And part of raising your kid properly (in my opinioin) would be to put the computer in the family room, and restrict computer/internet usage just like you should for television. I didn't have a TV in my room as a kid, likewise my kids won't have a computer in their room.
Internet, video games, and television are no substitute for quality time spent with your kids. That and books.
As a future doctor (2nd year med student), I can see how this sort of thing could help in an emergency situation. But I think that the potential for abuse is too great.
As of now I'm volunteering to remove anyone's implant at no cost (after I get my MD of course:).
My local supermarkets all have those cards. You need them to get the good prices. My solution to the database issue is: never get a card using your real name (that and pay cash). Maybe if they get enough George Bushes and Bill Gates in their database they'll finally ditch the scheme.
Seriously, do I really want there to be a record of my May 12th purchase of vaseline, latex gloves, a plunger, and a case of malt liqour? At least no record with my name attached. If they want to keep a database to find out that people who drink malt liquor also buy vaseline, that's cool. Just not, "Misanthropy buys malt liquor and vaseline every third teusday."
But if other companies like MS had not taken these ideas from Xerox they would never have made it out of the PARC labs. Sure Xerox had some brilliant engineers and computer scientists, but their executives had no vision or foresight. That's where Gates and Jobs came in. They didn't develop any new technology; they just brought it to the world.
I'm a mac user, but I hate the mice. I never liked the "no button" mouse. And this one looks no better (for me). And the "audio feedback" speaker sounds like it would get annoying really fast. I want to feel my mouse click. Not hear it. Though, I'm the sort that hates all sound from my computer unless I ask for it (e.g. music). Sound coming from my mouse sounds even worse.
I'll stick with my logitech optical wheel mouse. Nice feel, quiet click, responsive.
I looked at my parents house in a small town/suburb and it was an old B&W photo. But my cousins house in the city next to us was a very sharp color photo. Really cool!
"the neural activation patterns flow back and forth to produce nonlinear, self-organized, emergent properties -- like a biological organism."
Biological organism? Talk about a shocker!
I bet the guy is kicking himself after seeing that in print. In a conversation you can catch yourself after saying stupid stuff. When you're quoted in an article, you're screwed. I can hear him now, "Dammit why didn't I think before I spoke? No shit it's like a biological organism!"
Same here...I think I'm one of the only people that doesn't like surround sound.
The picture is in front of me so I expect the sound to come from where the picture is. When I hear sounds behind me but all the action is on a screen several feet in front of me it just doesn't make sense.
I find surround sound much more interesting for music and other "pure sound" applications. I'd love to hear something like a 13 channel symphony orchestra recording or hear somebody like Radiohead do a 13 channel recording. For movies I'll stick to stereo or 2.1.
The problem is that what was once computationally infeasible becomes much less so as processing power increases. 1024 bit public-key encryption is computationally infeasible to break now, but in 20-30 years it may be easily done.
This mainly applies to brute force attacks. If someone discovers a flaw in the algorithm then 30 years of hardware advances might not be necessary.
I'm guessing since Open Firmware is an open standard (and is available for x86) it would be trivial for a third party manufacturer to build a motherboard based on Open Firmware that could run OS X.
Guess they have something else up their sleeves. Probably some kind of proprietary DRM chip that the OS requires to run.
I've thought all along that the switch to all digital broadcasts is a bad idea. What is the main reason that people in the US watch broadcast TV? Because they can't afford cable or satellite. After the switch people are going to be unable to get any television at all unless they fork over hundreds of dollars for a new digital set.
OK I broadly understand 'sequencing the human genome' is mapping out all the combinates of genes.
Sort of. Sequencing is really just finding the sequence of the DNA bases. (i.e. if a certain piece of DNA is ACCGT that is it's sequence)
There are 23 chromosomes in the human genome. That chromosomes are a pair of the genes. I understand that each gene is one of four DNA molecules called A,G,C & T. There 16 combinations of those mlecules and I can map those out with a pencil and paper, I can produce all 23 sets with desktop computing power.
There are 23 pairs of chromosomes. Each human cell (besides sperm/eggs) have 46 chromosomes. Each chromosome has many genes. There are about 30,000 estimated genes in the human genome. Each gene can be hundreds or thousands of DNA bases (not "one of four"). There are around 3 billion bases in the human genome. Think your desktop computer will handle that?
And your math is wrong. Even if you just had four bases, that is 256 combinations not 16.
