At my university, when US students visit for semester-abroad programs they walk around in packs and rarely socialise with the locals. They generally don't have the work ethic to hog the computers though, so we don't have that problem. Most of them take subjects like History and Linguistics, and the few I've seen in STEM fields are woefully unprepared for the standards our university demands. Hey, they don't seem stupid, it's just like they've never actually had to really apply themselves before.
The fact that in your days the foreigners (who I'll assume were in the minority) were able to form a cabal that hogged terminals, while the locals stood by helplessly and wrung their hands, may point to a certain shortcoming on the will and tenacity of the locals to work together in order to be competitive, as well as a lack of initiative getting rules implemented about terminal quotas. If there was a problem, why didn't you do something about it? Just saying.
So you're saying the problem is that the corporations have the capability of influencing the government, correct? So, shouldn't we impose more restrictions on businesses so that they cannot influence politics in this way?
It all depends on how much they need to shift the market. If they want to shift it a lot, then they need at least 5 banks. If they just want to shift it up or down the flat middle section by a fraction, one bank just needs to say higher or lower than anybody else will, and even then only by a fraction of a percent.
Same. The only time I've found cloud apps useful is for collaboration projects where more than one person is working on the same document at a time and something like Hg/SVN won't work.
Dedupe is only implemented on a same-file-same-key basis. So if *you* upload the same file twice it will be deduped, but it won't share the data backend with anybody else.
How about rewarding a prosecutor based on how accurate their charges are compared to what the judge decides as a suitable settlement/fine/community service/sentence? They can still throw whatever charges they want, but the punishment should reflect something sane.
Fact: Eating raw and unprocessed foods is healthy.
I'll give you unprocessed, but raw? Good luck with getting enough protein and no salmonella. Oh, and about B12, I take it you'll just get injections?
Fact: Nature has achieved balance over the course of millions of years, a fine tuned perfected balance.
Nature is constantly changing. We are a product of nature. The 'balance' you speak of is a myth. Nature does not have hidden guardians which go around making sure things stay 'in balance', or any method behind its madness which directs it towards balance. It keeps shifting until it gets stuck somewhere for a while, and then it gets disturbed so it starts shifting again.
Fact: White man has way to much fucking hubris to think they can outsmart the universe all in one go, in one century. Fact: Humans invented greed, poverty, and in-balance of power, in nature, and in their culture.
You've never seen starving animals in the wild, have you? I would call that poverty. You've never seen an ocelot or wildcat kill more animals than it could possibly eat, have you? Because I'd call that greed. Humans are nothing special, we just do the regular "eat, sleep, reproduce" that every animal does.
Fact: Monsanto doesn't care about feeding anyone. They do care, and have a fiduciary responsibility to control over the market.
True, but nobody will buy their stuff unless it has higher yields and better resistance than the competitors. That this has the side-effect of upping prodution and bringing down food prices so that people in overpopulated third world countries can afford to eat. If it wasn't Monsanto, somebody else would be genetically tweaking crops to give higher yields and have better resistance to pests and drought.
Fact: Science is imperfect and can be fallible, it has been fooled in the past. Its only as good as our scientists are. We are far from a thorough, well thought, slow moving race. Particularly when employed for the big bucks.
Science understands this, which is why it constantly updates itself based on the newest data available. However, it is the best we have, so unless you have a better solution for feeding 6 billion people please stop standing in the way of progress.
Fact: Science only provides a limited model of what we understand about the universe.
If you think it needs some work, please contribute. If you think you have a better way of doing something, perform a double-blind study and see if what you believe is actually any better than the alternatives. Science is willing to accept your beliefs if you are willing to prove them. However, until you do provide that proof, please do not attempt to promote your beliefs over those who have proved theirs, because they are currently far more credible than you are.
