The study described in the web page accessible from the login-protected link (which is not the primary source) has been published on the Journal of the American Medical Association: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/ar... (protected too, but at least is the real thing). Here the AMA news release about the results, sufficiently informative: http://media.jamanetwork.com/n...
While in principle you could be right, fact is that a country relying on nuclear energy like USA is the greatest producer of CO2 in the world (per capita). While Italy is not the best in this sense, still produces less than half (per capita) comparing to USA. So, it is difficult to directly relate nuclear energy usage to better environmental impact and global warming.
I'm one of those that voted against going back to nuclear (because we already closed our few plants years ago). Progress is not a single, straight line in one direction. In particular, believing that your own direction is the only one is slightly arrogant. So is the original post. There is room for research and development in many different technologies, and you should be glad someone other will try other ways, because differentiation is more productive than dependence on one single technology. Since activating a new power source (whatever kind) needs enormous long-term investments, it is correct to ask taxpayers in which direction to invest. Here we have sun and wind, supposedly to last a little bit more than some year. We already have more than 5 Gwatts of solar plants (~ 5 nuclear plants), for which great investments have been made in the last years that is better to exploit even more. Last, if in some parts of Italy (e.g., Naples) is hard to manage regular garbage, I prefer not to investigate our ability of managing nuclear debris.
Years ago an Italian writer, Stefano Benni, in his romance "Terra!", at a certain point describes a scientist with a funny character, very good in science but often drunk, offensive and so, which latin motto was "Nulla teoria sine hosteria". Translated from Latin to english sounds like "No theories without a pub".
In Italy too (although 3 has some locked phones with contract, recently). You may buy a discounted phone by the provider (i.e., minimum 49 euros), but it is very usual to buy it independently from the carrier. Around iPhone, there is much discussion here about if there will be an exclusive carrier selling it (nobody is glad).
Another Apple project quickly forgotten was OpenDoc, which was something like OLE for Microsoft. With OpenDoc, at least the Cyberdog browser was developed (1996-97), together with object embedding capabilities on other software. It lasted just a bit.
Little roll and plain hyper-reduced photocopies by two medical students (both women). In the second picture there is an eurocent for comparison (however, sizes are similar). And here there is a scientific paper about cheating in medical schools published by the British Medical Journal; in particular, about the possible relation with future dishonest behaviour.
Yes, data is still owned by the Author (of course); the scientific article, as is, becomes owned by the publisher. This is the reason why often you can find online just the preliminary (unedited) version, which usually is almost the same but not really the same. The open access model is rather different, because rights remain to the author. However you pay to publish. From the little I know, also when publishing an article on a generic magazine or review, rights are transfered to the publisher as default, unless stated differently on a contract. The fact is that with paper media this was matter of few people, with the web more and more become suddenly interested and wonder about these legal issues, which are nothing new.
In one of the very first papers mentioning the Semantic Web, some paragraph was devoted to something then lost in the hype around the semantic web: the Web of trust, which had to be something like a certification of metadata. This is perhaps to be again regarded as important for the semantic web and the web in general (although not easy to manage). By the way, Norvig is not only a Google exec, but also a well known AI researcher, author of one of most important books on that subject.
We had something similar last year, with a funny Star Trek spoof in friulian language (a minority language spoken in North-eastern Italy), with enemies speaking in the dialect of a nearby city): "Star Trek Chel Just" (something like Star Trek the Original). You can find information on it on the Furlanist blog (http://ilfurlanist.splinder.com./
I have an old Siemens S55, and a SonyEricsson K700i. Both work with iSync and GPRS connection; with Panther, you have to start pairing from the cell phone for the K700i. If I remember well, there could be some problem with all-day events from iCal. K700 (and S700) have a free application from Salling Clicker to use them as mouse and controller for many apps (though less powerful than Salling Clicker). In addition to that, there exists Romeo, a freeware alternative to Salling Clicker. Neither application runs with the S55.
In the Budapest Open Access Initiative model, developing countries do not pay for publication. I agree on most what you (sunhou) say. But I wuld like also to add the fact that, on the web as well as on paper, an article should be technically prepared for publication. In technical fields we are able to prepare a camera-ready paper, which can be almost directly published; however, in other fields (in my direct knowledge, medicine and biology) this is simply not the case. Often the same publishers ask, for example, for printed images that are scanned before publication. All this practical work should be paid in some way.
Open Access finally arrives at IEEE, after it is being discussed since years in the biomed field (where access is crucial for developing countries). Some info at the Budapest Open Access Initiative (http://www.soros.org/openaccess/. For me as a scientist, I still have to get used to that, but everygrant has a part for publication expenses, often not used or used just to buy offprints. If I think at the library budget devoted to subscriptions at my university, well, that money can be easily spent for paying publication instead.
Regarding search quality, MSN bombing is already starting, without involving Google searches. If you search for 'merda' (italian word for feces, unpolite), the first result is a Vatican City congregation. E.g., http://search.msn.it/results.aspx?q=merda.
