Banks don't send email, the phishers aren't copying HTML from anybody. What makes phishing possible, isn't HTML, and it isn't crooks. It's the people who fall for it. Really?
My physics teacher at A-level (17-18, school leaving exam for the Americans) was the only teacher I'd had who used a digital whiteboard effectively.
1. Just with a remote camera for the small, fiddly demonstrations that are hard to see and normally have the whole class crowding round some small equipment. 2. For whole-class data analysis of an experiment, eg. software grabs the charging curve of a capacitor, or a truck rolling down a hill, etc. You can use the whiteboard to do the maths on that data to demonstrate the concepts.
The research comes from a University, not a newspaper.
It's not been published. (I looked.)
To all intents and purposes, this means the research hasn't been completed yet. Publishing a popular-science article about unpublished data is irresponsible and misleading to say the least, regardless of the accuracy of the conclusions.
It sounds like Alice and Bob need to coordinate in advance when they will use their low and high resistors. In which case, they're using a one-time pad and already secure.
No. (rtfa?) It's very similar to quantum cryptography, just without the quantum.
They say that they use a computer to test how the factors, CREB and ZIF something react with specific genes. How is this done?
Genes are activated when a protein binds to the DNA sequence normally found upstream of a gene. Each protein binds to a specific DNA sequence (although there are often acceptable variations within the sequence). So if a protein binds to CATTACG, then you can find which genes may be activated by this protein by scanning for genes that have the signature CATTACG upstream of them.
This is dead easy to do. Unfortunately, due to the combinatorial nature of gene control, and the fact that binding sequences tend not to be very well characterised, you get quite a lot of false positives. So it's a useful indicator, but one that normally needs to be validated by real experiments.
The article may grossly understate the work that's actually done, but assuming that it's accurate, that's all they did. Basically they did a grep of the genome for binding sequences for these two transcription factors and printed out which genes contained the correct sequences. But without experimental validation (which isn't technically hard, with microarray technology) - it means zilch. It's basically a few weeks of an undergraduate project, made into news.
If you're in a half-decent university, at least for science degrees, the lecture content should be significantly more up-to-date than even recent textbooks. I suppose this could apply less for computer science than the natural sciences, though.
if you don't modify the source code, you don't have to go out of your way to make sure it is present if you redistribute the software. the original source code is already freely available.
Any Free Software license allows you to use or distribute the software in any way you choose.
No, no it really doesn't.
Free software licenses vary, but lots require you to distribute the source code with any binary distribution (or a written offer to provide source, see the GPL).
Proteins are functional or structural objects -- they act as scaffolding, motors and chemical reaction centers. They can be modified in ways that allow the transmission of information (e.g. phosphorylation), but that's a secondary responsibility.
See hormones. Some proteins definitely have a primary responsibility of information transfer.
OTOH, you're right about proteins not being unfolded for reading - there's no dynamic change required to read a protein. However, a protein that is manufactured mis-folded won't be "read", or recognised by target cells, because any mis-folded protein loses its functionality.
That brings us to the really exciting bit about this research; for various reasons protein folding pathways are critical to every level of cell and organismal biology, but we hardly know anything about them. Prions disrupt folding pathways and cause refolding, so they will probably become key tools in protein folding research. The ability to artificially manufacture them - and hence manufacture similar but different prions and observe the differences in their effects - will tell us how they adjust protein folding pathways, which is a) interesting in itself and b) the first step to a cure.
I have come across some applications that ask you where to install them in their install program, then use hardcoded paths in the code. You'd better not install them anywhere else:)
Come on now, writing ANY type of program at 7 or 8 is AB-FUCKING-NORMAL, I don't care how smart you are, when you're 7 or 8 you're flying kites and playing little league, so I call bullshit. I call bullshit cause you think the dweebs and nerds here will give you credence and props cause you were one of the maybe 5, 10, 100? kids globally 'programming at 7 or 8'. Sorry Doogie Howser, you were learning to read and write at 7 or 8, and if you weren't, in all honesty, how normal of a child were you? Really?
Cheers. I learnt BASIC when I was 9, on an old "amstrad word processor" I found in my Grandad's attic. I had definitely learnt to read and write by then;-)
That's probably not *so* unusual for hackers today, to be honest. It's not normal compared with Joe Average.
Never been done before...
on
SimChurch
·
· Score: 4, Funny
"...no one has built an interactive 3D church environment before - complete with gothic arches and hard wooden pews."
Slashdot Mirror
Fire missiles at it
No shit, Sherlock.
My physics teacher at A-level (17-18, school leaving exam for the Americans) was the only teacher I'd had who used a digital whiteboard effectively.
1. Just with a remote camera for the small, fiddly demonstrations that are hard to see and normally have the whole class crowding round some small equipment.
2. For whole-class data analysis of an experiment, eg. software grabs the charging curve of a capacitor, or a truck rolling down a hill, etc. You can use the whiteboard to do the maths on that data to demonstrate the concepts.
