if evolution can/does affect every mechanism in a living organism, then the mechanism governing the ability to evolve must itself be included.
yes.
these researchers created a *false distinction* in their research question
They took what you call 'the mechanism governing the ability to evolve' and found a behavior in nature that they could drive a false dichotomy wedge into to create a *factor* where none exists. Here is where they invent the distinction out of *thin air* based on their personal opinion:
'Greater diversity among the cassettes in itself shouldn't be a selective advantage considering they aren't expressed and don't do anything else,' says lead author Dustin Brisson.
highlighted portion is **pure speculation** and forms the leverage for their whole experiment...if that ***opinion*** by the research is wrong the whole thing sinks...and it is just that one dude's opinion...which is not how a scientific research question is formed
bottom line: the process they describe, the bacteria being selected b/c some are more likely to survive is absolutely 100% main line accepted theory...their work does not in any way represent a new or different behavior in life
disclaimer: I am not a creation science supporter...i hate it...but I also hate equally the notion that **science can prove God does or does not exist**...looking at bacteria to somehow 'prove' evolution makes 'god' a delusion is itself a delusion.
science cannot prove **OR** disprove something abstract like a supernatural 'god'
I agree that those things Sony did are 100% bullshit. Me personally, I was most disappointed by their insistence upon using a proprietary memory stick that only worked on Sony devices.
fine...
but/. threads are going to be intolerable if we don't talk about **the alternative** while we bash Sony's dumb design choices...
**MICROSOFT ALSO SUCKS ASS**
if any random/.'er wants to vent about how 'Sony still sucks' I say fine, but let's not pretend we're having a productive discussion about which Next Gen system is better or will be more successful, or which one gamers should buy...
the core of an operating system should include a full GUI, video and mp3 playback, audio, USB, network, etc. for the least possible battery use
thank you...
i imagine some of the commeters above freaking out when they read that statement...I admit I learn alot from reading the 'assembly sucks C is better' but the context of the discussion is *exactly* the kind of purely theoretical, ignore the user abstract computing model that causes our industry so much trouble. Its the tendency for programmers to ignore the *user* in the equation completely b/c humans have too much complexity and uncertainty (for the nerd mind)
it the core problem of our industry, IMHO
let me repeat...I *love* the/.'ers who obviously know what they are talking about who, on comments for stories like this, debate the most abstract minutiae of coding for *efficientcy*
but it becomes a Moebius Downward Spiral of rhetoric at some point...i say have the discussions, but always remember that the human part of the equation is **the only reason the computer exists** up above there's actually a comment above where the guy talks about how 'true computing' doesn't even have a user! WTF
think about what MenuetOS will allow the **user** to do....and on what machine....
this OS concept, the concept that an OS Kernal should be built from the ground up for ***how the user will use it*** is the way to the future for our industry.
Electric vehicles in general are insanely expensive. I was watching Top gear (the crappy American version) and the had "Entry Level" electric vehicles on there.
Oh you saw a TV show once about electric cars?
**farts**
Seriously don't expect to arrive to any conclusions looking at this situation in that manner...
Electric car technology was purposefully pushed aside and kept on the shelf.
Question: Why do critics of big biz always just take for granted what the Corp. says the product in question costs? Be it gasoline or electric cars or w/e...
I don't trust the valuation that a typical US publicly held Corp puts on their products. It's **not** based on simple supply/demand, but all their unnecessary "market research" abstractions. Plus don't get me started on the 'marketing' budget for products.
Every time you see a commercial or social media bit, remember that the company advertising made the choice to make their product **more expensive** so that you could see that ad.
Let's start by getting proper pay for and hiring more teachers.
These fabricator things can be a great learning tool **For a quaified teacher to use**....it's not really on the radar for most schools right now.
Most schools are busy figuring out which teachers to lay off b/c of unnecessary budget cuts.
To the point above about "makerbots"
It is definitely hype. It's embarassing b/c essentially its the same thing as that plastic mold machine at tourist attractions that can make you a plastic souvenier of the Washington Monument.
Fabricator technology has improved greatly, but only in the commercial/industrial usage areas.
It **will** eventually reach the consumer level but now it is far,, far from it.
Changing the way you think is probably one of the hardest things to do.
see, this is true...I'm not sure where we disagree...
the advice given was 'read book x' and i responded that such blanket, impersonal advice is useless unless the person just blindly trusts the advice giver...
