Looks Veracruz has predominantly mercury vapor lighting, as opposed to the yellow-orange sodium vapor lighting seen in most of the other cities. Tokyo at night from space glows greenish blue for this reason, anyway. There's an discussion of this (and of other effects seen in pictures of cities at night taken from orbit) here: Cities At Night
Europe and most of Asia are on a single plate- the creatively named Eurasian Plate (the Urals were created 250 million years ago and no longer mark a plate boundary). If you were to divide up the continents by plate boundaries, Eurasia would be a continent that stretched from half of Iceland to half of Siberia, but would not include the Arabian peninsula or the Indian subcontinent. Also, parts of the Pacific Northwest would be in Juan de Fucaland or something. So that's not the best way of doing things. While it may not be supported by geology, I think there is merit to the idea that Europe exists as a place distinct from the rest of Eurasia due to the long history of cultural separation (though by this notion, it's silly to consider vast Asia as a single location). The whole "Urals are the boundary between Europe and Asia" idea comes from an eighteenth century cartographer named Philip Johan von Strahlenberg, but really was only done to draw a definite (but arbitrary) line between two entities that had been considered separate since antiquity.
Note: I suppose the Cubs have won some World Series in the past, and therefore already qualify as champs. Once these things get past a century, it's easy to forget they happened.
Acknowledging that there's still a few years to check some of these off...
Self-lacing sneakers? YES
Mr. Fusion? SADLY, NO
Hoverboards? NO
1980s nostalgia? SOME (and I'm sure someone has opened a Cafe '80s somewhere)
Flying cars? NO (nothing practical, anyways)
Video calls? YES (though not quite as depicted, and what was with all those fax machines?)
Video games without controllers? YES
Flat panel screens? YES
Chicago Cubs, World Series Champs? OH HELL NO
I looked into this, and apparently this invention is not about the sapphire itself being superconductive or even conductive- things might be different with the right doping, but ordinarily, a sapphire crystal is a very good electrical resistor. This is about using a precisely crafted sapphire thread as a support for laying down a high temperature superconductor. Known high temperature superconductors, being ceramics, are difficult to make into practical wires, something that has limited their use (for most applications that need superconducting wire, niobium alloys are used, which make fine wire, but these only superconduct under liquid helium temperatures).
Poloxamers are, as the Nature Medicine abstract describes, a triblock polymer. Blocks in polymerization are created by polymerizing one monomer chemical to create a chain, and then introducing another monomer to polymerize at the still reactive end of the original chain. This can be used to create a polymer that has regions of different properties. In the case of poloxamers, the blocks on the ends are polyethylene glycol while the middle block is less-soluble polypropylene glycol. This gives the chain a hydrophobic head and two hydrophilic tails. In aqueous conditions at lower temperatures, hydrogen bonds form between water and the hydrophilic chains and help to stabilize the poloxamer in solution. At higher temperatures, the hydrogen bonds break, and hydrophobic interactions between the polypropylene glycol blocks dominate (since it no longer interacts with water, it ends up interacting with itself). These interactions favor the formation of an insoluble gel. Cool down the gel, and the hydrophilic interactions take over again and the gel dissolves.
Cancer cells are known to be different in terms of having a scent. Cancer cells tend to have deranged metabolic processes as a result of keeping up with the demands of uncontrolled growth, and as a result often spew free radicals and reactive byproducts that damage compounds in the cell, breaking them down to simple alkanes and alkenes which are vanishingly scarce in healthy cells. These compounds are volatile enough to be detected by gas analysis methods, or by scent, if you happen to have a dog available.
I see that Mathematica will be required to create documents, but the target audience for this document format (repeatedly described by Wolfram and simple and easy) seem that they would have little use for a powerful and quite expensive piece of technical software. The format looks convenient if you already happen to be a Mathematica user, but it's a little strange to aim at a wider audience who are unlikely to have use for most of Mathematica's functionality.
Yes, for an environmental sample like this, the totality of the sample's DNA is isolated and sequenced together, producing a library of mostly partial genomes.
The original Venter paper http://www.sciencemag.org/content/suppl/2004/04/01/1093857.DC1/Venter.SOM.pdf (might require registration) about the expedition/ yacht cruise details the methods used to collect and extract the sample:
Sampling on the RV Weatherbird II was done as follows: Seawater
(170 liters) from stations 11 and 13 was directly filtered through a 0.8m Supor
membrane disc filter (Pall Life Sciences) followed in series by a 0.22m Supor
membrane disc filter (Pall Life Sciences). The sample from station 3 was pumped into a
250 L carboy prior to being filtered through the impact filters. The length of time from
collection of the sample until the end of the filtration step was approximately one hour.
