Actually, the electrons you send out are not the same ones the person on the other end gets - only the pattern is transmitted. This makes the internet a metaphysical system more so than old economy paper or plastic (physical) distribution.
If you have lots of shallow water in the tropics, coral reefs make more sense than the hi-tech scheme that was proposed. In addition to fish and shellfish for human consumption, there is scuba based ecotourism. Most coral reefs have a biodiversity higher than rainforests, and play a role in the basic maintainence of global ecosystems. If an area of shallow water isn't suitable for coral reefs, growing ocean vegetables (aka 'seaweed') is a proven method for salt water agriculture. Japan and China have huge areas with floating or submersed frames that are implanted with ocean vegetables - sushi anyone??.
All over the world, mangroves and salt marshes are being destroyed for shrimp farming. Thing is, natural coastal wetlands convert sunlight into food at a higher rate than any other ecosystem. They are breeding grounds for shrimp and lots of marine species. The artificial shrimp breeding grounds are dependent on inputs of large amounts of food gathered from elsewhere - shrimp farms can produce more shrimp per acre (or hectare, if you prefer) but they do this by requiring the indirect use of lots of farm land (corn and soy meal) or the ocean (capelin meal).
If irrigating with salt water on dry land, some of the water will evaporate, and the salt will become hypersaline, which imposes an energy cost on all plants... ever hear of the Dead Sea? Hypersalinity is to blame. Growing plants with salt water could work, as long as they are in the ocean or otherwise kept from getting too salty. How much energy would it cost to pump a few trillion gallons of salt water up onto land? Then grow genetically engineered tomatos for starving people in the third world? Forget it.
People in Asia have been growing ocean vegetables (aka 'seaweed') for a long time. Maybe that is not as hi-tech and mediagenic, but it makes more sense.
This only proves that one company has been mismanaged.
Follow the money: An operating system might cost $20 or $100 or $1000, but that is nothing compared to the cost for labor to set up a system, maintain it, and do something useful with it. Simple arithmetic conclusively proves that software is a relatively small cost for most businesses - they spend alot more for services, regardless of where the software came from. If businesses do 80% of the services in house, the market for consultants is still larger than the market for boxed software. Consulting is also a business that can be started on a shoe-string and scaled up, but trying to compete in the shrinkwrapped software market takes a big investment. Most businesses are attracted to the open source nature of Linux, its stability and security, not so much the price. The fact that Linux is free is something that appeals more to hobbyists, small business owners, academics, and third-worlders.
GNU/Linux isn't trying to repeal the laws of business; it is a different type of business strategy, where there is cooperation in a limited area (software design/distribution). Outside of that area, the market continues pretty much as usual. Most new businesses go under in the first few years, so the fact that some of the Linux companies are dropping is not a reason to assume that GNU/Linux is not viable.
Two Edge Sword that favors the Powerful
on
Quantum Computers
·
· Score: 1
Yes, quantum computing could smash traditional encryption while offering new and improved methods. But the new, expensive technology will initially be in the hands of the wealthy and powerful, leading to a new wave of accumulation.
If someone goes into a store and paste a phony price tag on some merchandise, it is called fraud. I don't see how this is different, or how existing laws would protect someone doing a price-switch over the net.
Another possibility: increased radiation weakens the immune systems of people, chickens, pigs, and other reservoirs of virii. So the germs are mutating, and we are more susceptible.
Guam is a US territory. While some laws might be looser, a Napster-sized copyright infringer in Guam would be shut down pronto. Taiwan has too much trade with the US - massive pressure would be applied. Even mainland China is starting to crack down on piracy as it tries to join the WTO and become part of the world economic community. Sealand will be pressured, but maybe they can pull it off.
If the software is single purpose (rip-off the music companies), it may not make it anywhere. If the software is a multipurpose distributed file sharing/internet file system, then it might make it... the VCR eeked through the courts because it had multiple uses, some legit.
PostgreSQL is probably more in line with Oracle in terms of functionality and performance. Last I saw, PostgreSQL still lacked a few SQL commands that were included in Oracle, but that these were in the works.
