Probably. But the anecdote the OP told was about eating dirt and chewing on a stick. Things that are demonstrably good for children but evoke horror in the average modern parent.
You can find more if you like. Sublethal exposure to antimicrobials like triclosan has been shown to select for drug resistant bacteria. If that scares people, good.
You've managed to screw up the basic tenant of homeopathy. Like cures like. So people immune to polio peeing in the water wouldn't do any good. Only people WITH polio peeing in the water. Since there aren't many of those around anymore, we should be seeing huge outbreaks of polio, homeopathically speaking.
It's possible, in theory, with some vaccines. But the original pertussis vaccine was a killed bacteria vaccine, which means that the entire organism was present. For it to mutate to survive the immunity it would have to turn into something completely different, so resistance is not a factor in this case.
Some new vaccines may use a limited number of antigens instead of whole organism. If they use few enough, the organism could conceivably mutate to not express that antigen anymore. But even newer vaccines that are in wide circulation include many antigens, so that's still not likely.
"feature those products being used by women rather than men."
Lots of products aimed at men feature women too. If you want to sell something to women, put a woman on it. If you want to sell something to men, put a woman on it. We just all like to look at women, rather than men.
There is evidence, including a large Finnish study, that the more variety of microbes you're exposed to as a child, the healthier your immune system as an adult and the less likely you are to have autoimmune diseases.
I'm not sure how having an integrated battery helps track where you go. As for *very* expensive, the last iPhone battery I replaced cost $19, had a higher capacity than the original, and came with a screwdriver. For comparison, the last spare replaceable cell phone battery I bought was for a Razr and cost more like $80.
Unless you like charging your phone all the time, the supercapacitor will need to hold as much energy as the battery. Since it can discharge it a lot faster, it's inherently more dangerous.
Corporations don't "pay the bills" and then go engage in their hobbies. Google is an advertising company that develops technology to support their business.
They could have designed it so you use the crosshairs. Lasers are cooler. The point is that you select the target, the gun remembers where it is, then fires when the crosshairs once again cross over it. You don't have to hold the laser OR the crosshairs over the spot you want to hit.
I don't think that's true. The photographer stated clearly in his description of the photo to the contest that it was created with an HDR like treatment of the RAW file. The AP photojournalism standards clearly allow dodging and burning:
Compositing two images to add or remove elements isn't allowed, nor is manipulating a photo in such a way that it misleads or changes the factual content, but there's no real suggestion that he did either of those things. He just tweaked the lighting a little.
If your definition of "high" is "higher than you'd normally get" you don't need multiple exposures. Lots of people make such photos from one RAW exposure. A RAW has considerably more dynamic range than a JPEG does.
You could create a RAW file easily enough, but it would be painfully evident that your 8 bit JPEG source data was not 10-16 bit RAW data. Not to mention the loss from the compression.
It looks like either its an HDR composition of several exposures, possibly with some dodging and burning, but the same effect could have been achieved with a flash.
I don't know the rules for this particular contest, but HDR wouldn't be contrary to many standards, although dodging and burning might be. Flashes aren't.
I can understand a kids' cartoon being worth watching. The "brohoof" stuff is kinda creepy though. In fact, a bunch of adults forming a fan club for a cartoon and calling themselves "bronies" is creepy too.
So your reply was completely off topic? Did you bother to read the message I replied to? Or did you just want to tell us your colourful anecdote about your father?
I don't know if a two-seater kit-car with no cargo-space qualifies as a car by today's metric."
Yeah, because things from Lamborghinis to Smart cars don't get described that way.
But it doesn't look very maneuverable in the air
Probably a good thing. Slower means more time to recover from mistakes, less maneuverable means less temptation to do something stupid, and being a paraglider it means if the engine fails or the pilot has a heart attack it will land itself mostly safely (for people on the ground).
I wouldn't want to be in a road accident with it either... the other car will drive right though it.
SUV drivers say the same things about, well, everything smaller than an SUV. Doesn't make any of those things any less cars.
Also, they make it street legal with a loophole: It's sold as a "kit car" and wouldn't pass the full road certification (no crash tests) required by what most people consider cars.
Just like all classic cars if they were built today. Still cars.
I don't think the thing is worth anywhere near $100k, and I seriously doubt it's practical for anybody's daily city commute, but it is definitely a car that flies. I actually looks like of like a model T.
Slashdot Mirror
Probably. But the anecdote the OP told was about eating dirt and chewing on a stick. Things that are demonstrably good for children but evoke horror in the average modern parent.
Whoops, wrong paper. Try this one:
http://aac.asm.org/content/45/2/428.abstract
You can find more if you like. Sublethal exposure to antimicrobials like triclosan has been shown to select for drug resistant bacteria. If that scares people, good.
