As my own consulting / repair business (finally) picks up, I'm planning on going with people I can trust. Granted, that's only a very few people, and it won't get me far... But a lot of the people that 'aren't getting fired' that you want are probably rather unhappy with their current jobs.
So I guess the answer is where it started. Network, network, network. I don't do enough of that really, myself.
What the hell are they going to do about the copyright issues?
Quoted for truth. I know I'm not the only one who thought "Hey, this would be cool... but the target websites are going to be pissed about losing their ad revenue."
For sites like Wikipedia and others whose goal is the distribution of their content, this isn't as much of a big deal (unless, in the case of Wikipedia, they snapshot a vandalized site...), but a lot of content providers won't be happy about getting their ad revenue stolen.
2. The absorption of mitochondria into eukaryotes
3. The absorption of chloroplasts into plant cells
They both were obviously absorbed, since chloroplast == cyanobacteria. Lyses do not also succeed. Since both these facts are known, it probably just hasn't been tested yet (we would need to locate or breed a suitable species, however.)
This aside, evolution does make a number of testable predictions, that have been born out in the breeding of insects, plants, bacteria, and, well, dogs, horses, etc. Just because every last detail of evolution has yet to be tested does not make it 'bad'. We still have no experimental evidence for gravity waves, yet we do not throw out relativity. Relativity is actually the weaker theory.
An example of a star (or something) that causes problems for theorists, but is canonically uninteresting, is the high-z quasar (supposedly among the most distant and, perforce, luminous objects in the universe) physically in front of the nearby opaque galaxy NGC 7319. The silence since it was reported has been deafening
It's been noticed, but it is rather weak.
It could be a really damn bright quasar, or it could be from a collision that sent a black hole careening away at extreme velocities. Either way, more data is needed and there are many, easier to picture-with-current-tech mysteries clamoring for it.
The size of those ships is considered to be... slightly exxagerated, considering they make no comment about the techniques needed to build ships that big.
>> OK, I'll bite. Which of these rely on actual evolution, as opposed to with mutations and natural selection? (If anyone thinks mutations and natural selection don't occur, they deserve to be beaten to death with a lead pipe.) How many examples actually depend on organisms being able to change from one family to another?
This relies, in part, on the definition of family. The problem with the creationist definition is that the difference between humans and bonobo chimps is far smaller than that of many species that they will claim are in the same family. Keep in mind, things don't change from one family to another, per se, but rather evolve into two separate families.
In terms of raw genetic change, it's obvious that point 1 does not require a change in kinds, since it only covers 70,000 years of genetic changes - from when we evolved language at our last bottleneck.
Most of the remaining are a bit trickier. We're talking about bacteria, virii, cancerous cells and other rapidly-mutating, and thus evolving, organisms. While a creationist may claim that the fight against newer, antibiotic-resistant diseases is not a 'change in kind', they likely do not realize that bacterial life, in truth, holds more variety than all eukaryotic life.
In the case of genetic algorithms and programming, these usually involve more drastic changes than a single mutation, however in the case of extremely complex problems (like oh, life itself), a much larger population base would prefer a much smaller mutation rate, stretching out across several million multiple branches in search of a solution. That involves the branching of 'kinds'.
To answer your question, evolutionary science has brought us at least the following (partial list):
1: Partial linguistic reconstruction of dead languages by examining genetic data. 2: The yearly flu vaccine. This would be utterly impossible without evolutionary theory. 3: Genetic algorithms for computing. For many problems, they are the fastest way of finding and appropriate solution. 4: Gene therapy. 5: Radiation therapy. 6: Cancer research and cures. 7: Bacterial synthesis. 8: Nanotechnology.
Just off the top of my head. Evolutionary theory (it's a theory, not a hypothesis, because it has indeed been proven), is of great import in a vast quantity of fields. Creationism and intelligent design teach no more than astrology, alchemy, and phrenology teach. They are useless, and in some cases even damaging.
He's an attention whore. He's just pissed because Penny Arcade out-whored him on this one. And I doubt that Tycho and Gabe donated the $10,000 thinking they'd make it up in ad revenue. They might, but nearly everyone who follows this scandal already knows about PA. They may gain a few new readers out of it but not many.
At least Andy Kaufman had the sense to promote himself as an actor.
Seriously though, if someone acts like a jerk, they shouldn't be surprised when they receive their comuppance.
I didn't have a problem with Firefox until it was handling millions of entries. Whether or not Opera could handle that many is a moot point, I don't need to lug around my five-year browsing history.
>> The actual "space race" may be taking place now, in the design stage of the American CEV. Can they build a craft superior to the Chinese?
The American models, by the specs, seem vastly superior to the Chinese craft. That this is merely a proposal for the same continued shuttle budget is even more intriguing. It shows how much of a setback the Shuttle really was.
It puts the US where the US should have been ~20 years ago, maybe 10.
Organisms on Earth have shown a rather intense ability to survive. I don't doubt that we may find microbes of some sort there.
That said, Mars will have retained most of its oxygen and nitrogen, it's just trapped in the soil and crust. Even Earth's moon could hold an atmosphere for a billion years or so.
