What you're looking for is a contract with an email provider that says they won't store your email after you mark it for deletion and they won't provide any of your information to anybody unless you tell them to or they have a court order.
I think the right place for a complaint is with Google. But you know what their business practices are so you know they're not about to make such an agreement.
The really cool stuff is going to have to wait for a device that extracts food (sugars or fats) and oxygen from blood and makes usable electricity so it's directly powered by food. And it would have to give priority to your body, although perhaps you could program it to help you control your weight.
The hip would be much better. It moves through a larger arc while walking and is powered by stronger muscles. But I suspect the energy-harvesting device would be even less comfortable than the knee brace.
I suspect what NVIDIA is trying to do is impede the development of compatible chipsets. They don't want to encourage another competitor to get into the video chip market. They already have all the competition they can handle. So what limited information they'll give you is wrapped in NDAs and Linux developers are in no position (and of no mind) to give anybody an NDA. So this makes them really difficult for FOSS developers to work with.
But for Microsoft, who has the bulk of their market and CAN control the distribution of proprietary information, they'd be willing to share their specs and details of how their hardware works.
I guess I assume that until a few thousand years ago, both Pan species ranged more widely and that humans pushed them to more remote areas only recently. I know that's assuming a lot. I think the difference here is I'm thinking of how recently they might have crossbred while you're thinking about how long ago they might have been separated.
None of us know how long ago there might have been Pan troglodytes bands south of the river or Pan paniscus north of the river.
It's hard to say why their social patterns emerged. The difference is very stark. I'd suggest that their parent species was more like us than either of them is today, or maybe more like gorillas. It seems like the violence of P. troglogytes is now innate, given the tendency of adult males raised by humans to rip your face off. P troglodytes might have become more and more agressive due to being pushed into remote areas where there was intense competition for food and range. P. paniscus might have stayed ahead of predation by maximizing their rate of reproduction,
Indeed, that's the boundary. I don't think it has provided sharp isolation for 2 million years or anything like that. River channels are not stable over time. They form loops and subchannels, digging into one bank. They form islands on one side and end up connecting them on the other side. You can see this happening in the present-day Congo near the mouth, also near Kinshasa and everywhere above N2 45' E16 11.5'. If you go on Google Earth you'll see this clearly. Also you can see evidence of more ancient channels to either side.
Animals on one side don't have to cross the river to get on the other side. The river will do it for them. In order for this NOT to happen they would have to stay away from the river.
The ranges of both animals must have varied a lot during the last million years so it's very likely that some animals were transferred in both directions.
Well, you're right that they wouldn't necessarily have to fork the code. But it would add complexity to the code they would have to write and take manhours away from their main effort, which is to implement their new features and take advantage of the new OS features in Windows Vista and 7. And the return on that investment is what Microsoft bases their decisions on. They are, after all, a for-profit company.
How much money do you suppose they would make getting IE9 vs. IE7 installed on that 25% of installed base? Remember, these are legacy systems owned by people who are demonstrably reluctant to buy into new technology. I think Microsoft made the right call based on return-on-effort.
It isn't all the same comparing Microsoft's decisions to other browsers because Microsoft still dominates the desktop market that IE is designed to run on. They don't HAVE to customize their browser to make it run a variety of operating systems to achieve a large market share. All those other browsers are from companies who have to work in a fragmented OS environment to achieve any market share at all. Microsoft has an advantage and it's silly to compare how they behave in that situation to companies that don't have the same advantage. Of course they will behave differently.
No, I'm saying they can engineer a plant so that a given pair of plants offspring cannot produce seed (think if it as a plant version of the mule). However, they can still produce pollen, so they are not really sterile, they just can't reproduce themselves - the pollen can fertilize a different species/cultivar.
And I'm saying they didn't do that. You can plant the soybeans or corn or canola or whatever in a field and it will grow. It's NOT sterile seed. The only thing that prevents you from doing it is laws that make it illegal.
An education is more than that. It's sitting through hours of lectures where students ask questions and topics are discussed at length, not only with the professor but with other students outside of class. It's submitting work and having it critiqued by an expert. It's discussing why your answers were wrong or incomplete. It's discussing why you have answers your professor never thought of but are still correct or more correct than what he was expecting. It's deciding what out-of-major classes are of interest to you or would further your education in your chosen field. It's telling your not-in-major friends about insights you learned from your classes that are applicable to everybody and listening to the same thing from them. Most of these things simply can't be automated and many of them can't be done as well on line. None of them can be done for $100 a degree.
None of that can be force-fed to you one-way down a wire. Education is interactive.
Real education can be had over the internet, but it's NOT the same and not as valuable as learning in-person, and it will never be cheap (unless somebody else is paying for it) and it will always take as long or nearly as long as the traditional route. It just takes that long to have that experience and absorb and digest that much information.
