The do not call regestry's enforcement has been delayed by a preliminary injuncion issued in response to some telemarketer's law suit. Thus, it is not in effect yet.
Microsoft may be a monopoly, but Office Depot is hardly the only place to buy software
What you are getting at is something called a "boycott." (excuse my sarcasm) The problem is that you must tell Office Depot that you will not shop there until they have changed their policy. I recomend that you do so through snail mail -- it has more impact. Also ask to be notified when they change their policy. You car write them at:
Office Depot Corporate Support Center
2200 Old Germantown Road
Delray Beach, FL 33445
I've said it before and I'll say it again: any "science" that is published first in a mainstream media outlet is suspect. My response to all such stories is, "In which peer reviewed journal will they be publishing their findings?" Sorry to troll but this story is most likely bogus.
See my journal for a list of other crapy science stories.
Nonetheless, you do have an interesting point about other liquids on mars.
But seriously, small technology development companies that then sell their research/patents to big companies don't care about public opinion b/c they are under the radar.
You seem to feel that killing something or experimenting with something that is a "non-sentient mass of cells" is ok. All humans (including you) are just a mass of cells so presumably your argument can be refined to be that we can experiment on anything that is not sentient.
It would be hard to argue that a newborn is sentient. Think about all of the great AIDS research that could be done by infecting infants with the disease and testing treatments. I hope this idea is appalling to you. What about experimenting on mentally retarded people. Someone with the intelegence of a three year old (or an octopus) is certainly not any more sentient than many of our animal research models.
Since the above types of research are unaceptable, there must be some criterion other than sentience that makes reseach on infants bad. The most common answer is that it is the potential of sentience that makes infanticide worse than killing a cow. That said, when you do what they are doing at Stanford you create life that has the potential for sentience and then destroy it before it reaches sentience.
The image on bigelow.com calls C6H12O6 (glucose, dextrose, and fructose all have this composition) a carbohydrate for photosynthesis, but on the chemosynthesis side it calls CH2O (aka formaldehyde) a carbohydrate. Last I checked formaldehyde and glucose had very different effects on most life forms.
In general the scientific community frowns on terms like "higher life forms." "Lower vertibrates" are now "non-mammalian vertibrates", "lower primates" are now "non-human primates."
And no, this is not some screwed up politically correct thing; the view is that the old terms (like "lower" and "higher") are not scientificaly acurate. There is no evidence that a frog is any more or less complex than a mouse. In fact, there are unicellular organisms with larger genomes than ours (human's).
The current theory is that all organisms evolved from a single ancestor -- thus all species have been evolving for the same ammount of time so none can be any more or less evolved than any other.
Re:A homozygous single copy murine immune mouse.
on
Human-Mouse Hybrids?
·
· Score: 3, Informative
If heritable, mice can be bred and animals which are homozygous for the altered gene can be phenotypically examined as long as the manipulation is not homozygous lethal or cause sterility in a single copy state. Unless using blastocysts from immunologically crippled mice, there would most likely be a recognition of non-self by murine immune cells not educated (which haven't seen during their development) to the human cells that would wipe them out.
It says:
Dipliod organisms (like all mammals including both humans and mice) have two sets of chromosomes and thus two copies of chromosome 1, two copies of chromosome 2, etc. Therefore if a particular mutation or altered gene is on, for example chromosome 3, then a mouse could have two copies of a normal chromosome (called a wild-type mouse), one normal and one altered chromosome (heterozygous), or two copies of the chromosome with the mutation (homozygous). Sometimes an animal homozygous for a certain mutation cannot survive to birth -- such a mutation is called "homozygous lethal." If the mutation is not homozygous lethal, and does not cause sterility, then one could raise a colony of mice that all have this particular mutation through selective breeding. The mice can then be examined to determine the phenotype -- or physical charactersitcs -- cause by the mutation.
and now the second sentence:
Whoever does this will have to use mice with no immune system othewise the mouse's immune system will recognise the embryonic stem cells that are introduced by the scientists as being forign and attack them. This is the same mechanism used by the body to fight off disease. (Translator's Comment: I dont think that is actualy true)
Actually I work in a lab studying circadian rhythms. The human cycle is about 24.3 hours. For rats its 23.7 or so. Keep in mind that this is only the frequency of the oscillations in the SCN (a brain region responsible for that sort of thing) and that a human's (or any mammals's) cycle is entrained to the environment. People normally exist in a 24 hour LD (light/dark) clycle and we entrain to whatever LD cycle we happen to be in. Otherwise you would never get over jetlag.
In spaceflight we have a.75:.75 LD cycle (i.e., 45 min. of light followed by 45 min. of dark) and weightlessness. The circadian oscillators are screwed up by this and thus the period retards to approx. 25 hours.