Filters were placed in 5ml of sucrose lysis buffer (20mM EDTA, 400mM NaCl, 0.75 M
Sucrose, 50mM Tris-HCl, pH 9.0) and stored in liquid nitrogen on the Weatherbird then
placed at -80C until DNA extractions were done.
Sample preparation. The impact filters were cut into quarters and placed in individual
50 ml conical tubes. TE buffer (5 ml, pH 8) containing 150 ug/ml lysozyme was added
to each tube. The tubes were incubated at 37oC for 2 hours. SDS was added to 0.1% and
the samples were then put through three freeze/thaw cycles. The lysate was then treated
with Proteinase K (100 ug/mL) for one hour at 55oC followed by three aqueous phenol
extractions and one extraction with phenol/chloroform. The supernatant was then
precipitated with two volumes of 100% ethanol and the DNA pellet washed with 70%
ethanol.
Which is all to say that a large amount of seawater was filtered through filters of appropriate pore size to catch microbes, the cells were broken open and the proteins were broken down, and the DNA was extracted with alcohol. The DNA extraction procedure is pretty standard for anything whose genes you'd like to sequence; more commonly, the sample would be made of cells from a single species or organism, like a human blood sample or a bacteria cell culture, but in this case, the sample is a mixture of all of the microbes in 175 liters of seawater.
Not exactly- telomeres play a direct role in the number of times DNA can be replicated, but that effect, while important, is separate from the cellular damage that appears to be associated with aging. The process by which our linear chromosomes are replicated fails to include a small length at the end, a problem that compounds itself with each replication. Telomeres are there as a buffer; they're just a repeated sequence of nucleotides (TTAGGG in vertebrates). And yes, after about 50 cell divisions (the Hayflick limit), telomeres are depleted in normal cells, and the cells are directed to commit suicide. As you note, this process helps limit replication of damaged cells; for cancer cells to thrive, they need a way to maintain telomeres. Which they can of course find, either by reactivating the enzyme telomerase or through a process known as ALT, but it does provide a major hurdle.
This all being true, it has long been argued that human aging is far more complicated than "telomeres: old people don't have them." Humans don't age like a cell culture- in addition to maximum lifespan, the frailities of old age and diseases associated with aging are relevant topics. Aged cells usually have damage to their membranes, to their DNA, and to their mitochondria and other organelles. While direct intervention with our telomeres might be necessary to extend maximum human lifespan beyond 120 years, give or take, limiting accumulated cell damage could drastically improve quality of life. This is where the mitochondrial free radical theory of aging came in. The mitochondrion is a machine that hands off electrons from molecule to molecule in order to extract energy; sometimes the handoff fails and a reactive species like a free radical or a peroxide is created. These chemical species can definitely damage cells in measurable ways- peroxidation of cell membranes, oxidation of DNA bases- so it was a reasonable enough theory to suggest that antioxidants could scavenge these species, preventing damage and "slowing aging." However, as the article notes, it turns out that the situation is far more complicated than oxidation being an unmitigated danger, and that this sort of intervention may do more harm than good.
The relevant journal article is available for free right now here.
One thing that should be pointed out is that this article is in the January 2010 issue, and was initially published online in September 2009, so this isn't breaking news, though it looks like research may have continued in the same lab following this paper- there's no reference t paraquat in the paper, for instance. Another, which is touched on in the news article is that the scientists involved do not dispute that reactive oxygen species can have deleterious effects on living organisms- just that aging is not a process of mitochondria being injured by ROS.
Their conclusion spells it out:
It is difficult to doubt that mitochondria play a key role in
the aging process [67, 68]. However, although it is well documented that irreversible oxidative damage accumulates
during aging [69], it seems that the MFRTA’s core statement
that postulates that aging is triggered by the
detrimental action of ROS produced during normal
metabolism is simply wrong. It is not yet clear whether
aging has a single cause or whether such a notion is misguided.
