Antibiotic resistance is estimated to contribute to more than 25000 deaths every year in Europe alone.
Penicillin, the first antibiotic, was discovered in 1928 and more than 100 compounds have been found since but, until a reported discovery earlier this month, no new class has been found since 1987.
Dame Sally Davies, the UK government's chief medical officer, has said that antibiotic resistance is "as big a risk as terrorism" and warned that Britain could return to a 19th-century world in which the smallest infection or operation could kill.
Rotthier said the responsibility was on everyone, from patients and doctors to governments and pharmaceutical companies, to take immediate steps to ensure the "legacy of antibiotics as a life-saving medicine is not squandered".
We're running out of "magic bullets" to kill off bacteria. If you're a cynic, you could ask "What good is it to run a drug company if the drugs you make aren't in demand because they no longer work?" If you take it at face value, it's "This is some scary stuff that can affect everyone."
Or maybe he just wants everyone to compete on a level playing field, which would result in less off-shoring to China and India because they either won't or can't meet the standards for waste.
When a woman says "That's not the real problem," it's an indirect approach to discussing the problem, rather than immediately jumping into it with both feet with an accusation and making it look like an inquisition..
"I don't feel like I can trust your intentions when speaking to you" and "I get the sense you don't consider what I want on an equal level as what you want in a given moment" can come across as pretty accusatory, and put the guy directly into defensive mode, because you're jumping right into the mess rather than give him a chance to participate in the process of discovering what the woman is really upset about. Half the time the guy knows that, for example, it's a trust or equal footing issue, and might even say it himself, given a minute.
And even those 4 most feared words - "We have to talk" - is better than "You cheating $%^$@, get the #!)* out now!", and less likely to result in the neighbors calling the cops.
It also works both ways. For example,when you hear "Does this dress make me look fat" and replying "It's not the dress", is just not the way to go, even when your goal is unambiguity.
I guess that's just another example of smart devices making us dumber:-(
If you leave a charger at the office, it's not too hard to plug the phone in when you get there, or after lunch for a few hours. Solution cost is $10 or less. Same as buying a second adapter for your laptop and leaving it at the office - solution cost is around $40. Simple solutions that work, and when you go on vacation, bring your office adapters with you and even if you lose or forget them, it's not a big deal because you have one at home.
And of course, if your phone is buried under paperwork or you've tossed a sweater on it, it can still charge.
Of course I know a couple of women like that too, but I think it's a different problem...
Menopause:-) And while I say that sort of tongue-in-cheek, the effect is very real. One of my sisters thought it was unfair that I could get HRT (hormone replacement therapy) but she couldn't, even though she was menopausal and felt she could benefit from it. People under stress tend to have lower empathy, and menopause is definitely stressful.
Easier to just leave a spare charger hanging around.
The LED used is 2200 lumens, which is about the same as a 150 watt lightbulb. Whereas the light bulb spreads its light everywhere, this is concentrated into a small beam. So, do not look at charger with remaining good eye.
Still doesn't answer my question - why should information be free?
It's certainly not in nature - quite the contrary. It takes energy to get information from point A to point B or entity A to entity B, and both result in an increase in entropy for the system as a whole. "Free" information is not free - it has a cost.
That is SO not right. Distributing information is work, and must overcome inertia. I have DVDs full of information that is never going to be distributed. I'm sure other devs are in the same position. Also, there is information that I am required by law not to divulge, ever (for example, here I can't talk to anyone about our deliberations as a jury), and other information that spreading will cause harm but has no upside, so I'll take that to my grave as well.
Maybe you can't keep a secret, but plenty of people can and do. No work involved to prevent it spreading. To the contrary, spreading it would require (at least a minimal level of) effort.
Also, you're now guilty of objectifying information. It's no more an object than it has "wants":-)
They didn't. The chemical is used in diapers to increase absorption. No diapers were killed in the making of this experiment. Hope that clears the air:-)
Ever wonder why most guys don't feel the constant need voice their feelings? Perhaps it's because men don't have to, they are masters of non-verbal communication skills.
No, it's because voicing your feelings is seen by men as a sign of weakness, so they bottle it inside, get frustrated, angry, and when it finally comes out, run for cover. On the other hand, it's seen by women as a sharing exercise to build friendship and trust.
