Background Info
on
Genome Surprise
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Want To Know What The Human Genome Project Is?
Begun formally in 1990, the U.S. Human Genome Project is a 13-year effort coordinated
by the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Institutes of Health. The
project originally was planned to last 15 years, but rapid technological advances
have accelerated the expected completion date to 2003. Project goals
are to
identify all the approximate 30,000 genes in human DNA,
determine the sequences of the 3 billion chemical base pairs
that make up human DNA,
store this information in databases,
improve tools for data analysis,
transfer related technologies to the private sector, and
address the ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI) that may
arise from the project.
To help achieve these goals, researchers also are studying the genetic makeup
of several nonhuman organisms. These include the common human gut bacterium
Escherichia coli, the fruit fly, and the laboratory mouse.
A unique aspect of the U.S. Human Genome Project is that it is the first large
scientific undertaking to address the ELSI implications that may arise from
the project.
Another important feature of the project is the federal government's long-standing
dedication to the transfer of technology to the private sector. By licensing
technologies to private companies and awarding grants for innovative research,
the project is catalyzing the multibillion-dollar U.S. biotechnology
industry and fostering the development of new medical
applications.
Sequence and Analysis of the human genome working draft was published
in February, 2001, in Nature and Science. See an index
of these papers and learn more about the
insights gained from them.
For more background information on the U.S. Human Genome Project, see the
following
A genome is all the DNA in an organism, including its genes. Genes carry
information for making all the proteins required by all organisms. These proteins determine,
among other things, how the organism looks, how well its body metabolizes food or fights
infection, and sometimes even how it behaves.
DNA is made up of four similar chemicals (called bases and abbreviated A, T, C, and G) that
are repeated millions or billions of times throughout a genome. The human genome, for example,
has 3 billion pairs of bases.
The particular order of As, Ts, Cs, and Gs is extremely important. The order underlies all of
life's diversity, even dictating whether an organism is human or another species such as yeast, rice,
or fruit fly, all of which have their own genomes and are themselves the focus of genome projects.
Because all organisms are related through similarities in DNA sequences, insights gained from
nonhuman genomes often lead to new knowledge about human biology.
"Costed" isn't a word. Let's assume that you're correct that implementing the XML features in the home edition would not cost any additional amount (which, given no knowledge of how Microsoft develops each one of the versions, I cannot state without a doubt). That cost still has to be incurred by the user of the home edition. Basically, if you include all the features that are in the professional edition within the home edition, then they are the same program and should cost the same amount of money. If you remove features from the home edition, the home edition should be less expensive. And this is the way it is. You're arguing that the home edition and the professional edition should be exactly the same in term of functionality because all of the functionality has to be developed anyway. How exactly would you price these "different" versions? If you make the home edition cheaper, corporations are all going to switch to the home edition since it's got the same functionality as the pro edition. If you make them the same, then the home edition is put at a price point that may be higher than the average user wants to spend on an office suite.
If you'd actually read the article you would know that because this is a hardware addition, there are quite a few PDAs listed that will work fine (i.e. PDAs that have already been released and don't just exist in the future.)
Yeah, guess what moron - not only did you rush to try to get first post and, in doing so, write a comment without any meaningful discussion of the article or even the topic BUT you also failed to get first post. way to go! you're a failure twice over. you kids that try to act like you're not going after first post by writing some overly generic reply are more sad than the assholes that just type "FP" and hit submit. christ, get a fucking job you asshat.
It appears someone failed in their instruction of you in regards to the English language. "Your" and "you're" are not the same word. Check out "too", "to", and "two" as well. You might learn something. Basically, what your drivel sounds like is the freshman at college who has just been exposed to Rand, Nietzsche, and Kant - perhaps some Rousseau or Pascal? You've got a lot to learn and saying the education system is "shit" (my, you are an eloquent one) shows that you don't have a deep understanding of the issue. But that's what your next few years are for. Stay in college and remember that I told you this. You're wrong now but you'll grow and realize your mistake. And don't worry if you disagree with me, just remember what I said.
If you're anything other than a college kid, (i.e. over the age of 22) then I weep for your life and the people who have to endure you.