You've managed to screw up the basic tenant of homeopathy. Like cures like. So people immune to polio peeing in the water wouldn't do any good. Only people WITH polio peeing in the water. Since there aren't many of those around anymore, we should be seeing huge outbreaks of polio, homeopathically speaking.
It's possible, in theory, with some vaccines. But the original pertussis vaccine was a killed bacteria vaccine, which means that the entire organism was present. For it to mutate to survive the immunity it would have to turn into something completely different, so resistance is not a factor in this case.
Some new vaccines may use a limited number of antigens instead of whole organism. If they use few enough, the organism could conceivably mutate to not express that antigen anymore. But even newer vaccines that are in wide circulation include many antigens, so that's still not likely.
"But there is no real relationship between these agents and the kinds of antibiotics that come in pills."
Wrong.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16922622
"feature those products being used by women rather than men."
Lots of products aimed at men feature women too. If you want to sell something to women, put a woman on it. If you want to sell something to men, put a woman on it. We just all like to look at women, rather than men.
There is evidence, including a large Finnish study, that the more variety of microbes you're exposed to as a child, the healthier your immune system as an adult and the less likely you are to have autoimmune diseases.
And then took six years and a few more billions to make them profitable (maybe)?
She's got a multibillion dollar portfolio of people's profiles for... tens of billions of dollars!
Doesn't seem like such a hot plan.
The world disagrees with you.
I'm not sure how having an integrated battery helps track where you go. As for *very* expensive, the last iPhone battery I replaced cost $19, had a higher capacity than the original, and came with a screwdriver. For comparison, the last spare replaceable cell phone battery I bought was for a Razr and cost more like $80.
Yeah, that sounds safe. Just don't charge your wife's cell phone right after yours... oops.
Plus you've only gotten 48 volts into your phone. Now you need to get down to a proper charging voltage somehow, without significant losses or bulk.
Unless you like charging your phone all the time, the supercapacitor will need to hold as much energy as the battery. Since it can discharge it a lot faster, it's inherently more dangerous.
Corporations don't "pay the bills" and then go engage in their hobbies. Google is an advertising company that develops technology to support their business.
They could have designed it so you use the crosshairs. Lasers are cooler. The point is that you select the target, the gun remembers where it is, then fires when the crosshairs once again cross over it. You don't have to hold the laser OR the crosshairs over the spot you want to hit.
Jerks with laser pointers seem pretty good at it, and they don't even use scopes.
I don't think that's true. The photographer stated clearly in his description of the photo to the contest that it was created with an HDR like treatment of the RAW file. The AP photojournalism standards clearly allow dodging and burning:
http://www.csus.edu/indiv/g/goffs/135%20photojournalism/Associated%20Press%20ethics%20code.pdf.
Compositing two images to add or remove elements isn't allowed, nor is manipulating a photo in such a way that it misleads or changes the factual content, but there's no real suggestion that he did either of those things. He just tweaked the lighting a little.
Sure. It looks quite possible it was from a single RAW. When I say HDR I mean the way people tend to use it today: higher-than-a-JPEG dynamic range.
If your definition of "high" is "higher than you'd normally get" you don't need multiple exposures. Lots of people make such photos from one RAW exposure. A RAW has considerably more dynamic range than a JPEG does.
You could create a RAW file easily enough, but it would be painfully evident that your 8 bit JPEG source data was not 10-16 bit RAW data. Not to mention the loss from the compression.
It looks like either its an HDR composition of several exposures, possibly with some dodging and burning, but the same effect could have been achieved with a flash.
I don't know the rules for this particular contest, but HDR wouldn't be contrary to many standards, although dodging and burning might be. Flashes aren't.
Yes.
I can understand a kids' cartoon being worth watching. The "brohoof" stuff is kinda creepy though. In fact, a bunch of adults forming a fan club for a cartoon and calling themselves "bronies" is creepy too.
So your reply was completely off topic? Did you bother to read the message I replied to? Or did you just want to tell us your colourful anecdote about your father?
Yeah, because things from Lamborghinis to Smart cars don't get described that way.
Probably a good thing. Slower means more time to recover from mistakes, less maneuverable means less temptation to do something stupid, and being a paraglider it means if the engine fails or the pilot has a heart attack it will land itself mostly safely (for people on the ground).
SUV drivers say the same things about, well, everything smaller than an SUV. Doesn't make any of those things any less cars.
Just like all classic cars if they were built today. Still cars.
I don't think the thing is worth anywhere near $100k, and I seriously doubt it's practical for anybody's daily city commute, but it is definitely a car that flies. I actually looks like of like a model T.