So this thing can fire stuff at many times the escape velocity of earths G pull. As soon as we can create a nuclear power plant that can launch its waste into space and have energy to spare we can switch all plants from fossil fuels to nuclear. Electricity might get a little more pricey but it'll solve that nasty C02 problem.
I guess I see your point but it would seem much simpler to just go with one resolution and make certain streams more lossy like MP3s. Or why didn't they just make two standards; 720p and 720i or 1080p and 1080i making the construction of HDTVs much simpler?
Why on earth is 1080i or any other interlaced format part of the HD spec? Isn't interlacing an artifact of CRT technology that died in the 90's in computer monitors?
This is from an old article describing the results on mice... Link
"In 16 mice with a tumor mass in the muscle, the researchers induced neutrophil production by administering an immune system booster known as GM-CSF over two months. In a short time, they observed that GM-CSF altered the growth dynamics of the cells. The tumors of two mice regressed completely and 80-90% tumor-cell death was seen in the rest. If the growth dynamics of tumors are universal, there is every reason to be hopeful the same result could be obtained in humans."
And some detail on how it works...
"Tumor cells, they have found, grow through the diffusion or migration of cancer cells at the tumor's outer edges. Only the cells close to the edge of the tumor proliferate--those inside the tumor do not, contrary to previous assumptions. According to the researchers' observations, cells formed at the edge of the tumor diffuse at the border of the tumor mass until they settle in curved depressions where the competition for space is lowest and where they are best protected from the immune system. In their new paper, Bru and co-workers show that the mechanical pressure exerted by immune-system cells known as "neutrophils" around mouse tumors can prevent the diffusion of these cells and thus prevent tumor growth."
I'm too much of a damn pessimist to believe it's true after reading something similar to this just about every week followed by "could lead to treatments"... Here's hoping I'm wrong.
So when we in America can afford to employ robots en masse and 300 million Chinese are suddenly left unemployed by "cheap overseas labor" do they have a right to cry foul about and uneven economic playing field?
Yes, it's a temporary monopoly granted by the government. Are you suggesting that artists shouldn't be able to receive compensation for their work because "it belongs to society"? Does it stop at art or should I be able to take your bike too?
"It is similar to the sociological consequences of the Prohibition period in the U.S. (during the 1920s). Certain laws can have unexpected consequences on society."
Not really, prohibition wasn't about property rights which some would argue is the basis of a society. So lets say that the recording industry continues to go after violators of copyright, even to the detriment of the industry; that should be their right as long as they own the property.
Metallica was stupid to take the approach they did and it cost them. If studpidity is going to mean the end of the recording industry then why take that away from them?
Wow. Wow... You need to understand that America is the richest country in the world because of capitalism. Our poor people have cars and fridges because of the innovation of the greedy. This really isn't a very complicated concept to grasp so why don't people get it? Our taxes are low but 20% of a trillion is more than 70% of a billion. I guess I'm being harsh, I was a Deomocrat for a while except that whole preponderance of evidence thing finally got to me.
This is outrageous. The fact that a company is allowed by government to fire innocent workers is unacceptable. Evil corporations have a responsibility to put food on my table and dammit they had better be held accountable if they're not doing their job.
I make candles for a living and I need your help. Please join me in emailing our legislators in my bid to regulate sunlight, it's putting hard working people like me out of business.
OK so then what do you think about the lifespan of neurons? They die and regenerate fairly regularly so you aren't the same you as you were two weeks ago. What if your consciousness could be offloaded to computer hardware while you were conscious and you could watch your old hardware die? Would you still be you?
You're assuming that you have a soul floating around that is somehow attached to your body. Using that thinking a perfect copy of a body isn't the same because the soul is lost. Futurology is usually based on trends predicted by science, your conception of a unique soul is not scientific.
If a perfect copy of yourself was made and placed in a chair across the desk from you it would be as real and soulful and deserving of human rights as you. I'd love to someday be able to have a conversation with myself, narcissistic as it sounds. What we experience, if you want to call it that, is user illusion. It's kind of ironic that science is proving something as mythological as fate to be true.
Of course you can't go on believing the truth on a day to day basis and try to remain free of mental institutions so we (including myself) go on believing in free will and heaven and hell, a soul, god, etc. I think as a species we became smart enough that self delusion evolved as a survial technique because truth is subject to the law of diminishing returns when applied to philosophy.
I don't think it's sad that people will live but it stands to reason that these people will also refuse treatment for their children who have the potential to have churchgoing kids so in a couple generations it would have an impact. They may figure out ways to cure us without embryonic stem cells by then.
OK now that was a good response:) It's true that scientists believed in a flat earth but then when new evidence was uncovered they changed their beliefs(that's science) and were imprisoned by the church.
