>And of course, not the _sequences_ are patented - >what is patented, is the usage of modification of >a certain sequence for medical purposes, or a >certain enzyme as an aim in medical treatment.
So, what you are telling me is if I'd like to use patented sequence for non-medical, "basic science" purpose, I don't even have to ask patent holder for permission? This is as far from the reality as it could be. I know _SEVERAL_ examples where people were not permitted to use such patented strings of AGCT because _their_"basic science"_results_ could possibly affect revenue of the patent holder or be used by others to "overcome" patent claims. How good is that? IMHO patents on the sequences will definitely slow down progress in the basic research.
First, it is great that people still have such a crazy ideas like that one:-) Anyways, there is high risk of a failure in this project cause gymnosperms are pretty hard to transform and they grow very slowly. My prediction is if they don't have a transformed lines already, they will be a few years after graduation when this product will hit the market:-) Oh, whatever... You are right about one thing, aequorin is a protein sentitive to Ca, but it emits light at 470nm (blue region) and, mind you this is very weak emision. It needs to have GFP (green fluorescent protein) (that has excitation at 470 and emision at 508nm) in order to be seen nicely:-) As for luciferin - this is not a protein! It is a chemical compound, kinda modified riboflavin phosphate. Not too toxic by itself, but requires an enzyme, luciferase to do "glowing" thing. Details of this and related reactions are at: http://lifesci.ucsb.edu/~biolum/chem/detail1.htm l Regards, kovi
Maybe it will be good, maybe it will not. Imoprtant is that this seems to be completely different approach than the one Wine is using. With Wine you don't have to recompile your app to make it working on linux. As far as I understand, you have to do that with MainWin. Therefore it is mostly solution for the developers who want to port their stuff to Unix, rather than for Joe SixPack who just wants to run Photoshop on linux.
$82? An overstatment, seems to me. Especially compared to C-Forge ($50) which supports far more languages and is avalilable for more UNIX platforms. Hell, "C/C++ only" version you get for free (binary only, though). IMHO there is no point in making yet another debugger integrated into this or that IDE, there are plenty of them around to use, statring from pure GDB and ending on excellent front-ends like DDD. I might be wrong on that, of course, given that I program mostly in Perl/shell:-) which usualy does not require anything more that vi.
I have 8MB Palm III and I don't have that many friends and there is only ca. 600kB free memory left now. I bought a memory upgrade from TRG mostly for storing maps (to use with GPS receiver). Depending on the size/detail level it takes between 0.5 / 2.5 MB each.
In contrary, I like to type something instead of doing "Click... Click... Click...". Now, what is your point and how it relates to Mandrake (as a RedHat derived work): a) processor optimization: same for both (correct me if I am wrong, but there are i686 packages for RH6.0) b) what does it mean *complete* ? c) install: very the same (at least for "Venus" verison of Mandrake, the only I've seen) d) KDE - included in RH 6.0 as well e) publisher - see posting about "Get thick books quickly" somewhere above
[Moderators, this is "troll, offtopic, flamebait" posting. Please score it down several points. Thank you and have a nice day]
Exactly ! First of all, it is not written anywhere that one has to install them all. There is no point in updating services / programs you don't use. For example: rdist or talk or KDE. These things are hardly needed on the machine running web server as a sole task. Using "minimalistic" approach during setup, it is possible to make "important patches list" much smaller. So these "incredible difficulties" in appalying some patches are just somebody's poor excuse for not doing proper sysadmin job. Another proof of that is "closed-source" CGI script story...
Well, I guess this is wrong place to ask such a question... but what'a hell. Moderators, please kill me, cause this is completely off topic. First, I have no fintest idea about the software to write CD on WinDos. Never seen/used any. Therefore I'd suggest to go for cdrecord. Nice UNIX command line tool recently ported to NT (alpha stage, but quite stable:-)
Find it at: ftp://ftp.fokus.gmd.de/pub/unix/cdrecord/alpha/w in32/
dev is SCSI number of your CD writer, dao means disk at once, speed means speed. Ah, if you CD writer is IDE, then I don't know. Best woud be to sell it and buy SCSI:-)
Hi, >[...]issue is valid[...] Hardly, cause this script was not open source - it was commercial product provided as source code. Ditto, it was not available to the open source community. He got it from friend, you could get it for $150. I could get for the same price, although I'd rather eat my army boots for a lunch. Imagine the things you could do, having source code of some product from Redmont. Point is that NT machine was checked by some competent admin, and didn't run any CGI crap. Why couldn't they find someone like that for Linux? -- kovi
[cut] >I decided to install Windows 2k Pro on one of my >(linux) laptop partitions. [cut] >Windows 2k is undoubtedly bloated outrageously, >but on my 192mb PII 366 system its not reall >noticed.
I must say, it is _very_ nice laptop!:-) Regards, kovi
Great, what we need is one more "visioner"! Like the one (wasn't his name Gilly Bates, or something?) who said 640kB is more then enough for everyone. And a few years later said his OS requires at least 4MB to run...
Slashdot Mirror
Hi,
>And of course, not the _sequences_ are patented -
>what is patented, is the usage of modification of
>a certain sequence for medical purposes, or a
>certain enzyme as an aim in medical treatment.