Altering our time system wont change our LD cycle. So unless we want to slow down the Earth's rotation by about 0.8%, we just need to live with it.
BTW, the study that was mentioned before is Alpatov, AM.Circadian rhythms in a long-term duration space flight. Adv Space Res 1992;12(1):249-52. I have included the abstract below:
Institute of Biomedical Problems, Moscow, USSR.
In order to maintain cosmonaut health and performance, it is important for the work-rest schedule to follow human circadian rhythms (CR). What happens with CR in space flight? Investigations of CR in mammals revealed, that the circadian phase in flight is less stable, probably due to a displacement of the range of entrainment, resulting from internal period change (the latter was confirmed on insects). The circadian period may be a gravity-dependent parameter. If so, the basic biological requirement for the day length might be different in weightlessness. On this basis, a higher risk of desynchronosis is expected in a long-duration space flight. As a countermeasure, a non-24-hr day length could be suggested, being close to the internal circadian period (in humans about 25 hr). Taking into account a possible displacement of period in weightlessness, it seems reasonable to establish a flexible work-rest schedule, capable to follow the body temperature CR by means of biofeedback.
The story says that it was sent certified mail so the judge probably would have asked to see the reciept. (Certified mail must be signed for upon delivery) Most likely the summons was recieved and ignored. Also if you refuse to sign for certified mail then (in most states) after 30 days the sender can act "as if" it had been recieved.
There is something very wrong with this article's argument. In a real economy, there is production and the produced items are exchanged -- money is just a means of making transactions more efficient. Economists do not deal in terms of dollars but in terms of equivalent tangable goods. In the case of EverQuest there is no production and no infrastructure. Money is simply being transfered between other economies where that money was earned by the production of real goods. Thus calculating dolars spent in transactions relating to EverQuest in order to rank it's "economy" is meaningless. You can't rank the economy b/c there is no economy.
BTW when I say "goods" I mean goods or services or anything usefull for that matter. A programer or movie actor is producing goods just like a factory worker is. The point is that something is getting done.
His "visceral hatred" asside, the post uses Noam Chomsky's opinions to justify its own opinions. This called "arguing from authority." Noam Chomsky's oplinions do not help or hurt the argument of the poster; they are irelevent -- except as a rhetorical device.
Have you ever read those reviews on Amazon that start "Well, I haven't read the book, but I think..." That is what your little article is. Clearly Mr. Chin has not seen the movie, or, perhaps he saw it and didn't pay any attentnion having made up his mind before he got to the theater.
First mistake is the attempt to discredit the film based on Hollywood's "post-9/11 government-sanctioned role as US war propaganda headquarters" an objectable premise that has not fully been established. It also forgets that movies take several years to go from green light to release and Black Hawk Down was done filming prior to Sept. 11.
The film clearly shows that the mission in Somalia is not in humanitarian aid in the first sceen of the movie. I'm not going to describe the sceen in detail but if you've seen the movie you know what I mean. Basicaly there is a U.N. food dump being siezed by Aidid's forces and the U.S. Ranges can't stop them because it would violate the rules of engagement.
There are also two celebrities you meantion, Clinton and Chomsky. The discussion of whether the mission was a Clinton blunder or a Bush Sr. blunder is irrelevent unless you happen to feel the need (through your political afilliations) to defend Clinton from any tainting on his record. Thanks for sharing Chomsky's "corection," but at the end of the movie (not really a spoiler), the credits tell us that 1000 Somalis were killed by American firepower.
Here's what I'm getting at. The article you posted is trying to correct the film and discredit it based on the idea that it glorifes war and was a justification for our military action. However, Black Hawk Down is probably the first war film in ten years to not glorify war. That is what the army likes about the movie. Black Hawk Down is a film about the strugle of individules. It is about houw they fight to protect one another when the mission is stupid and polititions have them fighting for no good reason. Please see a movie before panning it.
Where laws are concerned one must always tread carefully. What they are proposing is criminal penalties for security flaws. Imagine if the authors faced liability for writing ftpd with back dores in it. Whould people still be willing to write free software if that little disclaimer doesn't work any more?
There is a long history of laws (e.g., Sherman Act) designed to limit corporations but instead limit individuals.
I was at the Good Morning America tapeing with a bunch of other Columbia Engineering students and I wasn't all that impressed. The performance was pretty good and it certainly wins on the "coolness" factor but In terms of practicality IT was majorly lacking. With a price tag of $3000 it makes quite an expensive toy and yet it isn't fast enough to replace a car.
When I worked for the Attorney General's office, we used to investigate online fraud and would routinely use anonymizer.com and other services in order to view suspect web pages without *.gov showing up in their logs. If they see a few of those hits they quickly pack up, move to a new state, and buy a new domain.
