To briefly (and probably not completely accurately) summarize: 1) one guy did get fired, but that's because he wasn't getting published or graduating many students. Sorry you didn't perform. 2) a guy who said "I was fired" from the smithsonian wasn't actually fired (and was never employed there anyway), still has access to the collections and an office there, etc. They did move him to a different office, so the fact that he said "they changed the locks on my office" is true. Even worse, this is the guy who, in his last month as editor of a scientific journal (not because he was fired, but because his time was going to be up anyway) basically took it upon himself to wave a publication into print without peer review, saying that he was the only qualified editor, when there were others who could have and should have been able to review this paper.
So the ID advocates portrayed here seem to be acting in deceitful or unethical ways, and then this movie is compounding their deceit.
There are a lot of interesting questions still to be answered in evolutionary theory; rehashing the same battles over and over again with these people is a distraction at best.
I'd be interested in hearing about some of the work you did (and also what SUGEN is--I'm sorry but I'm not familiar with it).
The NCI-60 data can be spurious, but maybe some confidence assessment can be made based on the number of times any individual compound has been tested.
Well, COXEN works by examining patterns of genetic deregulation for each individual cancer tissue sample, and so this should be a more direct measurement of the causative factors than the situation you've described.
Well, COXEN will generally be used (at least at first) to suggest treatments for cancers that have either failed or don't have first-line treatments. So presumably the doctor has already tried or doesn't know which drug to use. In addition, since chemotherapeutic agents are generally administered in combinations, and because there are quite a few cancer drugs out there, the number of different combinations can be quite high, so hopefully this can be used to predict a few drugs that a) haven't been used, b) don't have adverse reactions or high toxicity (when administered together) and c) will work. Anyway, the doctor can decide to take the suggestions presented by the program or not. They're the ones administering the drugs, so it's really their call.
In addition, since this program requires microarray gene expression profiling analysis, which is somewhat more complicated than a lot of lab work (AFAIK), you wouldn't do this test in the first office visit, but more likely much later, and for cancers that don't have or aren't responding to standard treatments.
Some company researching the topic may use information they gathered from google to patent a compound, and then later may force the natives using the compound (as they extract it from the plant) to cease and decist, the pharmcorps cadre of lawyers and jackbooted thugs being more influential than that of the natives.
It wouldn't surprise me if that were to happen, and I agree that would be a bad thing, but that doesn't make what Google is doing bad. Rather, it's the way the patent system is set up for abuse and the "jackbooted thugs" who would abuse it that bring about the bad consequences. If Google had this information and did not provide it for free, preventing some independent researcher from altruistically developing a particular drug (I know, maybe this doesn't happen except in my little fantasy world of bunnies and kittens, but a significant proportion of the members of this website believe in giving their source code away for free, so maybe it isn't so far-fetched) then you could accurately say that Google was bad. Opening up the database may make the first scenario more likely than the second, but not opening it up makes the second much more difficult.
Oh, how bourgeois! This is an Apple Macintosh! The FreshenD feature would never be used to exude a smell of something so crass as pine! Macintosh users expect and demand more, and the FreshenD daemon delivers--a light, ethereal scent with notes of jasmine and citrus, evoking memories of a mountain lake after a spring rainfall.
Maybe you're thinking of Microsoft's SmellMe feature (which is rumored to be included with Longhorn). It's a shame--they throw all this money at this cool new feature, but it winds up smelling like a freshly cleaned toilet.
I do remember thinking that there was a possibility that your post was supposed to be funny, maybe as some sort of obscure Simpsons quote or something, and I'm sorry I didn't put that disclaimer in my post. ashot and at least one moderator took it seriously, however, so I did also. My beef's not with you but with whoever modded you up +1 Informative.
But how badly would it suck to get assigned the EJECTOR SEAT button and then have a completely successful flight?
<Shatner>Must... not... push... ejector seat button! Must remain... calm... but it compels me! Everything... fine... no need to push... the button. Must push the button!!!! It is... what makes us... human.</Shatner> (pushes button, sending screaming Ansarinauts into space, resulting in the loss of the rocket).
well, I think it is the fact that Karry is claming to be one of the working class...I don't think he can if he is rich. So I think the problem is, is that he is a hipocrite.
You mean like W? "Don't pay any attention that I basically got handed Harken Oil and the Texas Rangers 'cause of my daddy. Look! I've got a ranch! I'm a regular guy!"
I don't know how the republicans can claim this sort of populist mantle in this way. Seriously, saying "John Kerry pretends to understand the working class, but is loaded with Cash Money. Who is the real John Kerry?" implies that John Kerry is pretending to be blue-collar so that he can implement some sort of nefarious scheme to dick the working class over. Meanwhile, W, who's just as loaded (on the same order of, at any rate) and is actively implementing nefarious schemes to dick over the working class gets to pretend that he is fighting for the little guy. Ridiculous.