So why does it take so much computing power ? That is a lot of data to process and analyze.
What are the really doing with it ? Analyzing the raw genome data. Trying to locate genes by itself is a pretty tough job. Trying to match protein sequences with their original gene. This can be very hard because the original DNA sequence does not always match the protein it ultimately codes for. Basically there is a lot of data and a lot of processing of that data.
Why do they dum down these stories down so much ? Do some google searches on DNA, genes, bioinformatics, or gene mapping. You'll find plenty of articles that aren't so "dum".
What were the/. editors thinking linking to a 3MHz(!!) webserver on the front page??
Slashdot editors thinking? Oh wait...nevermind. Nothing to see here. move along.
Re:This is the (relatively) easy part
on
Photoshop for DNA
·
· Score: 1
oops...Looks like DrGene beat me to it.
note to self: read other replies in thread before writing
Re:This is the (relatively) easy part
on
Photoshop for DNA
·
· Score: 1
Oh. I forgot to add that the main barrier in synthetic protein design is folding. You can design a protein that works great in simulations, but getting a real working protein from that is very difficult because the synthetic proteins don't fold like they need to in order to create a functional protein.
Re:This is the (relatively) easy part
on
Photoshop for DNA
·
· Score: 1
Well...actually that IS a pretty big deal (unless you are talking about just putting together a sequence for a known protein.)
Actually designing your own working protein is still a long way off. There have been man made proteins, but they are little more than a chain of amino acids. They don't have any function. As for designing proteins with a specific function, we aren't there yet.
What we are able to do now is take known sequences of known proteins, replicate them, and splice those together.
So we've made it to the stage of being able to build stuff from stones, but we can't make our own bricks yet. It's not too far off, though. I'm sure in the next 5-10 years we will have a functional man-made protein. Most likely a catalytic, or nucleotide-binding protein.
(Note: I mean "we" as in people in the biomedical sciences. Not "we" as in work I am doing.)
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly, if someone is trying to prevent interception of their communications they will just use a different medium.
An anonymous proxy, a couple yahoo email accounts, and gpg; and you've got a pretty good system right there.
Having rules for your kids is not censorship.
And part of raising your kid properly (in my opinioin) would be to put the computer in the family room, and restrict computer/internet usage just like you should for television.
I didn't have a TV in my room as a kid, likewise my kids won't have a computer in their room.
Internet, video games, and television are no substitute for quality time spent with your kids. That and books.
As a future doctor (2nd year med student), I can see how this sort of thing could help in an emergency situation. But I think that the potential for abuse is too great.
:).
As of now I'm volunteering to remove anyone's implant at no cost (after I get my MD of course
My local supermarkets all have those cards. You need them to get the good prices. My solution to the database issue is: never get a card using your real name (that and pay cash). Maybe if they get enough George Bushes and Bill Gates in their database they'll finally ditch the scheme.
Seriously, do I really want there to be a record of my May 12th purchase of vaseline, latex gloves, a plunger, and a case of malt liqour? At least no record with my name attached. If they want to keep a database to find out that people who drink malt liquor also buy vaseline, that's cool.
Just not, "Misanthropy buys malt liquor and vaseline every third teusday."
But if other companies like MS had not taken these ideas from Xerox they would never have made it out of the PARC labs.
Sure Xerox had some brilliant engineers and computer scientists, but their executives had no vision or foresight. That's where Gates and Jobs came in. They didn't develop any new technology; they just brought it to the world.
Tis is the exact reason that apple ditched the all touch-sensitive input on 3G ipods and put a click wheel on 4G ipods.
I'm a mac user, but I hate the mice. I never liked the "no button" mouse. And this one looks no better (for me).
And the "audio feedback" speaker sounds like it would get annoying really fast. I want to feel my mouse click. Not hear it.
Though, I'm the sort that hates all sound from my computer unless I ask for it (e.g. music). Sound coming from my mouse sounds even worse.
I'll stick with my logitech optical wheel mouse.
Nice feel, quiet click, responsive.
I looked at my parents house in a small town/suburb and it was an old B&W photo. But my cousins house in the city next to us was a very sharp color photo. Really cool!
Damn. Beat me to it!
That guy is awesome.
A few good ones, but I found most to be between "kinda neat I guess" and "boring"
This guy called "Jenny" in every area code.
"the neural activation patterns flow back and forth to produce nonlinear, self-organized, emergent properties -- like a biological organism."
Biological organism? Talk about a shocker!
