Maybe this has already been mentioned, but taxpayers also fund medical libraries. Where I am, at the University of Texas Southwestern in Dallas, anyone can come in off the street and read expensive medical journals to their heart's content, free. Most major cities have similar facilities.
(This aside, I still think free (meaning internet) access to taxpayer-sponsored research is a good thing, provided that the peer-review institutions can be retained somehow.)
This is an excellent point, and one of the most challenging problems with fMRI and other "functional neuroimaging" methods. BOLD-fMRI (Blood Oxygen Level Dependent) relies on the fact that oxyhemoglobin is dimagnetic and deoxyhemoglobin is paramagnetic (a very interesting fact that was discovered in the 1950s by no other than Linus Pauling . ..), which means that oxygenated blood can be made to look "brighter" using certain MRI techniqies. The theoretical steps from neuronal activity to BOLD signal are this:
1. Neurons fire
2. Transient decrease of blood oxygen in that area due to increased use
3. Compensatory regional increase in blood flow causes increase in blood oxygen.
4. Miracle occurs / Change in concentration in oxygen imaged with MRI and bright "blobs" superimposed over structural image.
Many problems with this technique, and many assumptions that must be made. Just a few:
1. We assume that there is a consistent time course to these steps. During image processing, the blood oxygen vs. time curve is usually assumed to follow a particular theoretical model all over the brain. Problem is, maybe the compensatory increase in oxygenation is much slower in some areas of the brain than it is in others.
2. We have very little idea what it means that we see increased or decreased "activity" in an area, particularly when comparing normal and diseased conditions. Perhaps some areas of the brain are "always on" and there is no clear contrast between that condition and a "working" condition, therefore they NEVER appear to be activated by fMRI. Maybe the area of increased activity represents a "downstream effect" of activity in another area? Does increased activity suggest better function (e.g. more blood = gasoline to the engine = higher speed) or worse (less efficient engine = more gasoline to engine = same speed at higher cost).
Despite these problems, fMRI is damn cool because you really can "see someone think", which is a relatively new scientific development. The technology will get better, and eventually we'll get closer to the actual neurons, in terms of taking pictures of real neuronal activation instead of a blood oxygen proxy four or five physiological steps away. Anyhow, cool stuff.
The National Library of Medicine makes available a number (maybe 25?) of the electronic versions of print textbooks on a variety of topics. This can be an excellent resource. Check it out.
The Economist recently pointed out that China still recieved huge wads of international aid (premium content, no link, sorry). Sending men to the moon is a noble goal, but maybe it's something they ought to do on their own nickel.
Asking this might reveal my boundless ignorance, but how is Phoenix much different from Galeon? Is the difference that you have to have Mozilla installed to use Galeon? I use Galeon and I like it ok. Why would I want to use Phoenix instead? Thanks for any insight.
This is probably a dumb question, but I wonder why most ISPs don't support Linux, etc. even to the point where they will basically lie and tell you it won't work. Is it because the cost of training the tech staff is too high and they're not interested in serving the relatively small community of Linux users?
Or since this is Haloween, I'll toss out that maybe Microsoft has some kind of arrangement whereby the ISPs will actively discourage use of non-Windows OSes. Probably not, but anyways, this issue (and issues like it) are smack in the middle of what's keeping Linux from being on Mom and Dad's computer.
I'm sure I'm not the first to notice that over the past year or two, the quantity of technical stories has gone down, and the quantity of political / business stories has gone up. Unfortunately, the only topics most/. readers (myself included) are able to discuss in a literate fashion are those about things technical.
I guess I just hope the editors of the site think about shifting the focus back where it belongs. I have better things to do than sift through 400 heartfelt, but cripplingly ignorant posts speculating about antitrust law.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, this idea is already being implemented. Check Spurl.net's Zniff Search Engine (beta). It works on the principle you mentioned.
Maybe this has already been mentioned, but taxpayers also fund medical libraries. Where I am, at the University of Texas Southwestern in Dallas, anyone can come in off the street and read expensive medical journals to their heart's content, free. Most major cities have similar facilities.
