So, the real important question is whether or when will I be able to run version 4 on my favorite Amiga emulator? (Other than the even more obvious, what's the point?)
I should have mentioned that there is supposed to be a clinical trial starting in Florida based on cord blood. This also reflects the current successes in stem cell research.
Yeah, embryonic stem cells research may pay out some day, but most certainly not yet.
Maybe you should actually read science instead of press releases from the pro-embryonic stell cell lobby. They keep saying there is much promise, but the actual effective treatments have been based on adult stem cells. This may not always be the case, but it certainly is today
The only proven effective Type-1 diabetes cure, in mice was based on adult-stems cells -- just like what several other posters have been saying. This article refers to lab results where they reversed Type in mice, using ADULT not EMBRYONIC stems cells. This is not Christian pro-life lobby rantings.
You are right in saying it is not a Type I cure for humans (yet), but it is certainly promising.
BTW, No Type II cures based on stem cells have published to my knowledge.
In many ways, I could care less about adult vs. embryonic cell research in the U.S. (there are other countries you know). But as a U.S. Taxpayer, I would prefer not to have my tax dollars wasted on research that has to date proved useless when there is similar alternative that has been proved quite fruitful to date. Gov. Arnie bought the b.s. re: embryonic stem cells -- I would bet that California taxpayers see nothing useful coming out of it when the money is all spent.
Its only cheap in US compared to sugar because on price supports on sugar. In other countries, its not cheap -- HFCS requires lots of chemical processing unlike more natural sources of sugar.
HFCS is used in other countries too, but in much smaller proportions because it does not have the artifical price advantange.
Absolutely. Farts are filled with hydrogen coming from intestinal flora (often more than methane in fact). But, nothing at all wrong with getting a mix of Hydrogen and CH4 coming from your friendly bacteria either.
Its not really efficiency (grams H2/Joule sunlight) that anyone cares about. Its grams H2/dollar to produce that is important. Bacteria will actually work for food -- unlike the people that carry those signs.
Mass should be small since mass/volume hase cubing scaling. I expect MIT is not too concerned about it since they did not mention it.
I used to work at Cummins research center -- watch a turbocharger burst test if you get the chance, basically dump in as much fuel/air as it takes to get the flywheel to fly apart. Test is: is the casing is strong enough to contain all the flying pieces.
I just loaded gvim 7.0, issued the command:set wrap and went into insert mode.
Soft-wrapping worked just as you described. Line and column numbers are continuously displayed. Is hitting one keystroke to go into insert mode (since that is want you want) so terribly painful to learn? Surely, the number of keystrokes required using gvim is less than most editors.
If you like:set wrap to always be on, set the feature on in your startup script.:set ruler gives you constant display of row/column, again startup script. Drop down menus, off course. Though not all features available via menus.
All powerful editors have a learning curve. Emacs, Microsoft Word, Photoshop/GIMP. Using standard keystrokes such as "windows keys" for Word only scratch the surface of what you can do. Most features of Word are available (esp. if you ignore the macro/programming features). But the menus are complex to navigate and allow simple automation of repetive tasks. Using Word without understanding the paragraph templates means you are working too hard.
With power comes responsibilty. You need to invest time to learn how to use gvim, but it pays dividends. It's modal nature makes it unique (thus hard to use without any training). GVIM usage many of the common Windows idioms (on Windows) so it easier to get started than VI. Give it a fair try and you might discover you like it after all.
Got news for you. Living (as well as fossil) snakes still have legs (or at least the stubs). In some cases, there are tiny legs that are visible (not just skeletal stubs). This is entirely consistent with mainline evolutionary thought (the legs are thought to be vestigial)
A good size snake might have an external leg stub about the size of a grain of rice.
Delphi supports nested functions having access to variables in the outer function just like the original Pascal.
Delphi supports both the hokey I/O of Pascal as well abritrary handle based binary I/O
I was usually considered a C++ guru (not that I really consider myself to be one), and I find very little missing from Delphi that is in C++. It does not handle multiple inheritance (which I miss occasionally) or generics (which I miss frequently) and macros (kind of love/hate -- great at times, but occasionally abused). Most of the other stuff in C++ not in Delphi is not a big deal (rarely used or only minor convenience).
The latest.net Delphi does handle generics though.
The lack of cross-platform support makes Delphi a poor choice in many cases as well. Kylix was not quite there, and then Borland abandoned it. If you want to knock off a Windows only program, it is still the best tool on the market IMHO.
Visual Basic is attractive, but the deeper you deep, the more flawed you realize it is.
I guess I must have missed the press conference where the President admitted he has been breaking the law too. Seems to me he says that it is legal everytime.
My software business would not go bankrupt, it would simply go offshore where such law would not apply. There is precedent for such too -- you don't think all offshoring is because of cheaper labor do you? Sometimes the other guy's costs are lower because of fewer regulations, etc. too. Compare with outsourcing major medical surgery to other countries
The current crop of Republicans are doing exactly what you said, "Borrow and Spend". But when have the Democrats proven in recent history that they can balance the budget?
