure, even the unreasonable ones.
And thank God he did. If Gore had ended up winning, we would still be whining at Afghanistan to please stop letting the bullies pick on us.
I could be wrong, but I seem to remember that the original movie didn't have "Episode IV", and that was added later.
Because the ending of the last movie of the old ones had left no sensible possibility to create any sequels, Mr. Lucas will have the innovative and cunning idea of creating prequels.
So since we already have sequels to these movies, does that mean the next three are going to be episode -2, -1 and 0? Maybe he will just renumber them again. :)
You're in luck -- X11 has had the SHAPE extension for at least 15 years. I don't know if it's supported in XFREE86, however. My AIX desktop 5 years ago (?) had it, though. It was kind of amusing have a true circular window for a clock, but I have to say that it wasn't all the exciting.
Supposedly the byproduct of the reaction is water, which sounds good in principle. But where the does water go? Do you need to have a reservior for the water, or am I going to stand up with a wet lap after a long plane trip?
It's got to be good if it incorporates artificial intelligence!!
This is what is happening in Transmeta, great, innovative tech, let down by the company that created it.
The technology is innovative, granted, but I fail to see what's so great about it and why the company would be at fault for it's failing. It's slow, and simply not that much better than competing solutions. How did the "company" let it down? Not all innovative experiments pay off, and Transmeta is failing because of a bad idea.
Now, you might say that the company is not targeting Crusoe at the right markets (such as the embedded market), but to tell you the truth, we don't know that they haven't tried.
My memory of it is REALLY fuzzy. I had a lot of projects on the burners, and it was just one hunk of hardware among many that were floating around. It was a curiosity because it was from IBM and a prototype, which is the reason I remember it at all.
That said, yes, it was around 1983/84. I do remember that it was rather bulky, perhaps like a cash register, but I don't recall any membrane keys, sensor inputs, etc. It's entirely possible that they took a unit like that and created the prototype from it? On the other hand, I might just not remember the membrane keys.
If things had worked out differently, maybe your company would be Slashdot's Evil Enemy instead of Microsoft
Trust me, Bill Gates had nothing to worry about from that company. :)
This sounds all well and good, but what I don't understand is how they address the individual pixels. If I read this correctly, they are spraying the light emitting pixels onto the sheet. But how are they getting the power to each pixel? Are they spraying wires on as well?
The Z80 had an additional 80 instructions. In an 8-bit CPU, that's a lot of additional instructions.
That many? Well, my brain is starting to overheat from having to dredge up memories from that long ago, so it's entirely possible that I'm forgetting a lot of instructions. :)
Wow, how did that perform (comparatively) to the x86 based PC?
To be honest, I don't think I even powered it on, much less ran performance comparisons. Not to mention that just about everything was written in assembly in those days, so benchmarking was a task of rewriting a (normally trivial) program for each processor. Also remember that this was before the official launch of any sort of IBM PC, so I didn't have an 8086 system to compare it with.
My memory is fuzzy, but at the time it was kind of a curiosity of what IBM wanted to do with it.
After the launch, we all felt that IBM rejected it because they didn't want to compete with their expensive mini-computers. :) (we were 68K snobs, of course). The real reason is probably that porting CP/M software from 8080/Z80 to 8086 was a much easier task than to the 68000 particularly because of the byte ordering issues.
Once again, compatability issues rule the day.