Also, deficiencies in the SRY region, or particular disruptions to the process that determines physical sex. People exist who were phenotypically female at birth, and only discovered their "maleness" at puberty when their testes descended and they grew unexpected amounts of facial hair.
You're the one who's shortsighted to think that it's isolated to HURD.
I think GP was pointing out [at least] two things:
A GNU operating system is possible without the Linux kernel (i.e. GNU/HURD rather than GNU/Linux)
An SQL Injection attack doesn't care much about the underlying operating system
They don't appear to think it's isolated to HURD. I interpreted the statement "this wasn't a LINUX issue" as meaning Linux isn't a necessary precondition for attacks of this nature.
This is not like imprinting organisms from conception to adulthood, despite the tone of the summary.
No, for that you need to shoot the embryos with tiny gold pellets loaded with a very specific DNA sequence — 40-50 bp should do it. That's a much more advanced technology that we should have in about, er, -10 years.
Obvious bad grammar is something that flags comments as potentially uninformative. If a person gets the "easy to fix" things wrong (e.g. you're, it's, could've), it negatively correlates with the care that person takes to make well-informed statements. If you want to keep using bad grammar, go ahead. Just realise that it will mean your posts are less likely to be read in depth by me.
Coat hangers usually have a high iron content. The iron enhances the magnetic field inherent in any current flow, but if there's too much current flow, the iron saturates.
Related. Fig. 14 gets somewhat close to a coathanger.
[Cue mild logical inconsistency jitters] Clearly not enough of a fanboy to realise that the two circular thingies in front of the 7 were '0's, rather than 'O's.
If watching tv all day and eating ice cream makes them happy, then what's wrong with that?
Your post sounds like it may be vaguely sarcastic, but I'll choose to answer anyway.
Conditioning. The body and mind get conditioned to excelling at a very specific activity, and are less able to generalise for other things. There's not much TV time at school, so kids may get a bit irritable in that environment. Also add in a general rant about eating a variety of foods to give your body the best chance at getting essential nutrients.
They aren't saying "submit to a search" which would be a clear violation of your rights. They're saying "submit to a search or you can't get on the plane".
So how about these demands?
Dye your hair red (we'll provide the hair dye / bleach) or you can't get on the plane
Say you believe in the flying spaghetti monster or you can't get on the plane
Get a fake tan (here's a lotion you can use) or you can't get on the plane
Strip naked or you can't get on the plane
Drink this liquid or you can't get on the plane
Re:What's the deal with the rush of TSA stories re
on
TSA Pats Down 3-Year-Old
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The risk of dying in a plane crash is tiny to start with -- about 1 in 11 million -- and the risk of being the victim of a terrorist attack is smaller still
Consider the following situation: Henry is a traveller in the United States, who is about to go on a flight to New York. Is it more likely that he would die from a plane crash, or die from a plane crash caused by a terrorist action.
The quirky thing about how humans think is that if you set up a question like this, many people will pick the second option, even though it is more specific.
You could have saved them from publishing such garbage!
The correct phrase is, "You could have advised them of additional observations pertinent to their investigation that would be useful to report as well." Publishing results of investigations should be encouraged, regardless of the perceived uselessness of the results and the sillyness of the investigator's conclusions.
If the conclusions are thoughtless, then other people have an opportunity to make a name for themselves by reviewing the investigation and identifying alternative ways to interpret the data.
> Suppose that this "error" that happens every time nonetheless yields the same original DNA sequence?
I'm not convinced your example ACTG ----> rna UAUUCGAGAUAUAC ---> dna half-strand ACTG matches the article [with tyrosine changed to uracil], because it sounds like they're talking about substitutions, rather than insertions, in this article (i.e. ACTG ----> rna TATC (although if substitutions are happening, an insertion/deletion may also be possible).
Anyway, there are certain RNA codons that produce the same amino acid sequence (e.g. both UAU and UAC both code for the amino acid tyrosine). Following along your train of thought, it may be possible that these substitutions (assuming it's genetic RNA, rather than regulatory RNA) are to replace codons with more frequently used ones to speed up the translation process into an amino acid sequence.
To throw a further spanner in the works, a large proportion of non-genetic DNA (i.e. the stuff that doesn't get eventually converted into proteins) has functional aspects — it is transcribed into RNA and then used directly for cellular regulation (see here).
Come election day, nothing ever changed and the people were more content than they would have been without the illusion of political contention, it was very educational to watch.
I was actually wondering last night why governments in places like myanmar bother with voter intimidation when they only need to do a bit of number magic for vote counting (which happens away from the eye of [most] members of the public).
we know through various studies that you are mainly shaped by your environment, not your genetics.
It depends on the trait, see information on the aforementioned heritability.
If you refer to "shaped" as in physical appearance excluding clothing, hair dye, and other accessories, then there are a number of physical traits (considered distinguishing in western culture) that have a substantial or very high heritability, e.g. eye colour, height, hair colour, skin colour. The accessories, or external "shapes" that we put onto ourselves, have extremely low heritability. But even then it's still not always zero, e.g. a person with polydactyly may not be able to fit a standard glove or shoe, hair dyes for some colours do not work for all base hair colours, a tetrachromat may have a different fashion sense and choose a greater variety of "green" clothes to wear.
Slashdot Mirror
No Y means you're female.
Also, deficiencies in the SRY region, or particular disruptions to the process that determines physical sex. People exist who were phenotypically female at birth, and only discovered their "maleness" at puberty when their testes descended and they grew unexpected amounts of facial hair.