And both sexes generally perceive it the same way. Women regard men who are too "emo" as weak, and men regard women who don't talk about emotions as "ice queens."
This creates problems for women because they can't resolve conflicts with the men in the group by having everyone put it all out there nor by attacking the problem the same way as men do, so instead we use a more indirect approach, one that increases cooperation without making the men feel threatened. So, instead of pulling a Linus Torvalds and saying "Your idea is absolutely $(*&^&^$#+)_(* crap", we'll say something like "Maybe we're all looking at this the wrong way" (instead of singling out someone for blame). "We've probably gotten stale, so maybe we should spend a bit of time thinking of other approaches, and get back to this next week?"
I think the genetic differences are overblown. Social differences are a much bigger factor, and either gender can easily learn the skills needed to be a good communicator and team player. Rather than being a gender issue, it sounds more like a training issue.
I think it's not so much a question of learning the skills, but actually employing them at the appropriate time. Plus the difference in perspective on how to handle a problem. A man raids the fridge and takes the last piece of cake, even though you had told him you were saving it for one of the kids when they get home. When the issue comes up, the man says "So I'll go out and buy another cake. Problem solved!" The woman says "That's not the real problem here."
The guy doesn't understand - he'll "fix" the immediate problem, and as far as he's concerned, that ends it. The woman is thinking of all the other times he tried to "fix" a problem because he just didn't listen in the first place. So the man is thinking "I fixed it - why is she still nagging me?" and the woman is thinking "How can he *not* get it?"
Having lived on both sides of the gender divide, all I can offer up as an explanation is "it's complicated." I get where both sides are coming from, and the fact that it happens so often seems to point to gender being tied into it. Is it because men are socialized to fix the immediate problem, while women are socialized to look beyond the immediate problem? Is it a testosterone-fueled approach vs an estrogen-fueled approach? It's probably a bit of both, which of course is what makes life interesting:-) Then again, what do I know?
i hope not. i can't imagine anybody choosing suicide over this. (IF this ever moves beyond the usual "lab rats regain memory" stage)
I've already told everyone that if that happens, take me "out behind the barn and shoot me, and donate my body to science." What makes me me is my mind, not my arms, legs, heart, liver, or kidneys. When that's gone, the rest is just meat anyway, so might as well not consume further resources, and put people through the hassle of feeling guilty because they didn't visit "me" (even though nobody's home any more) often enough.I do NOT want to put that burden on my kids.
I keep my dogs until they can no longer live a quality life, then I take them to the vet and stay with them while they're killed. Doing otherwise (keeping a dog when it's terminally ill and suffering) would probably (and rightfully) get me investigated for cruelty. I think people have at least as much of a right to a life with some quality of life, and when that's no longer possible, help them end it. Apparently so do enough others to convince lawmakers to pass right to die legislation.
So hopefully this research will pay off and it won't come to that, but if it does, I'm going to pull the plug while I still can.
If the charger can see your phone, it's not in your pocket or purse. So if you're not carrying it around, just stick it on a window ledge (for a much shorter time) or under an incandescent light source (we still have them, eh?)
This also would not be for use outside the home - leaving it hang around to charge is a good way to lose it. Chargers are cheap - bring one to the office and everyone will love you when their phone is dying:-)
I get mod-bombed once in a while, where I'll see a slew of posts that were at +4, +5 suddenly go down to -1. It's no big deal - boys will be boys. Browse at -1 and look at what APK does to me all the time - again no big deal. He keeps on throwing around stupid accusations about my moderating his anonymous comments down via sockpuppets even though one account is pre-being-outed, the other post-being outed, and I lost the passwords (well, I maybe have them written down somewhere) when my vision failed for a good stretch and it was doubtful if I'd ever be able to use a computer again.
Most of the guys on slashdot are good eggs. They were mostly VERY supportive after I was outed in 2005. And someone is moderating APKs' comments down:-) It's not me - I make too many posts to get mod points (and besides, it's more fun / productive to get stories on the front page - 13 so far in January). And some of the comments the guys make defending me against APK are really great AND funny.