The lack of water on Mars has more to do with its low gravity - hydrogen occasionally splits from water molecules, and it is very difficult for planets of less than Jupiter or so mass to keep a solid hold on them. Earth is losing water through this process as well, albeit at a much slower rate.
Well yes, eventually Earth will freeze solid, or near enough so that tectonic activity no longer occurs.
This won't happen for a very long time. The sun will scorch Earth's atmosphere away and push its orbit back during expansion first. Being closer to the sun, several times more massive, having a moon and an overall denser crust (more appropriately, a smaller fraction of lighter materials, which make up our continents) mean that Earth will take a very long time to cool so.
Maybe, but the level of activity is somewhat in doubt. Earth's tectonics appear to be unusually active, thought to be a result from a collision of another planet orbitting at Earth's L4 lagrange point, shearing off much of the lighter portion of Earth's crust.
It is known that part of the reason why Mars is now 'dead' is because the planet ceased meaningful geological activity. The same is potentially true for Venus (though its rotation rate, for whatever reason, is abysmal.
This sort of thing happens, where a piece will reside in a museum or somewhere for a bit before someone realizes what it truly is. Someone else discovered the fossil, he discovered what it meant.
Actually getting tipped by your customers. I charge a flat fee (may have to stop that, but am building customer base now), and apparantly do a good job of making them confident of my skills.
My first customer was a dream - she made me lunch, even:-)
It won't render transparent pngs, or make any use of alpha masking in png data. Worse, try this:
Make a webpage with a complex background image. Now make a table with a different background image, a 2x2.gif, with two black pixels and two transparent ones, to darken out your background for say, a forum.
Load the page in Mozilla or Firefox. Works just fine.
Load it in IE. Grab a cup of coffee while you wait.
I wrote what was once considered to be a rather good poem (kind of lovey-dovey and such). Anyway, people were discussing it and I put in my opinion about some point.
Then some random person comes in and tells me I'm wrong (!?) and proceeds to explain their point of view. They didn't know I wrote it at the time.
I've since learned that that means I did a good job writing it:-)
Slashdot Mirror
As my own consulting / repair business (finally) picks up, I'm planning on going with people I can trust. Granted, that's only a very few people, and it won't get me far... But a lot of the people that 'aren't getting fired' that you want are probably rather unhappy with their current jobs.
So I guess the answer is where it started. Network, network, network. I don't do enough of that really, myself.
What the hell are they going to do about the copyright issues?
Quoted for truth. I know I'm not the only one who thought "Hey, this would be cool... but the target websites are going to be pissed about losing their ad revenue."
For sites like Wikipedia and others whose goal is the distribution of their content, this isn't as much of a big deal (unless, in the case of Wikipedia, they snapshot a vandalized site...), but a lot of content providers won't be happy about getting their ad revenue stolen.
The time it takes you to click does not modify the time. I got 22.
1. The creation of life
Is not a part of evolution, try again.
2. The absorption of mitochondria into eukaryotes
3. The absorption of chloroplasts into plant cells
They both were obviously absorbed, since chloroplast == cyanobacteria. Lyses do not also succeed. Since both these facts are known, it probably just hasn't been tested yet (we would need to locate or breed a suitable species, however.)
This aside, evolution does make a number of testable predictions, that have been born out in the breeding of insects, plants, bacteria, and, well, dogs, horses, etc. Just because every last detail of evolution has yet to be tested does not make it 'bad'. We still have no experimental evidence for gravity waves, yet we do not throw out relativity. Relativity is actually the weaker theory.
An example of a star (or something) that causes problems for theorists, but is canonically uninteresting, is the high-z quasar (supposedly among the most distant and, perforce, luminous objects in the universe) physically in front of the nearby opaque galaxy NGC 7319. The silence since it was reported has been deafening
It's been noticed, but it is rather weak.
It could be a really damn bright quasar, or it could be from a collision that sent a black hole careening away at extreme velocities. Either way, more data is needed and there are many, easier to picture-with-current-tech mysteries clamoring for it.
The size of those ships is considered to be... slightly exxagerated, considering they make no comment about the techniques needed to build ships that big.
>> OK, I'll bite. Which of these rely on actual evolution, as opposed to with mutations and natural selection? (If anyone thinks mutations and natural selection don't occur, they deserve to be beaten to death with a lead pipe.) How many examples actually depend on organisms being able to change from one family to another?
This relies, in part, on the definition of family. The problem with the creationist definition is that the difference between humans and bonobo chimps is far smaller than that of many species that they will claim are in the same family. Keep in mind, things don't change from one family to another, per se, but rather evolve into two separate families.
In terms of raw genetic change, it's obvious that point 1 does not require a change in kinds, since it only covers 70,000 years of genetic changes - from when we evolved language at our last bottleneck.
Most of the remaining are a bit trickier. We're talking about bacteria, virii, cancerous cells and other rapidly-mutating, and thus evolving, organisms. While a creationist may claim that the fight against newer, antibiotic-resistant diseases is not a 'change in kind', they likely do not realize that bacterial life, in truth, holds more variety than all eukaryotic life.