(This aside, I still think free (meaning internet) access to taxpayer-sponsored research is a good thing, provided that the peer-review institutions can be retained somehow.)
This is an excellent point, and one of the most challenging problems with fMRI and other "functional neuroimaging" methods. BOLD-fMRI (Blood Oxygen Level Dependent) relies on the fact that oxyhemoglobin is dimagnetic and deoxyhemoglobin is paramagnetic (a very interesting fact that was discovered in the 1950s by no other than Linus Pauling . . .), which means that oxygenated blood can be made to look "brighter" using certain MRI techniqies. The theoretical steps from neuronal activity to BOLD signal are this:
1. Neurons fire
2. Transient decrease of blood oxygen in that area due to increased use
3. Compensatory regional increase in blood flow causes increase in blood oxygen.
4. Miracle occurs / Change in concentration in oxygen imaged with MRI and bright "blobs" superimposed over structural image.
Many problems with this technique, and many assumptions that must be made. Just a few:
1. We assume that there is a consistent time course to these steps. During image processing, the blood oxygen vs. time curve is usually assumed to follow a particular theoretical model all over the brain. Problem is, maybe the compensatory increase in oxygenation is much slower in some areas of the brain than it is in others.
2. We have very little idea what it means that we see increased or decreased "activity" in an area, particularly when comparing normal and diseased conditions. Perhaps some areas of the brain are "always on" and there is no clear contrast between that condition and a "working" condition, therefore they NEVER appear to be activated by fMRI. Maybe the area of increased activity represents a "downstream effect" of activity in another area? Does increased activity suggest better function (e.g. more blood = gasoline to the engine = higher speed) or worse (less efficient engine = more gasoline to engine = same speed at higher cost).
Despite these problems, fMRI is damn cool because you really can "see someone think", which is a relatively new scientific development. The technology will get better, and eventually we'll get closer to the actual neurons, in terms of taking pictures of real neuronal activation instead of a blood oxygen proxy four or five physiological steps away. Anyhow, cool stuff.
The National Library of Medicine makes available a number (maybe 25?) of the electronic versions of print textbooks on a variety of topics. This can be an excellent resource. Check it out.
The Economist recently pointed out that China still recieved huge wads of international aid (premium content, no link, sorry). Sending men to the moon is a noble goal, but maybe it's something they ought to do on their own nickel.
Thanks for the info. I'm gonna download it. Whee! Another excuse not to study.
Asking this might reveal my boundless ignorance, but how is Phoenix much different from Galeon? Is the difference that you have to have Mozilla installed to use Galeon? I use Galeon and I like it ok. Why would I want to use Phoenix instead? Thanks for any insight.
This is probably a dumb question, but I wonder why most ISPs don't support Linux, etc. even to the point where they will basically lie and tell you it won't work. Is it because the cost of training the tech staff is too high and they're not interested in serving the relatively small community of Linux users?
Or since this is Haloween, I'll toss out that maybe Microsoft has some kind of arrangement whereby the ISPs will actively discourage use of non-Windows OSes. Probably not, but anyways, this issue (and issues like it) are smack in the middle of what's keeping Linux from being on Mom and Dad's computer.
I realize that was a troll, but your inane comment about how research jumped ahead by 100 years because of Mengele's research was just plain dumb.
I suspect I agree with you about whether we should do stem cell research, but you're not going to get anywhere using Mengele as an example.
That was hilarious. Bill is too big to laugh at himself now. Resist XP.
I'm sure I'm not the first to notice that over the past year or two, the quantity of technical stories has gone down, and the quantity of political / business stories has gone up. Unfortunately, the only topics most /. readers (myself included) are able to discuss in a literate fashion are those about things technical.
I guess I just hope the editors of the site think about shifting the focus back where it belongs. I have better things to do than sift through 400 heartfelt, but cripplingly ignorant posts speculating about antitrust law.
I thought this site was for "stuff that matters". I don't know if this qualifies....