You just don't get it. There are many many embryos that will NEVER be used. They WILL be destroyed. So what do you suggest? Having a solemn ceremony and bury the cells that you can't even see with your naked eye and will never be implanted?
That is just plain nonsense no matter how you slice it.
By the way, there is no definitive research yet that says adult stem cells are adequate. There is no doubt that embryonic are adequate for research. So in 10 years when scientists announce that adult stem cells don't cut it and they need embryonic for certain diseases what will your response be then? We need to bury the cells, not use them?
I bet dollars to doughnuts that if you were diagnosed with Parkinsons or if you suffered a spinal cord injury and the only hope you had was embryonic stem cell research, you wouldn't have a problem with it. But I digress.
I find it extremely unethical that anyone would stand in the way of potentially finding cures for many diseases. That is, essentially, what you do when you stand in the way of embryonic stem cell research.
When your "ethics" put the value of cells doomed to die anyway above those that are living, I would call that egregiously unethical.
I have always thought it would be sneaky to keep a few Linux PC's as temporary replacements so when someone's computer needs repaired, give them a Linux PC and explain the differences and you will have their old PC back to new in a few days and see what happens.
If you live right next to a WiMAX tower, I imagine it could cause some interference with your home 802.11a/b/g network. But if you live far away, it probably won't cause anymore interference than your own 2.4/5ghz cordless phone does.
802.11b can be made to go many miles yes. But in a reliable point to multipoint area with few shadow zones? Not on your life. You might get the first half mile to a mile for free at best without problems.
WiMAX is an attempt to get 1 to 3 miles reliably with a high level of QoS that just isn't present in 802.11b at all. All of this with CPE equipment sitting on a desk inside a building or home. I don't care what 802.11b gear you are using, you will not get 3 miles with the CPE indoors in a dense area with noise.
Just a couple of days ago I received a few phishing e-mails disguised to look like CitiBank e-mails that pointed to servers based in China. The e-mails originated from China as well. I even did some of the work for the FBI and sent full registration info for those IP addresses.
I was quite disappointed when I tried to report it to the FBI and I got what was clearly and automated response that said, "This is not an automated response."
Also recently I was privy to a situtation where a computer in a school system was acting VERY strange and typing text in Word on its own that seemed half gibberish and half not but with text that could almost be confused for terrorist communications. The school system called the FBI and gave them the IP of the machine. The FBI said they were monitoring it to try to determine the cause. The only problem? It was a private IP address and impossible to monitor remotely.
I understand that the FBI probably guessed (quite correctly IMO) that the computer was infected with one of the new worms that uses the dictation engine, but they told the school they were monitoring which was a lie. Additionally, they sent me an e-mail that said it wasn't automated when it so clearly was. No wonder we had intelligence failures leading up to 9/11.
Increasing signal cannot and would not provide you with more bandwidth. It might help you overcome noise thus maximizing your current maximum capacity. But increasing signal also increases the possiblity of reflections which in turn increases noise.
The best possibility is to use the maximum signal strength required to be "heard" over the noise which, given the possibility of reflections, it is sometimes actually less and not more.
All things being equal, the only real way to increase bandwidth is to increase the amount of spectrum you use. But not all modulation is created equal as is shown in 802.11g (ODFM) vs. 802.11b (DSSS). Same spectrum, different results. Wimax is one attempt to not only increase the amount of spectrum used, but increase the effeciency of the modulation technique to make the most of the bandwidth in that spectrum.
That and it also happens to be a theoretical competitor to telcos (cellular included) because of the possibilities it might offer.
You have been redirected to this page during a temporary period of planned downtime. We apologise for any inconvenience this work may have caused you. silicon.com should be available shortly and we encourage you to visit us again soon.
tony.luck@intel.com kenneth.w.chen@intel.com v enkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com suresh.b.siddha@inte l.com yanmin.zhang@intel.com junx.yao@intel.com arun.sharma@intel.com gordon.jin@intel.com
AMD
khawar.chaudhry:amd.com
That was with just a quick check of two. These contributors may not be specifically sponsored by their employers. I don't know. But they certainly contribute and do work there.
Maybe maybe not. You never know. Besides, they seem to be looking for people and maybe people that wouldn't have been considered before have gained more experience and skills since last applying so they are trying to get the latest info on the geek crowd to see who is worthy.