You packed it in a reused uhaul box. Never reuse boxes. The box was probably dammaged before you even sent it. Also, boxes must be filled with packing material or they will collapse when stacked. It looks like you just had your computer bouncing around inside the box.
Anyone notice the line at the bottom? Promotional? Not for sale? Who cares what these guys have lying around if they arn't selling it? This is just like the last story about the PDA.
hehe.. look at this cool new thing that you can't buy.
Let me get this straight. He wants to send and recieve "real" email and browse the "real" web etc. He wants a full sized screen and doesnt want to have it fit in his pocket or in the palm of his hand. Ths new "armheld" would be big enough that it has to be carried in a briefcase. These things are on the market right now. You can buy them here
Guess what. They are called laptops. Unless I missed something the point of a handheld is that it can fit in your pocket. If you want something that big then you might as well use a keyboard since it's faster than pen input anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
The do not call regestry's enforcement has been delayed by a preliminary injuncion issued in response to some telemarketer's law suit. Thus, it is not in effect yet.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SCOX&d=c&k=c1&c=rhat, ^ixic&a=v&p=s&t=6m&l=on&z=m&q= l
What you are getting at is something called a "boycott." (excuse my sarcasm) The problem is that you must tell Office Depot that you will not shop there until they have changed their policy. I recomend that you do so through snail mail -- it has more impact. Also ask to be notified when they change their policy. You car write them at:
Office Depot Corporate Support Center
2200 Old Germantown Road
Delray Beach, FL 33445
I've said it before and I'll say it again: any "science" that is published first in a mainstream media outlet is suspect. My response to all such stories is, "In which peer reviewed journal will they be publishing their findings?" Sorry to troll but this story is most likely bogus.
See my journal for a list of other crapy science stories.
Nonetheless, you do have an interesting point about other liquids on mars.
http://www.pm.gov.au/your_feedback/feedback.htm
:P
This took me all of 15 seconds to find.
Monsanto?
But seriously, small technology development companies that then sell their research/patents to big companies don't care about public opinion b/c they are under the radar.
I feel the need to present the other argument.
You seem to feel that killing something or experimenting with something that is a "non-sentient mass of cells" is ok. All humans (including you) are just a mass of cells so presumably your argument can be refined to be that we can experiment on anything that is not sentient.
It would be hard to argue that a newborn is sentient. Think about all of the great AIDS research that could be done by infecting infants with the disease and testing treatments. I hope this idea is appalling to you. What about experimenting on mentally retarded people. Someone with the intelegence of a three year old (or an octopus) is certainly not any more sentient than many of our animal research models.
Since the above types of research are unaceptable, there must be some criterion other than sentience that makes reseach on infants bad. The most common answer is that it is the potential of sentience that makes infanticide worse than killing a cow. That said, when you do what they are doing at Stanford you create life that has the potential for sentience and then destroy it before it reaches sentience.
Does someone have a better understanding of this?
The image on bigelow.com calls C6H12O6 (glucose, dextrose, and fructose all have this composition) a carbohydrate for photosynthesis, but on the chemosynthesis side it calls CH2O (aka formaldehyde) a carbohydrate. Last I checked formaldehyde and glucose had very different effects on most life forms.
Or it could be that the real address is fcc.gov not fcc.org.
sigh
why are the people who sound the most right often the most wrong?
In general the scientific community frowns on terms like "higher life forms." "Lower vertibrates" are now "non-mammalian vertibrates", "lower primates" are now "non-human primates."
And no, this is not some screwed up politically correct thing; the view is that the old terms (like "lower" and "higher") are not scientificaly acurate. There is no evidence that a frog is any more or less complex than a mouse. In fact, there are unicellular organisms with larger genomes than ours (human's).
The current theory is that all organisms evolved from a single ancestor -- thus all species have been evolving for the same ammount of time so none can be any more or less evolved than any other.
It says:
Dipliod organisms (like all mammals including both humans and mice) have two sets of chromosomes and thus two copies of chromosome 1, two copies of chromosome 2, etc. Therefore if a particular mutation or altered gene is on, for example chromosome 3, then a mouse could have two copies of a normal chromosome (called a wild-type mouse), one normal and one altered chromosome (heterozygous), or two copies of the chromosome with the mutation (homozygous). Sometimes an animal homozygous for a certain mutation cannot survive to birth -- such a mutation is called "homozygous lethal." If the mutation is not homozygous lethal, and does not cause sterility, then one could raise a colony of mice that all have this particular mutation through selective breeding. The mice can then be examined to determine the phenotype -- or physical charactersitcs -- cause by the mutation.
and now the second sentence:
Whoever does this will have to use mice with no immune system othewise the mouse's immune system will recognise the embryonic stem cells that are introduced by the scientists as being forign and attack them. This is the same mechanism used by the body to fight off disease. (Translator's Comment: I dont think that is actualy true)
In spaceflight we have a .75:.75 LD cycle (i.e., 45 min. of light followed by 45 min. of dark) and weightlessness. The circadian oscillators are screwed up by this and thus the period retards to approx. 25 hours.
