Most of these work in Safari4, and some even on the iPhone. This kind of stuff, written entirely in HTML5 and javascript, is one of the things Apple is hoping will make the lack of flash on the iPhone a moot point.
I hope not. I regularly act precisely the same way... sometimes I don't even check that there are 5 bills untill much later. I have never been stiffed by an ATM, never heard of anyone being stiffed, so my trust level is high.
But there was the one time I opened my wallet to find that there among the $20s was a $100 bill. To this day I have no idea where it came from: whether it was from the ATM that I had gotten money from the day before, or change from the coffee shop where it had been stacked with the $10s... Had I known where it had come from, I might have returned it. But it would have been a hell of a lot more work to do so if it had been the ATM.
Supports third party development? Are you kidding? Sure, you can make web apps, but palm, symbian and even windows mobile kinda blow it out of the water on that front.
sure, it was sorta correct, except for the idea that the correlation coefficient has anything to do with "significance." I work with large data sets, and we regularly see statistically significant correlations (p 10^-10 and such) for things with correlation coefficients ~ 0.05. He also states that "4/16 (25.00%) of those not seeded yawn, and 12/36 (33.33%) of those seeded yawn." would have been significant. Not even close. Under Fisher's exact test (my preferred contingency table test, as it is... umm... exact), that would still have a p value of 0.5.
Or so they claim. If they had an exploit, this would be true. If they didn't, it will cover that minor detail. A kind of nice little benefit of wireless exploit claims
What the hell is the comment about iTV in there for? iTV is hardware for viewing video, Democracy is software for finding/downloading it. I don't know how they will be comparable at all. Furthermore, Apple's track record is precisely one of making easy to use systems. The idea that it would require anything like the effort needed for MythTV is pretty out of line. More likely it will be like the iTunes store. Easy to use, but limited. (If we must compare, MythTV is more of a challenge to use, but far less limited)
Ugh. As a genetecist whose lab does work on this stuff (I personally avoid human data, but do work on speciation), I would say that one of the good points Hawks makes is that there is a lot of work that should have been cited that wasn't. They present their paper as if they are the first to suggest that there was a period of human-chimp hybridization. I won't go into the older literature, some of which they do cite, but more recently, Navarro and Barton (2003) (link may be behind paywall, sorry) provided some evidence for extensive hybridization. Also, Osada and Wu (2005) (which is cited, but really really strangely) were more explicit in their claim of hybridization (though here they refer to it as disproof of pure allopatry (a rapid event driven by geographic isolation)). Some of the methods in the "new" paper appear to be directly derived from tests in Osada and Wu. The work itself is good, but maybe not as groundbreaking as they would like to believe. Personally, I was just waiting for a good data set to come up with better evidence for something I was quite confident of already. This does that.
I also happen to think that as we investigate more and more pairs of close species, we will find this is not at all an uncommon pattern. There are lots of hybrids out there in nature, and you can be sure that genes make it across "species boundaries" with some regularity for quite a while.
One final note to destroy my credibility. Is anyone surpised that people had sex with chimps? (Okay, proto-humans with proto-chimps) We are a couple of horny species. I don't know too much about chimp sexual habits, but we humans sure are a kinky bunch to boot.
Applying natural selection as a template, lets look at what it really is. Natural selection is the phenomena of being removed from the gene pool prior to reproduction. Anything else that happens will allow your genes to carry on, which is how evolution works. People probably assumed that evolution stopped because they assume that most people manage to successfully reproduce prior to their death.
What you are referring to is negative selection. Nobody really doubts that this occurs. There are still plenty of genetic diseases which are killing pre-reproductive individuals and/or making them infertile*. What this article is concerned with is positive selection: genes which increase net reproduction. Genes like this will spread rapidly through the populations, and leave a very different type of signature in the genome, which is what this paper looks for.
* Whatever you may say about modern medicine, infertility is still a pretty big selective pressure. While we have technology to give many people offspring who can not do so through natural means, said technologies have a tendency to be expensive, and hence are far from universal.
Selective pressures resulting in 'differential reproductive success' are not much of a factor for many modern humans.
Actually, this is precisely what the article is addressing. They have a method to differentiate drift from selection, and show that selection is quite active in the (relatively) recent past. In that sense, the lay definition of evolution that you refer to (evolution by natural selection) is the appropriate thing to discuss here.
Dang, you beat me to it. That is one fantastic documentary. It does a great job of illustrating the potential follies of biocontrol. But scientists do always seem to think they have worked everything out this time.
Some other wonderfully bizarre scenes include the girl playing with a toad that she has dressed in a tutu, and my personal favorite: the guy in the VW microvan swerving down the road trying to hit every toad in his path. You know you've gotten one when you hear a good pop.
This gets a bit off topic, but why the hell does TM use a system by which you don't get to pick anything about your tickets except the price and general area? If you don't like the tickets you are assigned, you have to go the whole process again, and enter that damn pictureword again. And again. And again. This is convenience?!
