Stem cells are cells which have arisen following gametogenesis. Cancer cells, in at least 80% of cases, are cells that have started production of telomerase independently. Stem cells do not have telomerase, which is normall present only during gametogenesis, and in cancers.
A good company web site to look at to see how these things relate to each other, specifically dealing with oncology (the study of cancer) and limb regeneration, amon other topics, is:
http://www.geron.com/
The specific fram page with a discussion of their cancer research is:
http://www.geron.com/03.01_oncology.html
Intentional telomerase activation is generally only useful in wound healing therapies; this is because the cells in which the telomerase would act in this case have already specialized.
It's not know whether or not telomerase could act on stem cells directly, permitting "farming" of stem cells (an interesting idea, raised by your question). My gut feeling on this would be "no", based on the existance of teratomas, but I'm willing to be wrong (particularly if it ends up making me immortal... 8-)). The regenerative medicine page is at:
http://www.geron.com/03.03_regenmed.html
Note that Geron (the company whose site this is) has the patent on the genes coding for human Telomerase, owns the patents that led to "Dolly the sheep", and is interesting for other reasons.
The company was originally founded -- and their web page used to claim this -- to find a cure for human aging. They have a more mainstream message, these days, but they are certianly making progress on their original goal, even if they are getting a lot of products out of the intermediate work.
RMS has to be regretting that the GPL doesn't have an "advertising clause"...
Of course, since Linux ads seldom mention features or use of the software RMS wrote which is bundled with the system, it would have to be a significantly more agressive "advertising clause" than the old 4 clause BSD license, where it was mostly a "hold harmless".
I was able to run 1,600,000 simultaneous connections with a modified FreeBSD kernel, in June of 2001. Couldn't get much work done, but at about 300 baud per conection, after dividing up a gigabit ethernet link... you shouldn't expect to do much work.
Without modifications, after a patch to the credential reference counting (since committed to FreeBSD 4.5), as long as a stock kernel is tuned correctly, it can still *easily* handle 100,000 simultaneous connections (16K of window space for each connection = 1.6G of mbufs).
It was inevitable... Microsoft makes people pay for their beta's, and now Celera is making people pay to provide them with more information about the human genome, which would have otherwise cost them $600k a pop to sequence out themselves.
I think this is a good thing, since they will drive down the price, and they will get a broader information base than just Ventner's own genes: what's been sequenced is *a* human genome, not *the* human genome.
On the privacy side of things, I'd just as soon keep the contents of my chromosomes to myself (particularly 6, 11, 12, 17, 21, and 23), thanks, but that said, I'd like to read it myself and compare it to statistical data, without anyone looking over my shoulder, or writing my name down in a database next to the information.
Modern buildings, not modern bombs, are the reason that the bombs are more effective.
If the Oklahoma City Federal bBuilding had been a building built as a result of a WPA project, it would have suffered far less damage.
Modern buildings are built by engineers who are blancing cost vs. minimum required strength. If you know for sure what the minimum required strength is, then you can give yourselves much less margin.
The worst disaster most WPA buildings could befall is that they are so massive that they might sink into the ground.
Or, to put it another way... if we built nothing new for 100 years, the only things left standing would be more than 200 years old.
There's not such as big a difference as you imply.
Several months ago, the cable company signed an agreement with my apartment complex, where they paid the aprtment complex some money in order to get the apartment complex to do two things:
(1) Install cable outlets in the bedrooms of all apartments.
(2) Rip down the roof antennas....so basically, yes, cable *is* comparable, as the signal passes over a medium that they put into my bedroom, and they've explicitly taken measures to block my access to any signals which don't.
In any case, my argument was for access to broadcast signals, or signals in wires on your own premises, without an explicit grant of a right-of-way that would preclude you accessing them.
In case you want to argue cable some more, I'll warn you that I can argue "attractive nuisance" for a live cable outlet in an apartment building, and I can argue the right-of-way exception on the basis of court cases in which TCI Cable and Cox Cable have strung cables over someonees yard to get cable to that someone's house, and had to remove/reroute the cable becuase they failed to use a legal right-of-way.
Nokia makes 802.11, and other networking equipment; they also make 3G phones, and, finally, they are in bed with Covad: http://www.nokia.com/networks/mw1642/downloads/cov ad.pdf...