I mentioned how that dialectic is harmful for our industry
nowhere, ever, did I say anything that would lead you to conclude this:
It sounds to me like you're asking for a magic method or algorithm to put in place here.
no, I'm saying the exact opposite!
i'm saying that just throwing books at people b/c they helped **YOU** in your mind 'change the way you think' is just like the 'algorythm' you speak of above...
just throwing advice books at people w/o context is subtly selfish and insulting
I'm not attempting to contradict anyone but there is something to be learned here about the whole dialectic of the young techie seeking advice & what is considered a 'helpful' response...
Look, Capt.DrumkenBum, I can't prove or disprove your statements about how good this book is...I will agree that it is true in the sense that **you** see these things in this book.
You admit as much...
To each their own.
That's fair...not criticizing...my point is that, in *most* situations like this, the 'advice seeking dialectic' people in your position do not usually have the honesty to admit that **their way** is the right way
It's just a damn book.
When people treat these texts as cure-alls for complex questions, and I especiially hate this, when they respond to a question by just saying "Read. This. Book. 'xxxxx'" it really is beyond patronizing and encourages a cycle of ignorance
**why is the book so relevant**
If it is so awesome, even a person with lower level language skills should be able to articulate **why** in general it is so beneficial.
My point is, seeking advice is very difficult because so often, esp in techie land, the people who have the knowledge want you to come by it through the same arduous method that they did, in order to validate themselves
"How to Win Friends and Influence People" is a standard-issue pop Psychology book. Comparatively, it is old and out of date. Daniel Goleman's "Working With Emotional Intelligence" would be much more informative and relevant..
However, i'm not disagreeing...b/c Capt.DrumkenBum is giving a very personal opinion...it's about a personal identity narrative and that has to be considered in **all** dialectics like this in all situations or bad ideas will perpetuate
To the question: I advise anyone to go to a big bookstore w/ coffee shop inside on a rainy day, go to the section with books on this topic, grab 5-6 and a cup of coffee and thumb through all of them
I've been told my communication skills need some work.
now who said this? what was the context?
these questions are, IMHO, integral to giving you good advice!
other comments here are very helpful, but more for the general info and narrative than advice that will actually help you **make a decision in this situation** directly...I think you should absorb all the info, but you (and all techies) need to **consider the source** of this criticism
important quesitons:
> were they male or female? a co-worker or superior? what was the context...was it in an official capacity (like performance review), at the water cooler after a meeting, or after 2-3 beers on a conference? does this person have a good/bad reputation? is your office full of self-centered assholes?
> very important: has anyone else said this to you in a professional context recently or is this **just one person**?
honestly, you probably need to learn a thing or two and reading the good comments here can help, but w/o more information I can't tell if the problem is with **YOU** or **WITH THE PERSON WHO TOLD YOU THIS**
give yourself the benefit of the doubt **if** you are genuinely open to criticism;)
Local customs and laws, charters, and regulations are ignored or flouted without so much as a "Sorry," and the great armies of renta-cops rule the roost.
I love how your first statement established your credentials...then you drop the turd quoted above on us unsuspecting readers...
You're giving Russia a free pass...they could change this rule (and pretty much any rule) easily...
Russia sends punk rock activists to Siberia for 5 years, steals NFL team owner Super Bowl rings, bribes anyone in the world they need to, traffics heroin from Afghanistan (w/ our help sometimes)...**allows gays to be beat openly in the street**...drives tanks over luxury cars parked illegally in St. Petersberg...and forces all drivers to have a front camera that records awesome videos
Russia is fucking badass
They are second only to the US in 'do w/e the fuck we want'-ness!!!
Russia could end this law in a second if they wanted...you are totally giving Russian government a free pass here and I smell a shill/rat/troll!
That's how we work, it would just move from basic survival stuff to luxury goods. And that would be good.
you seem to subscribe to an adapted version of the 'Brave New World' idea of how the future might look...
i like that idea...i really think we could move to where our tech advancements have rightfully placed us without harming anyone & minimally offending people
I agree that "that's how we work" but just b/c that's true doesn't mean we'd "move from basic survival stuff to luxury goods"...
I mean, I think your right on that point, but in my mind if scarcity became balanced out we could progress to **new problems** and **new challenges** that we don't even see completely yet
What i'm saying is, Jules Vern could probably imagine humans sending an automaton to other worlds to explore...however, could Homer imagine the same?
Homer had no concept of other planets in the solar system...nor did they ancient mythmakers know anything about the internet...
Yet their works are equally valid and inspiring to certain people just as Jules Vern was for me...
The point is, the fun part is all about what we don't know...we should always be pushing to the edge of our capabilities b/c IMHO its the only way we'll keep from killing each other haha!
