Heh - 40 here. I've asked myself that many times. I've known a few people who went over to law in their 30's and currently make slightly more money than God.
However I'm convinced my wife's head would actually explode if I told her I was thinking about going back to school again - Grad school will have to do.
The whole thing swings on the correct translation of 'state" - anyone reading the full text of the speech would clearly interpret what he said as referring to nation-states, not to American "states".
In any case the **only** people pushing this nonsense (and the day before the election, surprise surprise) is MEMRI, which is an ultra-rightwing front group for the Israeli government, whose interests in seeing Bush reelected are clear.
With the new release of the Osama-Bin-Laden tape supporting John Kerry, I can 100% saying I am going for Bush.
He said "neither Bush nor Kerry can ensure your safety, only America's policies can" - how does this support Kerry?
If terrorists start saying they are going to start attacking any state the Bush wins and leaves the states the Kerry wins alone, then I am for Bush.
If he had actually said that I might agree. He didn't
Because that shows to me that the teorrists are running scared at another Bush administration.
Where are you pulling this from? Iran endorsed Bush!
Plus Bin-Laden was spouting everything the idiot Michel Moore was saying just adds to the theory that teorrists and dictators want to see Kerry in office because he will not hunt them down and give their people freedom.
The only remotely MM thing he mentioned was the Shrub reading that book about a goat while the Two Towers burned. Anyone with a brain has wondereda about that. I seriously doubt he got a copy of F911 and watched it in his cave. He doesn't care that much about what Americans think.
Eventually I hope to have it sharing functionality with some friends in different states so we can all have free local dial-ins for family and friends who are scattered.
Are there any guides to setting this kind of thing up? I'm utterly new to PBX technology, but I like the idea of having an Asterix box here connected to a phone, and one on the other side of the continent with the rest of the family. I assume that it would then be relatively easy to phone back&forth to one another freely, share conferences, etc.
Gore very nearly won 2000, and that was after 8 years of utterly relentless, ultrapartisan attacks by the Republicans on everything that had anything to do with the Democratic administration (even criticizing it as "wagging the dog" when Clinton went after Bin Laden). More than anything else Gore failed due to his own personality - he was never the most connected and sympathetic of people.
Failing to attack where the Republicans are weakest may be the undoing of Kerry - the right-wing spin is always on the old canard that Democrats are somehow weaker on national defence (the Republican platform being "America Made Safer By Being Despised By All Civilized Nations"). Their current strategy plays into this spin by appearing weak in the face of Republican attacks. People respect honesty, and Kerry could probably pick up a 5 point lead just by opening his mouth and telling the truth. I fear he's too much the politician for that.
He knew a spin job when he saw it, and he was ready for it.
With what? Shrieking insanity? Did you actually see that interview? The one where he wished he could challenge Matthews to a duel? He sounded like a man teetering on the edge of dementia. He's been persona non grata with the Democrats for a while now, and really shouldn't be called one.
If you actually think ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN have a right wing agenda then your frame of reference must be so far leftward...
You realize that can be turned around the other way as well, when right-wing crazies start muttering about "ultraleftwing CNN agendas" and similar nonsense? Whatever, but you won't find truly hard questioning of the Bush regime's agenda on any US cable network - this adminstration is treated with extreme delicacy by the media, particularly when compared with their credulous repeating of nonsensical conspiracy theories and slander regarding the previous administration.
"Yes, the AP eventually ran a retraction, but only after the hue and cry reached such a volume that they couldn't ignore it any more"
That part is just stupid spin. They had an incorrect story and they retracted it. Somehow the fact that they caught it relatively rapidly and admitted their mistake still isn't good enough for the ultra-right crazies.
I would think that the majority of the media, being strongly left-leaning and biased
See, this discredits your position instantly. You would like to establish some "left wing" bias in the media right off the bat in order to frame the debate in your favour.
No such bias currently exists. The range at the moment is from middle-of-the-road right wing (CNN) to ultra-right nationalist (FOX). There is no coherent liberal viewpoint mass media extant in the USA right now (with the exception of Air America, which is still embryonic).