In any case, the correlation between the presence of
oxidative damage and the aged phenotype simply does not
imply causation. Oxidative stress might be the consequence
of aging, if aging indeed has some discrete cause, or causes,
distinct from oxidative stress [40]. Alternatively, oxidative
stress might result from the failure of one particular maintenance system of the organism and thus participate in causing aging, but no more, as is often proposed in multicausal or unifying theories of aging [3–6]. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that it could not be beneficial to health to counteract the deleterious effects induced by ROS, at least in pathological situations. However, any intervention will nonetheless have to be very critically evaluated as clearly revealed by the antioxidant supplementation trials and in light of the increasing number of studies showing the crucial roles of ROS in cellular signaling.
There are three principal parts to the filler produced by these bacteria. First, the bacterium naturally produces calcium carbonate as a byproduct of breaking down urea as a nitrogen source; this activity has been greatly increased in the engineered bacterium. The second part is a "glue" made from levan, a polysaccharide that the bacterium is able to produce from sucrose; this activity is also natural, but highly upregulated in the engineered bacterium. The final part is the bacterial cells themselves; the cells are made long and threadlike by expressing a protein that halts cell division, and these filamentous cells act as reinforcing fibers. In practical usage, a solution of nutrients (including sucrose in particular) would need to be sprayed along with the bacterial spores in order for them to display this concrete-filling activity. This information comes from here.
It turns out that the press release is not really accurate with regard to the effect pH has on this engineered bacterium. The starting bacterium, Bacillus subtilis 168 naturally prefers a neutral pH, but by growing generations of this bacteria in media with gradually increased pH, it can be acclimated to thrive at the pH of concrete (roughly 10). This requires no engineered genetic modification. The steps to control the spread of this bacterium have little to do with pH, actually. First, the bacterium comes from a strain of Bacillus subtilis which has been produced as the result of decades of laboratory cultures, and is a mutant which depends on many key nutrients to be present in its enviroment to survive. In the wild, it would be a massively deficient competitor to wild Bacillus subtilis, which is extremely common in nature.
Also, the concrete repair activity is produced by upregulation of genes natural to Bacillus subtilis, not by anything transgenic. The upregulation of these genes presents an energy cost to the engineered bacterium while providing no benefit- if these bacteria mutate, it is more likely to be towards the wild phenotype. In addition, the team responsible has added a kill switch which tells the bacteria to commit suicide if sucrose is not present.
On the subject of multiple sheet configurations of graphene, something also mentioned in the article, I've been curious for awhile about the point that distinguishes "stacked graphene" from graphite. About how many layers of graphene planes are necessary before the material behaves more like graphite than graphene? Also, given that bulk graphite and graphene monolayers have quite different chemical and physical properties, is the transition abrupt, or are there intermediate states?
The liver has an amazing capacity to regenerate when healthy, and indeed it's possible to donate a partial liver and have the sections regenerate into healthy organs. However, cirrhosis of the liver involves damage that forms scar tissue throughout the organ. This scar tissue eventually blocks blood supply for the remaining healthy liver tissue, which reduces liver function and can cause a host of other complications.
The Shweeb FAQ addresses this question, and the answer is hilarious:
But what if someone refuses to pedal or goes really slowly?
Impact-cushioning buffers at each end of the pods allow faster pods to run into slower pods and form a Shweeb 'peloton'. This increases aerodynamic efficiency and, unlike a bicycle peloton, the power produced by those behind can contribute to the overall power of the group, thereby increasing speed and efficiency and removing the need to overtake. Should the rider in front refuse to pedal, the extra effort required by the rider(s) behind is minimal due to the low rolling resistance and single aero-pressure point of the peloton.
I think I see what the problem is. Since the incoming numbers move from left to right, a player is going to want to see the left side of the screen while using the stylus to swap numbers on the right size. When a right-handed person holds a stylus, their right hand is on the right side of the stylus, so they can see the screen real estate to the left (and since the action is not proceeding from the right, the fact that their hand obscures that area is unimportant). However, a left-handed person has their hand positioned left of the stylus, so that if they're working with it on the right side of the screen, it obscures the left side, which prevents them from seeing the new numbers flow into play.
I think it's something designers should consider with the increasing use of digital touchscreens- is a person's hand going to obscure what's being displayed or interfere with its manipulation? I haven't played this game, so I don't know how large of an effect this actually has- as a lefty, I tend to use a touchscreen stylus with either hand depending on context (about the only thing I can't do well right handed is fine manipulations of the sort necessary for handwriting). I think I'd just end up playing this right handed; it's not enough of an issue to me that I'd consider it being "left behind." A mode to reverse the direction of play would have been a nice feature though.
