The problem in using XML here is the same in any other application of the technology that by nature requires it be free from language bias: in what language do you create your standard? English? Indian? Cantonese? True w/ XSLT translators you can switch from one language DTD to another, but this is far from a 'universal' standard.
Not that I have a solution to this problem... I just can't help but think XML isn't the answer to _everything_... especially if English isn't your first language, though it is becoming the de facto standard for meta-data representation.
- jc ---------------------------------------------- -----------------
James C. Diggans
jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
I agree with your metaphor, everyone here seems to be upset by the viral analogy due to a perceived negativity. Viruses aren't inherently negative organisms and are used all over biological science for useful purposes. Not all viruses kill their hosts. Dyson's point was that a model of viral epidemiology (i.e. logarithmic spread across populations) is a good model for the current increase in the speed of information dissemination. It didn't intend to portray this as a negative (or necessarily positive) model, just as an interesting parallel between the biological flow of genetic material and the flow of information along electronic channels. Calm down.
- jc ---------------------------------------------- -----------------
James C. Diggans
jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
I spent two years at the University of Florida Genome Sequencing core and I can promise you the analogies Katz drew are right in one respect: the tactics used by PE Biosystems to keep competitors out of a burgeoning market are very similar to those ued by Microsoft. They dominate the market not because they have the best product, but because they undercut their competitors voraciously, knowing they have the capital on which to fall back while small, high-tech sequencing startups do not.
In the same light, PE's product is nowhere near as good as their many competitors. UF's _ONE_ MegaBACE capillary sequencer (MegaBACE is the primary competitor for PE's market share) had an uptime of more than 95% (which is great for such a new, immensely complex tech) while Baylor's genome center (comprised of 30+ 3700's, PE's new flagship capillary sequencer) has THREE full time PE techs ON STAFF to keep their machines running. That's kind of sad.
So in one respect, Katz is correct, PE has dominated a market many didn't even know existed and will be increasingly important. However, Mr. Hunkapiller does not rule the _data_ produced by his machines, which of course are mountains of orders of magnitude more important than the machine on which the sequence is obtained. For the most part raw sequence data is in the public domain... my only problem with Mr. Hunkapiller is his business practices, I do not fear one day he'll lead an army of Beautiful People to my doorstep.:P
- jc ---------------------------------------------- ----------------- James C. Diggans jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
Actually I was thinking we should've all emailed abuse@hotmail.com...:) ---------------------------------------------- ----------------- James C. Diggans jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
This patent and it's effects on Linux seem to be moot points. If, indeed, MS does try to flaunt their patent around and enforce it by bully-whipping anyone trying to create such a system the EFF would have no problem demonstrating prior art, whether in RedHat's RPM system or Debian's apt.
The fact that a patent is granted for a particular idea isn't always the most important concept, the patent never really becomes important until it's used as a weapon against a competitor. I doubt MS will ever have the cojones to attempt this, as anyone and their mother can show prior art for this particular 'concept'.
- jc ---------------------------------------------- ----------------- James C. Diggans jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
One of the first assertions in his argument is that the gravitational mass of a proton is equal to zero. However, since light is bent by gravitational fields, this cannot be true. I haven't yet dug through his math but I'm betting basing an argument on false assertions leads to false revelations.:) ---------------------------------------------- ----------------- James C. Diggans jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
I hate to admit to this (script kiddies go flame someone who cares) but I use and love Microsoft's Natural Keyboard. Outside of being stylish (which really only serves to interest my non-computer friends) it's worked flawlessly now for two years, feels great to the touch and doesn't include a mouse touchpad! (Personal issue, I prefer to have my mouse capable of travelling away from my keyboard.:).
- jc
------------------------------------------------ --------------- James C. Diggans jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
If you have two crimes with DNA evidence that is only this reliable, then more than likely some innocent person in the UK would test guilty.
First, each 'test' is a unique event, no two tests have any impact on each other. That said, for any single given comparison between two sets of human DNA the entire genome is certainly not compared directly for two reasons:
A) That is technically approaching 'rediculous' since the entire genome run out on an agarose gel looks like a big streak instead of the banding pattern we've all seen on Court TV.
B) It's an excercise in futility since a good percentage of all human DNA is repetitious. Some of these repetitious areas define what we look like (since we all basically look the same) and some are just 'junk' DNA that doesn't do anything. Comparing either of these sub groups is fairly futile.
To this end, DNA science instead turns to hypervariable regions of the human genome known as 'marker' regions. It's these marker regions that are actually compared in court cases. And the variability of these marker regions is what leads to the 1:37 million statistical figure.
Now since each trial is independant in a test like this EACH test for DNA similarity has a 1:37 million chance of matching to the level of exactness set by law. It doesn't really matter how many of these trials are carried out, whether its 80 a year or 80 million, each one has the same (tiny) chance of mis-conviction. This would be why the experts are suffering from blown minds about now considering my chances of winning the lottery every weekend are 1:~14million and I consider _that_ rediculous.