So why does Nokia care? Nokia cares because they believe that they will sell more equipment if connections can not be shared, than they will if connections are shared.
"How is [accessing a publically accessible wireless network] different [from listening to the music coming from the car that pulls up next to you at a stop light]?"
"It's passive".
So you're saying I can pirate cable and DirecTV, because doing so is *passive*, since the calbes and the signals are already present.
I guess this means I can run dump packets off a publically accessible wireless network, as long as I don't send any, right?
Again, I'm going to argue applicability: Walia v. Aetna was about a company which terminated someone who was already an employee for not signing a non-compete agreement.
What I'm talking about is that, unless you sign the non-compete, you don't get hired as software engineer, and you can't argue this fact, if you enter into the contract willingly.
I'm well aware of California law as it applies to right to work, and so on; among other things, it requires that your employer inform you that work done on your own time and equipment belong to you, regardless of what an employment agreement says.
On the other hand, you can contract for your time, and you can contract for pretty much anything, as long as it doesn't try and alienate an inalienable right, and as long as there is consideration exchanged on both sides, it's legal.
Also, note that the enforcement in my cousin's case was conditionalized on the company's continuing to pay my cousin's salary for the period of time the non-compete was in effect, which was court limited to a period of one year.
Such a condition on a non-compete agreement is in fact enforcible, since it gets around the section 16600 problem of robbing someone of their livelihood: by paying them their salary during the enforcement period, there is no loss of livelihood resulting from the enforcement. This is what's at issue in section 16600, the interpretation of which, in this case, is contingent on the "mobility/betterment" clause, operating in the absence of payment for the contract period.
Finally, the "narrow restraint" exception is applicable for an industry segment definition which is small enough; the Walia case was a general restriction, which is not something which normally occurs in, e.g., software engineering non-compete agreements.
I think you are missing my point; that point was that you are going to be hard put to find a technology industry job where you are not required to sign a non-compete agreement as part of the hiring process.
This precedent is meaningless to technology workers in California.
Why not Solaris? It's not like they'd have to pay royalties to anyone, or anything, or that it would cost them any more. And they could subsidize the Solaris developement by amortizing some of it across the new machines; they're going to have to do that anyway, with the Linux, if they plan on trading on their name that way.
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me; maybe it's just some tail-tweaking, rather than something that's really going to happen?
This really feels like a big mistake. Remember when BMD came out with a low end car, and no one bought it because BMW meant "upscale", but the mere existance of the lowscale offering damaged their brand image?
This is going to be labelled a troll, but I don't care; someone has to set you straight on the fact that the reason Lindows exists in the first place is usability.
"So does this mean that Linux users couldn't see Windows shares until just now?"
No, it just meant that non-geeks couldn't use them without a lot of hand-holding or obnoxious manual reading, logging in as root, and never forget, The Typing Of The Arcane Commands ("Can't I have just a *little* peril?")....Until now.
I guess they could always have done The Abasement To And Begging Of The Smarmy Elitist Linux Weenies, Keepers Of That Which Is Tediously Arcane For No Good Reason.
But then, who really has the time to travel to the retro gothic temple in Finland?
I guess you really don't get the idea that most people not only don't know about computers, but they would just as soon not have to learn any more than they have to to get by?
He didn't sign a non-competition agreement. This was solely a trade secrets case, and it made no decision regarding whether or not non-competition agreements are themselves binding in California.
I can guarantee they are in Minnesota; my cousin worked for a automated controls company that designed small control computers that were then OEM'ed by other companies, such as IBM. e quit to go to work for another company, and was sued by his former employer. He fought it to the apellate court, and lost. However:
o The former employer could only enforce it for one year o During that year, they had to pay him his salary
Never mind that modern hard disks are unreliable pieces of crap, or that IBM moved to a glass substrate that they never got to work quite right, so they sold off their entire hard disk division to Hitachi to scrape the mess off their shoe...
You can store more on them! Yea! Whoopie!
And then you can't back them up. But don't worry, you can back them up by buying another hard drive, which you can't bck up!
And figure out some way to store it off site, the way you used to store tapes off site. Except you pretty much have to buy some seriously expensive glue hardware, because IDE cables can't be more than a foot or so long before they start trashing your data, even without the help of a substandard hard drive.
In related news, I hear that for what it costs for a house on 1/8th of an acre in the rich part of towm, you can buy 100,000 acres of land bordering Love Canal or Three Mile Island. Yeah, the land is crap, but look how much you get!