"And just to bite at what I believe is a troll..."
Who do you think is a troll?
I wasn't pushing the idea that democracy has been brought to Iraq, or whatever it is has got you so upset. I was merely pointing out that if Iraq had a democracy, the majority would benefit from the removal of Hussein and therefore the majority would want Hussein out.
I hope that this war will show the Arab world that the United States will not back down. If a country or group believes that we will not attack them out of concern for our reputation, they are mistaken. Although, those Arabs who have used depression in the Middle East and the Palestinian situation as a means to motivate other Arabs to take up the fight against America, will use the war in Iraq to further their agenda. A viable solution to terrorism is if the regimes in the Middle East take an interest in helping their people up into decent living conditions and a resolution to the Palestinian situation where Israel is no longer an occupying force BUT they are not made to give Palestine their own territory because of terrorism. Ah, to dream these little dreams...
" Wow. If I keep saying Redhate and trolling about Red Hat will I get modded up too?"
Who should stop bitching? Anyway, my point was that it is childish to use terms like "Lunix", "M$", "Redhate" - basically perversions of a company's name make the issue seem a lot less important than it actually is. You respond to me like I'm some sort of Microsoft apologist. Where you get this idea, I don't know. I am merely trying to get the point across that when having a civilized discussion of companies, there's no need to resort to schoolyard type tactics of name-calling. Or would you prefer I call you "boogie" instead of "bogie" when I reply to you? You see my point now? Why don't you get a clue and stop bitching?
Well, let's be democratic about this. More Iraqi citizens have suffered through rape and torture at the hands of Saddam then those who have been killed or injured by American bombing. So, Saddam goes. Did you watch the Iraqis celebrating in the streets today? Didn't you feel proud of the job that the U.S. military has done? This has been a just and humane effort. Honestly, how can you see people celebrating in the streets and kicking a statue of Saddam's head and not think that these people are thankful for what we have done?
Read a few parents up - I'm not defending this guy at all. I was merely pointing out that the cases are similar and that the ruling by the Supreme Court could have an impact. I do see your point though.
I'm not seeing how it is that different. The guy takes the BIOS produced by MS, modifies it (censors, edits, whatever), and then resells it. It's the same concept - taking a copyrighted work produced by others, changing it to suit the needs of a customer, and selling it to that customer.
You are correct in the general case BUT there are cases where this is not correct. Let's suppose that we've got a task which, using von Neumann architecture, will take an amount of time that exceeds the expected lifetime of Earth. Now, using a parallel computer, in the theoretical sense will see this task take a reduced amount of time. Ignoring the possibility that the von Neumann based computer is shuttled to a safe environment before the destruction of Earth, the task will never be completed. But the parallel computer will complete the task because it does things more efficiently! The types of tasks I am envisioning here are those where time is critical. Let's say you need to know which way to steer my plane before it crashes. If the task isn't done as efficient, the plane crashes. Thus, a parallel computer can perform the task while the von Neumann cannot.
I'm nit picking but that's just to point out that with some tasks, if you can't do it the most efficiently, you can't do it at all.
He wasn't charged because of selling circumvention materials. He was charged because the BIOS he was selling was copyrighted material of Microsoft. Did you read up on any of this before posting? This is not about eventual use or any of the nonsense you're talking about. Let me try to break it down more simply for you. Let's say you decide to buy a piece of software at Walmart - some game or something for the PC. You then make a thousand copies of that game and begin selling it to people. You are violating copyright law. That's basically why the guy was arrested. Jesus, RTFA.
You know what, don't make sweeping generalizations that aren't true. Everyone over the age of 23 finds the use of 'gay' to mean any variant of bad, poor, or lacking? I don't think so. There are many people in this world that find homosexuality as offensive and disgusting as child molestation. They don't find people who use the word 'gay' in the manner previously noted ignorant. In fact, they probably agree. In the safe coddly world that you are trying to create where homosexuals aren't ever offended or made to feel like they are doing anything wrong, you are making people who hate homosexuality feel wrong. If you want to celebrate diversity so much, why don't you tell the next person who calls you a faggot that their opinion is not stupid (or gay, ha ha) and they have the right to it.