My point isn't to condemn the religious as mindless. My point is that if embryonic stem cells lead to a wave of cures and religious people refuse to use those cures for thier children and themselves then they will have a higher mortality rate than those who accept treatment. That's it.
Well if I'm wrong then address my argument not my name. Is the logic bad? I never said that cloning was good I just said that those who refuse medical treatment will die more often than those who don't.
If natural selection really works(and I think it does) then people with moral misgivings about this technology will refuse to accept medical help from stem cells and will have a higher mortality rate than godless heathens. Maybe they'll interpret their decline as the arrival armageddon. It could also mean a true separation of church and state.
Of course this all assumes that people will actually refuse treatment because of their religious/moral beliefs which I highly doubt, even diehard churchgoers don't believe that the sun revolves around the earth anymore.
I get the feeling that a gigantic black market will emerge if this passes. If the internet routes around censorship as if it's damage then technological progress will route around hardware restrictions as if it's censorship.
This is NOT a zero sum game. Higher wages for foreigners does not mean we'll necessarily get less. When the cotton gin was invented farmers lost their jobs, fired their chiropractors, moved to the city and bought cars. It has been suggested that the only reason we didn't sink into a deeper recession after 9/11 was because of the influx of cheap Chinese products (think Walmart).
There are about 2.4 billion people in China and India compared to 0.3 Billion in America. In a few short years that brainpower is going to contribute to our standard of living. These people worried about forign competition are probably not going to complain when a freakishly brillian scientist in India or China cures cancer and saves their mom. In the grand scheme of things it's better for everybody that some of our wealth goes to nourish the brains of impoverished kids, they'll be saving our lives when we're old and gray.
I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce and agriculture in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain.
John Adams
I have a feeling that we'll look back on the jobs most of us currently have as shackles that prevented us from pursuing our true interests.
There are fewer anti-monkeyman types around these days but they're much more organized and outspoken than in the past. Most interpret their increasing noise as an increase in numbers but really, they've just painted the number 11 on their amp.
Why belive me? I'm no professor. So here's a quote from an Economist article
Yet it should be clear, even to the most socially minded in Germany, that the clock cannot be turned back without inflicting enormous damage on the country's prospects. Germany has signed up to EU treaties that prescribe the free flow of capital across national borders. Repudiating these is impossible without leaving the Union. The same applies to taxing foreign-exchange transactions or introducing a minimum holding period for an equity investment--both recent suggestions. Hedge funds and private-equity funds have open access for the long or short term.
So, using the same logic, we should prevent the use of robots in manufacturing right? They're taking our jobs.
Changing the tax structure may help with the problem. But creating challenges for businesses will cause the loss of jobs in the country with the regulation. You can't buy a home to lose if you don't have a job in the first place.
Good point but the benefits common in Europe may only be possible in 50 years when robots do just about everything. That's not the case now. Now, it's cheaper to outsource to foreign labor markets, eventually robots will beat even cheap labor, freeing those workers from corporate tyranny (and a paycheck).
So are you really worried about wealth distribution to the poor? Because it's happening on a massive scale in China right now due to our outsourcing. Or ar you concerned about wealth distribution to you(a capitalist tendency)?
Slashdot Mirror
So this thing can fire stuff at many times the escape velocity of earths G pull. As soon as we can create a nuclear power plant that can launch its waste into space and have energy to spare we can switch all plants from fossil fuels to nuclear. Electricity might get a little more pricey but it'll solve that nasty C02 problem.
3Mhz, this won't get slashdotted.
I guess I see your point but it would seem much simpler to just go with one resolution and make certain streams more lossy like MP3s. Or why didn't they just make two standards; 720p and 720i or 1080p and 1080i making the construction of HDTVs much simpler?
Why on earth is 1080i or any other interlaced format part of the HD spec? Isn't interlacing an artifact of CRT technology that died in the 90's in computer monitors?
Link
And some detail on how it works...
I'm too much of a damn pessimist to believe it's true after reading something similar to this just about every week followed by "could lead to treatments"... Here's hoping I'm wrong.
So when we in America can afford to employ robots en masse and 300 million Chinese are suddenly left unemployed by "cheap overseas labor" do they have a right to cry foul about and uneven economic playing field?
Yes, it's a temporary monopoly granted by the government. Are you suggesting that artists shouldn't be able to receive compensation for their work because "it belongs to society"? Does it stop at art or should I be able to take your bike too?
Metallica was stupid to take the approach they did and it cost them. If studpidity is going to mean the end of the recording industry then why take that away from them?