As a side note, as our ability to sequence genomic data increases in speed our ability to compare larger and larger regions of human DNA will improve. At the moment it's fairly archaic, we chop each DNA sample with enzymes that cut at particular loci and then see if the pieces come out the same size. It's a dirty method to be sure. Perhaps someday soon we'll be able to just sequence each persons genome and compare them directly... though I don't see that being a possibility for at least ten years hence as it would require amazing computing power to compare 3x10^9 bases directly as well as some serious sequencing technology we just don't have yet. A typical state-of-the-art capillary DNA sequencer costs $250,000.00 (US) and can sequence approx. 100,000 bases a week. Do the math and you'd need a lot of machines to get 3x10^9 in any sort of court-friendly time frame... for now!
------------------------------------------------ --------------- James C. Diggans jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
How amusing the trolls and flames for this particular article must be for Mr. Katz... how many of these 13 year olds actually read Jon's responses? How many of them (after reading his erudite, controlled answers on the topic of their childish behaviour) still reveled in their ability to publically post such commentary as 'jonkatz is gay'?
How impressive we humans can really be when we think we're anonymous!
------------------------------------------------ --------------- James C. Diggans jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
Citibank now has their own sort of 'internet bank' called Citi-f/i... I received a flyer in the mail the other day and have been meaning to check it out. From the glossy brochure it seems there are no fees and the minimum balance is an entire dollar... sounds nearly too good to be true (and I'm betting it is). They dont have ATM's in my area but they do offer to reimburse the 'other bank's' service charges on four withdrawls a month. If your account balance is over $10,000, they will reimburse you for ANY and all withdrawls from enemy ATM's. Anyone have more info/experience with this bank than I?
fyi... I just visited the site to make sure I had the url correct and guess what, no unix support of any flavor! There goes that idea... Citi F/I
Why clone extinct species? Why this love of organisms that prove unable to survive in this day and age? What's so redeeming about the Huia bird that it deserves another chance to prove it's fitness? Cloning is one thing, but continuing to mess w/ the work of evolution only crowds the planet...
Along these same lines and perhaps I'm way off here, what about visible light? Sitting a foot from a 100 W bulb for hours on end reading exposes the reader to wavelengths of light slightly more energetic than RF. If the bulb's emitting light rays w/ 100W of power... isn't that more power and a higher frequency wave at nearly the same distance?
Slashdot Mirror
The problem in using XML here is the same in any other application of the technology that by nature requires it be free from language bias: in what language do you create your standard? English? Indian? Cantonese? True w/ XSLT translators you can switch from one language DTD to another, but this is far from a 'universal' standard.
... I just can't help but think XML isn't the answer to _everything_ ... especially if English isn't your first language, though it is becoming the de facto standard for meta-data representation.
- -----------------
Not that I have a solution to this problem
- jc
---------------------------------------------
James C. Diggans
jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
I agree with your metaphor, everyone here seems to be upset by the viral analogy due to a perceived negativity. Viruses aren't inherently negative organisms and are used all over biological science for useful purposes. Not all viruses kill their hosts. Dyson's point was that a model of viral epidemiology (i.e. logarithmic spread across populations) is a good model for the current increase in the speed of information dissemination. It didn't intend to portray this as a negative (or necessarily positive) model, just as an interesting parallel between the biological flow of genetic material and the flow of information along electronic channels. Calm down.
- -----------------
- jc
---------------------------------------------
James C. Diggans
jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
I spent two years at the University of Florida Genome Sequencing core and I can promise you the analogies Katz drew are right in one respect: the tactics used by PE Biosystems to keep competitors out of a burgeoning market are very similar to those ued by Microsoft. They dominate the market not because they have the best product, but because they undercut their competitors voraciously, knowing they have the capital on which to fall back while small, high-tech sequencing startups do not.
... my only problem with Mr. Hunkapiller is his business practices, I do not fear one day he'll lead an army of Beautiful People to my doorstep. :P
- -----------------
In the same light, PE's product is nowhere near as good as their many competitors. UF's _ONE_ MegaBACE capillary sequencer (MegaBACE is the primary competitor for PE's market share) had an uptime of more than 95% (which is great for such a new, immensely complex tech) while Baylor's genome center (comprised of 30+ 3700's, PE's new flagship capillary sequencer) has THREE full time PE techs ON STAFF to keep their machines running. That's kind of sad.
So in one respect, Katz is correct, PE has dominated a market many didn't even know existed and will be increasingly important. However, Mr. Hunkapiller does not rule the _data_ produced by his machines, which of course are mountains of orders of magnitude more important than the machine on which the sequence is obtained. For the most part raw sequence data is in the public domain
- jc
---------------------------------------------
James C. Diggans
jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
Actually I was thinking we should've all emailed abuse@hotmail.com ... :)- -----------------
---------------------------------------------
James C. Diggans
jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
This patent and it's effects on Linux seem to be moot points. If, indeed, MS does try to flaunt their patent around and enforce it by bully-whipping anyone trying to create such a system the EFF would have no problem demonstrating prior art, whether in RedHat's RPM system or Debian's apt.
