That's precisely the point. Low doses of UV are not going create lots of mutations. But if you hit a bacterium with lots of uv, you get so many mutations that when you select for some particular trait, you don't know what else you're getting with it.
And that's precisely an example of what I'm talking about. How do you know that the mutations caused by UV light are the same as mutations cause by some other way? And if they were different, how could you tell if they had a different effect on other things?
On the other hand, when you use the techniques of genetic engineering to insert or remove particular sequences of DNA, you know exactly which bits you're putting in.
But that ignores the context of where this thing will be. Simply because you know what you have created, that doesn't mean you will automatically know what effect it will have on other things, at least in something like biology at the moment, where there are still vast systems that we don't understand.
Even if Apple products were just as crappy as the cheaper competition, I'd still pay extra to get their "DRM'd" OS, because it's still a better over-all system for me. The moment some makes an open desktop OS that is as good as OS X, I may consider switching.
First of all, I'm, all for genetic engineering, if it's done ethically and safely. But your post does highlight some of the legit concerns people have.
A third example involves regulation of the types of bacteria used to produce flavors: if I randomly mutagenize bacteria with UV light until I find one I like, that's considered safe, even though I probably have no idea what mutations I've actually made. On the other hand, if I go in and, with ultra-precision, make a single, targeted mutation, that's considered wildly unsafe and the FDA will throw a fit if I try to use it.
But doesn't that ignore the fact that bacteria have probably been exposed to UV light for millions of years (even if it's at a lower dose, and not all the time), whereas your precision editing may be completely untested? It's this kind of focusing on the details which can lead to people overseeing potential problems in the real world.
I bet they said something similar when people were exploring the world and spreading new species into ecosystems that couldn't handle them. Great forward thinking there.
Sorry, but a very basic part of product design is taking into account the real world. In the real world, people do move optical drives around when they are in use, and should therefore be designed to tolerate that to some degree. This is, after all, a consumer gaming console and not some back-end, commercial device.
Yup, it really is amazing. I don't think anyone could have guessed it would have done so well.
Some of use knew right from the moment we saw the demo that it would become incredibly popular. Of course, many of us also get ignored when we start ranting about how important usability is and how there is more to design than aesthetics.
I think you will find the 200 mile range, like every other range spec, is dependent on your driving style. Thrashing any car, petrol or electric, consumes much more than when driving normally. Tesla were not being deceiving at all, from what I've read.
...but that would not be suitable for daily recharging.
Surely that depends entirely upon how far you drive and how much time you spend at a place with a socket each day. For some people, the specs of the Tesla would be more than enough. It also depends on if you have another vehicle to use, and if you want to use it to go on long trips in etc.
I can't seem to get into old games. I think it's neat until I start to play it and then realise that I can get the same experience with better graphics in a modern game. Perhaps I'm just not very nostalgic.
How does the price of non-related apps affect demand? There are many more cheap apps for desktops than there are expensive apps, so how is the iPhone any different? And if these really cheap apps are duplicating the functionality of some of the more expensive apps, then how is that anything other than good competition? If people don't want to buy a certain app because it is more expensive than what they usually pay for apps, then they must not see much value in it to begin with, and that is the developer's problem.
More likely they will try to find a way to prohibit Android from being installed.
You mean like how they've taken no action against JailBreak? I don't see why they would bother stopping Android being used on the iPhone, they just won't go even slightly out of their way to help support it.
Re:Can we get back to the old definition of WMDs
on
Botnets As "eWMDs"
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I've had a quick read of that link, and I can't find anything that suggests mass was ever meant as mass in the physical sense, rather than just a shortened version of massive. Perhaps I missed something?
You do know that for under $5000, you can get a small device with GPS, compass, altitude, linear and angular momentum sensors, and the ability to fly programmed paths that can even be updated during flight. The reason it costs the military so much is because they have to conform to certain standards. And if you can control a car with hobby-grade electronics and a few other parts, you can control a light aircraft.
And the only reason that I can think of as to why those military UAVs have a limited payload is because they were designed to be that way. If that's not the case, what exactly prevents them from using this technology on larger aircraft?
It's not fashion, it's more the work culture of the people who use it. Look at a few Ruby projects and you're more likely to see a project where interface design is taken a bit more seriously as well as following web standards etc. And please, don't give examples to the contrary, as when it come to this sort of thing, it's hardly a certainty and more of a noticeable correlation.
You do know that methamphetamine is available via prescription in the US, right? It's used in narcolepsy, ADHD, and obesity, usually for people who don't respond to amphetamines. And why do you favor diamorphine for emergency pain relief rather than the many other opiates, some of which a much stronger?
Slashdot Mirror
And that's precisely an example of what I'm talking about. How do you know that the mutations caused by UV light are the same as mutations cause by some other way? And if they were different, how could you tell if they had a different effect on other things?
But that ignores the context of where this thing will be. Simply because you know what you have created, that doesn't mean you will automatically know what effect it will have on other things, at least in something like biology at the moment, where there are still vast systems that we don't understand.