The article's claim that cartilage can't be regrown is incorrect. Cartilage can heal on its own, although it tends to thin as we age. Glucosamine sulfate is a prime building block for cartilage, and a few months of supplementation with glucosamine can lead to significant regrowth of connective tissues. There are numerous studies on Medline/Grateful Med that deal with glucosamine, one is posted below.
Also, shark cartilage, which was mentioned in other/. posts, does support cartilage regrowth, but it is a very large molecule that is poorly absorbed. Most commercial glucosamine is from shrimp shells that have been acid treated to break the cartilage into its monomer units...ie, glucosamine is more effective than shark cartilage, and it is produced from what would otherwise be a waste product.
TITLE: Glucosamine and chondroitin sulfates in the treatment of osteoarthritis: a survey.
AUTHORS: de los Reyes GC; Koda RT; Lien EJ
AUTHOR AFFILIATION: Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089, USA.
SOURCE: Prog Drug Res 2000;55(1):81-103.
[MEDLINE record in process]
CITATION IDS: PMID: 11127967 UI: 21003126
ABSTRACT: For more than 30 years, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been used as standards in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA). Serious and often life-threatening adverse effects due to these agents are common. Clinical findings have revealed that glucosamine sulfate and chondroitin sulfate are effective and safer alternatives to alleviate symptoms of OA. Experimental evidence indicates that these compounds and their low molecular weight derivatives have a particular tropism for cartilage where they serve as substrates in the biosynthesis of component building blocks. This paper is a literature review of the chemistry, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy and safety of these two nutraceuticals.
ADDITIONAL MESH HEADINGS: 2000/12
2000/29 11:00
PUBLICATION TYPES: Journal Article
LANGUAGES: eng
No, but it is a crisis of reason, an academic travesty, and a triumph of idiocy. The constitution is good, but it is limited to certain arenas. This battle is important, but will probably not be decided on constitutional grounds. Nor was the Kansas decision to 'de-emphasize' evolution in the schools reversed on constitutional issues - it was the fact that academic leaders and parents spoke out.
I agree that some social science research has an ideological bias behind it - often positions that I don't care for.
But a large amount of social science is driven by people who (although they have their own opinions) want to know the truth. The politically correct crowd doesn't want to see any research that suggests that human behavior like sexism or aggression is linked to biology, and right wing radio decries the pollsters whenever they don't like their findings. But real social science looks for The Truth irrespective of generally held beliefs. If there is a significant biological basis for a behavior, we are better off understanding that, even if it makes some people upset. And pollsters that want to be right apply the scientific method, from phrasing the question to gathering the sample to analyzing the data. Breaking or bending the rules of research may give an answer that may be more comforting, but it a delusional answer that will ultimately interfere with understanding of the world, and encourage dangerous behavior.
I agree that people in the social science community don't always embrace the truth, but you are wrong if you think that social science research is of little value in reaching the truth.
Semmelweiss was the physican who discovered that infant mortality could be greatly reduced if doctors would wash their hands between each delivery. The good doctors of the day would have no such restriction on their freedom for a nonsensical "germ theory" and persecuted Semmelweiss with all their power. Wegner, who developed the theory of continental drift, was greeted with laughter and scorn, not applause.
Now a school girl conducts perfectly good research into atttitudes regarding race, and she is persecuted as well. Unfortunate, but not surprising, as the scientific community is not always ready for science that disagrees with their comfortable notions.
Actually, the young lady did some interesting social science research - I wonder if the difference between adults and children is that adults know that they are not supposed to give an answer that might appear racist. Of course, there is no shortage of racist adults, so maybe the children identified with their own race, while the adults gave the groupthink acceptable answer.
Most science fairs allow social science and biophysical research, and if social science doesn't discuss important issues (that are sometimes controversial or uncomfortable) then why do it? The judges that pulled the project should be ashamed of themselves.
If we took all the corn grown today in the US and converted it to ethanol to power engines, it would only be enough energy for our tractors and fertilizer. To fuel our automotive fleet, we would have to cover the entire US with corn and somehow get the same productivity as we do in today's corn belt. And for every bushel of corn produced, we lose two bushels of topsoil, so its not a truly renewable resource. Maybe growing trees and producing methanol instead would be more efficient in terms of energy and soil loss, but it still wouldn't support a large population living high on the hog.