I understand what you're saying and i'm starting to become more sure about an idea that's been around for awhile...
I think the economic concept of ***scarcity*** itself is being rendered statistically irrelevant because of technology
technology is solving so many of our problems that we really don't **need** to work as much as we used to...
at least theoretically...right? or WTF else do we bother making and using these flaming gadgets?
look at food production...technology can become so efficient that it can always keep pace with demand...what then? wouldn't it be a crime **NOT** to give food freely?
we have the technology as humans to feed and clothe every living human in perpetuity now...strip away the B.S. and it is true
people talk of things like "divide and conquer" and "artificial scarcity" or "making a market" all the time, but I think we all need to reconsider **how much we are being held back as a species**
it has gotten really, really bad, IMHO...
**WHAT IF WE DON'T NEED TO WORK AS HARD ANYMORE???**
would your boss tell you that? what about the company that profits from the scarcity a particular technology solves?
technology has worked...it is solving most of our immediate problems...scarcity for the most basic essentials of human existence is no longer a evolutionary factor in modern countries to survival for most...the food is there...
as the trope goes, the problem is "human error" in this system...
They didn't just give up though, they attempted to kill/. by flooding the first few pages of comments with back and fourth idiot twitter like chatter but when whole threads started getting killed, it disrupted that tactic.
you summarize the history of paid commenters on/. recently really well...especially threading the needle and explaining the above section...
that's high level stuff and yes I agree I saw it used...unfortunately I still see it happening to this day
we're getting wiser to it for sure, your comment proves just that...
and ppl wonder why......I use the punctuation and sentence breaks that i use_method to my madness;)
Slashdot Mirror
I made a ****disclaimer**** to head off common trolling subjects...
seems like I need to adapt my anti-troll comment strategy a bit considering your comment
yes.
these researchers created a *false distinction* in their research question
They took what you call 'the mechanism governing the ability to evolve' and found a behavior in nature that they could drive a false dichotomy wedge into to create a *factor* where none exists. Here is where they invent the distinction out of *thin air* based on their personal opinion:
highlighted portion is **pure speculation** and forms the leverage for their whole experiment...if that ***opinion*** by the research is wrong the whole thing sinks...and it is just that one dude's opinion...which is not how a scientific research question is formed
bottom line: the process they describe, the bacteria being selected b/c some are more likely to survive is absolutely 100% main line accepted theory...their work does not in any way represent a new or different behavior in life
disclaimer: I am not a creation science supporter...i hate it...but I also hate equally the notion that **science can prove God does or does not exist**...looking at bacteria to somehow 'prove' evolution makes 'god' a delusion is itself a delusion.
science cannot prove **OR** disprove something abstract like a supernatural 'god'
wrong
'government' is humans organizing for economic advantage
****any system**** can be abused....
government, corporation, family, USMC platoon, classroom...they are all human systems
what makes one system better than the other is having better feedback channels...aka ****accountability****
I agree that those things Sony did are 100% bullshit. Me personally, I was most disappointed by their insistence upon using a proprietary memory stick that only worked on Sony devices.
fine...
but /. threads are going to be intolerable if we don't talk about **the alternative** while we bash Sony's dumb design choices...
**MICROSOFT ALSO SUCKS ASS**
if any random /.'er wants to vent about how 'Sony still sucks' I say fine, but let's not pretend we're having a productive discussion about which Next Gen system is better or will be more successful, or which one gamers should buy...
FTFY...
or not...you see, both competing systems are made by large companies who **screw the consumer over** as a matter of bussiness development.
Microsoft & Sony both bottleneck features to squeeze profit from basic computing functions.
But that doesn't mean one isn't better for you...
thank you...
i imagine some of the commeters above freaking out when they read that statement...I admit I learn alot from reading the 'assembly sucks C is better' but the context of the discussion is *exactly* the kind of purely theoretical, ignore the user abstract computing model that causes our industry so much trouble. Its the tendency for programmers to ignore the *user* in the equation completely b/c humans have too much complexity and uncertainty (for the nerd mind)
it the core problem of our industry, IMHO
let me repeat...I *love* the /.'ers who obviously know what they are talking about who, on comments for stories like this, debate the most abstract minutiae of coding for *efficientcy*
but it becomes a Moebius Downward Spiral of rhetoric at some point...i say have the discussions, but always remember that the human part of the equation is **the only reason the computer exists** up above there's actually a comment above where the guy talks about how 'true computing' doesn't even have a user! WTF
think about what MenuetOS will allow the **user** to do....and on what machine....
this OS concept, the concept that an OS Kernal should be built from the ground up for ***how the user will use it*** is the way to the future for our industry.
yes. it is obvious.