Altering our time system wont change our LD cycle. So unless we want to slow down the Earth's rotation by about 0.8%, we just need to live with it.
BTW, the study that was mentioned before is Alpatov, AM.Circadian rhythms in a long-term duration space flight. Adv Space Res 1992;12(1):249-52. I have included the abstract below:
The story says that it was sent certified mail so the judge probably would have asked to see the reciept. (Certified mail must be signed for upon delivery) Most likely the summons was recieved and ignored. Also if you refuse to sign for certified mail then (in most states) after 30 days the sender can act "as if" it had been recieved.
There is something very wrong with this article's argument. In a real economy, there is production and the produced items are exchanged -- money is just a means of making transactions more efficient. Economists do not deal in terms of dollars but in terms of equivalent tangable goods. In the case of EverQuest there is no production and no infrastructure. Money is simply being transfered between other economies where that money was earned by the production of real goods. Thus calculating dolars spent in transactions relating to EverQuest in order to rank it's "economy" is meaningless. You can't rank the economy b/c there is no economy.
BTW when I say "goods" I mean goods or services or anything usefull for that matter. A programer or movie actor is producing goods just like a factory worker is. The point is that something is getting done.
It is not very secure in that you can loose your card with the smart chip on it.
His "visceral hatred" asside, the post uses Noam Chomsky's opinions to justify its own opinions. This called "arguing from authority." Noam Chomsky's oplinions do not help or hurt the argument of the poster; they are irelevent -- except as a rhetorical device.
First mistake is the attempt to discredit the film based on Hollywood's "post-9/11 government-sanctioned role as US war propaganda headquarters" an objectable premise that has not fully been established. It also forgets that movies take several years to go from green light to release and Black Hawk Down was done filming prior to Sept. 11.
The film clearly shows that the mission in Somalia is not in humanitarian aid in the first sceen of the movie. I'm not going to describe the sceen in detail but if you've seen the movie you know what I mean. Basicaly there is a U.N. food dump being siezed by Aidid's forces and the U.S. Ranges can't stop them because it would violate the rules of engagement.
There are also two celebrities you meantion, Clinton and Chomsky. The discussion of whether the mission was a Clinton blunder or a Bush Sr. blunder is irrelevent unless you happen to feel the need (through your political afilliations) to defend Clinton from any tainting on his record. Thanks for sharing Chomsky's "corection," but at the end of the movie (not really a spoiler), the credits tell us that 1000 Somalis were killed by American firepower.
Here's what I'm getting at. The article you posted is trying to correct the film and discredit it based on the idea that it glorifes war and was a justification for our military action. However, Black Hawk Down is probably the first war film in ten years to not glorify war. That is what the army likes about the movie. Black Hawk Down is a film about the strugle of individules. It is about houw they fight to protect one another when the mission is stupid and polititions have them fighting for no good reason. Please see a movie before panning it.
That is unless of course the insecure products are made by an monopoly that illegaly prevents competition .... but that's another story.
Where laws are concerned one must always tread carefully. What they are proposing is criminal penalties for security flaws. Imagine if the authors faced liability for writing ftpd with back dores in it. Whould people still be willing to write free software if that little disclaimer doesn't work any more?
There is a long history of laws (e.g., Sherman Act) designed to limit corporations but instead limit individuals.
I was at the Good Morning America tapeing with a bunch of other Columbia Engineering students and I wasn't all that impressed. The performance was pretty good and it certainly wins on the "coolness" factor but In terms of practicality IT was majorly lacking. With a price tag of $3000 it makes quite an expensive toy and yet it isn't fast enough to replace a car.
When I worked for the Attorney General's office, we used to investigate online fraud and would routinely use anonymizer.com and other services in order to view suspect web pages without *.gov showing up in their logs. If they see a few of those hits they quickly pack up, move to a new state, and buy a new domain.
You packed it in a reused uhaul box. Never reuse boxes. The box was probably dammaged before you even sent it. Also, boxes must be filled with packing material or they will collapse when stacked. It looks like you just had your computer bouncing around inside the box.
Does anyone have a link to the article? It's hard to find anything on the slovinian site.
Anyone notice the line at the bottom? Promotional? Not for sale? Who cares what these guys have lying around if they arn't selling it? This is just like the last story about the PDA.
hehe.. look at this cool new thing that you can't buy.
Guess what. They are called laptops. Unless I missed something the point of a handheld is that it can fit in your pocket. If you want something that big then you might as well use a keyboard since it's faster than pen input anyway.