I bet the guy is kicking himself after seeing that in print. In a conversation you can catch yourself after saying stupid stuff. When you're quoted in an article, you're screwed.
I can hear him now, "Dammit why didn't I think before I spoke? No shit it's like a biological organism!"
Sure, it's preference.
I find surround sound in movies distracting instead of "enhancing". Others might not think so.
Same here...I think I'm one of the only people that doesn't like surround sound.
The picture is in front of me so I expect the sound to come from where the picture is.
When I hear sounds behind me but all the action is on a screen several feet in front of me it just doesn't make sense.
I find surround sound much more interesting for music and other "pure sound" applications.
I'd love to hear something like a 13 channel symphony orchestra recording or hear somebody like Radiohead do a 13 channel recording.
For movies I'll stick to stereo or 2.1.
I knew a guy who was in the Marines. He told me that they couldn't smoke pot because of the regular piss tests. So, instead they all took acid!
Just who I'd want to be around, some wigged out Marines...scary!
The problem is that what was once computationally infeasible becomes much less so as processing power increases.
1024 bit public-key encryption is computationally infeasible to break now, but in 20-30 years it may be easily done.
This mainly applies to brute force attacks. If someone discovers a flaw in the algorithm then 30 years of hardware advances might not be necessary.
I'm guessing since Open Firmware is an open standard (and is available for x86) it would be trivial for a third party manufacturer to build a motherboard based on Open Firmware that could run OS X.
Guess they have something else up their sleeves. Probably some kind of proprietary DRM chip that the OS requires to run.
I've thought all along that the switch to all digital broadcasts is a bad idea.
What is the main reason that people in the US watch broadcast TV? Because they can't afford cable or satellite.
After the switch people are going to be unable to get any television at all unless they fork over hundreds of dollars for a new digital set.
OK I broadly understand 'sequencing the human genome' is mapping out all the combinates of genes.
Sort of. Sequencing is really just finding the sequence of the DNA bases. (i.e. if a certain piece of DNA is ACCGT that is it's sequence)
There are 23 chromosomes in the human genome. That chromosomes are a pair of the genes. I understand that each gene is one of four DNA molecules called A,G,C & T. There 16 combinations of those mlecules and I can map those out with a pencil and paper, I can produce all 23 sets with desktop computing power.
There are 23 pairs of chromosomes. Each human cell (besides sperm/eggs) have 46 chromosomes.
Each chromosome has many genes. There are about 30,000 estimated genes in the human genome. Each gene can be hundreds or thousands of DNA bases (not "one of four"). There are around 3 billion bases in the human genome. Think your desktop computer will handle that?
And your math is wrong. Even if you just had four bases, that is 256 combinations not 16.
So why does it take so much computing power ?
That is a lot of data to process and analyze.
What are the really doing with it ?
Analyzing the raw genome data. Trying to locate genes by itself is a pretty tough job. Trying to match protein sequences with their original gene. This can be very hard because the original DNA sequence does not always match the protein it ultimately codes for. Basically there is a lot of data and a lot of processing of that data.
Why do they dum down these stories down so much ?
Do some google searches on DNA, genes, bioinformatics, or gene mapping. You'll find plenty of articles that aren't so "dum".
What were the /. editors thinking linking to a 3MHz(!!) webserver on the front page??
Slashdot editors thinking? Oh wait...nevermind.
Nothing to see here. move along.
oops...Looks like DrGene beat me to it.
note to self: read other replies in thread before writing
Oh. I forgot to add that the main barrier in synthetic protein design is folding. You can design a protein that works great in simulations, but getting a real working protein from that is very difficult because the synthetic proteins don't fold like they need to in order to create a functional protein.
Well...actually that IS a pretty big deal (unless you are talking about just putting together a sequence for a known protein.)
Actually designing your own working protein is still a long way off. There have been man made proteins, but they are little more than a chain of amino acids. They don't have any function. As for designing proteins with a specific function, we aren't there yet.
What we are able to do now is take known sequences of known proteins, replicate them, and splice those together.
So we've made it to the stage of being able to build stuff from stones, but we can't make our own bricks yet. It's not too far off, though. I'm sure in the next 5-10 years we will have a functional man-made protein. Most likely a catalytic, or nucleotide-binding protein.
(Note: I mean "we" as in people in the biomedical sciences. Not "we" as in work I am doing.)
Every porn site is going want these *way* more than they will want .xxx