You take the disc marked 1 out of the sleeve, it says, "put this in the computer and hold down C"
So you do that, then you change discs every 5 minutes for 20 minutes when it tells you to. Unless, like my gf and her emac, your installation came on a DVD, then you change no discs.
Then it's done and your mac works perfectly. Somewhere along the road, it asks you for your name or something too.
They really are a pleasure to work with from top to bottom and that includes installations (IMHO).
Just so as you know, for the would be biohackers, the immune system is ridiculously complex and any slashdot posting, mine included could never do it justice. This is *the* book for beginning Immunology, written by Janeway who recently passed away: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0815 33642X/ qid=1089304040/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/102-7999783-80057 25
We've known about humoral immunity and mutation for a very long time. Nowadays the hotness is considered by many to be in the field of molecular mimicry and toll-like receptors...
Imagine you're a virus, Cell X can blow up your house when his neighbour is in mode 1, however, Cell X's neighbour, Cell Y, has a communication system with cells X, A, B (and so on...) which can be highjacked to change cell Y's mood and make Cell Y change Cell X into mode 2.
Mimic the communication peptides of important pathways, spew those about into the environment, highjack the immune system to make itself weak in fighting you. Eventually, the immune system gets the hang of killing you, but by that time, you're already in 5 more people who will in turn infect 5 more people and so on...
TLRs are pattern recognition proteins that have "learned" over the eons "When you see molecular pattern X, don't listen to anything else anyone says because X is bad news. Go into Kill mode!". The huge thrust of this is that, sometimes Vaccines have low immunogenicity, or the wrong type of immunogenicity, if you can attach some PAMPs (pathogen assosiated molecular pattern) then these PAMP-r (the TLR) will make the cell respond appropriately.
This is all of course, grossly simplified, but none the less appreciably interesting.
This reminds me of a great joke. It essentially boils down to a long rambling boring story with a punchline that isn't funny.
The Joke is that the person hearing it can then make other people suffer and it's always funny to watch people hearing it for the first time if you're in the know. "Screw you, I want that 5 minutes of my lifeback!"
I agree,
Opera for windows is by and large my favourite windows browser.
For some reason it completely sucks on the Mac though so now I use safari.
cheers,
-S
Thanks for the interesting words, I half agree with you, but still vehemently disagree with fundamental human rights violations and unconscionable transactions.
This isn't to say everyone should get a daycare anda health plan, or even work fewer than 18 hours. Or even take away the ability and right to work in a dangerous environment for pay.
But there are some human dignities that shouldn't be stripped. My GF has taken a good course on this, I'll come back tommorow with some better examples (stripped of company name of course).
Apple pulled so many tricks out of its sleeves over the last month, I wouldn't be surprised to see this as one of the "big surprises" along with the new displays and G5 imacs.
I'm not a lawyer but... As for the people in an unsafe trial: If they signed a piece of paper stating that they no longer held the right to sue, the corp escapes liability. But, if they are not explicitly notified of this, this clause is in effect worthless and that's a tort of negligence.
Where there is a distinct economical advantage (read, one party is REALLY poor and desparate) and the wealthy party takes advantage of this, it's termed 'unconscionable transaction' and is also not valid under common law.
So, in the west, any company committing these would be flogged in a court day so companies don't do it (anymore)...
But, what they can do is take their operations with liabilities to a place where people can't afford to take them to court. Ever. This decreases liability and increases profits. Or, they got to a place where things like this are legal. Because this (profit) is the shareholders mandate it will be done and called "fiduciary duty". A reasonably prudent director will do everything in the best interest of a corporation he legally is allowed to.
A reputation that's soiled to people who don't matter or people who don't know that you have soiled your reputation isn't a soiled reputation: it's an efficient corporation.
This goes on all around us with many note worthy companies committing all sorts of these things. I am however aware that any statements I make without solid proof could someday be used against me (a lawsuit is expensive even if I had proof) so I'll keep the real world examples to myself.
As for securing suppliers best interests, that's a very 2 dimensional argument.
Ex: A Corp. comes to Country X, creates factory, abuses workers. Are the workers better off without company? probably not, they either have No money (company leaves because of civil unrest), or little money from terrible job.
So, because they Have To work, does that make it right to treat them horribly? Is it ethical to make them work 18 hour shifts while pregnant in unsafe environments? Is it legal? no to the first and yes to the second I'd wager. The kind of countries that allow this usually need the land tax revenue to pay for the tremendous debts we've stuck them with.
Legal but not ethical.
Of course the argument can be made that these people can someday be better off because of their current struggles and accumulations of wealth and I certainly agree. That doesn't mean we're not allowed to sympathize and it also doesn't mean that what the corporations do is "right".