I find it a bit ironic, really, in that people were screaming for the better part of 20 years about how consolidation of media ownership would result in limited viewpoints and a dominance of right-wing agendas. I scoffed at this idea, I really did. I regret it now, because we have arrived.
Project Censored has been around for a long time now. They're hardly sensationalistic - especially when one considers that they rarely get any attention at all from the media. They're left-leaning, sure. They've never pretended any differently.
However, at least they're willing to provide links and references. One rarely sees that much from the right wing crazies who like to smear the work of groups like this.
You're too hung up on the word "signal". In this context it simply means "event which passes through the discrimination algorithm". That's not the same thing as "intelligently generated signal". Given trillions of frequency bands and data from a massive range of sources, things which pass the initial tests at any arbitrary significance level are to be expected at a certain rate. They then go back an examine the events to see if they're actually interesting.
Would be pretty funny if it was real - the actual data path for the announcement would have gone to Drudge first, and Slashdot only later in the day. I think I've lost faith in the Nerdnet.
I really (really) hate to admit to liking anime, due to tha stigma attached.
All the same the stuff you're talking about represents the worst of the form.
Take a look at things like the Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex episodes, or Planetes, or Cowboy Bebop (though I'm not as in love with that as many are), or alternate reality stuff like Last Exile. There's some impressive storytelling and amazing animation.
Seriously - you went to the Soviet Union while it still existed and did a large, statistically significant sampling of people with respect to the appearance of their teeth? Enough to make generalizations about dental care for several hundred million people?
The answer is pertty much what a previous poster was talking about - they compare the sequences to ones from other organisms where they already know what a given gene does.
There's a huge database called "GenBank" (you can go there via ncbi.nlm.nih.gov ) where you can search (via an algorithm called "blast") your DNA or protein sequence against just about every DNA or protein sequence ever. If you get a result back listing fifty different, for instance, fatty acid synthesis genes at high confidence levels then you can be pretty sure you're looking at a fatty acid synthesis gene.
Of course this only works for about 60% or so of the genes in any given organism. What's going on with that other 40% is an interesting question that lots of people are working on. If you run up against one of them you just dump it in the "unknown function" bin...
The basic idea is to get a sampling of the "genome content" of a volume of seawater, looking for genes related to, for instance, metabolism of metals, or peculiar photosynthetic components, or whatever. You then have an idea of both organismic and metabolic diversity in an area - do it straight down a water column and you see how this varies across layers of the ocean.
Your point is a valid one all the same - this is a newish field called "metagenomics" and lots of professional scientists have been asking precisely the same question you did. The jury is still very much out on whether this is really going to produce anything useful.
Venter is a grandstander and a media whore. There, I said it.
He regularly trades off scientific benefit in favour of his own personal ego - to wit, most of the Celera genome is *his own DNA* and, even more egregiously, the dog genome is his own *pet poodle*, by all accounts.
I've heard plenty of criticism of this latest bit of nonsense of his - he's going to grab plenty of attention as the father of "metagenomics" or some such nonsense, but it is going to be left to more rigorous scientists to come in and clean up the field that he has barged into.
Right on - glad to hear I'm not the only one. I recently spent the entire 4.5 hours flying Vancouver-Toronto just staring at the terrain. Fascinating stuff - I'm sure I saw part of an astroblem on the praries, just a hint of an arc heading up to the north but contiguous over many miles. I fly a lot these days, but I don't think I'll ever get tired of watching the earth below.
Seems like kind of an ad hoc hypothesis - perhaps bipedal walking became less uncomfortable on the ape's stomach? It nearly died of a stomach aliment, IIRC, so this could be an immediate response to the illness.
Slashdot Mirror
Heh - 40 here. I've asked myself that many times. I've known a few people who went over to law in their 30's and currently make slightly more money than God.
However I'm convinced my wife's head would actually explode if I told her I was thinking about going back to school again - Grad school will have to do.
The whole thing swings on the correct translation of 'state" - anyone reading the full text of the speech would clearly interpret what he said as referring to nation-states, not to American "states".