I just don't see why they don't have a system like the airlines to let you pick your exact seat. It might not work when everyone is trying to get tickets at the same time, but for most things it would probably work just fine. It also solves the problem where there might not be good seats 4 in a row, but there might be 2 in one row and 2 in the row behind...
But I should stop flogging the dead horse. Fact is, TM is an awful monopolistic highway robber. Perl Jam was right. Ah well.
except that each entry is not an individual. It is a trace from a sequencing rig, usually. Which means that it is usually 500-1000 bases of sequence (with a bunch of other info there as well... it is not just the As Ts Gs and Cs, but also sequence quality and such). The human genome is roughly 3 billion bases. So they have the equivalent of say 200x the genome of an individual. Of course, the data they have is probably much more concentrated on some areas, where they have thousands of traces, and other areas where they have very few.
Anyway, the point is you are not about to be able to fit a genome on a floppy disk. Not even close.
Not to mention that the $1500 is just the starting price...
It should also be noted that there are no pictures yet, only renderings. Personally, I would want to be sure the thing existed before dropping $1.5K on it.
That or wait for apple to get its act together and release an official version. Clearly there are people who want them.
But what I really want to know is whether Adam actually had anything to do with Blendo. Jamie gives him no credit, but he claims a bunch. One of them is being a bit arrogant...
Or, as I like to say, given enough dice and enough time, eventually you will roll a trillion 1's in a row.
True enough. But just to extend the analogy. Given a bunch less time, you could roll a trillion 1ss or a trillion 2s or a trillion 3s, or 200 million series of 12345, or 24682468, or 54321...
ID never wants to acknowledge the fact that we, as humans, are very good at finding patterns and design even in random noise. I would like to see them actually define design, and how to recognize it unambiguously. Then we can start to talk about whether things are designed. There is a much longer argument here, but I'm late to the discussion, so nobody will read this...
Effect as a verb:
We plan to effect a change in policy.
Both are correct. Note that the second sentence could be also written with "affect," but this would have a totally different meaning. In the "effect" case, it means we are going to cause the change to occur. In the "affect" case the change is presumably going to happen whether we have anything to do with it or not, but we plan to influence it.
Nope. Apple announced that 4.9 would have podcast support well before BadApple came out. I guess BadFruit thought it would take apple longer to get this done than it did. Maybe apple pushed things a bit because of BadApple, but the itunes podcast support seems pretty well polished, so I doubt there was that much of an extra rush.
Public use should mean that the public owns the property.
...
Railroads could still have been built, but the tracks would have just been owned by the government.
I am not sure I disagree, but the fact is that the law has been this way for over a hundred years, which is why I brought up the railroads. I would also note that public use is a term that applies somewhat broadly. Navigable waterways are all public, but filled land (which was often until the point of filling a waterway) is generally considered perfectly fair game for private ownership (see most of Boston Harbor), as long as it contains some public accomodation.
The point is only that this is not a new thing in US law/history. It is an expansion, sure, but not totally new. At least we are required "just compensation"....
Your government can now take your property for the "public good"
Nothing new there. The government has always been allowed to do this. It is right there in the Bill of Rights: Amendment Five.
[N]or shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation"
The question has always been what constitutes "public use." It is not always a simple calculus of whether private companies benefit first. For example, railroads would not have been built without this power of eminent domain, and those all clearly benefited private entities on their way to the public good. Land for roads, airports, and such are also routinely "taken."
That said, I think that this idea that urban renewal (extending beyond a blighted area, which has been allowed for a while, for cleaning up slums and such) is a valid reason for taking, seems problematic to me. MBITLITF (My brother is the lawyer in the family), but it seems clear that this is a continuation of a trend to expand this power beyond what I would consider reasonable. Building a hotel and whatever else in the hopes that people will come to visit and thereby provide jobs seems just plain dumb, but the courts basically said that they can't make a ruling based on that; if the government thinks it is a good idea, that is good enough, and to overrule them would be a kind of judicial activism. (See, everyone hates judicial activism when it is convenient!)
Slashdot Mirror
Most of these work in Safari4, and some even on the iPhone. This kind of stuff, written entirely in HTML5 and javascript, is one of the things Apple is hoping will make the lack of flash on the iPhone a moot point.
Agreed. Doing anything out of spite is a bad idea. Long live Space Invaders!
Too easy, I know...
But there was the one time I opened my wallet to find that there among the $20s was a $100 bill. To this day I have no idea where it came from: whether it was from the ATM that I had gotten money from the day before, or change from the coffee shop where it had been stacked with the $10s... Had I known where it had come from, I might have returned it. But it would have been a hell of a lot more work to do so if it had been the ATM.