Especially old, in the sense that this chariot was excavated in 1922, and has been on display in Egypt for decades. The rash of recent articles about this "high-performance chariot" is due to it being loaned out to a foreign exhibit for the first time, which is noteworthy, but from the press you'd think this object was newly unearthed a few days ago.
"...I was a CEO of Apple no when I put the iPad in my hands like the Apple customers used or shall I wear a black turtleneck no and how he submitted the Ulysses app and I thought well they can't show a penis and then I asked him with my email to ask again no and then he asked me would I no to say no my Apple CEO and first I put my reality distortion field around him no and drew him down to me so I could remind him of the terms and conditions of the App Store no and his heart was going like mad and no I said no I won't No. "
Where do you stand on drugs which are synthesized or engineered versions of molecules native to the human body; for instance, human insulin or clotting Factor VIII expressed in engineered cultures? These are protein molecules that are meant to be exact copies of a substance normally produced by the human body, and they represent the translated output of genes native to the human genome. Genentech received a patent (I believe it will be in effect until 2014) for the preparation and use of recombinant Factor VIII, used in the treatment of hemophilia A. Factor VIII is a natural product, and a critical part of Genentech's work was isolating the gene from human X chromosomes, then replicating and amplifying the gene in both bacterial and mammalian cultures. The question is whether such work constitutes an "invention."
In their patent, Genentech is careful to write that their patent would pertain "to DNA isolates as well as to DNA expression vehicles containing gene sequences encoding human factor VIII in expressible form, to transformant host cell cultures thereof, capable of producing functional human factor VIII." In simpler terms, Genentech patented the isolated DNA molecule of the Factor VIII gene, as well as the specific use of recombination technologies to clone, amplify, and express this particular molecule as the Factor VIII protein. That particular molecule, however, exists on every X chromosome in your body (it may be an non-working copy if you're hemophiliac, which is why there's a market for Factor VIII). Indeed, other companies had been isolating Factor VIII protein product from human blood for years before a recombinant form was developed. Was it right to grant Genentech the patent, given the natural origin of Factor VIII? I would argue that it was, which I find interesting because I think the opposite about Myriad and its BRCA patents, which I commented on when those patents were ruled invalid by a US judge.
I feel that there's room to provide patent protection to biological pharmaceuticals without damaging a person's inherent ownership of their own body. What Genentech did for their patent seems like a bioengineering analog to patenting an organic chemistry-based synthetic route for a small-molecule drug. It just happens to use a genetic sequence as the "starting material." Others may disagree- Genentech patented a molecule identical to an isolated human gene- therefore, this is a "gene patent" and should be disallowed. I think, however, that what Genentech claims for the gene- exclusivity on producing recombinant Factor VIII as a drug- is narrow enough to be acceptable.
Conversely, the Myriad patents on BRCA1/2 are written extremely broadly to claim what seems to me to be an unjust level of ownership of the genes themselves. In my opinion, you should be able to patent a diagnostic test or a therapeutic agent based on a human gene. What Myriad did however with their patents is to claim the genes themselves at such a basic level as to really claim all possible tests and therapies, present and future for the lifetime of the patent.
Also, the way this technique works might pose some long-term risks. The agent used, the dye Rose Bengal, is activated by light to generate free radicals in surrounding molecules. The surrounding molecule radicals react with each other to crosslink and seal the wound shut. Generating collagen radicals that crosslink would be fine; it's the possibility of damaging DNA that would be trouble. Rose Bengal has been used as a diagnostic stain in human tissue for decades, and has a established record of safety, but it's worth proceding with caution here.
Cauterization uses the direct application of heat to seal wounds. The heat can be applied in a number of ways, including lasers, an electric current, or just a very hot piece of metal. This, however, is not a technique to destroy tissue but rather to glue it back together. The active principle is a light-sensitive dye called Rose Bengal that is applied to the wound. When Rose Bengal absorbs light with a wavelength of around 560nm, it enters an excited state which ends up transferring energy to surrounding molecules, which in the case of a wound, would primarily be collagen protein. The transferred energy generates free radical species that cause the collagen molecules to bind to each other, sealing the wound. So there isn't much heating of the wound; the laser is present to activate the Rose Bengal, not cook the tissue.