Oh you saw a TV show once about electric cars?
**farts**
Seriously don't expect to arrive to any conclusions looking at this situation in that manner...
Electric car technology was purposefully pushed aside and kept on the shelf.
Question: Why do critics of big biz always just take for granted what the Corp. says the product in question costs? Be it gasoline or electric cars or w/e...
I don't trust the valuation that a typical US publicly held Corp puts on their products. It's **not** based on simple supply/demand, but all their unnecessary "market research" abstractions. Plus don't get me started on the 'marketing' budget for products.
Every time you see a commercial or social media bit, remember that the company advertising made the choice to make their product **more expensive** so that you could see that ad.
These electric vehicles were destroyed to **guarantee revenue streams** which have been in place for centuries.
It was the global aristocracy that 'killed the electric car'
I don't know where the hell you are from, but here, in **America** its the FREE MARKET
If teachers were paid their true free market value, educators would be on the same level as doctors and lawyers.
anything
FTFY
Repubs will scream about *anything* end of story.
You are dead wrong about "Hollywood's" opposition to this bill. It is the copyright organizations, not filmmakers who lobby against this.
This is a good bill. Just accept it. Just b/c its not perfect doesn't mean it should go forward.
Democrats *will* vote for it. Enough GOP'ers might let it pass the House.
That's my challenge. Watch this bill. Watch ***ANY BILL*** and it is always GOP obstructionists.
Overall, this is a step in the right direction.
Let's start by getting proper pay for and hiring more teachers.
These fabricator things can be a great learning tool **For a quaified teacher to use**....it's not really on the radar for most schools right now.
Most schools are busy figuring out which teachers to lay off b/c of unnecessary budget cuts.
To the point above about "makerbots"
It is definitely hype. It's embarassing b/c essentially its the same thing as that plastic mold machine at tourist attractions that can make you a plastic souvenier of the Washington Monument.
Fabricator technology has improved greatly, but only in the commercial/industrial usage areas.
It **will** eventually reach the consumer level but now it is far,, far from it.
I **hate** tech hype! Wastes BILLIONS.
see, this is true...I'm not sure where we disagree...
the advice given was 'read book x' and i responded that such blanket, impersonal advice is useless unless the person just blindly trusts the advice giver...
I mentioned how that dialectic is harmful for our industry
nowhere, ever, did I say anything that would lead you to conclude this:
no, I'm saying the exact opposite!
i'm saying that just throwing books at people b/c they helped **YOU** in your mind 'change the way you think' is just like the 'algorythm' you speak of above...
just throwing advice books at people w/o context is subtly selfish and insulting
are you referring?
I'm not attempting to contradict anyone but there is something to be learned here about the whole dialectic of the young techie seeking advice & what is considered a 'helpful' response...
Look, Capt.DrumkenBum, I can't prove or disprove your statements about how good this book is...I will agree that it is true in the sense that **you** see these things in this book.
You admit as much...
That's fair...not criticizing...my point is that, in *most* situations like this, the 'advice seeking dialectic' people in your position do not usually have the honesty to admit that **their way** is the right way
It's just a damn book.
When people treat these texts as cure-alls for complex questions, and I especiially hate this, when they respond to a question by just saying "Read. This. Book. 'xxxxx'" it really is beyond patronizing and encourages a cycle of ignorance
**why is the book so relevant**
If it is so awesome, even a person with lower level language skills should be able to articulate **why** in general it is so beneficial.
My point is, seeking advice is very difficult because so often, esp in techie land, the people who have the knowledge want you to come by it through the same arduous method that they did, in order to validate themselves
"How to Win Friends and Influence People" is a standard-issue pop Psychology book. Comparatively, it is old and out of date. Daniel Goleman's "Working With Emotional Intelligence" would be much more informative and relevant..
However, i'm not disagreeing...b/c Capt.DrumkenBum is giving a very personal opinion...it's about a personal identity narrative and that has to be considered in **all** dialectics like this in all situations or bad ideas will perpetuate
To the question: I advise anyone to go to a big bookstore w/ coffee shop inside on a rainy day, go to the section with books on this topic, grab 5-6 and a cup of coffee and thumb through all of them
now who said this? what was the context?
these questions are, IMHO, integral to giving you good advice!
other comments here are very helpful, but more for the general info and narrative than advice that will actually help you **make a decision in this situation** directly...I think you should absorb all the info, but you (and all techies) need to **consider the source** of this criticism
important quesitons:
> were they male or female? a co-worker or superior? what was the context...was it in an official capacity (like performance review), at the water cooler after a meeting, or after 2-3 beers on a conference? does this person have a good/bad reputation? is your office full of self-centered assholes?