Fact: You motherfuckers are retarded as shit, insane, and suck for believing this shit can only end in a good, charitable, humanitarian, philanthropic way. More facts, I'm in a trollin (not really, epic trolls require more subtley and finess), flamewarrioring mood. Sometimes polite discourse isn't as effective and fun as being an ass. You won't be able to convince me, a reasonably well educated middle aged white boy that GMO is perfectly safe. Because I know better. But I wan't you to know that I thoroughly disapprove of the god-damn bullshit arguments I see that say GMO perfectly is safe. Thats like attributing safety to the scientific method. It has no morals or ethical concern about safety. Its a process. Mr. Wizard does not give a shit about little Timmy.
As a middle aged white boy, I'm guessing you have enough money to feed yourself by buying fresh produce at the local co-op. However, many people live in abject poverty to provide for your rock-n-roll lifestyle, so while you might be concerned that buying food which
I agree that something like that would help in preventing people from externalising costs (instead of reducing costs). The trouble with that is that there will inevitably be corruption and loss based on where that tax money goes to. If it is put into installing atmospheric CO2 scrubbers, then sure, but somehow I don't see that happening. Also, just because there is a market option for something which is cheaper doesn't always mean it will be taken, otherwise everybody would have heat-pumps instead of furnaces and would drive plug-in hybrids instead of automatic transmission V8 SUV 4x4s.
A pollution tax doesn't work because it doesn't actually do anything about all of the greenhouse gasses and soot which damage the environment. You'd have to factor in the cost of a CO2 scrubber and permanent storage of all produced CO2, and carbon offsets of both projects in trees planted.
A small car engine is rated at 200kW? Are you smoking crack? That's 270hp, in case you aren't familiar with metric units in this setting. A small car (let's say a VW Golf) has ~80kW, and still gets from 0 - 60mph in 10 seconds. And if you are driving with your foot all the way down 1/4 of the time, you're doing something wrong.
And then there's the assumption that the only solar panel you can use is what is built into the car - we have these fancy things called transmission lines and power outlets which mean that you can put solar in one place and take it out another. Complaining that a solar car won't work is like complaining that your regular electric car doesn't generate its own electricity, or that an ICE car doesn't find and pump oil and refine its own fuel.
Nullbasic (Tat) is certainly one of the more promising candidates for some sort of competitive interference of a mutated protein because it is directly involved in the replication cycle. However, it doesn't do anything about clearing up all of the viruses which are already present in infected cells so all it does is make the virus go into remission. Also, they've been doing in-vitro testing using genetic techniques which can't be carried across to in-vivo approaches, so basically all they've done is identified Tat as a potential drug target, and considering that successful drug development can take decades, we really shouldn't count our chickens before they're hatched.
HIV primarily infects immune cells, so if you can destroy all of the immune cells then it is far less likely to be accidentally produced later on down the line, which is how most of the people who have been 'cured' have done it. Even so, something as mundane as when they start getting grey hair, or if they get exposed to somebody with chickenpox, could set them off again, so the researchers are very cautious when they say 'cured'. It's not so much forcing the latent HIV to 'wake up' (because it isn't actually there, just the DNA code to produce it), as it is deleting all instances of where it could exist on the hard drive. Detecting and destroying infected cells is precisely the kind of thing that your immune system does, the trouble is that HIV mutates so quickly that any specific proteins which your immune system was using to recognise the infection will quickly be bred out of the remaining HIV-infected cells.
TB is a particularly tough one, because it has two completely separate metabolisms - aerobic and anaerobic. The first is used when it is on the run and infecting at will, and the second when one of the macrophages of your immune system has detected and engulphed it. TB then releases proteins which cause the macrophage to turn into what is known as a 'foamy macrophage' (it gets filled with little pockets of fats) which the TB then uses its anaerobic metabolism to live off of. As such, we have no 'cure' for TB, we can only make it go into remission. If your immune system ever gets compromised (eg flu, stress, HIV) it can start the whole TB infection again.