Definitely the Sarkeesians of the world don't help - the problem there is that men can't speak up without being labeled misogynists, and women who do speak up are pilloried as "not getting it." Looked at objectively, the bullying is pretty bad.
I'd say the haters (on both sides) are a vocal minority. And moderation is just moderation. It doesn't change the value of what you write, and since many users browse at -1 (where both the trash and the gems can be found) your voice is still heard. And that's what counts:-)
Its a law of nature is that everything is free in the monetary sense
Really? Since when does nature care about money? Nature got along quite nicely for billions of years without it. And the "law of nature" was, and still is, that everything has a cost - see the laws of thermodynamics.:-)
I don't mind politicians trying something new, but this really does bring down the class and dignity of the presidency. Going on the late night comedy shows was awkward enough (at best), but this is downright distasteful. With this administration, though, this is just par for the course.
Clinton's saxophone-playing appearance on "The Arsenio Hall Show" in June, though, was widely mocked at the time by many members of the we-know-everything gang covering national politics.
It wasn't dignified. It demeaned presidential politics. It "coarsened" the discourse of democracy, to use the language that syndicated columnist George Will seems to use to describe anything that isn't white, male and borrowed from ancient Rome or Greece. Clinton was dubbed the "Elvis candidate," in part because he was playing (or rather gamely trying to play) Elvis Presley's "Heartbreak Hotel."
What is the diversity of the active slashdot user base? Maybe we could have a poll limited to logged-in people only to keep people from tilting the stats?
Perhaps, but what would be the cowboy neal option?
Slashdot Mirror
Okay - how about "Radiation beam more powerful than a million suns detected heading our way"?
There's no need for regulation...
Just keep that in mind as you bury your 3-headed child.
Antibiotic resistance is estimated to contribute to more than 25000 deaths every year in Europe alone.
Penicillin, the first antibiotic, was discovered in 1928 and more than 100 compounds have been found since but, until a reported discovery earlier this month, no new class has been found since 1987.
Dame Sally Davies, the UK government's chief medical officer, has said that antibiotic resistance is "as big a risk as terrorism" and warned that Britain could return to a 19th-century world in which the smallest infection or operation could kill.
Rotthier said the responsibility was on everyone, from patients and doctors to governments and pharmaceutical companies, to take immediate steps to ensure the "legacy of antibiotics as a life-saving medicine is not squandered".
We're running out of "magic bullets" to kill off bacteria. If you're a cynic, you could ask "What good is it to run a drug company if the drugs you make aren't in demand because they no longer work?" If you take it at face value, it's "This is some scary stuff that can affect everyone."
Or maybe he just wants everyone to compete on a level playing field, which would result in less off-shoring to China and India because they either won't or can't meet the standards for waste.
This Star Trek campaign is obviously an infringement on "Space Balls 2: the search for more money". :-)
When a woman says "That's not the real problem," it's an indirect approach to discussing the problem, rather than immediately jumping into it with both feet with an accusation and making it look like an inquisition..
"I don't feel like I can trust your intentions when speaking to you" and "I get the sense you don't consider what I want on an equal level as what you want in a given moment" can come across as pretty accusatory, and put the guy directly into defensive mode, because you're jumping right into the mess rather than give him a chance to participate in the process of discovering what the woman is really upset about. Half the time the guy knows that, for example, it's a trust or equal footing issue, and might even say it himself, given a minute.
And even those 4 most feared words - "We have to talk" - is better than "You cheating $%^$@, get the #!)* out now!", and less likely to result in the neighbors calling the cops.
It also works both ways. For example,when you hear "Does this dress make me look fat" and replying "It's not the dress", is just not the way to go, even when your goal is unambiguity.
I guess that's just another example of smart devices making us dumber :-(
If you leave a charger at the office, it's not too hard to plug the phone in when you get there, or after lunch for a few hours. Solution cost is $10 or less. Same as buying a second adapter for your laptop and leaving it at the office - solution cost is around $40. Simple solutions that work, and when you go on vacation, bring your office adapters with you and even if you lose or forget them, it's not a big deal because you have one at home.
And of course, if your phone is buried under paperwork or you've tossed a sweater on it, it can still charge.
Of course I know a couple of women like that too, but I think it's a different problem...