> very important: has anyone else said this to you in a professional context recently or is this **just one person**?
honestly, you probably need to learn a thing or two and reading the good comments here can help, but w/o more information I can't tell if the problem is with **YOU** or **WITH THE PERSON WHO TOLD YOU THIS**
give yourself the benefit of the doubt **if** you are genuinely open to criticism ;)
I love how your first statement established your credentials...then you drop the turd quoted above on us unsuspecting readers...
You're giving Russia a free pass...they could change this rule (and pretty much any rule) easily...
Russia sends punk rock activists to Siberia for 5 years, steals NFL team owner Super Bowl rings, bribes anyone in the world they need to, traffics heroin from Afghanistan (w/ our help sometimes)...**allows gays to be beat openly in the street**...drives tanks over luxury cars parked illegally in St. Petersberg...and forces all drivers to have a front camera that records awesome videos
Russia is fucking badass
They are second only to the US in 'do w/e the fuck we want'-ness!!!
Russia could end this law in a second if they wanted...you are totally giving Russian government a free pass here and I smell a shill/rat/troll!
you seem to subscribe to an adapted version of the 'Brave New World' idea of how the future might look...
i like that idea...i really think we could move to where our tech advancements have rightfully placed us without harming anyone & minimally offending people
I agree that "that's how we work" but just b/c that's true doesn't mean we'd "move from basic survival stuff to luxury goods"...
I mean, I think your right on that point, but in my mind if scarcity became balanced out we could progress to **new problems** and **new challenges** that we don't even see completely yet
What i'm saying is, Jules Vern could probably imagine humans sending an automaton to other worlds to explore...however, could Homer imagine the same?
Homer had no concept of other planets in the solar system...nor did they ancient mythmakers know anything about the internet...
Yet their works are equally valid and inspiring to certain people just as Jules Vern was for me...
The point is, the fun part is all about what we don't know...we should always be pushing to the edge of our capabilities b/c IMHO its the only way we'll keep from killing each other haha!
n/t
right?
I understand what you're saying and i'm starting to become more sure about an idea that's been around for awhile...
I think the economic concept of ***scarcity*** itself is being rendered statistically irrelevant because of technology
technology is solving so many of our problems that we really don't **need** to work as much as we used to...
at least theoretically...right? or WTF else do we bother making and using these flaming gadgets?
look at food production...technology can become so efficient that it can always keep pace with demand...what then? wouldn't it be a crime **NOT** to give food freely?
we have the technology as humans to feed and clothe every living human in perpetuity now...strip away the B.S. and it is true
people talk of things like "divide and conquer" and "artificial scarcity" or "making a market" all the time, but I think we all need to reconsider **how much we are being held back as a species**
it has gotten really, really bad, IMHO...
**WHAT IF WE DON'T NEED TO WORK AS HARD ANYMORE???**
would your boss tell you that? what about the company that profits from the scarcity a particular technology solves?
technology has worked...it is solving most of our immediate problems...scarcity for the most basic essentials of human existence is no longer a evolutionary factor in modern countries to survival for most...the food is there...
as the trope goes, the problem is "human error" in this system...
profiting off of human misery is unsustainable...at some point with mathematical certainty you will have to put business profit over human suffering
capitalism is not an excuse to abuse & profit from human misery
capitalism is a macroeconomic contextualization of resource management...it is a concept that transcends an individual economic system or governemnt
everything about your comment is wrong
you summarize the history of paid commenters on /. recently really well...especially threading the needle and explaining the above section...
that's high level stuff and yes I agree I saw it used...unfortunately I still see it happening to this day
we're getting wiser to it for sure, your comment proves just that...
and ppl wonder why......I use the punctuation and sentence breaks that i use_method to my madness ;)
no.
**you** said "below market"
here's what I said, copied from my comment above:
your argument is pure trolling...you are using rhetorical trickery and this conversation is no longer value-added for anyone
my statements were sloppy, but they held up to scrutiny...the US has favorable trading status with Saudi Arabia and you've only helped show that
I'm not going to comment further on this thread
yes. exactly.
check out Aamaco...wholly owned subsidiary of Saudi Aramco ;)
then check out who Bush Sr. was partying with on 9/11 :P