One of our body's other techniques for fighting TB is to encase it in a hard shell (known as a granuloma) if there is a section which is so infected that it is worth it just 'writing it off'. Even then TB can survive, and if the granuloma is ever broken open the TB infection can resume. Egyptian mummies have been found with granulomas in their lungs, and when broken open some of the TB cells inside were still alive.
I think the trouble is we've already killed off all of the 'easy' diseases. The difficult ones now, TB, HIV, malaria and influenza all have big problems that we're going to need some novel new paradigm of treatment if we ever want to completely cure them.
Curing each cancer individually is the same thing as curing each patient individually because almost every person's cancer is caused by a different mutation, particularly once it really gets going, when it mutates like crazy due to the fast, unregulated divisions.
This is still something which would need regular 'top-up' doses, because it doesn't actually kill the virus but simply prevents it from affecting the immune system by making the immune cells (the HIV's target) inhospitable for the virus to live in. The trouble is that if HIV is able to infect even a single cell before the treatment is given, it actually splices its entire genome somewhere into the DNA of that cell, and at any random time some hormone or environmental factor might cause that section of the DNA to be 'run', causing the virus to be produced again. Think of it like a compromised server - you can never be sure that some executable somewhere deep in the OS wasn't modified to reinstall backdoors whenever it gets run by something as inane as unplugging a keyboard. Unfortunately, with biological systems we don't really have the option of doing a complete wipe and reinstalling from scratch...
The trouble is that there *have* been a number of cures/vaccines, but HIV mutates so quickly that they were quickly rendered ineffective. HIV can differ significantly even between somebody and the person they were infected by, all depending on how their immune system responds to the infection and what drugs they are given.
Please look it up. Note that both the weight and matching screen resolution are non-negotiable. A laptop that's +1lb heavier or relies on 1024x768 max resolution will not count as a MacBook Air equivalent.
vsThinkpad X1 Carbon: 14" 1600x900 screen 2.99lbs 8 hours usage So, better or equal in every respect. Not only that, if you don't mind an extra 0.4lbs you can get it with a touch screen.
The iPod touch is significantly thinner than an iPhone (and cheaper). An iPhone does not count as iPod touch substitute, why should an Android phone?
Unlike iPhones, Android phones come in a whole variety of shapes and sizes (and prices).
Hence him saying that if Apple doesn't come up with a new product X, where X is to the iPhone as the iPhone was to the iPod, they are going to have to fight it out in markets which have competition. If they have competition they won't be able to charge high enough to have the same margins, and their profits will go down. If you believe Apple will come up with product X, well, I hope that turns out well for you. But frankly, the leadership at Apple since Jobs died has been pretty shocking and if you think they are going to demand the same perfection as Jobs did, which is what made Apple distinguish itself in the first place, remember the Maps fiasco.
It was brick walls and corrugated iron roofing, so I wouldn't say it was particularly susceptible to fire. There was some grass just outside the house that didn't burn, so clearly the heat was only higher up. The only weak point was that the wood inside the roof, under the metal, was ~70 years old so was extremely dry. The heat was so intense once the house caught alight that all the windowpanes melted.
We had an old house in a sandy, scrubby area that had plenty of room around it and still burnt down when a bushfire came through. The firefighter said that the air was so hot that it heated the wood under the corrugated iron roof until it spontaneously caught on fire.
In the rest of the world people don't insist on driving the biggest car, owning the newest $GADGET or having enormous houses with central heating. In the rest of the world earning $7.25/hr is a decent salary, and people are happy because they value their friends and their place in the community instead of envying the smiling models they see on TV. In the US you don't work for a *living*, you work for all of the bullshit that you have been convinced is necessary to have in order to be happy.
Slashdot Mirror
At my university, when US students visit for semester-abroad programs they walk around in packs and rarely socialise with the locals. They generally don't have the work ethic to hog the computers though, so we don't have that problem. Most of them take subjects like History and Linguistics, and the few I've seen in STEM fields are woefully unprepared for the standards our university demands. Hey, they don't seem stupid, it's just like they've never actually had to really apply themselves before.
