I just bought a copy, I'm that impressed. This is truely the way installation should be done. No crappy half working X11 in 16 colours. No half-assed mouse support. And best of all, I can keep using my computer during the installation.
Thanks. In this study they're not "doing" STM in the sense that they're scanning the structure of an organic sample, they're just using an STM observe the effect of presenting a biological sample to a gold buffer.
Depends on the size of the protein, but unfortunately you're right for most interesting proteins. There are hybrid computational modelling + mass spectrography techniques that can reduce the required computational time by orders of magnatude. When peptides fold up into proteins they make covalent bonds between the aminoacids. When you're doing a computer simulation you can say something about which bonds are more likely than others (and this can reduce your run time to less than blind search) but you can't say with any certainty which aminoacids are bound to which. What these hybrid techniques do is cut up the folded protein into small molecules (5-6 aminoacids) and then messure the mass. From this data you can tell if there are certain crosschain combinations. For example, you can see that there is a Cysteine-Asparagine bond and if there is a Serine-Proline bond or whatever. Armed with this information you can remove a lot of possibilities from your search space.
We retain the exclusive right to sell construction-kits or fully assembled devices based on our design.
And yet they don't actually offer fully assembled devices. Way to go, prohibit people from making a buck off your design just to make yourself feel better and remove the possibility of someone who wants one of these puppys from getting one unless they're willing to build it themselves from scratch.
We grant everybody the right to construct the microscope using the here-published design for private or educational purposes
So I can't even get the geeky neighbourhood kid to build it for me for $40 because that would be "commercial purposes". Plan. If I want 200 of them I can't take the design to a local manufacturer and pay them to do the tooling. Great.
You're full of shit. Ya can't use an STM with organic samples, let alone live organic samples, let along live organic samples in real time. I know most Slashdot residents are morons but try not to insult the intelligence of those of us who have one.
no. To find the 3d structure of a protein or a virus you need to be able to crystalize it and then use a technique such as xray crystalography or NMR. There are some new techniques being developed based on mass spectography that can determine the structure of proteins that cannot be crystalized, but they're in their infancy. An STM simply can't be used, because the sample must be able to conduct a current (ie, it has to be a metal or something placed on top of a metal). Preparing samples for an STM is much like preparing samples for an electron microscope, you need to infuse the sample with a conductive material (usually gold) to be able to see it clearly.
Atomic force microsopes on the other hand can do some very neat work with small organic particals, but seperating something like an HIV from solution is still difficult, and usually involved crystalization.
Go look at the jargon file. ESR considers it a virtue to not think through the solution before jumping right into coding. The idea of designing, documenting and testing software is not part of the "release early, release often" philosophy. So don't go on about the NYT's definition of "hacker". Sure it's not what ESR has defined it as but what he has defined it as is not something to proud of either. If you're a software engineer and some calls you a hacker, punch em in the face.
that's a really good way to forgive someone's "accident", force them out of business. But hey, they don't have to go out of business, they can always release the source code to the proprietory parts of their software under the GPL. Usually that's the only option. If the company could afford to develop the GPL'd portions of the program that they "accidentally" aquired they would never have aquired them in the first place.
Which brings up a really good point. If company X aquires my GPL'd source code and makes $Y million dollars from their product which essentially consists of 40% of my code, shouldn't I be able to get 40% of Y out of them? If so, they're doubly fucked. I can get 40% of all the profits they've made since they aquired my source and I can withhold that source from them forcing them to pay whatever the hell I want (as long as it is less than what it would cost for them to reimplement my source). Even if they choose to reimplement my source I can hound them till the end of their days claiming that their reimplementation is significantly similar to my source code. For every feature they implement I can point to similar features in my product and cry shananigans. I can demand access to their source code to prove that they havn't violated my license (again) and then I can use my intimate knowledge to improve the features of my own source code. If I get caught, who cares? It's not like they can sue me for 40% of my revenues, I don't have any!
All in all this spells disaster for any company that even thinks about touching GPL software. That's why so many companies refuse to give their employees permission to work on Free Software. If they're working on proprietory software and they're working on Free Software, the chances are they are writing software that's remotely similar.
Actually it's a lot worse than that. Trolltech holds the position that Free Software and Commercial Software are two seperate things. Even though there is plenty of Commercial Free Software.
uhhh.. there's the logs of the intrusion detection system at the ISP, and the one at the ISP's backbone provider, and the one at the attacker's ISP. This is typically called a "paper trail" and without it you don't have a case.
I agree with most of what you are saying. Unfortunately I really don't appreciate the way you are saying it. It's not a crime to write a virus, it's a crime to maliciously distribute it. Must of the technology that has been developed by virus writers has been adopted for other purposes, most notably "software protection". When that technology is adopted it is usually done without any form of attribution. Why? Because virus writers are seen as less than human. Maybe that will change when the first war in cyberspace is fought.
All the crimes you have mentioned have one thing in common: they're malicious acts. Don't hate on the people who specifically go out of their way to harm no-one, just because there are malicious people out there who identify themselves as them.
But it's not like you can go to their website and buy one. Maybe that would be a good first step in making their products commercially viable: offer their potential customers a way to order them.
This demonstrates the fictional world in which Slashdot readers live. Say after me: RFIDs cannot be read at any significant distance, they're just an electronic replacement for barcodes.
Seriously MicroOptical has been doing press releases of their latest and greatest inventions sincle the late eighties and yes, they've been using the "not yet available for mass production" line since then. Their a concept company, hoping that oneday they'll find some rich sucker who'll pay a fortune for a one off.
You could use an environment variable to override the default or look for "chooser" in the path. This is such an obvious concept that it is absolutely rediculous that no OS does it.