If the balanced budgets under Clinton are your evidence, you must have forgetten that congress controls the purse and Reublicans were in change of Congress.
What Republicans forgot was how much fun it was to be in charge (having been out of power in Congress for a long time). It did not take them very long to learn to spend money like drunken sailors though.
Neither party seems to care one bit about actual fiscal responsibility. The two party have their differences, but they seem on their love of pork.
Sadly I don't have a solution to the one-party / two-names system.
Note that these are all recent references, having nothing to do with Sutterfield's analysis that is sometimes used by creationists.
The data is not conclusive, but it is unwise to be too attached to scientific theories that happen to be considered "proven". Not enough evidence yet to consider C=Constant false perhaps, but several scientists are concluding this as most likely based on several different kinds of observations.
Even something apparently simple as graviton exchange can result in experimental observation that the orbit of planets around the sun would decay if gravitons are limited to C. From experimental observations of the planets and the lack of decay. Here is an article that suggest gravitons must be at least 2E10 times C. This is the reason that gravity is typically described as a warping of space, though graviton particle exchange makes more sense in other contexts.
BTW, from what I have been able to see, none of the modern science for C!=constant helps the creationists.
William Paley, Divine Watchmaker argument. Natural Theology: or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity, Collected from the Appearances of Nature, first published in 1802
Triple point of water is 273.16K, water is unusual in that the liquid form is denser than the solid, so the triple point (gas / liquid / solid in equilibrium) is the highest temperature for the solid form.
See here for a simple explanation with phase diagram
Gates/MS have never changed their position on software patents. They are bad for others to own. Anything that keeps MS from owning the world is a (i>bad thing. Gates/MS are not unique in this viewpoint, just more successful than most that share it.
Labels such as communist and cancerous are just ways to emphasize badness. No different than Republicans call Democrats communists or Democrats calling Republicans fascists. Few believe these labels, its just a way to emphasize that the opposition is considered bad.
Bill is almost right though, software patents are bad. If I ran a major software company I would get defensive patents too.
The real fear re: MS patent portfolio is how MS might use them against open source competition. Of course, this would be bad. Given the history of MS, there is good reason to fear this.
Slashdot Mirror
So, the real important question is whether or when will I be able to run version 4 on my favorite Amiga emulator? (Other than the even more obvious, what's the point?)
Sorry, screwed up.
I should have mentioned that there is supposed to be a clinical trial starting in Florida based on cord blood. This also reflects the current successes in stem cell research.
Yeah, embryonic stem cells research may pay out some day, but most certainly not yet.
Maybe you should actually read science instead of press releases from the pro-embryonic stell cell lobby. They keep saying there is much promise, but the actual effective treatments have been based on adult stem cells. This may not always be the case, but it certainly is today
The only proven effective Type-1 diabetes cure, in mice was based on adult-stems cells -- just like what several other posters have been saying. This article refers to lab results where they reversed Type in mice, using ADULT not EMBRYONIC stems cells. This is not Christian pro-life lobby rantings.
You are right in saying it is not a Type I cure for humans (yet), but it is certainly promising.
BTW, No Type II cures based on stem cells have published to my knowledge.
In many ways, I could care less about adult vs. embryonic cell research in the U.S. (there are other countries you know). But as a U.S. Taxpayer, I would prefer not to have my tax dollars wasted on research that has to date proved useless when there is similar alternative that has been proved quite fruitful to date. Gov. Arnie bought the b.s. re: embryonic stem cells -- I would bet that California taxpayers see nothing useful coming out of it when the money is all spent.
Its only cheap in US compared to sugar because on price supports on sugar. In other countries, its not cheap -- HFCS requires lots of chemical processing unlike more natural sources of sugar.
HFCS is used in other countries too, but in much smaller proportions because it does not have the artifical price advantange.
Absolutely. Farts are filled with hydrogen coming from intestinal flora (often more than methane in fact). But, nothing at all wrong with getting a mix of Hydrogen and CH4 coming from your friendly bacteria either.
Its not really efficiency (grams H2/Joule sunlight) that anyone cares about. Its grams H2/dollar to produce that is important. Bacteria will actually work for food -- unlike the people that carry those signs.
ref: Hanlon's Razor
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
Finally, "News I Can Use"
Hate to reply to myself as a general rule, but I thought a little searching would pay off.
Here is a movie from Rolls Royce, not exactly the same, but it's nice.
Of course, its the basis for which I pick my side.
Try 20,000 revs / sec
E = 1/2 mV^2
Mass should be small since mass/volume hase cubing scaling. I expect MIT is not too concerned about it since they did not mention it.
I used to work at Cummins research center -- watch a turbocharger burst test if you get the chance, basically dump in as much fuel/air as it takes to get the flywheel to fly apart. Test is: is the casing is strong enough to contain all the flying pieces.
I just loaded gvim 7.0, issued the command :set wrap and went into insert mode.
:set wrap to always be on, set the feature on in your startup script. :set ruler gives you constant display of row/column, again startup script. Drop down menus, off course. Though not all features available via menus.