The fact that in your days the foreigners (who I'll assume were in the minority) were able to form a cabal that hogged terminals, while the locals stood by helplessly and wrung their hands, may point to a certain shortcoming on the will and tenacity of the locals to work together in order to be competitive, as well as a lack of initiative getting rules implemented about terminal quotas. If there was a problem, why didn't you do something about it? Just saying.
So you're saying the problem is that the corporations have the capability of influencing the government, correct? So, shouldn't we impose more restrictions on businesses so that they cannot influence politics in this way?
It all depends on how much they need to shift the market. If they want to shift it a lot, then they need at least 5 banks. If they just want to shift it up or down the flat middle section by a fraction, one bank just needs to say higher or lower than anybody else will, and even then only by a fraction of a percent.
Same. The only time I've found cloud apps useful is for collaboration projects where more than one person is working on the same document at a time and something like Hg/SVN won't work.
What does Iran's sexual discrimination have to do with their space program?
Dedupe is only implemented on a same-file-same-key basis. So if *you* upload the same file twice it will be deduped, but it won't share the data backend with anybody else.
How about rewarding a prosecutor based on how accurate their charges are compared to what the judge decides as a suitable settlement/fine/community service/sentence? They can still throw whatever charges they want, but the punishment should reflect something sane.
Fact: Eating raw and unprocessed foods is healthy.
I'll give you unprocessed, but raw? Good luck with getting enough protein and no salmonella. Oh, and about B12, I take it you'll just get injections?
Fact: Nature has achieved balance over the course of millions of years, a fine tuned perfected balance.
Nature is constantly changing. We are a product of nature. The 'balance' you speak of is a myth. Nature does not have hidden guardians which go around making sure things stay 'in balance', or any method behind its madness which directs it towards balance. It keeps shifting until it gets stuck somewhere for a while, and then it gets disturbed so it starts shifting again.
Fact: White man has way to much fucking hubris to think they can outsmart the universe all in one go, in one century.
Fact: Humans invented greed, poverty, and in-balance of power, in nature, and in their culture.
You've never seen starving animals in the wild, have you? I would call that poverty. You've never seen an ocelot or wildcat kill more animals than it could possibly eat, have you? Because I'd call that greed. Humans are nothing special, we just do the regular "eat, sleep, reproduce" that every animal does.
Fact: Monsanto doesn't care about feeding anyone. They do care, and have a fiduciary responsibility to control over the market.
True, but nobody will buy their stuff unless it has higher yields and better resistance than the competitors. That this has the side-effect of upping prodution and bringing down food prices so that people in overpopulated third world countries can afford to eat. If it wasn't Monsanto, somebody else would be genetically tweaking crops to give higher yields and have better resistance to pests and drought.
Fact: Science is imperfect and can be fallible, it has been fooled in the past. Its only as good as our scientists are. We are far from a thorough, well thought, slow moving race. Particularly when employed for the big bucks.
Science understands this, which is why it constantly updates itself based on the newest data available. However, it is the best we have, so unless you have a better solution for feeding 6 billion people please stop standing in the way of progress.
Fact: Science only provides a limited model of what we understand about the universe.
If you think it needs some work, please contribute. If you think you have a better way of doing something, perform a double-blind study and see if what you believe is actually any better than the alternatives. Science is willing to accept your beliefs if you are willing to prove them. However, until you do provide that proof, please do not attempt to promote your beliefs over those who have proved theirs, because they are currently far more credible than you are.
Fact: You motherfuckers are retarded as shit, insane, and suck for believing this shit can only end in a good, charitable, humanitarian, philanthropic way.