You're the one who's shortsighted to think that it's isolated to HURD.
I think GP was pointing out [at least] two things:
They don't appear to think it's isolated to HURD. I interpreted the statement "this wasn't a LINUX issue" as meaning Linux isn't a necessary precondition for attacks of this nature.
Learn how to use Google man!
Maybe they tried, but their router rejected the connection from Google because it was sending too many packets in the initial window.
According to this, it's from a letter written by Raymond Chandler, an American novelist who was frustrated by his publisher's actions.
This is not like imprinting organisms from conception to adulthood, despite the tone of the summary.
No, for that you need to shoot the embryos with tiny gold pellets loaded with a very specific DNA sequence — 40-50 bp should do it. That's a much more advanced technology that we should have in about, er, -10 years.
Obvious bad grammar is something that flags comments as potentially uninformative. If a person gets the "easy to fix" things wrong (e.g. you're, it's, could've), it negatively correlates with the care that person takes to make well-informed statements. If you want to keep using bad grammar, go ahead. Just realise that it will mean your posts are less likely to be read in depth by me.
property is thief.
I'm not quite sure where you're going on this one. Did you mean one of the following?
Coat hangers usually have a high iron content. The iron enhances the magnetic field inherent in any current flow, but if there's too much current flow, the iron saturates.
Related. Fig. 14 gets somewhat close to a coathanger.
As a OO7 Fanboy
[Cue mild logical inconsistency jitters]
Clearly not enough of a fanboy to realise that the two circular thingies in front of the 7 were '0's, rather than 'O's.
Straging by itself makes a huge difference in a game
I presume you accidentally strafed the 'f' key in that statement.
If watching tv all day and eating ice cream makes them happy, then what's wrong with that?
Your post sounds like it may be vaguely sarcastic, but I'll choose to answer anyway.
Conditioning. The body and mind get conditioned to excelling at a very specific activity, and are less able to generalise for other things. There's not much TV time at school, so kids may get a bit irritable in that environment. Also add in a general rant about eating a variety of foods to give your body the best chance at getting essential nutrients.
Tickle me is easily broken or tuned out.
Related.
If you're going along those lines:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meccano
They aren't saying "submit to a search" which would be a clear violation of your rights. They're saying "submit to a search or you can't get on the plane".
So how about these demands?
The risk of dying in a plane crash is tiny to start with -- about 1 in 11 million -- and the risk of being the victim of a terrorist attack is smaller still
Consider the following situation: Henry is a traveller in the United States, who is about to go on a flight to New York. Is it more likely that he would die from a plane crash, or die from a plane crash caused by a terrorist action.
The quirky thing about how humans think is that if you set up a question like this, many people will pick the second option, even though it is more specific.
Meh, this one has smaller letters, and is still marginally readable. Although with the linked text, the words make it easier to work out what it says.
You could have saved them from publishing such garbage!
The correct phrase is, "You could have advised them of additional observations pertinent to their investigation that would be useful to report as well." Publishing results of investigations should be encouraged, regardless of the perceived uselessness of the results and the sillyness of the investigator's conclusions.
If the conclusions are thoughtless, then other people have an opportunity to make a name for themselves by reviewing the investigation and identifying alternative ways to interpret the data.
> Suppose that this "error" that happens every time nonetheless yields the same original DNA sequence?
I'm not convinced your example ACTG ----> rna UAUUCGAGAUAUAC ---> dna half-strand ACTG matches the article [with tyrosine changed to uracil], because it sounds like they're talking about substitutions, rather than insertions, in this article (i.e. ACTG ----> rna TATC (although if substitutions are happening, an insertion/deletion may also be possible).
Anyway, there are certain RNA codons that produce the same amino acid sequence (e.g. both UAU and UAC both code for the amino acid tyrosine). Following along your train of thought, it may be possible that these substitutions (assuming it's genetic RNA, rather than regulatory RNA) are to replace codons with more frequently used ones to speed up the translation process into an amino acid sequence.
proteins can't write DNA
Unless that protein is DNA polymerase...
To throw a further spanner in the works, a large proportion of non-genetic DNA (i.e. the stuff that doesn't get eventually converted into proteins) has functional aspects — it is transcribed into RNA and then used directly for cellular regulation (see here).
Come election day, nothing ever changed and the people were more content than they would have been without the illusion of political contention, it was very educational to watch.
I was actually wondering last night why governments in places like myanmar bother with voter intimidation when they only need to do a bit of number magic for vote counting (which happens away from the eye of [most] members of the public).
The LHCb sees where the antimatter's gone
ALICE looks at collisions, of lead ions
we know through various studies that you are mainly shaped by your environment, not your genetics.
It depends on the trait, see information on the aforementioned heritability.
If you refer to "shaped" as in physical appearance excluding clothing, hair dye, and other accessories, then there are a number of physical traits (considered distinguishing in western culture) that have a substantial or very high heritability, e.g. eye colour, height, hair colour, skin colour. The accessories, or external "shapes" that we put onto ourselves, have extremely low heritability. But even then it's still not always zero, e.g. a person with polydactyly may not be able to fit a standard glove or shoe, hair dyes for some colours do not work for all base hair colours, a tetrachromat may have a different fashion sense and choose a greater variety of "green" clothes to wear.
There is no nature-nurture debate.
Of course there is, just not among scientists (and certainly not among geneticists who are aware of heritability).
Will this mean Debian will break less due to KDE updates? If so, I'm all for it. If not, I probably won't care either way.