Because I have a pink bathroom.
The research comes from a University, not a newspaper.
It's not been published. (I looked.)
To all intents and purposes, this means the research hasn't been completed yet. Publishing a popular-science article about unpublished data is irresponsible and misleading to say the least, regardless of the accuracy of the conclusions.
It sounds like Alice and Bob need to coordinate in advance when they will use their low and high resistors. In which case, they're using a one-time pad and already secure.
No. (rtfa?) It's very similar to quantum cryptography, just without the quantum.
When you get as far as trying it, you'll find out that making the source compile on another operating system is 80% of the work in porting.
I'm not saying that it actually works that way but Gore-Tex is still probably better than any other material for this purpose.
Paramo.
Like Gore-Tex, but actually works ;-)
GAIM is a GNOME app, is it not?
No. No, it's not.
GAIM is a random app that goes completely its own way, and is well known for ignoring requests from other segments of the community.
And you, Sir, are one of the reasons why males have a bad name.
Because Thunderbird 2 is an international rescue craft.
Genes are activated when a protein binds to the DNA sequence normally found upstream of a gene. Each protein binds to a specific DNA sequence (although there are often acceptable variations within the sequence). So if a protein binds to CATTACG, then you can find which genes may be activated by this protein by scanning for genes that have the signature CATTACG upstream of them.
This is dead easy to do. Unfortunately, due to the combinatorial nature of gene control, and the fact that binding sequences tend not to be very well characterised, you get quite a lot of false positives. So it's a useful indicator, but one that normally needs to be validated by real experiments.
The article may grossly understate the work that's actually done, but assuming that it's accurate, that's all they did. Basically they did a grep of the genome for binding sequences for these two transcription factors and printed out which genes contained the correct sequences. But without experimental validation (which isn't technically hard, with microarray technology) - it means zilch. It's basically a few weeks of an undergraduate project, made into news.
(I am a molecular biologist)
Yes, that's numberwang!
If you're in a half-decent university, at least for science degrees, the lecture content should be significantly more up-to-date than even recent textbooks. I suppose this could apply less for computer science than the natural sciences, though.
if you don't modify the source code, you don't have to go out of your way to make sure it is present if you redistribute the software. the original source code is already freely available.
This is incorrect. Try reading the license!
+1 Funny :-)
Any Free Software license allows you to use or distribute the software in any way you choose.
No, no it really doesn't.
Free software licenses vary, but lots require you to distribute the source code with any binary distribution (or a written offer to provide source, see the GPL).
This is important.
> Actually, experimental design and statistical evaluation are big parts of my job.
This obviously doesn't stop you from talking complete bollocks about it, though.
Really? I'm interested to see where Microsoft are taxing me on my current server (All components individually bought, running Gentoo Linux).
In this particular case, it's you taxing everyone who has to use the Gentoo thing :)
Proteins are functional or structural objects -- they act as scaffolding, motors and chemical reaction centers. They can be modified in ways that allow the transmission of information (e.g. phosphorylation), but that's a secondary responsibility.
See hormones. Some proteins definitely have a primary responsibility of information transfer.
OTOH, you're right about proteins not being unfolded for reading - there's no dynamic change required to read a protein. However, a protein that is manufactured mis-folded won't be "read", or recognised by target cells, because any mis-folded protein loses its functionality.
That brings us to the really exciting bit about this research; for various reasons protein folding pathways are critical to every level of cell and organismal biology, but we hardly know anything about them. Prions disrupt folding pathways and cause refolding, so they will probably become key tools in protein folding research. The ability to artificially manufacture them - and hence manufacture similar but different prions and observe the differences in their effects - will tell us how they adjust protein folding pathways, which is a) interesting in itself and b) the first step to a cure.
Of course, most of the people in the IRC channel are core GNOME hackers who think this is really quite funny.
riiight.
:)
I have come across some applications that ask you where to install them in their install program, then use hardcoded paths in the code. You'd better not install them anywhere else
Come on now, writing ANY type of program at 7 or 8 is AB-FUCKING-NORMAL, I don't care how smart you are, when you're 7 or 8 you're flying kites and playing little league, so I call bullshit. I call bullshit cause you think the dweebs and nerds here will give you credence and props cause you were one of the maybe 5, 10, 100? kids globally 'programming at 7 or 8'. Sorry Doogie Howser, you were learning to read and write at 7 or 8, and if you weren't, in all honesty, how normal of a child were you? Really?
Cheers. I learnt BASIC when I was 9, on an old "amstrad word processor" I found in my Grandad's attic. I had definitely learnt to read and write by then ;-)
That's probably not *so* unusual for hackers today, to be honest. It's not normal compared with Joe Average.
"...no one has built an interactive 3D church environment before - complete with gothic arches and hard wooden pews."
HAVE YOU NEVER PLAYED DEUS EX???