- -----------------
The fact that a patent is granted for a particular idea isn't always the most important concept, the patent never really becomes important until it's used as a weapon against a competitor. I doubt MS will ever have the cojones to attempt this, as anyone and their mother can show prior art for this particular 'concept'.
- jc
---------------------------------------------
James C. Diggans
jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
One of the first assertions in his argument is that the gravitational mass of a proton is equal to zero. However, since light is bent by gravitational fields, this cannot be true. I haven't yet dug through his math but I'm betting basing an argument on false assertions leads to false revelations. :)- -----------------
---------------------------------------------
James C. Diggans
jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
I hate to admit to this (script kiddies go flame someone who cares) but I use and love Microsoft's Natural Keyboard. Outside of being stylish (which really only serves to interest my non-computer friends) it's worked flawlessly now for two years, feels great to the touch and doesn't include a mouse touchpad! (Personal issue, I prefer to have my mouse capable of travelling away from my keyboard. :).
- ---------------
- jc
-----------------------------------------------
James C. Diggans
jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
First, each 'test' is a unique event, no two tests have any impact on each other. That said, for any single given comparison between two sets of human DNA the entire genome is certainly not compared directly for two reasons:
A) That is technically approaching 'rediculous' since the entire genome run out on an agarose gel looks like a big streak instead of the banding pattern we've all seen on Court TV.
B) It's an excercise in futility since a good percentage of all human DNA is repetitious. Some of these repetitious areas define what we look like (since we all basically look the same) and some are just 'junk' DNA that doesn't do anything. Comparing either of these sub groups is fairly futile.
To this end, DNA science instead turns to hypervariable regions of the human genome known as 'marker' regions. It's these marker regions that are actually compared in court cases. And the variability of these marker regions is what leads to the 1:37 million statistical figure.
Now since each trial is independant in a test like this EACH test for DNA similarity has a 1:37 million chance of matching to the level of exactness set by law. It doesn't really matter how many of these trials are carried out, whether its 80 a year or 80 million, each one has the same (tiny) chance of mis-conviction. This would be why the experts are suffering from blown minds about now considering my chances of winning the lottery every weekend are 1:~14million and I consider _that_ rediculous.
As a side note, as our ability to sequence genomic data increases in speed our ability to compare larger and larger regions of human DNA will improve. At the moment it's fairly archaic, we chop each DNA sample with enzymes that cut at particular loci and then see if the pieces come out the same size. It's a dirty method to be sure. Perhaps someday soon we'll be able to just sequence each persons genome and compare them directly ... though I don't see that being a possibility for at least ten years hence as it would require amazing computing power to compare 3x10^9 bases directly as well as some serious sequencing technology we just don't have yet. A typical state-of-the-art capillary DNA sequencer costs $250,000.00 (US) and can sequence approx. 100,000 bases a week. Do the math and you'd need a lot of machines to get 3x10^9 in any sort of court-friendly time frame ... for now!
-----------------------------------------------
James C. Diggans
jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
How amusing the trolls and flames for this particular article must be for Mr. Katz ... how many of these 13 year olds actually read Jon's responses? How many of them (after reading his erudite, controlled answers on the topic of their childish behaviour) still reveled in their ability to publically post such commentary as 'jonkatz is gay'?
- ---------------
How impressive we humans can really be when we think we're anonymous!
-----------------------------------------------
James C. Diggans
jdiggans@excelsior-web.com
Citibank now has their own sort of 'internet bank' called Citi-f/i ... I received a flyer in the mail the other day and have been meaning to check it out. From the glossy brochure it seems there are no fees and the minimum balance is an entire dollar ... sounds nearly too good to be true (and I'm betting it is). They dont have ATM's in my area but they do offer to reimburse the 'other bank's' service charges on four withdrawls a month. If your account balance is over $10,000, they will reimburse you for ANY and all withdrawls from enemy ATM's. Anyone have more info/experience with this bank than I?
... I just visited the site to make sure I had the url correct and guess what, no unix support of any flavor! ... Citi F/I
fyi
There goes that idea
Why clone extinct species? Why this love of organisms that prove unable to survive in this day and age? What's so redeeming about the Huia bird that it deserves another chance to prove it's fitness? Cloning is one thing, but continuing to mess w/ the work of evolution only crowds the planet ...
Along these same lines and perhaps I'm way off here, what about visible light? Sitting a foot from a 100 W bulb for hours on end reading exposes the reader to wavelengths of light slightly more energetic than RF. If the bulb's emitting light rays w/ 100W of power ... isn't that more power and a higher frequency wave at nearly the same distance?