The KDE file selector? What? It's just the Qt file selector man? Almost everything in KDE is just Qt with lipstick on. Qt is a brilliant product and KDE is riding the wave. When you consider how much excellent stuff they've got to work with you see that they're not really putting in any more work than the GTK team.
If "smart phones" were really smart,
on
Death of the PDA?
·
· Score: 1
they wouldn't use the tower to make a call to a phone that is in the same room/shopping centre as me. Of course, if smart phones had direct phone to phone capabilities it would be a little harder to justify charging me an absurd amount per minute.
Slashdot Mirror
I just bought a copy, I'm that impressed. This is truely the way installation should be done. No crappy half working X11 in 16 colours. No half-assed mouse support. And best of all, I can keep using my computer during the installation.
Thanks. In this study they're not "doing" STM in the sense that they're scanning the structure of an organic sample, they're just using an STM observe the effect of presenting a biological sample to a gold buffer.
Depends on the size of the protein, but unfortunately you're right for most interesting proteins. There are hybrid computational modelling + mass spectrography techniques that can reduce the required computational time by orders of magnatude. When peptides fold up into proteins they make covalent bonds between the aminoacids. When you're doing a computer simulation you can say something about which bonds are more likely than others (and this can reduce your run time to less than blind search) but you can't say with any certainty which aminoacids are bound to which. What these hybrid techniques do is cut up the folded protein into small molecules (5-6 aminoacids) and then messure the mass. From this data you can tell if there are certain crosschain combinations. For example, you can see that there is a Cysteine-Asparagine bond and if there is a Serine-Proline bond or whatever. Armed with this information you can remove a lot of possibilities from your search space.
And yet they don't actually offer fully assembled devices. Way to go, prohibit people from making a buck off your design just to make yourself feel better and remove the possibility of someone who wants one of these puppys from getting one unless they're willing to build it themselves from scratch.
We grant everybody the right to construct the microscope using the here-published design for private or educational purposes
So I can't even get the geeky neighbourhood kid to build it for me for $40 because that would be "commercial purposes". Plan. If I want 200 of them I can't take the design to a local manufacturer and pay them to do the tooling. Great.
You're full of shit. Ya can't use an STM with organic samples, let alone live organic samples, let along live organic samples in real time. I know most Slashdot residents are morons but try not to insult the intelligence of those of us who have one.
Atomic force microsopes on the other hand can do some very neat work with small organic particals, but seperating something like an HIV from solution is still difficult, and usually involved crystalization.
Go look at the jargon file. ESR considers it a virtue to not think through the solution before jumping right into coding. The idea of designing, documenting and testing software is not part of the "release early, release often" philosophy. So don't go on about the NYT's definition of "hacker". Sure it's not what ESR has defined it as but what he has defined it as is not something to proud of either. If you're a software engineer and some calls you a hacker, punch em in the face.
Which brings up a really good point. If company X aquires my GPL'd source code and makes $Y million dollars from their product which essentially consists of 40% of my code, shouldn't I be able to get 40% of Y out of them? If so, they're doubly fucked. I can get 40% of all the profits they've made since they aquired my source and I can withhold that source from them forcing them to pay whatever the hell I want (as long as it is less than what it would cost for them to reimplement my source). Even if they choose to reimplement my source I can hound them till the end of their days claiming that their reimplementation is significantly similar to my source code. For every feature they implement I can point to similar features in my product and cry shananigans. I can demand access to their source code to prove that they havn't violated my license (again) and then I can use my intimate knowledge to improve the features of my own source code. If I get caught, who cares? It's not like they can sue me for 40% of my revenues, I don't have any!
All in all this spells disaster for any company that even thinks about touching GPL software. That's why so many companies refuse to give their employees permission to work on Free Software. If they're working on proprietory software and they're working on Free Software, the chances are they are writing software that's remotely similar.
Actually it's a lot worse than that. Trolltech holds the position that Free Software and Commercial Software are two seperate things. Even though there is plenty of Commercial Free Software.
my god, you're that nazi father I heard about.
it's amazing how clearly you've thought through all the issues here. You must be some sort of genius.
uhhh.. there's the logs of the intrusion detection system at the ISP, and the one at the ISP's backbone provider, and the one at the attacker's ISP. This is typically called a "paper trail" and without it you don't have a case.
cool, no problem. Thanks.
All the crimes you have mentioned have one thing in common: they're malicious acts. Don't hate on the people who specifically go out of their way to harm no-one, just because there are malicious people out there who identify themselves as them.
But it's not like you can go to their website and buy one. Maybe that would be a good first step in making their products commercially viable: offer their potential customers a way to order them.
This demonstrates the fictional world in which Slashdot readers live. Say after me: RFIDs cannot be read at any significant distance, they're just an electronic replacement for barcodes.
Just don't look, just don't look.
Seriously MicroOptical has been doing press releases of their latest and greatest inventions sincle the late eighties and yes, they've been using the "not yet available for mass production" line since then. Their a concept company, hoping that oneday they'll find some rich sucker who'll pay a fortune for a one off.
and like everything made by MicroOptical they're "not on the market yet". Vapour.
You could use an environment variable to override the default or look for "chooser" in the path. This is such an obvious concept that it is absolutely rediculous that no OS does it.
that fuckin' sux!
The KDE file selector? What? It's just the Qt file selector man? Almost everything in KDE is just Qt with lipstick on. Qt is a brilliant product and KDE is riding the wave. When you consider how much excellent stuff they've got to work with you see that they're not really putting in any more work than the GTK team.
they wouldn't use the tower to make a call to a phone that is in the same room/shopping centre as me. Of course, if smart phones had direct phone to phone capabilities it would be a little harder to justify charging me an absurd amount per minute.
assuming you even could.
cause even if you watch The Matrix Reloaded 4 times you're not getting that value for money.