Let's hear it for being offensive! I'm offended whenever I see a gay pride parade or two guys holding hands. Do I complain and tell people that while I know they don't mean to offend me, they are? No, I don't. We live in a society where there are quite a few freedoms. You're not the morality police so why don't you just pipe down? Honestly, you're being gay.
Okay, then I am not following your point at all. Weren't you saying that by mainland China's entrance into the search engine game, Google would have competition? From what you've said in your reply, you're claiming that because of other search engines Google will be forced to get better. I agree with this as no search engine rules forever. I just don't see how you think mainland China is going to influence this?
I don't think they will have much of an impact because their people are going to be cut off and therefore only capitalist societies will be driving Google and other search engines to get better.
"If China's search can compete, unfairly or fairly..."
Well, perhaps the government can force their search engine upon the people but is this really competition? If the Chinese people aren't allowed to choose their search engine, then there's no competition because Google isn't in the market. And who is to know whether the Chinese engine will be any good? I'd have more faith in the development efforts of Microsoft, who have an established track record of hiring the best people to develop their products or buying products to remarket.
I don't know if I have made my point as clearly as I want. Basically, the government of mainland China will force their engine on the people so it doesn't actually have to be any good. Therefore, Google isn't going to be driven to be any better based on this new foray. Second, Google isn't losing market share because they can't get into the market, AFAIK.
Due to the fact that you believed I would reply with something "mindless", since you assumed it, I will not bother with you. You've proven yourself to be rude and not interested in an interesting discussion. Rather, you are looking to make yourself look good at the expense of others.
In the future, take note of this.
Here are two statements:
1) And PLEASE, don't say mindless things like "We've lost our freedoms"
2) Could you expound on your statement a bit? What, specifically, are you referring to when you say that government is taking on bad traits? They are accomplishing the same basic result but one is the mark of someone who is interested in discussion and the other is the mark of someone who feels small in their life. You figure out the difference.
Here's a question that I'm mulling over as a result of reading the synopsis of this article. With all the literary and cinematic works that have been made which deal with a Big Brother-like state [for lack of a shorter term], why is it that the governments of the world are still able to move in the directions outlined in those works? It seems like no matter how embedded in our culture the idea that certain traits of governments are bad and that we must rally against them, these traits continue to crop up. Consider this, has the U.S. become more or less like the vision of 1984 since publication?
"Read up on SSL; that's not an error, but proper behavior." I know that tough guy. I was pointing out that IE was not behaving incorrectly and, in fact, that any browser should mark Redhat as untrusted.
Where did I bash Slashdot? I was replying to an AC who was bashing Microsoft without cause.
My dear anonymous friend,
Please do a little more fact checking before lobbing slander upon a company. If I were to call you a racist without any evidence, I bet you'd be upset. So too is Microsoft upset to hear your charge of anticompetitive practices. I am currently using Mozilla 1.3 and upon opening the linked page I received the following warning: "Website Certified By An Unknown Authority Unable to verify the identity of listman.redhat.com as a trusted site." So I guess the Mozilla team has been sabotaged and is now in cahoots with Microsoft, right?
Before you bash Microsoft next time, take a breath and relax. There are bigger fish to fry. Saddam Hussein uses rape to keep people in line; Bill Gates uses some rather harsh software licenses. Who is worse? Figure it out and then go after him.
How much of a step is it to go from playing games on your computer or Playstation 2 to playing with a robot. Sure, there's a technological step but the basic premise remains the same - you're gaining enjoyment from an object meant to simulate some level of human experience through transistors and electricity.
Slashdot Mirror
Begun formally in 1990, the U.S. Human Genome Project is a 13-year effort coordinated by the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Institutes of Health. The project originally was planned to last 15 years, but rapid technological advances have accelerated the expected completion date to 2003. Project goals are to
- identify all the approximate 30,000 genes in human DNA,
- determine the sequences of the 3 billion chemical base pairs
that make up human DNA,
- store this information in databases,
- improve tools for data analysis,
- transfer related technologies to the private sector, and
- address the ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI) that may
arise from the project.