Slashdot Mirror
Looks Veracruz has predominantly mercury vapor lighting, as opposed to the yellow-orange sodium vapor lighting seen in most of the other cities. Tokyo at night from space glows greenish blue for this reason, anyway. There's an discussion of this (and of other effects seen in pictures of cities at night taken from orbit) here: Cities At Night
Europe and most of Asia are on a single plate- the creatively named Eurasian Plate (the Urals were created 250 million years ago and no longer mark a plate boundary). If you were to divide up the continents by plate boundaries, Eurasia would be a continent that stretched from half of Iceland to half of Siberia, but would not include the Arabian peninsula or the Indian subcontinent. Also, parts of the Pacific Northwest would be in Juan de Fucaland or something. So that's not the best way of doing things. While it may not be supported by geology, I think there is merit to the idea that Europe exists as a place distinct from the rest of Eurasia due to the long history of cultural separation (though by this notion, it's silly to consider vast Asia as a single location). The whole "Urals are the boundary between Europe and Asia" idea comes from an eighteenth century cartographer named Philip Johan von Strahlenberg, but really was only done to draw a definite (but arbitrary) line between two entities that had been considered separate since antiquity.
Note: I suppose the Cubs have won some World Series in the past, and therefore already qualify as champs. Once these things get past a century, it's easy to forget they happened.
Acknowledging that there's still a few years to check some of these off...
Self-lacing sneakers? YES
Mr. Fusion? SADLY, NO
Hoverboards? NO
1980s nostalgia? SOME (and I'm sure someone has opened a Cafe '80s somewhere)
Flying cars? NO (nothing practical, anyways)
Video calls? YES (though not quite as depicted, and what was with all those fax machines?)
Video games without controllers? YES
Flat panel screens? YES
Chicago Cubs, World Series Champs? OH HELL NO
I looked into this, and apparently this invention is not about the sapphire itself being superconductive or even conductive- things might be different with the right doping, but ordinarily, a sapphire crystal is a very good electrical resistor. This is about using a precisely crafted sapphire thread as a support for laying down a high temperature superconductor. Known high temperature superconductors, being ceramics, are difficult to make into practical wires, something that has limited their use (for most applications that need superconducting wire, niobium alloys are used, which make fine wire, but these only superconduct under liquid helium temperatures).
Poloxamers are, as the Nature Medicine abstract describes, a triblock polymer. Blocks in polymerization are created by polymerizing one monomer chemical to create a chain, and then introducing another monomer to polymerize at the still reactive end of the original chain. This can be used to create a polymer that has regions of different properties. In the case of poloxamers, the blocks on the ends are polyethylene glycol while the middle block is less-soluble polypropylene glycol. This gives the chain a hydrophobic head and two hydrophilic tails. In aqueous conditions at lower temperatures, hydrogen bonds form between water and the hydrophilic chains and help to stabilize the poloxamer in solution. At higher temperatures, the hydrogen bonds break, and hydrophobic interactions between the polypropylene glycol blocks dominate (since it no longer interacts with water, it ends up interacting with itself). These interactions favor the formation of an insoluble gel. Cool down the gel, and the hydrophilic interactions take over again and the gel dissolves.
Cancer cells are known to be different in terms of having a scent. Cancer cells tend to have deranged metabolic processes as a result of keeping up with the demands of uncontrolled growth, and as a result often spew free radicals and reactive byproducts that damage compounds in the cell, breaking them down to simple alkanes and alkenes which are vanishingly scarce in healthy cells. These compounds are volatile enough to be detected by gas analysis methods, or by scent, if you happen to have a dog available.
I see that Mathematica will be required to create documents, but the target audience for this document format (repeatedly described by Wolfram and simple and easy) seem that they would have little use for a powerful and quite expensive piece of technical software. The format looks convenient if you already happen to be a Mathematica user, but it's a little strange to aim at a wider audience who are unlikely to have use for most of Mathematica's functionality.
Which is all to say that a large amount of seawater was filtered through filters of appropriate pore size to catch microbes, the cells were broken open and the proteins were broken down, and the DNA was extracted with alcohol. The DNA extraction procedure is pretty standard for anything whose genes you'd like to sequence; more commonly, the sample would be made of cells from a single species or organism, like a human blood sample or a bacteria cell culture, but in this case, the sample is a mixture of all of the microbes in 175 liters of seawater.