In any case the **only** people pushing this nonsense (and the day before the election, surprise surprise) is MEMRI, which is an ultra-rightwing front group for the Israeli government, whose interests in seeing Bush reelected are clear.
Here's the link to a bit about MEMRI-
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/org/memri.php
This is just desperate last-minute spinning.
With the new release of the Osama-Bin-Laden tape supporting John Kerry, I can 100% saying I am going for Bush.
He said "neither Bush nor Kerry can ensure your safety, only America's policies can" - how does this support Kerry?
If terrorists start saying they are going to start attacking any state the Bush wins and leaves the states the Kerry wins alone, then I am for Bush.
If he had actually said that I might agree. He didn't
Because that shows to me that the teorrists are running scared at another Bush administration.
Where are you pulling this from? Iran endorsed Bush!
Plus Bin-Laden was spouting everything the idiot Michel Moore was saying just adds to the theory that teorrists and dictators want to see Kerry in office because he will not hunt them down and give their people freedom.
The only remotely MM thing he mentioned was the Shrub reading that book about a goat while the Two Towers burned. Anyone with a brain has wondereda about that. I seriously doubt he got a copy of F911 and watched it in his cave. He doesn't care that much about what Americans think.
Eventually I hope to have it sharing functionality with some friends in different states so we can all have free local dial-ins for family and friends who are scattered.
Are there any guides to setting this kind of thing up? I'm utterly new to PBX technology, but I like the idea of having an Asterix box here connected to a phone, and one on the other side of the continent with the rest of the family. I assume that it would then be relatively easy to phone back&forth to one another freely, share conferences, etc.
However I've no idea where to begin...
Clinton never went after bin Laden
Yes he did.
Unless the facts are now "too partisan"?
Gore very nearly won 2000, and that was after 8 years of utterly relentless, ultrapartisan attacks by the Republicans on everything that had anything to do with the Democratic administration (even criticizing it as "wagging the dog" when Clinton went after Bin Laden). More than anything else Gore failed due to his own personality - he was never the most connected and sympathetic of people.
Failing to attack where the Republicans are weakest may be the undoing of Kerry - the right-wing spin is always on the old canard that Democrats are somehow weaker on national defence (the Republican platform being "America Made Safer By Being Despised By All Civilized Nations"). Their current strategy plays into this spin by appearing weak in the face of Republican attacks. People respect honesty, and Kerry could probably pick up a 5 point lead just by opening his mouth and telling the truth. I fear he's too much the politician for that.
With what? Shrieking insanity? Did you actually see that interview? The one where he wished he could challenge Matthews to a duel? He sounded like a man teetering on the edge of dementia. He's been persona non grata with the Democrats for a while now, and really shouldn't be called one.
If you actually think ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN have a right wing agenda then your frame of reference must be so far leftward...
You realize that can be turned around the other way as well, when right-wing crazies start muttering about "ultraleftwing CNN agendas" and similar nonsense? Whatever, but you won't find truly hard questioning of the Bush regime's agenda on any US cable network - this adminstration is treated with extreme delicacy by the media, particularly when compared with their credulous repeating of nonsensical conspiracy theories and slander regarding the previous administration.
"Yes, the AP eventually ran a retraction, but only after the hue and cry reached such a volume that they couldn't ignore it any more"
That part is just stupid spin. They had an incorrect story and they retracted it. Somehow the fact that they caught it relatively rapidly and admitted their mistake still isn't good enough for the ultra-right crazies.
I would think that the majority of the media, being strongly left-leaning and biased
See, this discredits your position instantly. You would like to establish some "left wing" bias in the media right off the bat in order to frame the debate in your favour.
No such bias currently exists. The range at the moment is from middle-of-the-road right wing (CNN) to ultra-right nationalist (FOX). There is no coherent liberal viewpoint mass media extant in the USA right now (with the exception of Air America, which is still embryonic).