So, what you are telling me is if I'd like to use patented
sequence for non-medical, "basic science" purpose, I don't
even have to ask patent holder for permission? This is as
far from the reality as it could be. I know _SEVERAL_ examples
where people were not permitted to use such patented strings
of AGCT because _their_"basic science"_results_ could
possibly affect revenue of the patent holder or be used by
others to "overcome" patent claims. How good is that?
IMHO patents on the sequences will definitely slow down
progress in the basic research.
Regards,
kovi
First, it is great that people still have such a crazy ideas like that one :-) Anyways, there is high risk of a failure in this project cause gymnosperms are pretty hard to transform and they grow very slowly. My prediction is if they don't have a transformed lines already, they will be a few years after graduation when this product will hit the market :-) Oh, whatever... :-) m l
You are right about one thing, aequorin is a protein sentitive to Ca, but it emits light at 470nm (blue region) and, mind you this is very weak emision. It needs to have GFP (green fluorescent protein) (that has excitation at 470 and emision at 508nm) in order to be seen nicely
As for luciferin - this is not a protein! It is a chemical compound, kinda modified riboflavin phosphate. Not too toxic by itself, but requires an enzyme, luciferase to do "glowing" thing.
Details of this and related reactions are at:
http://lifesci.ucsb.edu/~biolum/chem/detail1.ht
Regards,
kovi
Maybe it will be good, maybe it will not. Imoprtant is that this seems to be completely different approach than the one Wine is using.
With Wine you don't have to recompile your app to make it working on linux. As far as I understand, you have to do that with MainWin. Therefore it is mostly solution for the developers who want to port their stuff to Unix, rather than for Joe SixPack who just wants to run Photoshop on linux.
$82? An overstatment, seems to me. Especially compared to C-Forge ($50) which supports far more languages and is avalilable for more UNIX platforms. Hell, "C/C++ only" version you get for free (binary only, though). :-) which usualy does not require anything more that vi.
IMHO there is no point in making yet another debugger integrated into this or that IDE, there are plenty of them around to use, statring from pure GDB and ending on excellent front-ends like DDD.
I might be wrong on that, of course, given that I program mostly in Perl/shell
I have 8MB Palm III and I don't have that many friends and there is only ca. 600kB free memory left now.
I bought a memory upgrade from TRG mostly for storing maps (to use with GPS receiver). Depending on the size/detail level it takes between 0.5 / 2.5 MB each.
In contrary, I like to type something instead of
doing "Click... Click... Click...". Now, what is
your point and how it relates to Mandrake (as a RedHat derived work):
a) processor optimization: same for both (correct me if I am wrong, but there are i686 packages for RH6.0)
b) what does it mean *complete* ?
c) install: very the same (at least for "Venus" verison of Mandrake, the only I've seen)
d) KDE - included in RH 6.0 as well
e) publisher - see posting about "Get thick books quickly" somewhere above
[Moderators, this is "troll, offtopic, flamebait" posting. Please score it down several points. Thank you and have a nice day]
Exactly !
First of all, it is not written anywhere that one has to install them all. There is no point in updating services / programs you don't use. For example: rdist or talk or KDE. These things are
hardly needed on the machine running web server as a sole task. Using "minimalistic" approach during setup, it is possible to make "important patches list" much smaller.
So these "incredible difficulties" in appalying some patches are just somebody's poor excuse for not doing proper sysadmin job. Another proof of that is "closed-source" CGI script story...
Regards,
kovi
Well, I guess this is wrong place to ask such a question... but what'a hell. :-)
w in32/
:-)
:-)
Moderators, please kill me, cause this is completely off topic.
First, I have no fintest idea about the software to write CD on WinDos. Never seen/used any.
Therefore I'd suggest to go for cdrecord. Nice UNIX command line tool recently ported to NT (alpha stage, but quite stable
Find it at:
ftp://ftp.fokus.gmd.de/pub/unix/cdrecord/alpha/
Then get your iso image and just type:
cdrecord dev=3,0 -v speed=2 -dao iso_image_name.iso
dev is SCSI number of your CD writer, dao means disk at once, speed means speed. Ah, if you CD writer is IDE, then I don't know. Best woud be to sell it and buy SCSI
Good luck
kovi
PS Sorry for style/typos I had too much beer
Hi,
>[...]issue is valid[...]
Hardly, cause this script was not open source -
it was commercial product provided as source code. Ditto, it was not available to the open source community. He got it from friend, you could get it
for $150. I could get for the same price, although I'd rather eat my army boots for a lunch.
Imagine the things you could do, having source code of some product from Redmont.
Point is that NT machine was checked by some competent admin, and didn't run any CGI crap. Why couldn't they find someone like that for Linux?
--
kovi
You probably mean this:t ml
:-).
http://help.netscape.com/kb/consumer/990807-8.h
A) It is not a fix for the bus errors
B) It _partially_ fixes some java problems
Overall, using Netscape is hell, but there is no
choice at the moment (except lynx maybe
Regards,
MK
[cut]
:-)
>I decided to install Windows 2k Pro on one of my
>(linux) laptop partitions.
[cut]
>Windows 2k is undoubtedly bloated outrageously,
>but on my 192mb PII 366 system its not reall
>noticed.
I must say, it is _very_ nice laptop!
Regards,
kovi
Great, what we need is one more "visioner"! Like the one (wasn't his name Gilly Bates, or something?) who said 640kB is more then enough for everyone. And a few years later said his OS requires at least 4MB to run...