This all being true, it has long been argued that human aging is far more complicated than "telomeres: old people don't have them." Humans don't age like a cell culture- in addition to maximum lifespan, the frailities of old age and diseases associated with aging are relevant topics. Aged cells usually have damage to their membranes, to their DNA, and to their mitochondria and other organelles. While direct intervention with our telomeres might be necessary to extend maximum human lifespan beyond 120 years, give or take, limiting accumulated cell damage could drastically improve quality of life. This is where the mitochondrial free radical theory of aging came in. The mitochondrion is a machine that hands off electrons from molecule to molecule in order to extract energy; sometimes the handoff fails and a reactive species like a free radical or a peroxide is created. These chemical species can definitely damage cells in measurable ways- peroxidation of cell membranes, oxidation of DNA bases- so it was a reasonable enough theory to suggest that antioxidants could scavenge these species, preventing damage and "slowing aging." However, as the article notes, it turns out that the situation is far more complicated than oxidation being an unmitigated danger, and that this sort of intervention may do more harm than good.
One thing that should be pointed out is that this article is in the January 2010 issue, and was initially published online in September 2009, so this isn't breaking news, though it looks like research may have continued in the same lab following this paper- there's no reference t paraquat in the paper, for instance. Another, which is touched on in the news article is that the scientists involved do not dispute that reactive oxygen species can have deleterious effects on living organisms- just that aging is not a process of mitochondria being injured by ROS. Their conclusion spells it out:
There are three principal parts to the filler produced by these bacteria. First, the bacterium naturally produces calcium carbonate as a byproduct of breaking down urea as a nitrogen source; this activity has been greatly increased in the engineered bacterium. The second part is a "glue" made from levan, a polysaccharide that the bacterium is able to produce from sucrose; this activity is also natural, but highly upregulated in the engineered bacterium. The final part is the bacterial cells themselves; the cells are made long and threadlike by expressing a protein that halts cell division, and these filamentous cells act as reinforcing fibers. In practical usage, a solution of nutrients (including sucrose in particular) would need to be sprayed along with the bacterial spores in order for them to display this concrete-filling activity. This information comes from here.
Also, the concrete repair activity is produced by upregulation of genes natural to Bacillus subtilis, not by anything transgenic. The upregulation of these genes presents an energy cost to the engineered bacterium while providing no benefit- if these bacteria mutate, it is more likely to be towards the wild phenotype. In addition, the team responsible has added a kill switch which tells the bacteria to commit suicide if sucrose is not present.
This engineered bacterium system was entered into the International Genetically Engineered Machine competition, so there's a lot more information about this project at the team's project page. In particular, there's a more thorough description of the kill switch the team engineered to prevent the spread of this bacterium beyond the target environment, the underlying mechanism being that sucrose must be available in the environment to prevent the bacterium from producing a toxin which kills itself.
On the subject of multiple sheet configurations of graphene, something also mentioned in the article, I've been curious for awhile about the point that distinguishes "stacked graphene" from graphite. About how many layers of graphene planes are necessary before the material behaves more like graphite than graphene? Also, given that bulk graphite and graphene monolayers have quite different chemical and physical properties, is the transition abrupt, or are there intermediate states?
Fluorene is a hydrocarbon compound named for its fluorescence. Despite what the name suggests, it contains no fluorine.
The liver has an amazing capacity to regenerate when healthy, and indeed it's possible to donate a partial liver and have the sections regenerate into healthy organs. However, cirrhosis of the liver involves damage that forms scar tissue throughout the organ. This scar tissue eventually blocks blood supply for the remaining healthy liver tissue, which reduces liver function and can cause a host of other complications.
The Shweeb FAQ addresses this question, and the answer is hilarious:
Well, they did just have that article about a geocentrism conference. Slashdot truly is the place to discuss the bleeding edge of scientific progess.
I think I see what the problem is. Since the incoming numbers move from left to right, a player is going to want to see the left side of the screen while using the stylus to swap numbers on the right size. When a right-handed person holds a stylus, their right hand is on the right side of the stylus, so they can see the screen real estate to the left (and since the action is not proceeding from the right, the fact that their hand obscures that area is unimportant). However, a left-handed person has their hand positioned left of the stylus, so that if they're working with it on the right side of the screen, it obscures the left side, which prevents them from seeing the new numbers flow into play.
I think it's something designers should consider with the increasing use of digital touchscreens- is a person's hand going to obscure what's being displayed or interfere with its manipulation? I haven't played this game, so I don't know how large of an effect this actually has- as a lefty, I tend to use a touchscreen stylus with either hand depending on context (about the only thing I can't do well right handed is fine manipulations of the sort necessary for handwriting). I think I'd just end up playing this right handed; it's not enough of an issue to me that I'd consider it being "left behind." A mode to reverse the direction of play would have been a nice feature though.