Presumably they are looking for geeks to apply. They put that out there and it gets posted to Slashdot (which they probably expected) and gets deciphered in less than 20 minutes or so (which they also probably expected) and inevitably results in lots of geeks pondering applying to Google.
Sounds reasonable and gets them good exposure at the same time. There is a reason why Google is a household name. This is one more example.
That would have essentially been a debate unless they were asked in seperate rooms or something.
No, the President doesn't specifically make policy, but he can influence by urging lawmakers to take action and get a bill on his desk, vowing to veto a bill and things like that. This serves to dissuade lawmakers from pursuing bills with marginal support. So in essence, the true power of the President is:
-He listens to the will of the people and promises to do what is best for them -Urges lawmakers to act on issues that are vital -Signs into law these bills
Listening to the will and doing what is best for them can mean changing positions based on changing world situations. This has been called flip-flopping by Republicans and given as a bad thing. Would flip-flopping be a bad thing if stem cell researchers discovered that they could cure cancer with more embryonic stem lines for study requiring a change of Bush's policy? Of course not.
I use it on Fedora 2 and it works quite nicely. I have seen one site that had Real content that it refused to play. I don't know why. Could be more the fault of the site than anything.
Forgive me if this is answered somewhere on the UL website, but do you include or plan to include support out of the box for MP3's and any other technology that Red Hat may refuse to include?
Additionally, if the amount and breadth of your own patches and packages makes it such that UL and Debian are relatives only in spirit, will you go your own way or continue to try to keep ties with it?
No, it doesn't. The main reason is that my primary concern are US interests when it comes to the war on terror. There are other reasons but they would only ensue a flame war.
The whole thing is crap. If he had voted against it, he would have been crucified as weak in the "war on terrorism" of which Iraq had nothing to do with as far as the US is concerned anyway.
Bush and company tried very hard to make a return of McCarthyism and politically assasinate anyone that didn't vote their way.
Bottom line is that Iraq never should have happened this time around. If we were going to take Saddam out of power, it should have been done the first time we were there after they invaded Kuwait.
We would have been much better off and the "war" much better fought with all of those troops scouring Afghanistan looking for bin Laden. But Bush didn't do that, did he?
Wonder (oil) why (oil) he (oil) wouldn't (oil) pursue (oil) the (oil) real (oil) mastermind (oil) behind (oil) 9/11?
If you check out bin Laden and al Qaeda's modus operandi, you will find that anyone that kills Muslims (even if they are other Muslims) or aids those that do (think Saudi Arabia) are on their hitlist. Remember that Saddam tortured and killed many of his own citizens.
Probably the only thing that kept Saddam in the neutral list for al Qaeda was that he has been a constant thorn in the side of the US. In other words the enemy of their enemy was their friend. Just like the US was to bin Laden when Russia was trying to take over Afghanistan. Remember we trained him. As soon as that struggle was over, he turned around and put the US in his sights.
I do not doubt that he and al Qaeda may have sought help from Iraq. It doesn't appear they got any. Even if they had, if ever the US completely withdraws from the Middle East, you can bet Saddam and Iraq will be next on their list or not far down it. Wait, they are already there bombing it and killing Iraqis. I guess merging US influence there tipped the scales a bit and has placed greater anger on Iraq.
This president has most certainly killed off jobs here. I can give you a first hand example. There was a federal job I applied for. The job was planned prior to the Iraq war. Because of the crazy amount of United States taxpayers money that is being poured in to another country, the job was cancelled and I didn't get it because that federal agency's budget was cut.
It is simple economics. When take billions of dollars out of the US economy and pour it into another country, the US will suffer. I am of the opinion that the ill effects of this haven't yet been fully realized.
I have personally switched about 15 or so people which have in turn switched at least a few people. I always mention it when discussions on the Internet come up or if people ask me about computers which happens often as people always feel compelled to ask how they can speed up their aged Pentium 2 computer that is probably worth more as a paperweight (or Linux server:))
Slashdot Mirror
If Kerry and Edwards want to secure a second term, they will push for reforms. If not, they won't.
Part of having a free society is that if people really want to, they can go into the voting booth and flip a coin.
Since the President is the only one authorized to launch a nuclear weapon, I will always avoid voting for a moron.
You just don't get it. There are many many embryos that will NEVER be used. They WILL be destroyed. So what do you suggest? Having a solemn ceremony and bury the cells that you can't even see with your naked eye and will never be implanted?