More facts, I'm in a trollin (not really, epic trolls require more subtley and finess), flamewarrioring mood. Sometimes polite discourse isn't as effective and fun as being an ass. You won't be able to convince me, a reasonably well educated middle aged white boy that GMO is perfectly safe. Because I know better. But I wan't you to know that I thoroughly disapprove of the god-damn bullshit arguments I see that say GMO perfectly is safe. Thats like attributing safety to the scientific method. It has no morals or ethical concern about safety. Its a process. Mr. Wizard does not give a shit about little Timmy.
As a middle aged white boy, I'm guessing you have enough money to feed yourself by buying fresh produce at the local co-op. However, many people live in abject poverty to provide for your rock-n-roll lifestyle, so while you might be concerned that buying food which
I agree that something like that would help in preventing people from externalising costs (instead of reducing costs). The trouble with that is that there will inevitably be corruption and loss based on where that tax money goes to. If it is put into installing atmospheric CO2 scrubbers, then sure, but somehow I don't see that happening. Also, just because there is a market option for something which is cheaper doesn't always mean it will be taken, otherwise everybody would have heat-pumps instead of furnaces and would drive plug-in hybrids instead of automatic transmission V8 SUV 4x4s.
(I can't quite tell: are you simply not familiar with how the US legal system works, or are you deliberately misrepresenting it?)
mangu is pointing out the fact that it doesn't seem to be a very good system.
A pollution tax doesn't work because it doesn't actually do anything about all of the greenhouse gasses and soot which damage the environment. You'd have to factor in the cost of a CO2 scrubber and permanent storage of all produced CO2, and carbon offsets of both projects in trees planted.
A small car engine is rated at 200kW? Are you smoking crack? That's 270hp, in case you aren't familiar with metric units in this setting. A small car (let's say a VW Golf) has ~80kW, and still gets from 0 - 60mph in 10 seconds. And if you are driving with your foot all the way down 1/4 of the time, you're doing something wrong.
And then there's the assumption that the only solar panel you can use is what is built into the car - we have these fancy things called transmission lines and power outlets which mean that you can put solar in one place and take it out another. Complaining that a solar car won't work is like complaining that your regular electric car doesn't generate its own electricity, or that an ICE car doesn't find and pump oil and refine its own fuel.
Nullbasic (Tat) is certainly one of the more promising candidates for some sort of competitive interference of a mutated protein because it is directly involved in the replication cycle. However, it doesn't do anything about clearing up all of the viruses which are already present in infected cells so all it does is make the virus go into remission. Also, they've been doing in-vitro testing using genetic techniques which can't be carried across to in-vivo approaches, so basically all they've done is identified Tat as a potential drug target, and considering that successful drug development can take decades, we really shouldn't count our chickens before they're hatched.
HIV primarily infects immune cells, so if you can destroy all of the immune cells then it is far less likely to be accidentally produced later on down the line, which is how most of the people who have been 'cured' have done it. Even so, something as mundane as when they start getting grey hair, or if they get exposed to somebody with chickenpox, could set them off again, so the researchers are very cautious when they say 'cured'. It's not so much forcing the latent HIV to 'wake up' (because it isn't actually there, just the DNA code to produce it), as it is deleting all instances of where it could exist on the hard drive. Detecting and destroying infected cells is precisely the kind of thing that your immune system does, the trouble is that HIV mutates so quickly that any specific proteins which your immune system was using to recognise the infection will quickly be bred out of the remaining HIV-infected cells.
TB is a particularly tough one, because it has two completely separate metabolisms - aerobic and anaerobic. The first is used when it is on the run and infecting at will, and the second when one of the macrophages of your immune system has detected and engulphed it. TB then releases proteins which cause the macrophage to turn into what is known as a 'foamy macrophage' (it gets filled with little pockets of fats) which the TB then uses its anaerobic metabolism to live off of. As such, we have no 'cure' for TB, we can only make it go into remission. If your immune system ever gets compromised (eg flu, stress, HIV) it can start the whole TB infection again.