I disagree with your definition of ethics but agree that I am no more right than you. Also, since there is no ethical consideration in matters of legality, it is often the case that a transaction may be legal and yet unethical.
Example: A is a company. A tests products of questionable (read highly dangerous) safety on desparate persons in impoverished countries or communities. If A is legally allowed to do this, then it will, espescially if the citizens of empoverished country B have little or no legal recourse (not having money for lawyers or constitutional infrastructure to support their claims).
They would not legally be bound by the tort in the country of their head office, nor would persons in the B country have a course of action.
This obviously, is not a complete proof of concept. It has holes and clear rebuttals, but the essential idea is there that a corporation is capable of acting in a way that could be considered unethical and that they are often encouraged to do so in the interest of profit. If A's directors/officers decide A shouldn't do this but instead fund expensive local trials which put them at risk for liabilities, A's directors will be replaced by A's shareholders or the interests representing them.
As for a person's deterrant for unconscionable acts: while it's true the ultimately the only deterrant is assault on property, there is also a commonly held ideology that acting in your neighbours best interest will someday be in your best interest. Systems of ethos frequently contain some variation of the "due unto others" notion.
Well upon even the most cursory inspection my analogy fails I suppose.
What was meant by it was that corporations like the borg are purpose driven and unreasonable. A corporation answers only to its largest shareholders (excluding dissent, derivative action and oppression, but that doesn't really apply here), it is capable of committing social wrongs as long as it is legally appropriate.
A corporation has incapable of ethics unless ethics are profitable in which case a corporation is capable of the "display" of ethics.
A corporation has the goal of expansion and profit at all costs which ultimately creates bigger and bigger corporations which have a homogenizing effect on businesses and local culture.
My use of the term economic assault means that the only deterrant a corporation understands is outright assault on its money. If you can show it you will harm its money, it will listen.
I guess they're not really like the borg at all. But the single minded purpose of expansion and not having to listen to reason is a facet of borg.
That's Great! I would watch in a heartbeat. Please apply for a producer position at whichever company owns the rights now.
I was reading thinking it practically writes itself, but in a good way!
It would be cool to see the groups attacking the core worlds as being "driven by desparation for the technology" and you could draw parallels to the current state of affairs in the third world.
The trouble is there are borg like entities all around us in the world today. A large corporation is essentially borg-like, it's driven by the single purpose of profit and cannot be reasoned with in any way other than economic assault. I was going to write more about this but one of my neighbours is playing extremely loud music and I have to leave the apt. or I'm going to go mad.
Are you using it on a Mac? I found the copy protected CDs I bought didn't do anything other than show another folder in them when opened in a finder window.
When I ask these kinds of questions people usually roll their eyes and tell me to F# off; sociable types of people....
I don't know that much about processor design or performance trade offs, though I know the generally important terms are RISC CISC, L1/L2/L3 caches, FSB and clock speed.
Can you point me to an online resource that presents another level of detail without drowning me in too many orders of magnitude of detail?
I'm not entirely sure about this because of my lack of experience with networks. I saw there was "no LAN" on it, but I also saw that it supports 10 users...
So, right now, I have a DSL modem, which is connected to my ISP using PPPoE, the DSL is split between my wireless capable computer and my girlfriend's wired computer using a router... Both are apples.
If I got this, which of the following would work: 1) take the ethernet cable from the router out of my computer and put it into this thing, work wirelessly.
2) Sell my router and buy my girlfriend a wireless card for her desktop, use both computer wirelessly.
Thank you in advance to anyone who asnwers sincerely, -S
I am an atheist, in China, I will be normal, in the U.S. I would be considered a freak and ostracised. I am a scientist by training, in the U.S., stem cell research is heavily limited by bible thumping politicians, in China, no such problem.
In China, a white guy speaking chinese is impressive. In the U.S. a white guy speaking anything but english is scary, espescially if he speaks french too!
In China... I could go on for hours but I have class in ten minutes (chinese class at that).
While I'm not sure which regime in china he's talking about, not the present one definitely...
But, during the revolution, post revolution and the redbook days Mao DID mean well. It's obvious from his writings from before he came to any sort of power, and his thoughts are fairly consistent.
Slashdot Mirror
OS X works like this.
You take the disc marked 1 out of the sleeve, it says, "put this in the computer and hold down C"
So you do that, then you change discs every 5 minutes for 20 minutes when it tells you to. Unless, like my gf and her emac, your installation came on a DVD, then you change no discs.
Then it's done and your mac works perfectly. Somewhere along the road, it asks you for your name or something too.
They really are a pleasure to work with from top to bottom and that includes installations (IMHO).