We are living on the accumulated bio-capital of millions of years, and when it is gone, the burst bubble will redefine civilization (if it still exists). Until then, enjoy the party!!
If any body bothered to follow the link, the following would be obvious. It isn't a genetically engineered bug, it is a naturally occuring cyanobacter (aka 'blue-green algae' or 'green bacteria'). Now on to the meat of the article.
The doctrine of Microbial Infallibility states that microbes can do anything that humans can, and that they do it faster-better-cheaper. But the idea that we put a bioreactor inside a smokestack or factory probably won't be practical. Sunlight is a limiting factor that they try to overcome using mirrors and light pipes. Light will still probably be a limiting factor as it will take a fairly large volume/surface area of green bacteria to slurp up the thousands of tons of CO2 that pass through a smokestack daily. Also, nutrients like N-P-K will be needed in large amounts to fix so much carbon. This will require lots of fossil fuel to fix the nitrogen, and will speed the depletion of limited phosphate resources. And what will they do with the tons of muck that are produced every day - it will probably concentrate more of the Mercury and Cadmium than Carbon.
While the idea is thought provoking, it is an idea that may cost more than its worth. There are a lot of green plants on Earth that have dampened the build-up of CO2, but cant stop it in the face of the growing hordes of industrial humans. This idea doesn't make too much sense to ecologists - even though green bacteria can grow exponentially and soak up lots of gas, they probably need to be coddled, or they would be doing it already!!
Youre right - encrypted messages stand out from much other traffic as they have a much higher degree of entropy. Some snoops are probably using a simple entropy calculating filter to limit the percent of internet traffic that recieves heavy duty scrutinizing.
The particular spammouflage approach from the website appears to be rather insecure (one method of encrypting/decrypting for everyone), but it suggests closely related ideas that could catch on. Why not run the message through a public key system and then hide it in spam? The snoops that be are less likely to bother you if your encrypted message is never noticed. Obscurity alone is not enough - cryptosystems should also be mathematically secure or demonstratably difficult to crack. But together, it could be a good thing.
I interviewed once with a company that does payroll and bill processing. I didn't get the job, but I found out that they have printing plants all over the country, they know how long it takes for mail to go from one area to another, and they send the bills from far away places to maximize the float on the money. For them, its worth millions of dollars a year.
Unless you are looking for a good, Free image/map package for your box.
1) only the code for processing the images is OS. Not the images - high quality stuff is still expensive or unavailable. The US govt has a policy of selective availability and can black-out their birds in a time of crisis. Software similar to OSSIm is available in other commercial and Free software (like GRASS, the Free GIS package, originally from the US Army Corps of Engineers). Even GIMP can run filters to identify edges or do feature enhancement, and with a ruler and calculator, other geographic functions are possible (but slow and boring).
2) (Re: satellites) The Frenchmen atop the castle said "We already got one - it's very nice!" The Russians, Chinese, Indians, Europeans, Canadians, and Japanese also have sophisticated satellites, and presumably know how to analyze the images.
3) An open-sky policy is good for peace. It is hard to amass troops on your border for a surprise invasion if the world is watching. Being able to analyze surface processes on the Earth is also good for environmentalists (and developers, but they have always had an edge in terms of $$).
4) Much of the commercial GIS/Remote sensing software has been developed in harmony with various militaries around the world. If it's closed source, you can never be certain that it isn't back-doored, booby-trapped, land-mined, orrrrr * * The person responsible for that OS rant has been sacked. The management appologizes, and assures you it won't happen again. * *
So don't panic. OSSIM is a good thing, but the US is not giving up its strategic advantage. A technical software package is liberated and improved via the Cathedral model des..arrggghhh.