One of our body's other techniques for fighting TB is to encase it in a hard shell (known as a granuloma) if there is a section which is so infected that it is worth it just 'writing it off'. Even then TB can survive, and if the granuloma is ever broken open the TB infection can resume. Egyptian mummies have been found with granulomas in their lungs, and when broken open some of the TB cells inside were still alive.
I think the trouble is we've already killed off all of the 'easy' diseases. The difficult ones now, TB, HIV, malaria and influenza all have big problems that we're going to need some novel new paradigm of treatment if we ever want to completely cure them.
Curing each cancer individually is the same thing as curing each patient individually because almost every person's cancer is caused by a different mutation, particularly once it really gets going, when it mutates like crazy due to the fast, unregulated divisions.
Thales also was involved in an arms/bribery scandal in South Africa.
This is still something which would need regular 'top-up' doses, because it doesn't actually kill the virus but simply prevents it from affecting the immune system by making the immune cells (the HIV's target) inhospitable for the virus to live in. The trouble is that if HIV is able to infect even a single cell before the treatment is given, it actually splices its entire genome somewhere into the DNA of that cell, and at any random time some hormone or environmental factor might cause that section of the DNA to be 'run', causing the virus to be produced again. Think of it like a compromised server - you can never be sure that some executable somewhere deep in the OS wasn't modified to reinstall backdoors whenever it gets run by something as inane as unplugging a keyboard. Unfortunately, with biological systems we don't really have the option of doing a complete wipe and reinstalling from scratch...
The trouble is that there *have* been a number of cures/vaccines, but HIV mutates so quickly that they were quickly rendered ineffective. HIV can differ significantly even between somebody and the person they were infected by, all depending on how their immune system responds to the infection and what drugs they are given.
What if it expires after the first time it is used?
Please look it up. Note that both the weight and matching screen resolution are non-negotiable. A laptop that's +1lb heavier or relies on 1024x768 max resolution will not count as a MacBook Air equivalent.
Let's compare the 13.3" MB Air:
1400x900 screen
2.96lbs
7 hours usage
vsThinkpad X1 Carbon:
14" 1600x900 screen
2.99lbs
8 hours usage
So, better or equal in every respect. Not only that, if you don't mind an extra 0.4lbs you can get it with a touch screen.
The iPod touch is significantly thinner than an iPhone (and cheaper). An iPhone does not count as iPod touch substitute, why should an Android phone?
Unlike iPhones, Android phones come in a whole variety of shapes and sizes (and prices).
Hence him saying that if Apple doesn't come up with a new product X, where X is to the iPhone as the iPhone was to the iPod, they are going to have to fight it out in markets which have competition. If they have competition they won't be able to charge high enough to have the same margins, and their profits will go down. If you believe Apple will come up with product X, well, I hope that turns out well for you. But frankly, the leadership at Apple since Jobs died has been pretty shocking and if you think they are going to demand the same perfection as Jobs did, which is what made Apple distinguish itself in the first place, remember the Maps fiasco.
Samsung has a current P/E of 10.9
It was brick walls and corrugated iron roofing, so I wouldn't say it was particularly susceptible to fire. There was some grass just outside the house that didn't burn, so clearly the heat was only higher up. The only weak point was that the wood inside the roof, under the metal, was ~70 years old so was extremely dry. The heat was so intense once the house caught alight that all the windowpanes melted.
We had an old house in a sandy, scrubby area that had plenty of room around it and still burnt down when a bushfire came through. The firefighter said that the air was so hot that it heated the wood under the corrugated iron roof until it spontaneously caught on fire.
In the rest of the world people don't insist on driving the biggest car, owning the newest $GADGET or having enormous houses with central heating. In the rest of the world earning $7.25/hr is a decent salary, and people are happy because they value their friends and their place in the community instead of envying the smiling models they see on TV. In the US you don't work for a *living*, you work for all of the bullshit that you have been convinced is necessary to have in order to be happy.