Just so as you know, for the would be biohackers, the immune system is ridiculously complex and any slashdot posting, mine included could never do it justice.5 33642X/ qid=1089304040/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/102-7999783-80057 25
This is *the* book for beginning Immunology, written by Janeway who recently passed away:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/081
We've known about humoral immunity and mutation for a very long time. Nowadays the hotness is considered by many to be in the field of molecular mimicry and toll-like receptors...
Imagine you're a virus, Cell X can blow up your house when his neighbour is in mode 1, however, Cell X's neighbour, Cell Y, has a communication system with cells X, A, B (and so on...) which can be highjacked to change cell Y's mood and make Cell Y change Cell X into mode 2.
Mimic the communication peptides of important pathways, spew those about into the environment, highjack the immune system to make itself weak in fighting you. Eventually, the immune system gets the hang of killing you, but by that time, you're already in 5 more people who will in turn infect 5 more people and so on...
TLRs are pattern recognition proteins that have "learned" over the eons "When you see molecular pattern X, don't listen to anything else anyone says because X is bad news. Go into Kill mode!". The huge thrust of this is that, sometimes Vaccines have low immunogenicity, or the wrong type of immunogenicity, if you can attach some PAMPs (pathogen assosiated molecular pattern) then these PAMP-r (the TLR) will make the cell respond appropriately.
This is all of course, grossly simplified, but none the less appreciably interesting.
Expect to see a lot of this stuff in the future.
That was so very insightful, thank you.
I'm going to try and work it into a paper next semester.
Cheers,
I don't think the iPod does, does anyone know?
I never noticed sound enhancer it makes my music sound ridiculously better on high settings!
Is there anyway to apply at like a filter to my files permanently so it sounds like this on the ipod?
we've got hoes
This reminds me of a great joke.
It essentially boils down to a long rambling boring story with a punchline that isn't funny.
The Joke is that the person hearing it can then make other people suffer and it's always funny to watch people hearing it for the first time if you're in the know.
"Screw you, I want that 5 minutes of my lifeback!"
I agree, Opera for windows is by and large my favourite windows browser. For some reason it completely sucks on the Mac though so now I use safari. cheers, -S
Thanks for the interesting words, I half agree with you, but still vehemently disagree with fundamental human rights violations and unconscionable transactions.
This isn't to say everyone should get a daycare anda health plan, or even work fewer than 18 hours. Or even take away the ability and right to work in a dangerous environment for pay.
But there are some human dignities that shouldn't be stripped.
My GF has taken a good course on this, I'll come back tommorow with some better examples (stripped of company name of course).
Wait until monday!
Then we'll talk.
Apple pulled so many tricks out of its sleeves over the last month, I wouldn't be surprised to see this as one of the "big surprises" along with the new displays and G5 imacs.
: )
I'm not a lawyer but...
As for the people in an unsafe trial:
If they signed a piece of paper stating that they no longer held the right to sue, the corp escapes liability. But, if they are not explicitly notified of this, this clause is in effect worthless and that's a tort of negligence.
Where there is a distinct economical advantage (read, one party is REALLY poor and desparate) and the wealthy party takes advantage of this, it's termed 'unconscionable transaction' and is also not valid under common law.
So, in the west, any company committing these would be flogged in a court day so companies don't do it (anymore)...
But, what they can do is take their operations with liabilities to a place where people can't afford to take them to court. Ever. This decreases liability and increases profits. Or, they got to a place where things like this are legal. Because this (profit) is the shareholders mandate it will be done and called "fiduciary duty". A reasonably prudent director will do everything in the best interest of a corporation he legally is allowed to.
A reputation that's soiled to people who don't matter or people who don't know that you have soiled your reputation isn't a soiled reputation: it's an efficient corporation.
This goes on all around us with many note worthy companies committing all sorts of these things. I am however aware that any statements I make without solid proof could someday be used against me (a lawsuit is expensive even if I had proof) so I'll keep the real world examples to myself.
As for securing suppliers best interests, that's a very 2 dimensional argument.
Ex: A Corp. comes to Country X, creates factory, abuses workers. Are the workers better off without company? probably not, they either have No money (company leaves because of civil unrest), or little money from terrible job.
So, because they Have To work, does that make it right to treat them horribly? Is it ethical to make them work 18 hour shifts while pregnant in unsafe environments? Is it legal? no to the first and yes to the second I'd wager. The kind of countries that allow this usually need the land tax revenue to pay for the tremendous debts we've stuck them with.
Legal but not ethical.
Of course the argument can be made that these people can someday be better off because of their current struggles and accumulations of wealth and I certainly agree. That doesn't mean we're not allowed to sympathize and it also doesn't mean that what the corporations do is "right".
I disagree with your definition of ethics but agree that I am no more right than you. Also, since there is no ethical consideration in matters of legality, it is often the case that a transaction may be legal and yet unethical.