Giodnamdt, I htae tihs agruenmt!!!! If yuo wnat to be lzay aobut yuor witrnig, tath's fnie, btu we cna slitl btcih auobt it! If yuo dno't wnat to bheotr lraineng teh rlues, dno't kdi ysorulef taht teh lganugae is eolvivng, yrou'e jsut bnieg lzay!!!
Srue, mnay rlues aer arrrbtiay, btu wtih no rlues, (scuh as in tihs empxlae) rdinaeg bcmoees, cisfuonng, pnaiufl, adn mlsiaednig!
Right. It's not a monopoly, it's a monopsony. A monopoly is defined as one single vendor selling a product, such that the vendor has a disproportionate amount of power to keep prices higher than they would be if there were competition among vendors (people would tend to shop at the vendor with the lowest price). Assuming all companies want the most amount of money possible, every company would desire to be a monopoly, because then they could charge whatever they want for a product. A market in which there is a monopoly power is not a free market, because the monopoly controls prices--not the law of supply and demand.
A monopsony, OTOH, is defined as one single buyer buying a product, such that the buyer has a disproportionate amount of power to keep prices lower than they would be if there were no competition among buyers (vendors would want to sell to the buyer offering the highest price). Again, a market in which there is a monopsony power is not a free market, because the monopsony controls prices, not the law of supply and demand. This is sort of what we have with Wal-Mart. There are competing (in this case, clothing) vendors who want to sell their products to walmart, because wal-mart is huge and can buy a large amount of product. Since wal-mart is so huge, and since there are competing vendors trying to sell to wal-mart, if company A doesn't sell their products to wal-mart, the competing vendors will, and will make more money and drive company A out of business. (worst case). Now if there were several buyers for the product, and the raw materials for the product went up, company A could say, "Sorry, but costs have gone up, and so we have to raise prices of our product." Some buyers might say, "no thanks, that's too expensive," but others might not, because they really want to buy the product. But in this case, since there's only one buyer with the scope and reach of Wal-mart, Walmart can say "Too bad, sell it at this price or we won't buy it," so company A can either do it, or get driven out of business by its competitors.
Now most of us here don't really have a problem with companies making money in a free and fair market, but when these monopolistic or monopsonistic powers arise, they make money unfairly and have a disproportionate amount of power, and that's what we're complaining about.
Slashdot Mirror
See this for some hot debunking action.
To briefly (and probably not completely accurately) summarize: 1) one guy did get fired, but that's because he wasn't getting published or graduating many students. Sorry you didn't perform. 2) a guy who said "I was fired" from the smithsonian wasn't actually fired (and was never employed there anyway), still has access to the collections and an office there, etc. They did move him to a different office, so the fact that he said "they changed the locks on my office" is true. Even worse, this is the guy who, in his last month as editor of a scientific journal (not because he was fired, but because his time was going to be up anyway) basically took it upon himself to wave a publication into print without peer review, saying that he was the only qualified editor, when there were others who could have and should have been able to review this paper.
So the ID advocates portrayed here seem to be acting in deceitful or unethical ways, and then this movie is compounding their deceit.
There are a lot of interesting questions still to be answered in evolutionary theory; rehashing the same battles over and over again with these people is a distraction at best.
The NCI-60 data can be spurious, but maybe some confidence assessment can be made based on the number of times any individual compound has been tested.
If I had points, I'd mod you up.
Well, COXEN works by examining patterns of genetic deregulation for each individual cancer tissue sample, and so this should be a more direct measurement of the causative factors than the situation you've described.
Feedback, of course, is critical.
In addition, since this program requires microarray gene expression profiling analysis, which is somewhat more complicated than a lot of lab work (AFAIK), you wouldn't do this test in the first office visit, but more likely much later, and for cancers that don't have or aren't responding to standard treatments.
They may not be out to get you, but they are out to get your money.
Groovy! Smashing! Yay capitalism!
English, Motherfucker! Do you speak it?!!
Sure...If batshit crazy manliness turns you on.
It wouldn't surprise me if that were to happen, and I agree that would be a bad thing, but that doesn't make what Google is doing bad. Rather, it's the way the patent system is set up for abuse and the "jackbooted thugs" who would abuse it that bring about the bad consequences. If Google had this information and did not provide it for free, preventing some independent researcher from altruistically developing a particular drug (I know, maybe this doesn't happen except in my little fantasy world of bunnies and kittens, but a significant proportion of the members of this website believe in giving their source code away for free, so maybe it isn't so far-fetched) then you could accurately say that Google was bad. Opening up the database may make the first scenario more likely than the second, but not opening it up makes the second much more difficult.