Supports third party development? Are you kidding? Sure, you can make web apps, but palm, symbian and even windows mobile kinda blow it out of the water on that front.
sure, it was sorta correct, except for the idea that the correlation coefficient has anything to do with "significance." I work with large data sets, and we regularly see statistically significant correlations (p 10^-10 and such) for things with correlation coefficients ~ 0.05. He also states that "4/16 (25.00%) of those not seeded yawn, and 12/36 (33.33%) of those seeded yawn." would have been significant. Not even close. Under Fisher's exact test (my preferred contingency table test, as it is... umm... exact), that would still have a p value of 0.5.
Or so they claim. If they had an exploit, this would be true. If they didn't, it will cover that minor detail. A kind of nice little benefit of wireless exploit claims
What the hell is the comment about iTV in there for? iTV is hardware for viewing video, Democracy is software for finding/downloading it. I don't know how they will be comparable at all. Furthermore, Apple's track record is precisely one of making easy to use systems. The idea that it would require anything like the effort needed for MythTV is pretty out of line. More likely it will be like the iTunes store. Easy to use, but limited. (If we must compare, MythTV is more of a challenge to use, but far less limited)
I also happen to think that as we investigate more and more pairs of close species, we will find this is not at all an uncommon pattern. There are lots of hybrids out there in nature, and you can be sure that genes make it across "species boundaries" with some regularity for quite a while.
One final note to destroy my credibility. Is anyone surpised that people had sex with chimps? (Okay, proto-humans with proto-chimps) We are a couple of horny species. I don't know too much about chimp sexual habits, but we humans sure are a kinky bunch to boot.
iTube? How last century. iMonorail is where it's at! (As long as there is a healthy supply of donuts for braking.)
* Whatever you may say about modern medicine, infertility is still a pretty big selective pressure. While we have technology to give many people offspring who can not do so through natural means, said technologies have a tendency to be expensive, and hence are far from universal.
Some other wonderfully bizarre scenes include the girl playing with a toad that she has dressed in a tutu, and my personal favorite: the guy in the VW microvan swerving down the road trying to hit every toad in his path. You know you've gotten one when you hear a good pop.
I just don't see why they don't have a system like the airlines to let you pick your exact seat. It might not work when everyone is trying to get tickets at the same time, but for most things it would probably work just fine. It also solves the problem where there might not be good seats 4 in a row, but there might be 2 in one row and 2 in the row behind...
But I should stop flogging the dead horse. Fact is, TM is an awful monopolistic highway robber. Perl Jam was right. Ah well.
Anyway, the point is you are not about to be able to fit a genome on a floppy disk. Not even close.
It should also be noted that there are no pictures yet, only renderings. Personally, I would want to be sure the thing existed before dropping $1.5K on it.
That or wait for apple to get its act together and release an official version. Clearly there are people who want them.
Three points for anyone who gets that reference.
On the other hand, Kansas is flatter than a pancake
http://www.tectonic.force9.co.uk.nyud.net:8090/bes tbots.htm t m
http://www.m5industries.com/html/press/sfweekly.h
But what I really want to know is whether Adam actually had anything to do with Blendo. Jamie gives him no credit, but he claims a bunch. One of them is being a bit arrogant...
ID never wants to acknowledge the fact that we, as humans, are very good at finding patterns and design even in random noise. I would like to see them actually define design, and how to recognize it unambiguously. Then we can start to talk about whether things are designed. There is a much longer argument here, but I'm late to the discussion, so nobody will read this...
Affect as a noun: He speaks with an affect.
Effect as a verb: We plan to effect a change in policy.
Both are correct. Note that the second sentence could be also written with "affect," but this would have a totally different meaning. In the "effect" case, it means we are going to cause the change to occur. In the "affect" case the change is presumably going to happen whether we have anything to do with it or not, but we plan to influence it.
I thought they used Macs...
Nope. Apple announced that 4.9 would have podcast support well before BadApple came out. I guess BadFruit thought it would take apple longer to get this done than it did. Maybe apple pushed things a bit because of BadApple, but the itunes podcast support seems pretty well polished, so I doubt there was that much of an extra rush.
...
Railroads could still have been built, but the tracks would have just been owned by the government. I am not sure I disagree, but the fact is that the law has been this way for over a hundred years, which is why I brought up the railroads. I would also note that public use is a term that applies somewhat broadly. Navigable waterways are all public, but filled land (which was often until the point of filling a waterway) is generally considered perfectly fair game for private ownership (see most of Boston Harbor), as long as it contains some public accomodation.
The point is only that this is not a new thing in US law/history. It is an expansion, sure, but not totally new. At least we are required "just compensation"....
That said, I think that this idea that urban renewal (extending beyond a blighted area, which has been allowed for a while, for cleaning up slums and such) is a valid reason for taking, seems problematic to me. MBITLITF (My brother is the lawyer in the family), but it seems clear that this is a continuation of a trend to expand this power beyond what I would consider reasonable. Building a hotel and whatever else in the hopes that people will come to visit and thereby provide jobs seems just plain dumb, but the courts basically said that they can't make a ruling based on that; if the government thinks it is a good idea, that is good enough, and to overrule them would be a kind of judicial activism. (See, everyone hates judicial activism when it is convenient!)