In the case of genetic algorithms and programming, these usually involve more drastic changes than a single mutation, however in the case of extremely complex problems (like oh, life itself), a much larger population base would prefer a much smaller mutation rate, stretching out across several million multiple branches in search of a solution. That involves the branching of 'kinds'.
To answer your question, evolutionary science has brought us at least the following (partial list):
1: Partial linguistic reconstruction of dead languages by examining genetic data.
2: The yearly flu vaccine. This would be utterly impossible without evolutionary theory.
3: Genetic algorithms for computing. For many problems, they are the fastest way of finding and appropriate solution.
4: Gene therapy.
5: Radiation therapy.
6: Cancer research and cures.
7: Bacterial synthesis.
8: Nanotechnology.
Just off the top of my head. Evolutionary theory (it's a theory, not a hypothesis, because it has indeed been proven), is of great import in a vast quantity of fields. Creationism and intelligent design teach no more than astrology, alchemy, and phrenology teach. They are useless, and in some cases even damaging.
He's an attention whore. He's just pissed because Penny Arcade out-whored him on this one. And I doubt that Tycho and Gabe donated the $10,000 thinking they'd make it up in ad revenue. They might, but nearly everyone who follows this scandal already knows about PA. They may gain a few new readers out of it but not many.
At least Andy Kaufman had the sense to promote himself as an actor.
Seriously though, if someone acts like a jerk, they shouldn't be surprised when they receive their comuppance.
I didn't have a problem with Firefox until it was handling millions of entries. Whether or not Opera could handle that many is a moot point, I don't need to lug around my five-year browsing history.
Firefox can keep a lot of history and download data, which causes most of its slowdowns.
Reducing your history size and having Firefox clear the download manager at program close goes a long way to fixing those issues.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun#History_and_futur e_of_the_Sun
Not sure, I've read about it elsewhere though.
It's been calculated that solar winds will push Earth's orbit back out of reach of the sun's photosphere.
>> The actual "space race" may be taking place now, in the design stage of the American CEV. Can they build a craft superior to the Chinese?
The American models, by the specs, seem vastly superior to the Chinese craft. That this is merely a proposal for the same continued shuttle budget is even more intriguing. It shows how much of a setback the Shuttle really was.
It puts the US where the US should have been ~20 years ago, maybe 10.
Or fifty.
Repeated deus ex machina makes me gack. Parting of Ways could have been sooooo cool, but no, Russel had to lamify it.
Organisms on Earth have shown a rather intense ability to survive. I don't doubt that we may find microbes of some sort there.
That said, Mars will have retained most of its oxygen and nitrogen, it's just trapped in the soil and crust. Even Earth's moon could hold an atmosphere for a billion years or so.
The lack of water on Mars has more to do with its low gravity - hydrogen occasionally splits from water molecules, and it is very difficult for planets of less than Jupiter or so mass to keep a solid hold on them. Earth is losing water through this process as well, albeit at a much slower rate.
Well yes, eventually Earth will freeze solid, or near enough so that tectonic activity no longer occurs.
This won't happen for a very long time. The sun will scorch Earth's atmosphere away and push its orbit back during expansion first. Being closer to the sun, several times more massive, having a moon and an overall denser crust (more appropriately, a smaller fraction of lighter materials, which make up our continents) mean that Earth will take a very long time to cool so.
Maybe, but the level of activity is somewhat in doubt. Earth's tectonics appear to be unusually active, thought to be a result from a collision of another planet orbitting at Earth's L4 lagrange point, shearing off much of the lighter portion of Earth's crust.
It is known that part of the reason why Mars is now 'dead' is because the planet ceased meaningful geological activity. The same is potentially true for Venus (though its rotation rate, for whatever reason, is abysmal.
Ann Coulter, McArthy, Jack Thompson...
I wonder what makes people go into these modes. It's like they don't feel there is any reprecussion to their actions. They are real-life trolls.
This sort of thing happens, where a piece will reside in a museum or somewhere for a bit before someone realizes what it truly is. Someone else discovered the fossil, he discovered what it meant.
Actually getting tipped by your customers. I charge a flat fee (may have to stop that, but am building customer base now), and apparantly do a good job of making them confident of my skills.
:-)
My first customer was a dream - she made me lunch, even
It is intolerably poor with layered rendering.
.gif, with two black pixels and two transparent ones, to darken out your background for say, a forum.
It won't render transparent pngs, or make any use of alpha masking in png data. Worse, try this:
Make a webpage with a complex background image.
Now make a table with a different background image, a 2x2
Load the page in Mozilla or Firefox. Works just fine.
Load it in IE. Grab a cup of coffee while you wait.
At least now you know she really was a woman.
We have, however, gone through multiple mass extinction events.
So it's not out of the question.
I wrote what was once considered to be a rather good poem (kind of lovey-dovey and such). Anyway, people were discussing it and I put in my opinion about some point.
:-)
Then some random person comes in and tells me I'm wrong (!?) and proceeds to explain their point of view. They didn't know I wrote it at the time.
I've since learned that that means I did a good job writing it