Th primary reason to dislike ads, particularly on a service which is almost guaranteed to operate with a user base of laptop users, is the amount of screen realestate the advertisements end up taking up.
There's a finite amount of usable space on a laptop screen relative to a desktop, anyway, and further reducing this puts it below the real estate point where a laptop was something that was able top push the person past their buy-point in the first place.
It's called a transcoding proxy. It works by using a combination of a transparent proxy, and a content rewrite mechanism, to keep the frame contents happy by re-rooting them relative to the embedded frame.
For bonus points, it can ensure that the download of the banner download succeeds before it permits the rest of the content to transit the proxy.
I can license code to you, if you want to do something like this, but it will cost you some $ for the license, unless you are willing to do a "fee plus royalty" arrangement, and I'm convinced that there's royalties to be made from your business model.
Of course, that leaves the broswer people to implement a "frame focus", where the browser "focuses in" on a single frame for display purposes, but downloads content like it's displaying all of it...
That's not really an issue for the business model, though, since 99.9% of the machines that will be using the service will be using it from Windows.
In most people's minds, "good judgement" means "if given the same set of facts, the other person would come to the same conclusion or make the same decision I would".
So unless you are a "jackbooted fascist", you aren't going to elect one based on them having "good judgement".
Slashdot Mirror
There is no real link there.
Stem cells are cells which have arisen following gametogenesis. Cancer cells, in at least 80% of cases, are cells that have started production of telomerase independently. Stem cells do not have telomerase, which is normall present only during gametogenesis, and in cancers.
A good company web site to look at to see how these things relate to each other, specifically dealing with oncology (the study of cancer) and limb regeneration, amon other topics, is:
http://www.geron.com/
The specific fram page with a discussion of their cancer research is:
http://www.geron.com/03.01_oncology.html
Intentional telomerase activation is generally only useful in wound healing therapies; this is because the cells in which the telomerase would act in this case have already specialized.
It's not know whether or not telomerase could act on stem cells directly, permitting "farming" of stem cells (an interesting idea, raised by your question). My gut feeling on this would be "no", based on the existance of teratomas, but I'm willing to be wrong (particularly if it ends up making me immortal... 8-)). The regenerative medicine page is at:
http://www.geron.com/03.03_regenmed.html
Note that Geron (the company whose site this is) has the patent on the genes coding for human Telomerase, owns the patents that led to "Dolly the sheep", and is interesting for other reasons.
The company was originally founded -- and their web page used to claim this -- to find a cure for human aging. They have a more mainstream message, these days, but they are certianly making progress on their original goal, even if they are getting a lot of products out of the intermediate work.
-- Terry
RMS has to be regretting that the GPL doesn't have an "advertising clause"...
Of course, since Linux ads seldom mention features or use of the software RMS wrote which is bundled with the system, it would have to be a significantly more agressive "advertising clause" than the old 4 clause BSD license, where it was mostly a "hold harmless".
-- Terry
Without the Van Allen radiation belts...
Van Allen's radiation pants would fall down.
(Yeah, it's off topic, but it had to be said).
-- Terry
New "Crossing Jordan" episode: a man is found dead, shot twice. The only clue is a can of Spam jammed in his mouth, unopened...
-- Terry
So? Use non-blocking I/O instead. Problem solved.
-- Terry
I don't understand what the issue is here.
I was able to run 1,600,000 simultaneous connections with a modified FreeBSD kernel, in June of 2001. Couldn't get much work done, but at about 300 baud per conection, after dividing up a gigabit ethernet link... you shouldn't expect to do much work.
Without modifications, after a patch to the credential reference counting (since committed to FreeBSD 4.5), as long as a stock kernel is tuned correctly, it can still *easily* handle 100,000 simultaneous connections (16K of window space for each connection = 1.6G of mbufs).
-- Terry
It was inevitable... Microsoft makes people pay for their beta's, and now Celera is making people pay to provide them with more information about the human genome, which would have otherwise cost them $600k a pop to sequence out themselves.
I think this is a good thing, since they will drive down the price, and they will get a broader information base than just Ventner's own genes: what's been sequenced is *a* human genome, not *the* human genome.