Not meant to offend, just a joke (however,/. people could better check articles...). This kind of calls can be done, since some years, with Web Services protocols (i.e., XML-RPC, SOAP, etc). Look at W3C .
On some of the images, we used a mosaic algorithm for stiching them together (although pathologists do not see a real necessity on that, because they are able to diagnose anyway). However, it is almost impossible to have a perfect mosaic on the whole area, because on such large amount of images you may accumulate subpixel errors up to visible artifacts (and this because you have to align on both x,y directions). I suspect that even the TNO image, observed at maximum resolution, will show at least some interruption for the same reason.
I know it's risky (risk of slashdotting, of course...), however among the things I do for research there are also the so-called "digital slides", which are digital copies of pathology glass slides. We acquire them with a motorised microscope, at 40x magnification, which means about 0.3 micron/pixel. The maximum area acquired was about 21x45 mm, for a total of 28340 images, each one is 699x572 pixel (analog camera). This corresponds to about 11.3 Gpixels. Usually we remain well under this value, but anyway around 1-2 Gpixel on average. Please be very kind with our test server: http://www.telemed.uniud.it/eslides/. (anyway, I never thought this kind of things could become a news item).
Just before the protocol list, I read this: "Implementation of these Protocols and, to the extent Microsoft is not the owner or sole owner of the Technical Documentation for these Protocols, use of this Technical Documentation may require securing additional rights from third parties."
Although M$ is the devil, it's hard to say they claim IP rights on such a list.
>Anyways, what the NIH now seem to be doing (and very >rightly so) is to force the scientists to use different >journals to publish in. In other words, they are >trying to do away with a completely artificial monopoly.
NIH has its own series of electronic publications to push: those at the BioMedCentral that start with BMC. Such journals are based on the open access model, which means the Authors pay for publishing, and then the articles can be freely read by anyone. This allows to effectively free results, but of course the publication model is very different.
Not only blogs. I'm sometimes surprised for what is still available on Usenet archives... I found some post of me back to 1996, by searching with google on groups.
Slashdot Mirror
The study described in the web page accessible from the login-protected link (which is not the primary source) has been published on the Journal of the American Medical Association: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/ar... (protected too, but at least is the real thing).
Here the AMA news release about the results, sufficiently informative: http://media.jamanetwork.com/n...
While in principle you could be right, fact is that a country relying on nuclear energy like USA is the greatest producer of CO2 in the world (per capita). While Italy is not the best in this sense, still produces less than half (per capita) comparing to USA. So, it is difficult to directly relate nuclear energy usage to better environmental impact and global warming.
I'm one of those that voted against going back to nuclear (because we already closed our few plants years ago).
Progress is not a single, straight line in one direction. In particular, believing that your own direction is the only one is slightly arrogant. So is the original post.
There is room for research and development in many different technologies, and you should be glad someone other will try other ways, because differentiation is more productive than dependence on one single technology.
Since activating a new power source (whatever kind) needs enormous long-term investments, it is correct to ask taxpayers in which direction to invest. Here we have sun and wind, supposedly to last a little bit more than some year. We already have more than 5 Gwatts of solar plants (~ 5 nuclear plants), for which great investments have been made in the last years that is better to exploit even more.
Last, if in some parts of Italy (e.g., Naples) is hard to manage regular garbage, I prefer not to investigate our ability of managing nuclear debris.
Years ago an Italian writer, Stefano Benni, in his romance "Terra!", at a certain point describes a scientist with a funny character, very good in science but often drunk, offensive and so, which latin motto was "Nulla teoria sine hosteria". Translated from Latin to english sounds like "No theories without a pub".
In Italy too (although 3 has some locked phones with contract, recently). You may buy a discounted phone by the provider (i.e., minimum 49 euros), but it is very usual to buy it independently from the carrier. Around iPhone, there is much discussion here about if there will be an exclusive carrier selling it (nobody is glad).
Another Apple project quickly forgotten was OpenDoc, which was something like OLE for Microsoft. With OpenDoc, at least the Cyberdog browser was developed (1996-97), together with object embedding capabilities on other software. It lasted just a bit.
Little roll and plain hyper-reduced photocopies by two medical students (both women).
In the second picture there is an eurocent for comparison (however, sizes are similar).
And here there is a scientific paper about cheating in medical schools published by the British Medical Journal; in particular, about the possible relation with future dishonest behaviour.
Yes, data is still owned by the Author (of course); the scientific article, as is, becomes owned by the publisher. This is the reason why often you can find online just the preliminary (unedited) version, which usually is almost the same but not really the same. The open access model is rather different, because rights remain to the author. However you pay to publish.
From the little I know, also when publishing an article on a generic magazine or review, rights are transfered to the publisher as default, unless stated differently on a contract.
The fact is that with paper media this was matter of few people, with the web more and more become suddenly interested and wonder about these legal issues, which are nothing new.