The standard answer would involve something about free will, but that seems too convoluted to me. God might be the all good creative force, but there is little evidence that god is all powerful or all knowing... Just the unfolding creative good. And along the way to perfection, we get the XFL. Stay tuned to a universe near you.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the electrons you send out are not the same ones the person on the other end gets - only the pattern is transmitted. This makes the internet a metaphysical system more so than old economy paper or plastic (physical) distribution.
What was the market value of the first moon rocks?
If you have lots of shallow water in the tropics, coral reefs make more sense than the hi-tech scheme that was proposed. In addition to fish and shellfish for human consumption, there is scuba based ecotourism. Most coral reefs have a biodiversity higher than rainforests, and play a role in the basic maintainence of global ecosystems. If an area of shallow water isn't suitable for coral reefs, growing ocean vegetables (aka 'seaweed') is a proven method for salt water agriculture. Japan and China have huge areas with floating or submersed frames that are implanted with ocean vegetables - sushi anyone??.
All over the world, mangroves and salt marshes are being destroyed for shrimp farming. Thing is, natural coastal wetlands convert sunlight into food at a higher rate than any other ecosystem. They are breeding grounds for shrimp and lots of marine species. The artificial shrimp breeding grounds are dependent on inputs of large amounts of food gathered from elsewhere - shrimp farms can produce more shrimp per acre (or hectare, if you prefer) but they do this by requiring the indirect use of lots of farm land (corn and soy meal) or the ocean (capelin meal).
... ever hear of the Dead Sea? Hypersalinity is to blame. Growing plants with salt water could work, as long as they are in the ocean or otherwise kept from getting too salty. How much energy would it cost to pump a few trillion gallons of salt water up onto land? Then grow genetically engineered tomatos for starving people in the third world? Forget it.
If irrigating with salt water on dry land, some of the water will evaporate, and the salt will become hypersaline, which imposes an energy cost on all plants
People in Asia have been growing ocean vegetables (aka 'seaweed') for a long time. Maybe that is not as hi-tech and mediagenic, but it makes more sense.
It is not real Mexican food.
This only proves that one company has been mismanaged.
Follow the money: An operating system might cost $20 or $100 or $1000, but that is nothing compared to the cost for labor to set up a system, maintain it, and do something useful with it. Simple arithmetic conclusively proves that software is a relatively small cost for most businesses - they spend alot more for services, regardless of where the software came from. If businesses do 80% of the services in house, the market for consultants is still larger than the market for boxed software. Consulting is also a business that can be started on a shoe-string and scaled up, but trying to compete in the shrinkwrapped software market takes a big investment. Most businesses are attracted to the open source nature of Linux, its stability and security, not so much the price. The fact that Linux is free is something that appeals more to hobbyists, small business owners, academics, and third-worlders.
GNU/Linux isn't trying to repeal the laws of business; it is a different type of business strategy, where there is cooperation in a limited area (software design/distribution). Outside of that area, the market continues pretty much as usual. Most new businesses go under in the first few years, so the fact that some of the Linux companies are dropping is not a reason to assume that GNU/Linux is not viable.
Yes, quantum computing could smash traditional encryption while offering new and improved methods. But the new, expensive technology will initially be in the hands of the wealthy and powerful, leading to a new wave of accumulation.
If someone goes into a store and paste a phony price tag on some merchandise, it is called fraud. I don't see how this is different, or how existing laws would protect someone doing a price-switch over the net.
Another possibility: increased radiation weakens the immune systems of people, chickens, pigs, and other reservoirs of virii. So the germs are mutating, and we are more susceptible.
Guam is a US territory. While some laws might be looser, a Napster-sized copyright infringer in Guam would be shut down pronto. Taiwan has too much trade with the US - massive pressure would be applied. Even mainland China is starting to crack down on piracy as it tries to join the WTO and become part of the world economic community. Sealand will be pressured, but maybe they can pull it off. ... the VCR eeked through the courts because it had multiple uses, some legit.
If the software is single purpose (rip-off the music companies), it may not make it anywhere. If the software is a multipurpose distributed file sharing/internet file system, then it might make it
PostgreSQL is probably more in line with Oracle in terms of functionality and performance. Last I saw, PostgreSQL still lacked a few SQL commands that were included in Oracle, but that these were in the works.