Pilots can't simultaneously defend the cockpit and fly the plane. If somebody on the plane is going to be armed, it needs to be somebody who can spare enough attention to police the situation.
The kind of news they're looking for is that X shares of YYY are ordered for sale or purchase at $Z.ZZZ and they want to make a buy or sell decision bases on that before their competitors do.
This seem superficially to be reasonable, but in fact this is even more misleading than the 99% figure. You have to remember the sheer quantity of useless stuff in our genome, as well as the redundancy of protein structure.
What useless stuff? Can you identify it? Would you be willing to have it deleted in your children and replaced with harmless filler from another species? Do you think something that looks and acts like a human being would result?
What number you get depends on the method of comparison. I've read every number between 94% and 99% for the fraction of DNA that humans share with chimpanzees. Since the bonobo is almost but not exactly a chimp, there's no surprise in this article. It's confirmation of what we thought we knew based on morphology. Yep! Bonobos are ALSO closely related to humans and chimps.
Here's a site that states different numbers and discusses a number of other species: http://genetics.thetech.org/online-exhibits/genes-common
And different numbers here: http://anthro.palomar.edu/primate/prim_8.htm
To look at relatedness, there are more subtle measures. We have genetic tests now that can be used to establish probable paternity and measure genetic relatedness of individuals within the same species. These tests focus on differences in detail rather tnan overall similarity.
Another thing to look at is chromosomes. People normally have 46 chromosomes. Chimps and bonobos normally have 48. Our chromosome 2 is divided into 2 chromosomes in chimps and I'm guessing also in bonobos.
Slashdot Mirror
Nobody has quantum computers. They're fiction.
What you're looking for is a contract with an email provider that says they won't store your email after you mark it for deletion and they won't provide any of your information to anybody unless you tell them to or they have a court order. I think the right place for a complaint is with Google. But you know what their business practices are so you know they're not about to make such an agreement.
So does this one go to Eminiar VII or Vendicar?
Banning chemicals based on their molecular mass! This sounds like a great way to ban everything. Then the government can lock us all up.
What do you suppose are the top 5 practical applications for a 16 petaflop computer?
If the company's going to give the government what they want for a request, why bother getting a court order?
Why complain about it on Slashdot? Call your MP!
The really cool stuff is going to have to wait for a device that extracts food (sugars or fats) and oxygen from blood and makes usable electricity so it's directly powered by food. And it would have to give priority to your body, although perhaps you could program it to help you control your weight.
The hip would be much better. It moves through a larger arc while walking and is powered by stronger muscles. But I suspect the energy-harvesting device would be even less comfortable than the knee brace.
I suspect what NVIDIA is trying to do is impede the development of compatible chipsets. They don't want to encourage another competitor to get into the video chip market. They already have all the competition they can handle. So what limited information they'll give you is wrapped in NDAs and Linux developers are in no position (and of no mind) to give anybody an NDA. So this makes them really difficult for FOSS developers to work with.
But for Microsoft, who has the bulk of their market and CAN control the distribution of proprietary information, they'd be willing to share their specs and details of how their hardware works.
I guess I assume that until a few thousand years ago, both Pan species ranged more widely and that humans pushed them to more remote areas only recently. I know that's assuming a lot. I think the difference here is I'm thinking of how recently they might have crossbred while you're thinking about how long ago they might have been separated.
None of us know how long ago there might have been Pan troglodytes bands south of the river or Pan paniscus north of the river.
It's hard to say why their social patterns emerged. The difference is very stark. I'd suggest that their parent species was more like us than either of them is today, or maybe more like gorillas. It seems like the violence of P. troglogytes is now innate, given the tendency of adult males raised by humans to rip your face off. P troglodytes might have become more and more agressive due to being pushed into remote areas where there was intense competition for food and range. P. paniscus might have stayed ahead of predation by maximizing their rate of reproduction,
Indeed, that's the boundary. I don't think it has provided sharp isolation for 2 million years or anything like that. River channels are not stable over time. They form loops and subchannels, digging into one bank. They form islands on one side and end up connecting them on the other side. You can see this happening in the present-day Congo near the mouth, also near Kinshasa and everywhere above N2 45' E16 11.5'. If you go on Google Earth you'll see this clearly. Also you can see evidence of more ancient channels to either side.
Animals on one side don't have to cross the river to get on the other side. The river will do it for them. In order for this NOT to happen they would have to stay away from the river.
The ranges of both animals must have varied a lot during the last million years so it's very likely that some animals were transferred in both directions.