Soft-wrapping worked just as you described. Line and column numbers are continuously displayed. Is hitting one keystroke to go into insert mode (since that is want you want) so terribly painful to learn? Surely, the number of keystrokes required using gvim is less than most editors.
If you like
All powerful editors have a learning curve. Emacs, Microsoft Word, Photoshop/GIMP. Using standard keystrokes such as "windows keys" for Word only scratch the surface of what you can do. Most features of Word are available (esp. if you ignore the macro/programming features). But the menus are complex to navigate and allow simple automation of repetive tasks. Using Word without understanding the paragraph templates means you are working too hard.
With power comes responsibilty. You need to invest time to learn how to use gvim, but it pays dividends. It's modal nature makes it unique (thus hard to use without any training). GVIM usage many of the common Windows idioms (on Windows) so it easier to get started than VI. Give it a fair try and you might discover you like it after all.
Got news for you. Living (as well as fossil) snakes still have legs (or at least the stubs). In some cases, there are tiny legs that are visible (not just skeletal stubs). This is entirely consistent with mainline evolutionary thought (the legs are thought to be vestigial)
A good size snake might have an external leg stub about the size of a grain of rice.
Delphi supports nested functions having access to variables in the outer function just like the original Pascal.
.net Delphi does handle generics though.
Delphi supports both the hokey I/O of Pascal as well abritrary handle based binary I/O
I was usually considered a C++ guru (not that I really consider myself to be one), and I find very little missing from Delphi that is in C++. It does not handle multiple inheritance (which I miss occasionally) or generics (which I miss frequently) and macros (kind of love/hate -- great at times, but occasionally abused). Most of the other stuff in C++ not in Delphi is not a big deal (rarely used or only minor convenience).
The latest
The lack of cross-platform support makes Delphi a poor choice in many cases as well. Kylix was not quite there, and then Borland abandoned it. If you want to knock off a Windows only program, it is still the best tool on the market IMHO.
Visual Basic is attractive, but the deeper you deep, the more flawed you realize it is.
I guess I must have missed the press conference where the President admitted he has been breaking the law too. Seems to me he says that it is legal everytime.
Ever hear of the "law of unintended consequences"
My software business would not go bankrupt, it would simply go offshore where such law would not apply. There is precedent for such too -- you don't think all offshoring is because of cheaper labor do you? Sometimes the other guy's costs are lower because of fewer regulations, etc. too. Compare with outsourcing major medical surgery to other countries
Hmm, maybe I need to start using Star Office after all.
The current crop of Republicans are doing exactly what you said, "Borrow and Spend". But when have the Democrats proven in recent history that they can balance the budget?
If the balanced budgets under Clinton are your evidence, you must have forgetten that congress controls the purse and Reublicans were in change of Congress.
What Republicans forgot was how much fun it was to be in charge (having been out of power in Congress for a long time). It did not take them very long to learn to spend money like drunken sailors though.
Neither party seems to care one bit about actual fiscal responsibility. The two party have their differences, but they seem on their love of pork.
Sadly I don't have a solution to the one-party / two-names system.
If you interpret Genesis literally, you get into serious problems with a 1 year=1 month interpretation, you have 3 years olds have babies.
Two words, Plausible Deniability
Yeah, and my dentist really likes software and likes to talk about software while he is drilling for oil in my mouth.
Here are a few references. here, here
, and here
Note that these are all recent references, having nothing to do with Sutterfield's analysis that is sometimes used by creationists.
The data is not conclusive, but it is unwise to be too attached to scientific theories that happen to be considered "proven". Not enough evidence yet to consider C=Constant false perhaps, but several scientists are concluding this as most likely based on several different kinds of observations.
Even something apparently simple as graviton exchange can result in experimental observation that the orbit of planets around the sun would decay if gravitons are limited to C. From experimental observations of the planets and the lack of decay. Here is an article that suggest gravitons must be at least 2E10 times C. This is the reason that gravity is typically described as a warping of space, though graviton particle exchange makes more sense in other contexts.
BTW, from what I have been able to see, none of the modern science for C!=constant helps the creationists.
William Paley, Divine Watchmaker argument. Natural Theology: or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity, Collected from the Appearances of Nature, first published in 1802
Triple point of water is 273.16K, water is unusual in that the liquid form is denser than the solid, so the triple point (gas / liquid / solid in equilibrium) is the highest temperature for the solid form.
See here for a simple explanation with phase diagram
Gates/MS have never changed their position on software patents. They are bad for others to own. Anything that keeps MS from owning the world is a (i>bad thing. Gates/MS are not unique in this viewpoint, just more successful than most that share it.
Labels such as communist and cancerous are just ways to emphasize badness. No different than Republicans call Democrats communists or Democrats calling Republicans fascists. Few believe these labels, its just a way to emphasize that the opposition is considered bad.
Bill is almost right though, software patents are bad. If I ran a major software company I would get defensive patents too.
The real fear re: MS patent portfolio is how MS might use them against open source competition. Of course, this would be bad. Given the history of MS, there is good reason to fear this.
Creationist website warning. However, it does have fossil screws, hammers and a couple of other fossil artifacts. the link