Wow. Wow... You need to understand that America is the richest country in the world because of capitalism. Our poor people have cars and fridges because of the innovation of the greedy. This really isn't a very complicated concept to grasp so why don't people get it? Our taxes are low but 20% of a trillion is more than 70% of a billion. I guess I'm being harsh, I was a Deomocrat for a while except that whole preponderance of evidence thing finally got to me.
Yeah, totally, fewer impoverished foreigners and cheaper Ipods are ruining my life.
This is outrageous. The fact that a company is allowed by government to fire innocent workers is unacceptable. Evil corporations have a responsibility to put food on my table and dammit they had better be held accountable if they're not doing their job.
I make candles for a living and I need your help. Please join me in emailing our legislators in my bid to regulate sunlight, it's putting hard working people like me out of business.
So people that die after falling in a frozen lake with no brain function and are later revived are still dead right?
OK so then what do you think about the lifespan of neurons? They die and regenerate fairly regularly so you aren't the same you as you were two weeks ago. What if your consciousness could be offloaded to computer hardware while you were conscious and you could watch your old hardware die? Would you still be you?
You're assuming that you have a soul floating around that is somehow attached to your body. Using that thinking a perfect copy of a body isn't the same because the soul is lost. Futurology is usually based on trends predicted by science, your conception of a unique soul is not scientific.
If a perfect copy of yourself was made and placed in a chair across the desk from you it would be as real and soulful and deserving of human rights as you. I'd love to someday be able to have a conversation with myself, narcissistic as it sounds. What we experience, if you want to call it that, is user illusion. It's kind of ironic that science is proving something as mythological as fate to be true.
Of course you can't go on believing the truth on a day to day basis and try to remain free of mental institutions so we (including myself) go on believing in free will and heaven and hell, a soul, god, etc. I think as a species we became smart enough that self delusion evolved as a survial technique because truth is subject to the law of diminishing returns when applied to philosophy.
I don't think it's sad that people will live but it stands to reason that these people will also refuse treatment for their children who have the potential to have churchgoing kids so in a couple generations it would have an impact. They may figure out ways to cure us without embryonic stem cells by then.
OK now that was a good response :) It's true that scientists believed in a flat earth but then when new evidence was uncovered they changed their beliefs(that's science) and were imprisoned by the church.
My point isn't to condemn the religious as mindless. My point is that if embryonic stem cells lead to a wave of cures and religious people refuse to use those cures for thier children and themselves then they will have a higher mortality rate than those who accept treatment. That's it.
Well if I'm wrong then address my argument not my name. Is the logic bad? I never said that cloning was good I just said that those who refuse medical treatment will die more often than those who don't.
If natural selection really works(and I think it does) then people with moral misgivings about this technology will refuse to accept medical help from stem cells and will have a higher mortality rate than godless heathens. Maybe they'll interpret their decline as the arrival armageddon. It could also mean a true separation of church and state.
Of course this all assumes that people will actually refuse treatment because of their religious/moral beliefs which I highly doubt, even diehard churchgoers don't believe that the sun revolves around the earth anymore.
I get the feeling that a gigantic black market will emerge if this passes. If the internet routes around censorship as if it's damage then technological progress will route around hardware restrictions as if it's censorship.
Ummm, yeah, I don't think they had chiropractors on call either :D Gimme a break, I'm trying to give up coffee this week.
There are about 2.4 billion people in China and India compared to 0.3 Billion in America. In a few short years that brainpower is going to contribute to our standard of living. These people worried about forign competition are probably not going to complain when a freakishly brillian scientist in India or China cures cancer and saves their mom. In the grand scheme of things it's better for everybody that some of our wealth goes to nourish the brains of impoverished kids, they'll be saving our lives when we're old and gray. I have a feeling that we'll look back on the jobs most of us currently have as shackles that prevented us from pursuing our true interests.
There are fewer anti-monkeyman types around these days but they're much more organized and outspoken than in the past. Most interpret their increasing noise as an increase in numbers but really, they've just painted the number 11 on their amp.
So, using the same logic, we should prevent the use of robots in manufacturing right? They're taking our jobs.
Changing the tax structure may help with the problem. But creating challenges for businesses will cause the loss of jobs in the country with the regulation. You can't buy a home to lose if you don't have a job in the first place.
Good point but the benefits common in Europe may only be possible in 50 years when robots do just about everything. That's not the case now. Now, it's cheaper to outsource to foreign labor markets, eventually robots will beat even cheap labor, freeing those workers from corporate tyranny (and a paycheck).
So are you really worried about wealth distribution to the poor? Because it's happening on a massive scale in China right now due to our outsourcing. Or ar you concerned about wealth distribution to you(a capitalist tendency)?