There's plenty of natural bacteria that I wouldn't want anywhere remotely near me.
That's besides the point. I'm talking about the stability of ecosystems here.
Even if Apple products were just as crappy as the cheaper competition, I'd still pay extra to get their "DRM'd" OS, because it's still a better over-all system for me. The moment some makes an open desktop OS that is as good as OS X, I may consider switching.
First of all, I'm, all for genetic engineering, if it's done ethically and safely. But your post does highlight some of the legit concerns people have.
A third example involves regulation of the types of bacteria used to produce flavors: if I randomly mutagenize bacteria with UV light until I find one I like, that's considered safe, even though I probably have no idea what mutations I've actually made. On the other hand, if I go in and, with ultra-precision, make a single, targeted mutation, that's considered wildly unsafe and the FDA will throw a fit if I try to use it.
But doesn't that ignore the fact that bacteria have probably been exposed to UV light for millions of years (even if it's at a lower dose, and not all the time), whereas your precision editing may be completely untested? It's this kind of focusing on the details which can lead to people overseeing potential problems in the real world.
Never underestimate human ingenuity. Not to mention advancements in off-the-shelf technology and manufacturing tools.
I bet they said something similar when people were exploring the world and spreading new species into ecosystems that couldn't handle them. Great forward thinking there.
Sorry, but a very basic part of product design is taking into account the real world. In the real world, people do move optical drives around when they are in use, and should therefore be designed to tolerate that to some degree. This is, after all, a consumer gaming console and not some back-end, commercial device.
Yeah, so much less hassle than buying a single unit that does it all for you.
Perhaps this person has other things to do?
Yup, it really is amazing. I don't think anyone could have guessed it would have done so well.
Some of use knew right from the moment we saw the demo that it would become incredibly popular. Of course, many of us also get ignored when we start ranting about how important usability is and how there is more to design than aesthetics.
55 mile range (instead of the advertised 200+).
I think you will find the 200 mile range, like every other range spec, is dependent on your driving style. Thrashing any car, petrol or electric, consumes much more than when driving normally. Tesla were not being deceiving at all, from what I've read.
...but that would not be suitable for daily recharging.
Surely that depends entirely upon how far you drive and how much time you spend at a place with a socket each day. For some people, the specs of the Tesla would be more than enough. It also depends on if you have another vehicle to use, and if you want to use it to go on long trips in etc.
Captain Obvious wants to know if you've ever heard of iodine or a shaver.
Did you use microscopic teeth, specifically designed for the job?
I can't seem to get into old games. I think it's neat until I start to play it and then realise that I can get the same experience with better graphics in a modern game. Perhaps I'm just not very nostalgic.
Real life stuff is generally boring and difficult if you have to do all the hard stuff.
Perhaps for many gamers, but certainly not all.
How does the price of non-related apps affect demand? There are many more cheap apps for desktops than there are expensive apps, so how is the iPhone any different? And if these really cheap apps are duplicating the functionality of some of the more expensive apps, then how is that anything other than good competition? If people don't want to buy a certain app because it is more expensive than what they usually pay for apps, then they must not see much value in it to begin with, and that is the developer's problem.
More likely they will try to find a way to prohibit Android from being installed.
You mean like how they've taken no action against JailBreak? I don't see why they would bother stopping Android being used on the iPhone, they just won't go even slightly out of their way to help support it.
I've had a quick read of that link, and I can't find anything that suggests mass was ever meant as mass in the physical sense, rather than just a shortened version of massive. Perhaps I missed something?
You do know that for under $5000, you can get a small device with GPS, compass, altitude, linear and angular momentum sensors, and the ability to fly programmed paths that can even be updated during flight. The reason it costs the military so much is because they have to conform to certain standards. And if you can control a car with hobby-grade electronics and a few other parts, you can control a light aircraft.
And the only reason that I can think of as to why those military UAVs have a limited payload is because they were designed to be that way. If that's not the case, what exactly prevents them from using this technology on larger aircraft?
It's not fashion, it's more the work culture of the people who use it. Look at a few Ruby projects and you're more likely to see a project where interface design is taken a bit more seriously as well as following web standards etc. And please, don't give examples to the contrary, as when it come to this sort of thing, it's hardly a certainty and more of a noticeable correlation.
Pollution, perhaps. But not that much damage from what I've read.
...if we treated all parties as though their intoxication were no defense of their behavior...
I thought that in the case of car accidents, being intoxicated is automatic negligence (of some form), not a way of avoiding negligence.
What true nerd wouldn't be fascinated by the chemistry and neurological processes of the brain?
You do know that methamphetamine is available via prescription in the US, right? It's used in narcolepsy, ADHD, and obesity, usually for people who don't respond to amphetamines. And why do you favor diamorphine for emergency pain relief rather than the many other opiates, some of which a much stronger?
Not if people were allowed to grow their own plants for personal use, rather than legalising the sale of it, which is one often suggested solution.