In one of the very first papers mentioning the Semantic Web, some paragraph was devoted to something then lost in the hype around the semantic web: the Web of trust, which had to be something like a certification of metadata. This is perhaps to be again regarded as important for the semantic web and the web in general (although not easy to manage).
By the way, Norvig is not only a Google exec, but also a well known AI researcher, author of one of most important books on that subject.
We had something similar last year, with a funny Star Trek spoof in friulian language (a minority language spoken in North-eastern Italy), with enemies speaking in the dialect of a nearby city): "Star Trek Chel Just" (something like Star Trek the Original). You can find information on it on the Furlanist blog (http://ilfurlanist.splinder.com./
I too support Pivot. Nice, no underlying database.
Workshops on User Modeling techniques and Web Personalization have been held since 1996. Perhaps there you can find some prior art.
I have an old Siemens S55, and a SonyEricsson K700i.
Both work with iSync and GPRS connection; with Panther, you have to start pairing from the cell phone for the K700i.
If I remember well, there could be some problem with all-day events from iCal.
K700 (and S700) have a free application from Salling Clicker to use them as mouse and controller for many apps (though less powerful than Salling Clicker).
In addition to that, there exists Romeo, a freeware alternative to Salling Clicker. Neither application runs with the S55.
We had great news of this kind in Europe exaclty one year ago, but at the end card didn't show up in our roads. News in Italian: http://www.ecotrasporti.it/eolo.html
Site of the company in English: http://www.theaircar.com/Lucerne.html
In the Budapest Open Access Initiative model, developing countries do not pay for publication. .
I agree on most what you (sunhou) say. But I wuld like also to add the fact that, on the web as well as on paper, an article should be technically prepared for publication. In technical fields we are able to prepare a camera-ready paper, which can be almost directly published; however, in other fields (in my direct knowledge, medicine and biology) this is simply not the case. Often the same publishers ask, for example, for printed images that are scanned before publication.
All this practical work should be paid in some way
Open Access finally arrives at IEEE, after it is being discussed since years in the biomed field (where access is crucial for developing countries).
Some info at the Budapest Open Access Initiative (http://www.soros.org/openaccess/.
For me as a scientist, I still have to get used to that, but everygrant has a part for publication expenses, often not used or used just to buy offprints. If I think at the library budget devoted to subscriptions at my university, well, that money can be easily spent for paying publication instead.
Regarding search quality, MSN bombing is already starting, without involving Google searches. If you search for 'merda' (italian word for feces, unpolite), the first result is a Vatican City congregation.
E.g., http://search.msn.it/results.aspx?q=merda.
Not meant to offend, just a joke (however, /. people could better check articles...).
This kind of calls can be done, since some years, with Web Services protocols (i.e., XML-RPC, SOAP, etc).
Look at W3C .
mmm. the point is: is the remote for controlling the iPod smaller than the iPod itself?
If it is of the same size as your stereo remote, no.
On some of the images, we used a mosaic algorithm for stiching them together (although pathologists do not see a real necessity on that, because they are able to diagnose anyway). However, it is almost impossible to have a perfect mosaic on the whole area, because on such large amount of images you may accumulate subpixel errors up to visible artifacts (and this because you have to align on both x,y directions).
I suspect that even the TNO image, observed at maximum resolution, will show at least some interruption for the same reason.
I know it's risky (risk of slashdotting, of course...), however among the things I do for research there are also the so-called "digital slides", which are digital copies of pathology glass slides. We acquire them with a motorised microscope, at 40x magnification, which means about 0.3 micron/pixel. The maximum area acquired was about 21x45 mm, for a total of 28340 images, each one is 699x572 pixel (analog camera). This corresponds to about 11.3 Gpixels. Usually we remain well under this value, but anyway around 1-2 Gpixel on average.
Please be very kind with our test server: http://www.telemed.uniud.it/eslides/.
(anyway, I never thought this kind of things could become a news item).
Just before the protocol list, I read this:
"Implementation of these Protocols and, to the extent Microsoft is not the owner or sole owner of the Technical Documentation for these Protocols, use of this Technical Documentation may require securing additional rights from third parties."
Although M$ is the devil, it's hard to say they claim IP rights on such a list.
Yes, in fact: but the fire estinguisher was just thrown out by a policeman towards the guy. It was part of the internal tools of the jeep.
>Anyways, what the NIH now seem to be doing (and very
>rightly so) is to force the scientists to use different
>journals to publish in. In other words, they are
>trying to do away with a completely artificial
monopoly.
NIH has its own series of electronic publications to push: those at the BioMedCentral that start with BMC. Such journals are based on the open access model, which means the Authors pay for publishing, and then the articles can be freely read by anyone. This allows to effectively free results, but of course the publication model is very different.
Not only blogs. I'm sometimes surprised for what is still available on Usenet archives... I found some post of me back to 1996, by searching with google on groups.