Genome annotation (finding all the interest features in the sequence) is really computationally intensive, due in large part to the number of separate (often sub-optimally written) algorithms that have to be chained together and interpreted. My team at the iPlant Collaborative worked with the authors of a popular open-source annotation tool called "MAKER" to get it running at scale on the 302 TFLOP Lonestar 4 supercomputer, which in turn was used by the pine team to do in a few hours what used to be 6 months of painstaking bioinformatics. In another month or so, this algorithm will be available via REST API allowing, literally, "Annotation As A Service".
It's a nice story, and they provide a MatLab environment to play around with their model, but ultimately I don't believe this work is reproducible given the materials provided. All we're really given is a sandbox to play in where we can adjust model parameters, and so the work should never have been published.
What would convince me? For starters, the ability to take an arbitrary set of values for these SNPs, punch them in, and see the result change. If I put in SNPs from one of the CEU HapMap samples, I would expect to see a vaguely Caucasian face. If the individual is female, I would expect feminized features. Adding to this, I think we need to see more of the source used in the data wrangling. There's quite a bit of "and then this happened" in the methods.
I work for Mother Nature; So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies. Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about. But trust me.... You don't. I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you don't know what you are talking about. This is how bad info gets passed around. If you dont know about the topic....Dont make yourself sound like you do. Cos some slashdotters believe anything they hear."
You are so absolutely spot-on. I have the burns (and my parents have the repaired hole in their roof) to show for one of those "interesting" childhoods, and I'm now a scientist at a major East Coast research institute. I'm doing everything I can to encourage the urge to tinker in my young daughter. So far, it appears to be working [fingers crossed].
I wonder if the passport is valid if for some (terribly unfortunate and completely accidental) reason, the RFIP chip was to be inactivated? If so, the obvious answer to this being forced upon us, if you're worried about this sort of thing, it to just zap your passport with an electromagnetic field.
How about never reinstalling? My Powerbook has been through Jag, Panther, and Tiger and all associated service releases without ever needing a complete reinstall. And of course, the general consensus here at./ is that Mac OS X is indeed 'feature complete'. That said, the whole ubuntu reinstall business does annoy me. I wish the upgrade process was a bit more seamless (yes, I know, it's open source so I should go fix it. Explain to my supervisor how I should be allowed to spend 3-6 months working on a seamless upgrader for Ubunutu....)
Which war? Please tell me which declared war you support. Presumably you mean World War Two, because that was the last legally declared American War. The current cockup is pure militaristic adventuring combined with a poorly considered attack on the inanimate noun 'terror'.
While it's true that I have exponentially more CPUs running Linux (~128) than Human Child 4.5 (1), I do take exception to your broad sweeping assertion! Seriously though, my little girl's computer runs OS X but we are learning LOGO (Turtle Graphics) and plan to move to something like SmallTalk when she can read more than simple words. She is well aware that your computer is a tool and that you can make it do just about anything!
Slashdot Mirror
You're posting anonymously, but if you can figure out how to contact me I can set you up.
Genome annotation (finding all the interest features in the sequence) is really computationally intensive, due in large part to the number of separate (often sub-optimally written) algorithms that have to be chained together and interpreted. My team at the iPlant Collaborative worked with the authors of a popular open-source annotation tool called "MAKER" to get it running at scale on the 302 TFLOP Lonestar 4 supercomputer, which in turn was used by the pine team to do in a few hours what used to be 6 months of painstaking bioinformatics. In another month or so, this algorithm will be available via REST API allowing, literally, "Annotation As A Service".
It's a nice story, and they provide a MatLab environment to play around with their model, but ultimately I don't believe this work is reproducible given the materials provided. All we're really given is a sandbox to play in where we can adjust model parameters, and so the work should never have been published.
What would convince me? For starters, the ability to take an arbitrary set of values for these SNPs, punch them in, and see the result change. If I put in SNPs from one of the CEU HapMap samples, I would expect to see a vaguely Caucasian face. If the individual is female, I would expect feminized features. Adding to this, I think we need to see more of the source used in the data wrangling. There's quite a bit of "and then this happened" in the methods.
We're hiring. PM me.
Perhaps if they built a large wooden badger...
We all knew this would be the outcome, right?
No shit dude, I came here to post the same thing.
I wonder what these guys think of this discovery..
Sweet! Shaky, blurry videos of hot postdoc chicks making out over a soundtrack of "White and Nerdy"
Mr. Yossarian was unavailable for comment.
Haven't these guys read their Dan Simmons?
I work for Mother Nature; So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies. Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about. But trust me.... You don't. I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you don't know what you are talking about. This is how bad info gets passed around. If you dont know about the topic....Dont make yourself sound like you do. Cos some slashdotters believe anything they hear."
/wrong metasite
//slashies
//dont' kill me
You are so absolutely spot-on. I have the burns (and my parents have the repaired hole in their roof) to show for one of those "interesting" childhoods, and I'm now a scientist at a major East Coast research institute. I'm doing everything I can to encourage the urge to tinker in my young daughter. So far, it appears to be working [fingers crossed].
Rogalian of Undercity for President! (He's dead sexxy)
Amen.
"you were way too early "
wrong.
I wonder if the passport is valid if for some (terribly unfortunate and completely accidental) reason, the RFIP chip was to be inactivated? If so, the obvious answer to this being forced upon us, if you're worried about this sort of thing, it to just zap your passport with an electromagnetic field.
Dear sirs I am new to the Intrnet. What are these "Role Playing Games" and where can I find one?
If you live in the United States, quite frankly, The Man does all but wear the monster mask.
How about never reinstalling? My Powerbook has been through Jag, Panther, and Tiger and all associated service releases without ever needing a complete reinstall. And of course, the general consensus here at ./ is that Mac OS X is indeed 'feature complete'. That said, the whole ubuntu reinstall business does annoy me. I wish the upgrade process was a bit more seamless (yes, I know, it's open source so I should go fix it. Explain to my supervisor how I should be allowed to spend 3-6 months working on a seamless upgrader for Ubunutu....)
Sadistically enough, the answer is probably "Yes"
"The War"
Which war? Please tell me which declared war you support. Presumably you mean World War Two, because that was the last legally declared American War. The current cockup is pure militaristic adventuring combined with a poorly considered attack on the inanimate noun 'terror'.
There's no text here. Just adding a bit of junk to escape the lameness filter.
Probably g*d-damn Windows only. Certainly the one example game they show requries DirectX, which bodes poorly.
While it's true that I have exponentially more CPUs running Linux (~128) than Human Child 4.5 (1), I do take exception to your broad sweeping assertion! Seriously though, my little girl's computer runs OS X but we are learning LOGO (Turtle Graphics) and plan to move to something like SmallTalk when she can read more than simple words. She is well aware that your computer is a tool and that you can make it do just about anything!