To help achieve these goals, researchers also are studying the genetic makeup of several nonhuman organisms. These include the common human gut bacterium Escherichia coli, the fruit fly, and the laboratory mouse.A unique aspect of the U.S. Human Genome Project is that it is the first large scientific undertaking to address the ELSI implications that may arise from the project.
Another important feature of the project is the federal government's long-standing dedication to the transfer of technology to the private sector. By licensing technologies to private companies and awarding grants for innovative research, the project is catalyzing the multibillion-dollar U.S. biotechnology industry and fostering the development of new medical applications.
Sequence and Analysis of the human genome working draft was published in February, 2001, in Nature and Science. See an index of these papers and learn more about the insights gained from them.
For more background information on the U.S. Human Genome Project, see the following
What's a genome? And why is it important?
To understand more read
Who did you speak with at core-source who told you this misinformation?
"Costed" isn't a word. Let's assume that you're correct that implementing the XML features in the home edition would not cost any additional amount (which, given no knowledge of how Microsoft develops each one of the versions, I cannot state without a doubt). That cost still has to be incurred by the user of the home edition. Basically, if you include all the features that are in the professional edition within the home edition, then they are the same program and should cost the same amount of money. If you remove features from the home edition, the home edition should be less expensive. And this is the way it is. You're arguing that the home edition and the professional edition should be exactly the same in term of functionality because all of the functionality has to be developed anyway. How exactly would you price these "different" versions? If you make the home edition cheaper, corporations are all going to switch to the home edition since it's got the same functionality as the pro edition. If you make them the same, then the home edition is put at a price point that may be higher than the average user wants to spend on an office suite.
If you'd actually read the article you would know that because this is a hardware addition, there are quite a few PDAs listed that will work fine (i.e. PDAs that have already been released and don't just exist in the future.)
Come on buddy, you left yourself wide open for that crack.
Yeah, guess what moron - not only did you rush to try to get first post and, in doing so, write a comment without any meaningful discussion of the article or even the topic BUT you also failed to get first post. way to go! you're a failure twice over. you kids that try to act like you're not going after first post by writing some overly generic reply are more sad than the assholes that just type "FP" and hit submit. christ, get a fucking job you asshat.
Hilarity ensues.
If you're anything other than a college kid, (i.e. over the age of 22) then I weep for your life and the people who have to endure you.
I wasn't pushing the idea that democracy has been brought to Iraq, or whatever it is has got you so upset. I was merely pointing out that if Iraq had a democracy, the majority would benefit from the removal of Hussein and therefore the majority would want Hussein out.
I hope that this war will show the Arab world that the United States will not back down. If a country or group believes that we will not attack them out of concern for our reputation, they are mistaken. Although, those Arabs who have used depression in the Middle East and the Palestinian situation as a means to motivate other Arabs to take up the fight against America, will use the war in Iraq to further their agenda. A viable solution to terrorism is if the regimes in the Middle East take an interest in helping their people up into decent living conditions and a resolution to the Palestinian situation where Israel is no longer an occupying force BUT they are not made to give Palestine their own territory because of terrorism. Ah, to dream these little dreams...
Anyway, what's the trolling call about?
Who should stop bitching?
Anyway, my point was that it is childish to use terms like "Lunix", "M$", "Redhate" - basically perversions of a company's name make the issue seem a lot less important than it actually is. You respond to me like I'm some sort of Microsoft apologist. Where you get this idea, I don't know. I am merely trying to get the point across that when having a civilized discussion of companies, there's no need to resort to schoolyard type tactics of name-calling. Or would you prefer I call you "boogie" instead of "bogie" when I reply to you?
You see my point now? Why don't you get a clue and stop bitching?
Well, let's be democratic about this. More Iraqi citizens have suffered through rape and torture at the hands of Saddam then those who have been killed or injured by American bombing. So, Saddam goes. Did you watch the Iraqis celebrating in the streets today? Didn't you feel proud of the job that the U.S. military has done? This has been a just and humane effort. Honestly, how can you see people celebrating in the streets and kicking a statue of Saddam's head and not think that these people are thankful for what we have done?