Menopause :-) And while I say that sort of tongue-in-cheek, the effect is very real. One of my sisters thought it was unfair that I could get HRT (hormone replacement therapy) but she couldn't, even though she was menopausal and felt she could benefit from it. People under stress tend to have lower empathy, and menopause is definitely stressful.
Easier to just leave a spare charger hanging around.
The LED used is 2200 lumens, which is about the same as a 150 watt lightbulb. Whereas the light bulb spreads its light everywhere, this is concentrated into a small beam. So, do not look at charger with remaining good eye.
Still doesn't answer my question - why should information be free?
It's certainly not in nature - quite the contrary. It takes energy to get information from point A to point B or entity A to entity B, and both result in an increase in entropy for the system as a whole. "Free" information is not free - it has a cost.
That is SO not right. Distributing information is work, and must overcome inertia. I have DVDs full of information that is never going to be distributed. I'm sure other devs are in the same position. Also, there is information that I am required by law not to divulge, ever (for example, here I can't talk to anyone about our deliberations as a jury), and other information that spreading will cause harm but has no upside, so I'll take that to my grave as well.
Maybe you can't keep a secret, but plenty of people can and do. No work involved to prevent it spreading. To the contrary, spreading it would require (at least a minimal level of) effort.
Also, you're now guilty of objectifying information. It's no more an object than it has "wants" :-)
They didn't. The chemical is used in diapers to increase absorption. No diapers were killed in the making of this experiment. Hope that clears the air :-)
I'm pretty sure that there are plenty of men who want more women on their teams as well :-)
Ever wonder why most guys don't feel the constant need voice their feelings? Perhaps it's because men don't have to, they are masters of non-verbal communication skills.
No, it's because voicing your feelings is seen by men as a sign of weakness, so they bottle it inside, get frustrated, angry, and when it finally comes out, run for cover. On the other hand, it's seen by women as a sharing exercise to build friendship and trust.
And both sexes generally perceive it the same way. Women regard men who are too "emo" as weak, and men regard women who don't talk about emotions as "ice queens."
This creates problems for women because they can't resolve conflicts with the men in the group by having everyone put it all out there nor by attacking the problem the same way as men do, so instead we use a more indirect approach, one that increases cooperation without making the men feel threatened. So, instead of pulling a Linus Torvalds and saying "Your idea is absolutely $(*&^&^$#+)_(* crap", we'll say something like "Maybe we're all looking at this the wrong way" (instead of singling out someone for blame). "We've probably gotten stale, so maybe we should spend a bit of time thinking of other approaches, and get back to this next week?"
I think the genetic differences are overblown. Social differences are a much bigger factor, and either gender can easily learn the skills needed to be a good communicator and team player. Rather than being a gender issue, it sounds more like a training issue.
I think it's not so much a question of learning the skills, but actually employing them at the appropriate time. Plus the difference in perspective on how to handle a problem. A man raids the fridge and takes the last piece of cake, even though you had told him you were saving it for one of the kids when they get home. When the issue comes up, the man says "So I'll go out and buy another cake. Problem solved!" The woman says "That's not the real problem here."
The guy doesn't understand - he'll "fix" the immediate problem, and as far as he's concerned, that ends it. The woman is thinking of all the other times he tried to "fix" a problem because he just didn't listen in the first place. So the man is thinking "I fixed it - why is she still nagging me?" and the woman is thinking "How can he *not* get it?"
Having lived on both sides of the gender divide, all I can offer up as an explanation is "it's complicated." I get where both sides are coming from, and the fact that it happens so often seems to point to gender being tied into it. Is it because men are socialized to fix the immediate problem, while women are socialized to look beyond the immediate problem? Is it a testosterone-fueled approach vs an estrogen-fueled approach? It's probably a bit of both, which of course is what makes life interesting :-) Then again, what do I know?
i hope not. i can't imagine anybody choosing suicide over this. (IF this ever moves beyond the usual "lab rats regain memory" stage)
I've already told everyone that if that happens, take me "out behind the barn and shoot me, and donate my body to science." What makes me me is my mind, not my arms, legs, heart, liver, or kidneys. When that's gone, the rest is just meat anyway, so might as well not consume further resources, and put people through the hassle of feeling guilty because they didn't visit "me" (even though nobody's home any more) often enough.I do NOT want to put that burden on my kids.