I find it a bit ironic, really, in that people were screaming for the better part of 20 years about how consolidation of media ownership would result in limited viewpoints and a dominance of right-wing agendas. I scoffed at this idea, I really did. I regret it now, because we have arrived.
Project Censored has been around for a long time now. They're hardly sensationalistic - especially when one considers that they rarely get any attention at all from the media. They're left-leaning, sure. They've never pretended any differently.
However, at least they're willing to provide links and references. One rarely sees that much from the right wing crazies who like to smear the work of groups like this.
They are? That's very interesting. Do you have any way of supporting that contention other than just saying it is so?
No? Thought not.
You're too hung up on the word "signal". In this context it simply means "event which passes through the discrimination algorithm". That's not the same thing as "intelligently generated signal". Given trillions of frequency bands and data from a massive range of sources, things which pass the initial tests at any arbitrary significance level are to be expected at a certain rate. They then go back an examine the events to see if they're actually interesting.
Would be pretty funny if it was real - the actual data path for the announcement would have gone to Drudge first, and Slashdot only later in the day. I think I've lost faith in the Nerdnet.
I just watched the first series a while back. It really is some of the most outstanding science fiction work I've ever seen in any visual medium.
I really (really) hate to admit to liking anime, due to tha stigma attached.
All the same the stuff you're talking about represents the worst of the form.
Take a look at things like the Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex episodes, or Planetes, or Cowboy Bebop (though I'm not as in love with that as many are), or alternate reality stuff like Last Exile. There's some impressive storytelling and amazing animation.
Seriously - you went to the Soviet Union while it still existed and did a large, statistically significant sampling of people with respect to the appearance of their teeth? Enough to make generalizations about dental care for several hundred million people?
Wow. Good job.
Agreed, but I have yet to figure out how to go all ninja with my plastic spork.
I'm just hoping there are a bunch of really burly football guys in the back of the plane somewhere.
Quite a good one, usually. Worth a read, as is the rest of the magazine.
One word man - decaf.
The answer is pertty much what a previous poster was talking about - they compare the sequences to ones from other organisms where they already know what a given gene does.
There's a huge database called "GenBank" (you can go there via ncbi.nlm.nih.gov ) where you can search (via an algorithm called "blast") your DNA or protein sequence against just about every DNA or protein sequence ever. If you get a result back listing fifty different, for instance, fatty acid synthesis genes at high confidence levels then you can be pretty sure you're looking at a fatty acid synthesis gene.
Of course this only works for about 60% or so of the genes in any given organism. What's going on with that other 40% is an interesting question that lots of people are working on. If you run up against one of them you just dump it in the "unknown function" bin...
The basic idea is to get a sampling of the "genome content" of a volume of seawater, looking for genes related to, for instance, metabolism of metals, or peculiar photosynthetic components, or whatever. You then have an idea of both organismic and metabolic diversity in an area - do it straight down a water column and you see how this varies across layers of the ocean.
Your point is a valid one all the same - this is a newish field called "metagenomics" and lots of professional scientists have been asking precisely the same question you did. The jury is still very much out on whether this is really going to produce anything useful.
Venter is a grandstander and a media whore. There, I said it.
He regularly trades off scientific benefit in favour of his own personal ego - to wit, most of the Celera genome is *his own DNA* and, even more egregiously, the dog genome is his own *pet poodle*, by all accounts.
I've heard plenty of criticism of this latest bit of nonsense of his - he's going to grab plenty of attention as the father of "metagenomics" or some such nonsense, but it is going to be left to more rigorous scientists to come in and clean up the field that he has barged into.
Right on - glad to hear I'm not the only one. I recently spent the entire 4.5 hours flying Vancouver-Toronto just staring at the terrain. Fascinating stuff - I'm sure I saw part of an astroblem on the praries, just a hint of an arc heading up to the north but contiguous over many miles. I fly a lot these days, but I don't think I'll ever get tired of watching the earth below.
Seems like kind of an ad hoc hypothesis - perhaps bipedal walking became less uncomfortable on the ape's stomach? It nearly died of a stomach aliment, IIRC, so this could be an immediate response to the illness.