On the privacy side of things, I'd just as soon keep the contents of my chromosomes to myself (particularly 6, 11, 12, 17, 21, and 23), thanks, but that said, I'd like to read it myself and compare it to statistical data, without anyone looking over my shoulder, or writing my name down in a database next to the information.
-- Terry
Great... the first Slashdot-related fatality...
"Too much web traffic kills Internet bicyclist..."
-- Terry
"...an analysis application that mathematically ranks travelers'potential as security threats."
...yeah, that's what I thought...
OK... so what's the fitness function?
I'd be satisfied with anything that, if we were to run it on all of the people who flew on September 11th 2001, it:
o flagged every one of the hijackers
o didn't flag anyone else
-- Terry
Modern buildings, not modern bombs, are the reason that the bombs are more effective.
If the Oklahoma City Federal bBuilding had been a building built as a result of a WPA project, it would have suffered far less damage.
Modern buildings are built by engineers who are blancing cost vs. minimum required strength. If you know for sure what the minimum required strength is, then you can give yourselves much less margin.
The worst disaster most WPA buildings could befall is that they are so massive that they might sink into the ground.
Or, to put it another way... if we built nothing new for 100 years, the only things left standing would be more than 200 years old.
-- Terry
There's not such as big a difference as you imply.
...so basically, yes, cable *is* comparable, as the signal passes over a medium that they put into my bedroom, and they've explicitly taken measures to block my access to any signals which don't.
Several months ago, the cable company signed an agreement with my apartment complex, where they paid the aprtment complex some money in order to get the apartment complex to do two things:
(1) Install cable outlets in the bedrooms of all apartments.
(2) Rip down the roof antennas.
In any case, my argument was for access to broadcast signals, or signals in wires on your own premises, without an explicit grant of a right-of-way that would preclude you accessing them.
In case you want to argue cable some more, I'll warn you that I can argue "attractive nuisance" for a live cable outlet in an apartment building, and I can argue the right-of-way exception on the basis of court cases in which TCI Cable and Cox Cable have strung cables over someonees yard to get cable to that someone's house, and had to remove/reroute the cable becuase they failed to use a legal right-of-way.
-- Terry
What "the ruling"?
We are talking about an "advisory" published by Nokia, in which they call people who do war-chalking thieves... not the outcome of a court case.
-- Terry
Like the rest of you, I wondered why Nokia cares.
v ad.pdf ...
Nokia makes 802.11, and other networking equipment; they also make 3G phones, and, finally, they are in bed with Covad: http://www.nokia.com/networks/mw1642/downloads/co
So why does Nokia care? Nokia cares because they believe that they will sell more equipment if connections can not be shared, than they will if connections are shared.
-- Terry
"How is [accessing a publically accessible wireless network] different [from listening to the music coming from the car that pulls up next to you at a stop light]?"
"It's passive".
So you're saying I can pirate cable and DirecTV, because doing so is *passive*, since the calbes and the signals are already present.
I guess this means I can run dump packets off a publically accessible wireless network, as long as I don't send any, right?
Thanks, but I don't quite buy that theory.
-- Terry
Again, I'm going to argue applicability: Walia v. Aetna was about a company which terminated someone who was already an employee for not signing a non-compete agreement.
What I'm talking about is that, unless you sign the non-compete, you don't get hired as software engineer, and you can't argue this fact, if you enter into the contract willingly.
I'm well aware of California law as it applies to right to work, and so on; among other things, it requires that your employer inform you that work done on your own time and equipment belong to you, regardless of what an employment agreement says.
On the other hand, you can contract for your time, and you can contract for pretty much anything, as long as it doesn't try and alienate an inalienable right, and as long as there is consideration exchanged on both sides, it's legal.
Also, note that the enforcement in my cousin's case was conditionalized on the company's continuing to pay my cousin's salary for the period of time the non-compete was in effect, which was court limited to a period of one year.
Such a condition on a non-compete agreement is in fact enforcible, since it gets around the section 16600 problem of robbing someone of their livelihood: by paying them their salary during the enforcement period, there is no loss of livelihood resulting from the enforcement. This is what's at issue in section 16600, the interpretation of which, in this case, is contingent on the "mobility/betterment" clause, operating in the absence of payment for the contract period.
Finally, the "narrow restraint" exception is applicable for an industry segment definition which is small enough; the Walia case was a general restriction, which is not something which normally occurs in, e.g., software engineering non-compete agreements.