That is just plain nonsense no matter how you slice it.
By the way, there is no definitive research yet that says adult stem cells are adequate. There is no doubt that embryonic are adequate for research. So in 10 years when scientists announce that adult stem cells don't cut it and they need embryonic for certain diseases what will your response be then? We need to bury the cells, not use them?
I bet dollars to doughnuts that if you were diagnosed with Parkinsons or if you suffered a spinal cord injury and the only hope you had was embryonic stem cell research, you wouldn't have a problem with it. But I digress.
I find it extremely unethical that anyone would stand in the way of potentially finding cures for many diseases. That is, essentially, what you do when you stand in the way of embryonic stem cell research.
When your "ethics" put the value of cells doomed to die anyway above those that are living, I would call that egregiously unethical.
I have always thought it would be sneaky to keep a few Linux PC's as temporary replacements so when someone's computer needs repaired, give them a Linux PC and explain the differences and you will have their old PC back to new in a few days and see what happens.
If you live right next to a WiMAX tower, I imagine it could cause some interference with your home 802.11a/b/g network. But if you live far away, it probably won't cause anymore interference than your own 2.4/5ghz cordless phone does.
802.11b can be made to go many miles yes. But in a reliable point to multipoint area with few shadow zones? Not on your life. You might get the first half mile to a mile for free at best without problems.
WiMAX is an attempt to get 1 to 3 miles reliably with a high level of QoS that just isn't present in 802.11b at all. All of this with CPE equipment sitting on a desk inside a building or home. I don't care what 802.11b gear you are using, you will not get 3 miles with the CPE indoors in a dense area with noise.
Just a couple of days ago I received a few phishing e-mails disguised to look like CitiBank e-mails that pointed to servers based in China. The e-mails originated from China as well. I even did some of the work for the FBI and sent full registration info for those IP addresses.
I was quite disappointed when I tried to report it to the FBI and I got what was clearly and automated response that said, "This is not an automated response."
Also recently I was privy to a situtation where a computer in a school system was acting VERY strange and typing text in Word on its own that seemed half gibberish and half not but with text that could almost be confused for terrorist communications. The school system called the FBI and gave them the IP of the machine. The FBI said they were monitoring it to try to determine the cause. The only problem? It was a private IP address and impossible to monitor remotely.
I understand that the FBI probably guessed (quite correctly IMO) that the computer was infected with one of the new worms that uses the dictation engine, but they told the school they were monitoring which was a lie. Additionally, they sent me an e-mail that said it wasn't automated when it so clearly was. No wonder we had intelligence failures leading up to 9/11.
Increasing signal cannot and would not provide you with more bandwidth. It might help you overcome noise thus maximizing your current maximum capacity. But increasing signal also increases the possiblity of reflections which in turn increases noise.
The best possibility is to use the maximum signal strength required to be "heard" over the noise which, given the possibility of reflections, it is sometimes actually less and not more.
All things being equal, the only real way to increase bandwidth is to increase the amount of spectrum you use. But not all modulation is created equal as is shown in 802.11g (ODFM) vs. 802.11b (DSSS). Same spectrum, different results. Wimax is one attempt to not only increase the amount of spectrum used, but increase the effeciency of the modulation technique to make the most of the bandwidth in that spectrum.
That and it also happens to be a theoretical competitor to telcos (cellular included) because of the possibilities it might offer.
How originial:
You have been redirected to this page during a temporary period of planned downtime. We apologise for any inconvenience this work may have caused you. silicon.com should be available shortly and we encourage you to visit us again soon.
-The silicon.com Team
It would help if you checked changelogs on kernel.org who is contributing patches:
torben.mathiasen@hp.com
v enkatesh.pallipadi@intel.come l.com
HP
bjorn.helgaas@hp.com
davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com
eranian@hpl.hp.com
Dell
Matt_Domsch@dell.com
Intel
tony.luck@intel.com
kenneth.w.chen@intel.com
suresh.b.siddha@int
yanmin.zhang@intel.com
junx.yao@intel.com
arun.sharma@intel.com
gordon.jin@intel.com
AMD
khawar.chaudhry:amd.com
That was with just a quick check of two. These contributors may not be specifically sponsored by their employers. I don't know. But they certainly contribute and do work there.
"Let them eat cake."
Wait a minute, didn't she get beheaded for not listening?