The article's claim that cartilage can't be regrown is incorrect. Cartilage can heal on its own, although it tends to thin as we age. Glucosamine sulfate is a prime building block for cartilage, and a few months of supplementation with glucosamine can lead to significant regrowth of connective tissues. There are numerous studies on Medline/Grateful Med that deal with glucosamine, one is posted below.
Also, shark cartilage, which was mentioned in other
TITLE: Glucosamine and chondroitin sulfates in the treatment of osteoarthritis: a survey.
AUTHORS: de los Reyes GC; Koda RT; Lien EJ
AUTHOR AFFILIATION: Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089, USA.
SOURCE: Prog Drug Res 2000;55(1):81-103.
[MEDLINE record in process]
CITATION IDS: PMID: 11127967 UI: 21003126
ABSTRACT: For more than 30 years, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been used as standards in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA). Serious and often life-threatening adverse effects due to these agents are common. Clinical findings have revealed that glucosamine sulfate and chondroitin sulfate are effective and safer alternatives to alleviate symptoms of OA.
Experimental evidence indicates that these compounds and their low molecular weight derivatives have a particular tropism for cartilage where they serve as substrates in the biosynthesis of component building blocks. This paper is a literature review of the chemistry, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy and safety of these two nutraceuticals. ADDITIONAL MESH HEADINGS: 2000/12 2000/29 11:00
PUBLICATION TYPES: Journal Article
LANGUAGES: eng
Micropayments are a slippery slope to convert the internet to one big pay site.
But when you move to Singapore, you will have to fly back to London each friday to rent a disc that will play in your machine.
No, but it is a crisis of reason, an academic travesty, and a triumph of idiocy. The constitution is good, but it is limited to certain arenas. This battle is important, but will probably not be decided on constitutional grounds. Nor was the Kansas decision to 'de-emphasize' evolution in the schools reversed on constitutional issues - it was the fact that academic leaders and parents spoke out.
I agree that some social science research has an ideological bias behind it - often positions that I don't care for.
But a large amount of social science is driven by people who (although they have their own opinions) want to know the truth. The politically correct crowd doesn't want to see any research that suggests that human behavior like sexism or aggression is linked to biology, and right wing radio decries the pollsters whenever they don't like their findings. But real social science looks for The Truth irrespective of generally held beliefs. If there is a significant biological basis for a behavior, we are better off understanding that, even if it makes some people upset. And pollsters that want to be right apply the scientific method, from phrasing the question to gathering the sample to analyzing the data. Breaking or bending the rules of research may give an answer that may be more comforting, but it a delusional answer that will ultimately interfere with understanding of the world, and encourage dangerous behavior.
I agree that people in the social science community don't always embrace the truth, but you are wrong if you think that social science research is of little value in reaching the truth.
Semmelweiss was the physican who discovered that infant mortality could be greatly reduced if doctors would wash their hands between each delivery. The good doctors of the day would have no such restriction on their freedom for a nonsensical "germ theory" and persecuted Semmelweiss with all their power. Wegner, who developed the theory of continental drift, was greeted with laughter and scorn, not applause.
Now a school girl conducts perfectly good research into atttitudes regarding race, and she is persecuted as well. Unfortunate, but not surprising, as the scientific community is not always ready for science that disagrees with their comfortable notions.
Actually, the young lady did some interesting social science research - I wonder if the difference between adults and children is that adults know that they are not supposed to give an answer that might appear racist. Of course, there is no shortage of racist adults, so maybe the children identified with their own race, while the adults gave the groupthink acceptable answer.
Most science fairs allow social science and biophysical research, and if social science doesn't discuss important issues (that are sometimes controversial or uncomfortable) then why do it? The judges that pulled the project should be ashamed of themselves.
If we took all the corn grown today in the US and converted it to ethanol to power engines, it would only be enough energy for our tractors and fertilizer. To fuel our automotive fleet, we would have to cover the entire US with corn and somehow get the same productivity as we do in today's corn belt. And for every bushel of corn produced, we lose two bushels of topsoil, so its not a truly renewable resource. Maybe growing trees and producing methanol instead would be more efficient in terms of energy and soil loss, but it still wouldn't support a large population living high on the hog.