I keep my dogs until they can no longer live a quality life, then I take them to the vet and stay with them while they're killed. Doing otherwise (keeping a dog when it's terminally ill and suffering) would probably (and rightfully) get me investigated for cruelty. I think people have at least as much of a right to a life with some quality of life, and when that's no longer possible, help them end it. Apparently so do enough others to convince lawmakers to pass right to die legislation.
So hopefully this research will pay off and it won't come to that, but if it does, I'm going to pull the plug while I still can.
If the charger can see your phone, it's not in your pocket or purse. So if you're not carrying it around, just stick it on a window ledge (for a much shorter time) or under an incandescent light source (we still have them, eh?)
This also would not be for use outside the home - leaving it hang around to charge is a good way to lose it. Chargers are cheap - bring one to the office and everyone will love you when their phone is dying :-)
my genome (which is information) stays with me. It's not open for replication outside my own body.
I appreciate your sacrifice, as it keeps the Flynn effect going.
Not really - I have 2 daughters, and they're totally awesome :-)
You can't possible get what you want (absolutely no anthropomorphizing) because:
"Vacuum wants to be filled."
Really? "Nothing" has wants? Hardly :-)
As long as they keep giving us a choice ...
I get mod-bombed once in a while, where I'll see a slew of posts that were at +4, +5 suddenly go down to -1. It's no big deal - boys will be boys. Browse at -1 and look at what APK does to me all the time - again no big deal. He keeps on throwing around stupid accusations about my moderating his anonymous comments down via sockpuppets even though one account is pre-being-outed, the other post-being outed, and I lost the passwords (well, I maybe have them written down somewhere) when my vision failed for a good stretch and it was doubtful if I'd ever be able to use a computer again.
Most of the guys on slashdot are good eggs. They were mostly VERY supportive after I was outed in 2005. And someone is moderating APKs' comments down :-) It's not me - I make too many posts to get mod points (and besides, it's more fun / productive to get stories on the front page - 13 so far in January). And some of the comments the guys make defending me against APK are really great AND funny.
Definitely the Sarkeesians of the world don't help - the problem there is that men can't speak up without being labeled misogynists, and women who do speak up are pilloried as "not getting it." Looked at objectively, the bullying is pretty bad.
I'd say the haters (on both sides) are a vocal minority. And moderation is just moderation. It doesn't change the value of what you write, and since many users browse at -1 (where both the trash and the gems can be found) your voice is still heard. And that's what counts :-)
Its a law of nature is that everything is free in the monetary sense
Really? Since when does nature care about money? Nature got along quite nicely for billions of years without it. And the "law of nature" was, and still is, that everything has a cost - see the laws of thermodynamics. :-)
"replicated the these findings for teams that worked together online communicating purely by typing messages into a browser"
So I guess that emoticons work for "out-of-band" communications. :-)
Of course, if it were Linus Torvalds going the ASCII art route, it would probably be more like "You #-( @@ $@%$ %*^@^##% dummy!" :-(
I don't mind politicians trying something new, but this really does bring down the class and dignity of the presidency. Going on the late night comedy shows was awkward enough (at best), but this is downright distasteful. With this administration, though, this is just par for the course.
You haven't seen it yet, so why be so quick to judge? Also, pundits were saying that Bill Clinton's appearance playing sax on The Arsenio Hall Show was a mistake, but look what happened:.
Clinton's saxophone-playing appearance on "The Arsenio Hall Show" in June, though, was widely mocked at the time by many members of the we-know-everything gang covering national politics.
It wasn't dignified. It demeaned presidential politics. It "coarsened" the discourse of democracy, to use the language that syndicated columnist George Will seems to use to describe anything that isn't white, male and borrowed from ancient Rome or Greece. Clinton was dubbed the "Elvis candidate," in part because he was playing (or rather gamely trying to play) Elvis Presley's "Heartbreak Hotel."
What is the diversity of the active slashdot user base? Maybe we could have a poll limited to logged-in people only to keep people from tilting the stats?
Perhaps, but what would be the cowboy neal option?
[_] As long as it's NOT "CowboyNeal" I'm good.