Example:
A is a company. A tests products of questionable (read highly dangerous) safety on desparate persons in impoverished countries or communities. If A is legally allowed to do this, then it will, espescially if the citizens of empoverished country B have little or no legal recourse (not having money for lawyers or constitutional infrastructure to support their claims).
They would not legally be bound by the tort in the country of their head office, nor would persons in the B country have a course of action.
This obviously, is not a complete proof of concept. It has holes and clear rebuttals, but the essential idea is there that a corporation is capable of acting in a way that could be considered unethical and that they are often encouraged to do so in the interest of profit. If A's directors/officers decide A shouldn't do this but instead fund expensive local trials which put them at risk for liabilities, A's directors will be replaced by A's shareholders or the interests representing them.
As for a person's deterrant for unconscionable acts: while it's true the ultimately the only deterrant is assault on property, there is also a commonly held ideology that acting in your neighbours best interest will someday be in your best interest. Systems of ethos frequently contain some variation of the "due unto others" notion.
Well upon even the most cursory inspection my analogy fails I suppose.
What was meant by it was that corporations like the borg are purpose driven and unreasonable.
A corporation answers only to its largest shareholders (excluding dissent, derivative action and oppression, but that doesn't really apply here), it is capable of committing social wrongs as long as it is legally appropriate.
A corporation has incapable of ethics unless ethics are profitable in which case a corporation is capable of the "display" of ethics.
A corporation has the goal of expansion and profit at all costs which ultimately creates bigger and bigger corporations which have a homogenizing effect on businesses and local culture.
My use of the term economic assault means that the only deterrant a corporation understands is outright assault on its money. If you can show it you will harm its money, it will listen.
I guess they're not really like the borg at all. But the single minded purpose of expansion and not having to listen to reason is a facet of borg.
That's Great! I would watch in a heartbeat. Please apply for a producer position at whichever company owns the rights now.
I was reading thinking it practically writes itself, but in a good way!
It would be cool to see the groups attacking the core worlds as being "driven by desparation for the technology" and you could draw parallels to the current state of affairs in the third world.
I agree completely.
The trouble is there are borg like entities all around us in the world today. A large corporation is essentially borg-like, it's driven by the single purpose of profit and cannot be reasoned with in any way other than economic assault. I was going to write more about this but one of my neighbours is playing extremely loud music and I have to leave the apt. or I'm going to go mad.
-S
Are you using it on a Mac? I found the copy protected CDs I bought didn't do anything other than show another folder in them when opened in a finder window.
It's what cavemen used before iPods were invented, I think it's made of dinosaur parts or something.
When I ask these kinds of questions people usually roll their eyes and tell me to F# off; sociable types of people....
I don't know that much about processor design or performance trade offs, though I know the generally important terms are RISC CISC, L1/L2/L3 caches, FSB and clock speed.
Can you point me to an online resource that presents another level of detail without drowning me in too many orders of magnitude of detail?
Thanks,
-S
Ughh.... Yes, mother...
I'm not entirely sure about this because of my lack of experience with networks. I saw there was "no LAN" on it, but I also saw that it supports 10 users...
So, right now, I have a DSL modem, which is connected to my ISP using PPPoE, the DSL is split between my wireless capable computer and my girlfriend's wired computer using a router... Both are apples.
If I got this, which of the following would work:
1) take the ethernet cable from the router out of my computer and put it into this thing, work wirelessly.
2) Sell my router and buy my girlfriend a wireless card for her desktop, use both computer wirelessly.
Thank you in advance to anyone who asnwers sincerely,
-S
oh Zing!
While I can accept that a lot of people might care about Ogg, it doesn't make a difference to me, my files are all AAC or MP3s.
Either way, this news isn't going to make me huck the ipod in favour of one of the uglier players, whatever they're called.
I keep finding that I already know what I have to say; which is awkward to say the least.
I don't go to many concerts but, the band 'Live' is the only band I've ever heard who sounded better live.
I remember thinking, oh wow, that's actually his voice, did he just say fuck? hey, I had no idea that musicians could sing, cool!
I am an atheist, in China, I will be normal, in the U.S. I would be considered a freak and ostracised. I am a scientist by training, in the U.S., stem cell research is heavily limited by bible thumping politicians, in China, no such problem.
In China, a white guy speaking chinese is impressive. In the U.S. a white guy speaking anything but english is scary, espescially if he speaks french too!
In China... I could go on for hours but I have class in ten minutes (chinese class at that).
While I'm not sure which regime in china he's talking about, not the present one definitely...
But, during the revolution, post revolution and the redbook days Mao DID mean well. It's obvious from his writings from before he came to any sort of power, and his thoughts are fairly consistent.