We are living on the accumulated bio-capital of millions of years, and when it is gone, the burst bubble will redefine civilization (if it still exists). Until then, enjoy the party!!
If any body bothered to follow the link, the following would be obvious. It isn't a genetically engineered bug, it is a naturally occuring cyanobacter (aka 'blue-green algae' or 'green bacteria'). Now on to the meat of the article.
The doctrine of Microbial Infallibility states that microbes can do anything that humans can, and that they do it faster-better-cheaper. But the idea that we put a bioreactor inside a smokestack or factory probably won't be practical. Sunlight is a limiting factor that they try to overcome using mirrors and light pipes. Light will still probably be a limiting factor as it will take a fairly large volume/surface area of green bacteria to slurp up the thousands of tons of CO2 that pass through a smokestack daily. Also, nutrients like N-P-K will be needed in large amounts to fix so much carbon. This will require lots of fossil fuel to fix the nitrogen, and will speed the depletion of limited phosphate resources. And what will they do with the tons of muck that are produced every day - it will probably concentrate more of the Mercury and Cadmium than Carbon.
While the idea is thought provoking, it is an idea that may cost more than its worth. There are a lot of green plants on Earth that have dampened the build-up of CO2, but cant stop it in the face of the growing hordes of industrial humans. This idea doesn't make too much sense to ecologists - even though green bacteria can grow exponentially and soak up lots of gas, they probably need to be coddled, or they would be doing it already!!
Youre right - encrypted messages stand out from much other traffic as they have a much higher degree of entropy. Some snoops are probably using a simple entropy calculating filter to limit the percent of internet traffic that recieves heavy duty scrutinizing.
The particular spammouflage approach from the website appears to be rather insecure (one method of encrypting/decrypting for everyone), but it suggests closely related ideas that could catch on. Why not run the message through a public key system and then hide it in spam? The snoops that be are less likely to bother you if your encrypted message is never noticed. Obscurity alone is not enough - cryptosystems should also be mathematically secure or demonstratably difficult to crack. But together, it could be a good thing.
I interviewed once with a company that does payroll and bill processing. I didn't get the job, but I found out that they have printing plants all over the country, they know how long it takes for mail to go from one area to another, and they send the bills from far away places to maximize the float on the money. For them, its worth millions of dollars a year.
Unless you are looking for a good, Free image/map package for your box.
1) only the code for processing the images is OS. Not the images - high quality stuff is still expensive or unavailable. The US govt has a policy of selective availability and can black-out their birds in a time of crisis. Software similar to OSSIm is available in other commercial and Free software (like GRASS, the Free GIS package, originally from the US Army Corps of Engineers). Even GIMP can run filters to identify edges or do feature enhancement, and with a ruler and calculator, other geographic functions are possible (but slow and boring).
2) (Re: satellites) The Frenchmen atop the castle said "We already got one - it's very nice!" The Russians, Chinese, Indians, Europeans, Canadians, and Japanese also have sophisticated satellites, and presumably know how to analyze the images.
3) An open-sky policy is good for peace. It is hard to amass troops on your border for a surprise invasion if the world is watching. Being able to analyze surface processes on the Earth is also good for environmentalists (and developers, but they have always had an edge in terms of $$).
4) Much of the commercial GIS/Remote sensing software has been developed in harmony with various militaries around the world. If it's closed source, you can never be certain that it isn't back-doored, booby-trapped, land-mined, orrrrr * * The person responsible for that OS rant has been sacked. The management appologizes, and assures you it won't happen again. * *
So don't panic. OSSIM is a good thing, but the US is not giving up its strategic advantage. A technical software package is liberated and improved via the Cathedral model des..arrggghhh.
The standard answer would involve something about free will, but that seems too convoluted to me. God might be the all good creative force, but there is little evidence that god is all powerful or all knowing... Just the unfolding creative good. And along the way to perfection, we get the XFL. Stay tuned to a universe near you.
Alprazolam - what have you been taking ?? Haben sie angst??