Read a few parents up - I'm not defending this guy at all. I was merely pointing out that the cases are similar and that the ruling by the Supreme Court could have an impact. I do see your point though.
Same difference.
If you do, you're wrong.
You're no different than the people who type "Lunix."
Learn to enjoy civil discourse.
You are correct in the general case BUT there are cases where this is not correct. Let's suppose that we've got a task which, using von Neumann architecture, will take an amount of time that exceeds the expected lifetime of Earth. Now, using a parallel computer, in the theoretical sense will see this task take a reduced amount of time. Ignoring the possibility that the von Neumann based computer is shuttled to a safe environment before the destruction of Earth, the task will never be completed. But the parallel computer will complete the task because it does things more efficiently! The types of tasks I am envisioning here are those where time is critical. Let's say you need to know which way to steer my plane before it crashes. If the task isn't done as efficient, the plane crashes. Thus, a parallel computer can perform the task while the von Neumann cannot.
I'm nit picking but that's just to point out that with some tasks, if you can't do it the most efficiently, you can't do it at all.
I concur. I was going to issue a reply to that kid's nonsense but you've stated the argument quite eloquently.
He wasn't charged because of selling circumvention materials. He was charged because the BIOS he was selling was copyrighted material of Microsoft. Did you read up on any of this before posting? This is not about eventual use or any of the nonsense you're talking about. Let me try to break it down more simply for you. Let's say you decide to buy a piece of software at Walmart - some game or something for the PC. You then make a thousand copies of that game and begin selling it to people. You are violating copyright law. That's basically why the guy was arrested. Jesus, RTFA.
Let's hear it for being offensive! I'm offended whenever I see a gay pride parade or two guys holding hands. Do I complain and tell people that while I know they don't mean to offend me, they are? No, I don't. We live in a society where there are quite a few freedoms. You're not the morality police so why don't you just pipe down?
Honestly, you're being gay.
I don't think they will have much of an impact because their people are going to be cut off and therefore only capitalist societies will be driving Google and other search engines to get better.
I don't know if I have made my point as clearly as I want. Basically, the government of mainland China will force their engine on the people so it doesn't actually have to be any good. Therefore, Google isn't going to be driven to be any better based on this new foray. Second, Google isn't losing market share because they can't get into the market, AFAIK.
In the future, take note of this.
Here are two statements:
1) And PLEASE, don't say mindless things like "We've lost our freedoms"
2) Could you expound on your statement a bit? What, specifically, are you referring to when you say that government is taking on bad traits?
They are accomplishing the same basic result but one is the mark of someone who is interested in discussion and the other is the mark of someone who feels small in their life. You figure out the difference.
Good Luck!
Here's a question that I'm mulling over as a result of reading the synopsis of this article. With all the literary and cinematic works that have been made which deal with a Big Brother-like state [for lack of a shorter term], why is it that the governments of the world are still able to move in the directions outlined in those works? It seems like no matter how embedded in our culture the idea that certain traits of governments are bad and that we must rally against them, these traits continue to crop up. Consider this, has the U.S. become more or less like the vision of 1984 since publication?
I know that tough guy. I was pointing out that IE was not behaving incorrectly and, in fact, that any browser should mark Redhat as untrusted.
Where did I bash Slashdot? I was replying to an AC who was bashing Microsoft without cause.
Please do a little more fact checking before lobbing slander upon a company. If I were to call you a racist without any evidence, I bet you'd be upset. So too is Microsoft upset to hear your charge of anticompetitive practices.
I am currently using Mozilla 1.3 and upon opening the linked page I received the following warning:
"Website Certified By An Unknown Authority
Unable to verify the identity of listman.redhat.com as a trusted site."
So I guess the Mozilla team has been sabotaged and is now in cahoots with Microsoft, right?
Before you bash Microsoft next time, take a breath and relax. There are bigger fish to fry. Saddam Hussein uses rape to keep people in line; Bill Gates uses some rather harsh software licenses. Who is worse? Figure it out and then go after him.