-- Terry
Freaking busybodies...
I will put my router up on cinderblocks in my front yard if I damn well want to...
-- Terry
I think you are missing my point; that point was that you are going to be hard put to find a technology industry job where you are not required to sign a non-compete agreement as part of the hiring process.
This precedent is meaningless to technology workers in California.
-- Terry
Why not Solaris? It's not like they'd have to pay royalties to anyone, or anything, or that it would cost them any more. And they could subsidize the Solaris developement by amortizing some of it across the new machines; they're going to have to do that anyway, with the Linux, if they plan on trading on their name that way.
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me; maybe it's just some tail-tweaking, rather than something that's really going to happen?
This really feels like a big mistake. Remember when BMD came out with a low end car, and no one bought it because BMW meant "upscale", but the mere existance of the lowscale offering damaged their brand image?
-- Terry
This is going to be labelled a troll, but I don't care; someone has to set you straight on the fact that the reason Lindows exists in the first place is usability.
...Until now.
"So does this mean that Linux users couldn't see Windows shares until just now?"
No, it just meant that non-geeks couldn't use them without a lot of hand-holding or obnoxious manual reading, logging in as root, and never forget, The Typing Of The Arcane Commands ("Can't I have just a *little* peril?").
I guess they could always have done The Abasement To And Begging Of The Smarmy Elitist Linux Weenies, Keepers Of That Which Is Tediously Arcane For No Good Reason.
But then, who really has the time to travel to the retro gothic temple in Finland?
I guess you really don't get the idea that most people not only don't know about computers, but they would just as soon not have to learn any more than they have to to get by?
-- Terry
"Harcourt Fenton Mudd! Have you been DRINKING?!? ..."
-- Terry
Uh, read the decision before posting.
He didn't sign a non-competition agreement. This was solely a trade secrets case, and it made no decision regarding whether or not non-competition agreements are themselves binding in California.
I can guarantee they are in Minnesota; my cousin worked for a automated controls company that designed small control computers that were then OEM'ed by other companies, such as IBM. e quit to go to work for another company, and was sued by his former employer. He fought it to the apellate court, and lost. However:
o The former employer could only enforce it for one year
o During that year, they had to pay him his salary
They did both.
-- Terry
Density is king.
Never mind that modern hard disks are unreliable pieces of crap, or that IBM moved to a glass substrate that they never got to work quite right, so they sold off their entire hard disk division to Hitachi to scrape the mess off their shoe...
You can store more on them! Yea! Whoopie!
And then you can't back them up. But don't worry, you can back them up by buying another hard drive, which you can't bck up!
And figure out some way to store it off site, the way you used to store tapes off site. Except you pretty much have to buy some seriously expensive glue hardware, because IDE cables can't be more than a foot or so long before they start trashing your data, even without the help of a substandard hard drive.
In related news, I hear that for what it costs for a house on 1/8th of an acre in the rich part of towm, you can buy 100,000 acres of land bordering Love Canal or Three Mile Island. Yeah, the land is crap, but look how much you get!
-- Terry
Th primary reason to dislike ads, particularly on a service which is almost guaranteed to operate with a user base of laptop users, is the amount of screen realestate the advertisements end up taking up.
There's a finite amount of usable space on a laptop screen relative to a desktop, anyway, and further reducing this puts it below the real estate point where a laptop was something that was able top push the person past their buy-point in the first place.
-- Terry
It's called a transcoding proxy. It works by using a combination of a transparent proxy, and a content rewrite mechanism, to keep the frame contents happy by re-rooting them relative to the embedded frame.
For bonus points, it can ensure that the download of the banner download succeeds before it permits the rest of the content to transit the proxy.
I can license code to you, if you want to do something like this, but it will cost you some $ for the license, unless you are willing to do a "fee plus royalty" arrangement, and I'm convinced that there's royalties to be made from your business model.
Of course, that leaves the broswer people to implement a "frame focus", where the browser "focuses in" on a single frame for display purposes, but downloads content like it's displaying all of it...
That's not really an issue for the business model, though, since 99.9% of the machines that will be using the service will be using it from Windows.
-- Terry
In most people's minds, "good judgement" means "if given the same set of facts, the other person would come to the same conclusion or make the same decision I would".
So unless you are a "jackbooted fascist", you aren't going to elect one based on them having "good judgement".
-- Terry