Well, you're right that they wouldn't necessarily have to fork the code. But it would add complexity to the code they would have to write and take manhours away from their main effort, which is to implement their new features and take advantage of the new OS features in Windows Vista and 7. And the return on that investment is what Microsoft bases their decisions on. They are, after all, a for-profit company.
How much money do you suppose they would make getting IE9 vs. IE7 installed on that 25% of installed base? Remember, these are legacy systems owned by people who are demonstrably reluctant to buy into new technology. I think Microsoft made the right call based on return-on-effort.
It isn't all the same comparing Microsoft's decisions to other browsers because Microsoft still dominates the desktop market that IE is designed to run on. They don't HAVE to customize their browser to make it run a variety of operating systems to achieve a large market share. All those other browsers are from companies who have to work in a fragmented OS environment to achieve any market share at all. Microsoft has an advantage and it's silly to compare how they behave in that situation to companies that don't have the same advantage. Of course they will behave differently.
Realize that some of us do not need to be force-fed information we are quite capable of performing this feat on our own.
The only times I have visited a university was to assist CS professors in teaching a class.
I do realize however that I am a exception to the rule and yes 90% of the general public will need to be force-fed.
I find that highly credible.
OK, so how long have bonobos been isolated from Pan troglodytes? What keeps them from crossbreeding other than interference from modern people?
No, I'm saying they can engineer a plant so that a given pair of plants offspring cannot produce seed (think if it as a plant version of the mule). However, they can still produce pollen, so they are not really sterile, they just can't reproduce themselves - the pollen can fertilize a different species/cultivar.
And I'm saying they didn't do that. You can plant the soybeans or corn or canola or whatever in a field and it will grow. It's NOT sterile seed. The only thing that prevents you from doing it is laws that make it illegal.
An education is more than that. It's sitting through hours of lectures where students ask questions and topics are discussed at length, not only with the professor but with other students outside of class. It's submitting work and having it critiqued by an expert. It's discussing why your answers were wrong or incomplete. It's discussing why you have answers your professor never thought of but are still correct or more correct than what he was expecting. It's deciding what out-of-major classes are of interest to you or would further your education in your chosen field. It's telling your not-in-major friends about insights you learned from your classes that are applicable to everybody and listening to the same thing from them. Most of these things simply can't be automated and many of them can't be done as well on line. None of them can be done for $100 a degree.
None of that can be force-fed to you one-way down a wire. Education is interactive.
Real education can be had over the internet, but it's NOT the same and not as valuable as learning in-person, and it will never be cheap (unless somebody else is paying for it) and it will always take as long or nearly as long as the traditional route. It just takes that long to have that experience and absorb and digest that much information.
Pilots can't simultaneously defend the cockpit and fly the plane. If somebody on the plane is going to be armed, it needs to be somebody who can spare enough attention to police the situation.
If the plants were sterile they wouldn't cross pollinate other farmers' crops.
Which wouldn't "bee" a problem if the seeds were sterile.
The kind of news they're looking for is that X shares of YYY are ordered for sale or purchase at $Z.ZZZ and they want to make a buy or sell decision bases on that before their competitors do.
Erm, Bonobos (Pan paniscus) are "chimps": they share the genus "Pan" (=chimpanzee") with the "common chimpanzee" (Pan troglodytes).
Pan troglodytes has one of the stupidest scientific names imaginable. They don't live in caves. They live in the forest. Pan silvani?.
My Latin's no good, so that's probably the wrong ending.
This seem superficially to be reasonable, but in fact this is even more misleading than the 99% figure. You have to remember the sheer quantity of useless stuff in our genome, as well as the redundancy of protein structure.
What useless stuff? Can you identify it? Would you be willing to have it deleted in your children and replaced with harmless filler from another species? Do you think something that looks and acts like a human being would result?
What number you get depends on the method of comparison. I've read every number between 94% and 99% for the fraction of DNA that humans share with chimpanzees. Since the bonobo is almost but not exactly a chimp, there's no surprise in this article. It's confirmation of what we thought we knew based on morphology. Yep! Bonobos are ALSO closely related to humans and chimps. Here's a site that states different numbers and discusses a number of other species: http://genetics.thetech.org/online-exhibits/genes-common And different numbers here: http://anthro.palomar.edu/primate/prim_8.htm To look at relatedness, there are more subtle measures. We have genetic tests now that can be used to establish probable paternity and measure genetic relatedness of individuals within the same species. These tests focus on differences in detail rather tnan overall similarity. Another thing to look at is chromosomes. People normally have 46 chromosomes. Chimps and bonobos normally have 48. Our chromosome 2 is divided into 2 chromosomes in chimps and I'm guessing also in bonobos.
Could be true for bonobos and chimps too. They don't live on the same streets.