Especially old, in the sense that this chariot was excavated in 1922, and has been on display in Egypt for decades. The rash of recent articles about this "high-performance chariot" is due to it being loaned out to a foreign exhibit for the first time, which is noteworthy, but from the press you'd think this object was newly unearthed a few days ago.
"...I was a CEO of Apple no when I put the iPad in my hands like the Apple customers used or shall I wear a black turtleneck no and how he submitted the Ulysses app and I thought well they can't show a penis and then I asked him with my email to ask again no and then he asked me would I no to say no my Apple CEO and first I put my reality distortion field around him no and drew him down to me so I could remind him of the terms and conditions of the App Store no and his heart was going like mad and no I said no I won't No. "
Where do you stand on drugs which are synthesized or engineered versions of molecules native to the human body; for instance, human insulin or clotting Factor VIII expressed in engineered cultures? These are protein molecules that are meant to be exact copies of a substance normally produced by the human body, and they represent the translated output of genes native to the human genome. Genentech received a patent (I believe it will be in effect until 2014) for the preparation and use of recombinant Factor VIII, used in the treatment of hemophilia A. Factor VIII is a natural product, and a critical part of Genentech's work was isolating the gene from human X chromosomes, then replicating and amplifying the gene in both bacterial and mammalian cultures. The question is whether such work constitutes an "invention."
In their patent, Genentech is careful to write that their patent would pertain "to DNA isolates as well as to DNA expression vehicles containing gene sequences encoding human factor VIII in expressible form, to transformant host cell cultures thereof, capable of producing functional human factor VIII." In simpler terms, Genentech patented the isolated DNA molecule of the Factor VIII gene, as well as the specific use of recombination technologies to clone, amplify, and express this particular molecule as the Factor VIII protein. That particular molecule, however, exists on every X chromosome in your body (it may be an non-working copy if you're hemophiliac, which is why there's a market for Factor VIII). Indeed, other companies had been isolating Factor VIII protein product from human blood for years before a recombinant form was developed. Was it right to grant Genentech the patent, given the natural origin of Factor VIII? I would argue that it was, which I find interesting because I think the opposite about Myriad and its BRCA patents, which I commented on when those patents were ruled invalid by a US judge.
I feel that there's room to provide patent protection to biological pharmaceuticals without damaging a person's inherent ownership of their own body. What Genentech did for their patent seems like a bioengineering analog to patenting an organic chemistry-based synthetic route for a small-molecule drug. It just happens to use a genetic sequence as the "starting material." Others may disagree- Genentech patented a molecule identical to an isolated human gene- therefore, this is a "gene patent" and should be disallowed. I think, however, that what Genentech claims for the gene- exclusivity on producing recombinant Factor VIII as a drug- is narrow enough to be acceptable.
Conversely, the Myriad patents on BRCA1/2 are written extremely broadly to claim what seems to me to be an unjust level of ownership of the genes themselves. In my opinion, you should be able to patent a diagnostic test or a therapeutic agent based on a human gene. What Myriad did however with their patents is to claim the genes themselves at such a basic level as to really claim all possible tests and therapies, present and future for the lifetime of the patent.
Also, the way this technique works might pose some long-term risks. The agent used, the dye Rose Bengal, is activated by light to generate free radicals in surrounding molecules. The surrounding molecule radicals react with each other to crosslink and seal the wound shut. Generating collagen radicals that crosslink would be fine; it's the possibility of damaging DNA that would be trouble. Rose Bengal has been used as a diagnostic stain in human tissue for decades, and has a established record of safety, but it's worth proceding with caution here.
Cauterization uses the direct application of heat to seal wounds. The heat can be applied in a number of ways, including lasers, an electric current, or just a very hot piece of metal. This, however, is not a technique to destroy tissue but rather to glue it back together. The active principle is a light-sensitive dye called Rose Bengal that is applied to the wound. When Rose Bengal absorbs light with a wavelength of around 560nm, it enters an excited state which ends up transferring energy to surrounding molecules, which in the case of a wound, would primarily be collagen protein. The transferred energy generates free radical species that cause the collagen molecules to bind to each other, sealing the wound. So there isn't much heating of the wound; the laser is present to activate the Rose Bengal, not cook the tissue.