Oh, how bourgeois! This is an Apple Macintosh! The FreshenD feature would never be used to exude a smell of something so crass as pine! Macintosh users expect and demand more, and the FreshenD daemon delivers--a light, ethereal scent with notes of jasmine and citrus, evoking memories of a mountain lake after a spring rainfall.
Maybe you're thinking of Microsoft's SmellMe feature (which is rumored to be included with Longhorn). It's a shame--they throw all this money at this cool new feature, but it winds up smelling like a freshly cleaned toilet.
I do remember thinking that there was a possibility that your post was supposed to be funny, maybe as some sort of obscure Simpsons quote or something, and I'm sorry I didn't put that disclaimer in my post. ashot and at least one moderator took it seriously, however, so I did also. My beef's not with you but with whoever modded you up +1 Informative.
Any grammar nazi with mod points, please step this way.
Somebody mod the parent up, and the grandparent down, because ashot's correct and proverbialcow's not. "Perfectly well english" my ass.
It's 1000 Swiss Francs, which works out to about $800 US. Still pretty steep, but not quite the psychological value of one grand.
But how badly would it suck to get assigned the EJECTOR SEAT button and then have a completely successful flight?
<Shatner>Must... not... push... ejector seat button! Must remain... calm... but it compels me! Everything... fine... no need to push... the button. Must push the button!!!! It is... what makes us... human.</Shatner> (pushes button, sending screaming Ansarinauts into space, resulting in the loss of the rocket).
I thought you had advanced beyond our primitive Download.Ject technology...on the Moon!
You mean like W? "Don't pay any attention that I basically got handed Harken Oil and the Texas Rangers 'cause of my daddy. Look! I've got a ranch! I'm a regular guy!"
I don't know how the republicans can claim this sort of populist mantle in this way. Seriously, saying "John Kerry pretends to understand the working class, but is loaded with Cash Money. Who is the real John Kerry?" implies that John Kerry is pretending to be blue-collar so that he can implement some sort of nefarious scheme to dick the working class over. Meanwhile, W, who's just as loaded (on the same order of, at any rate) and is actively implementing nefarious schemes to dick over the working class gets to pretend that he is fighting for the little guy. Ridiculous.
Giodnamdt, I htae tihs agruenmt!!!! If yuo wnat to be lzay aobut yuor witrnig, tath's fnie, btu we cna slitl btcih auobt it! If yuo dno't wnat to bheotr lraineng teh rlues, dno't kdi ysorulef taht teh lganugae is eolvivng, yrou'e jsut bnieg lzay!!!
Srue, mnay rlues aer arrrbtiay, btu wtih no rlues, (scuh as in tihs empxlae) rdinaeg bcmoees, cisfuonng, pnaiufl, adn mlsiaednig!
Flying Crocodile R00lz!
Hey, baby, let me show you "The Rest of the Industry"!
Giggidy-Giggidy-Giggidy-Goo!
Your loss.
Powerbook owner.
Maybe so, but
[1] The Ass of MourningBlade, personal communication
does not a good citation make.
Right. It's not a monopoly, it's a monopsony. A monopoly is defined as one single vendor selling a product, such that the vendor has a disproportionate amount of power to keep prices higher than they would be if there were competition among vendors (people would tend to shop at the vendor with the lowest price). Assuming all companies want the most amount of money possible, every company would desire to be a monopoly, because then they could charge whatever they want for a product. A market in which there is a monopoly power is not a free market, because the monopoly controls prices--not the law of supply and demand.
A monopsony, OTOH, is defined as one single buyer buying a product, such that the buyer has a disproportionate amount of power to keep prices lower than they would be if there were no competition among buyers (vendors would want to sell to the buyer offering the highest price). Again, a market in which there is a monopsony power is not a free market, because the monopsony controls prices, not the law of supply and demand. This is sort of what we have with Wal-Mart. There are competing (in this case, clothing) vendors who want to sell their products to walmart, because wal-mart is huge and can buy a large amount of product. Since wal-mart is so huge, and since there are competing vendors trying to sell to wal-mart, if company A doesn't sell their products to wal-mart, the competing vendors will, and will make more money and drive company A out of business. (worst case). Now if there were several buyers for the product, and the raw materials for the product went up, company A could say, "Sorry, but costs have gone up, and so we have to raise prices of our product." Some buyers might say, "no thanks, that's too expensive," but others might not, because they really want to buy the product. But in this case, since there's only one buyer with the scope and reach of Wal-mart, Walmart can say "Too bad, sell it at this price or we won't buy it," so company A can either do it, or get driven out of business by its competitors.
Now most of us here don't really have a problem with companies making money in a free and fair market, but when these monopolistic or monopsonistic powers arise, they make money unfairly and have a disproportionate amount of power, and that's what we're complaining about.
Yeah...and why is the search in a drop-down box? And why aren't the samples put in sub-menus--nobody wants to have to scroll a drop-down box.