Maybe maybe not. You never know. Besides, they seem to be looking for people and maybe people that wouldn't have been considered before have gained more experience and skills since last applying so they are trying to get the latest info on the geek crowd to see who is worthy.
Presumably they are looking for geeks to apply. They put that out there and it gets posted to Slashdot (which they probably expected) and gets deciphered in less than 20 minutes or so (which they also probably expected) and inevitably results in lots of geeks pondering applying to Google.
Sounds reasonable and gets them good exposure at the same time. There is a reason why Google is a household name. This is one more example.
That would have essentially been a debate unless they were asked in seperate rooms or something.
No, the President doesn't specifically make policy, but he can influence by urging lawmakers to take action and get a bill on his desk, vowing to veto a bill and things like that. This serves to dissuade lawmakers from pursuing bills with marginal support. So in essence, the true power of the President is:
-He listens to the will of the people and promises to do what is best for them
-Urges lawmakers to act on issues that are vital
-Signs into law these bills
Listening to the will and doing what is best for them can mean changing positions based on changing world situations. This has been called flip-flopping by Republicans and given as a bad thing. Would flip-flopping be a bad thing if stem cell researchers discovered that they could cure cancer with more embryonic stem lines for study requiring a change of Bush's policy? Of course not.
Dehydration. Vitamin deficiencies make it feel worse or so I have heard.
I use it on Fedora 2 and it works quite nicely. I have seen one site that had Real content that it refused to play. I don't know why. Could be more the fault of the site than anything.
Bruce,
Forgive me if this is answered somewhere on the UL website, but do you include or plan to include support out of the box for MP3's and any other technology that Red Hat may refuse to include?
Additionally, if the amount and breadth of your own patches and packages makes it such that UL and Debian are relatives only in spirit, will you go your own way or continue to try to keep ties with it?
TIA
No, it doesn't. The main reason is that my primary concern are US interests when it comes to the war on terror. There are other reasons but they would only ensue a flame war.
Yes, we have succeeded at some things
Name a few. Anything remotely having to do with Iraq doesn't count.
The whole thing is crap. If he had voted against it, he would have been crucified as weak in the "war on terrorism" of which Iraq had nothing to do with as far as the US is concerned anyway.
Bush and company tried very hard to make a return of McCarthyism and politically assasinate anyone that didn't vote their way.
Bottom line is that Iraq never should have happened this time around. If we were going to take Saddam out of power, it should have been done the first time we were there after they invaded Kuwait.
We would have been much better off and the "war" much better fought with all of those troops scouring Afghanistan looking for bin Laden. But Bush didn't do that, did he?
Wonder (oil) why (oil) he (oil) wouldn't (oil) pursue (oil) the (oil) real (oil) mastermind (oil) behind (oil) 9/11?
If you check out bin Laden and al Qaeda's modus operandi, you will find that anyone that kills Muslims (even if they are other Muslims) or aids those that do (think Saudi Arabia) are on their hitlist. Remember that Saddam tortured and killed many of his own citizens.
Probably the only thing that kept Saddam in the neutral list for al Qaeda was that he has been a constant thorn in the side of the US. In other words the enemy of their enemy was their friend. Just like the US was to bin Laden when Russia was trying to take over Afghanistan. Remember we trained him. As soon as that struggle was over, he turned around and put the US in his sights.
I do not doubt that he and al Qaeda may have sought help from Iraq. It doesn't appear they got any. Even if they had, if ever the US completely withdraws from the Middle East, you can bet Saddam and Iraq will be next on their list or not far down it. Wait, they are already there bombing it and killing Iraqis. I guess merging US influence there tipped the scales a bit and has placed greater anger on Iraq.
This president has most certainly killed off jobs here. I can give you a first hand example. There was a federal job I applied for. The job was planned prior to the Iraq war. Because of the crazy amount of United States taxpayers money that is being poured in to another country, the job was cancelled and I didn't get it because that federal agency's budget was cut.
It is simple economics. When take billions of dollars out of the US economy and pour it into another country, the US will suffer. I am of the opinion that the ill effects of this haven't yet been fully realized.
I have personally switched about 15 or so people which have in turn switched at least a few people. I always mention it when discussions on the Internet come up or if people ask me about computers which happens often as people always feel compelled to ask how they can speed up their aged Pentium 2 computer that is probably worth more as a paperweight (or Linux server :))
It has nothing to do with antitrust and everything to do with making an example out of SCO. That is my impression.