Even then, we just pump the wind power into the grid and ask people on the tail-end to pay for the wind power. This is what Colorado does. The wind is added to the grid, and the extra cost gets dished out to people who pay for the wind generated energy. In the end it is the same result. Although, a year or so back the wind power dropped below the "brown power" and the program was pretty much capped at that point.
You don't need to have any experience to understand the power grid at the level of pump power in, and other generator will smooth out the power generation. We couldn't convert the entire grid to wind, or to solar, but mix those in with a good amount of baseline power (I'd recommend nuclear) and you have a green energy portfolio without crashing everything.
Yeah, this is the most worthless article to make slashdot for nearly a day.
Oddly enough, P.Z. Myers of Pharyngula actually had a good write up on this paper. It turns out that they are in fact totopotent. They proved it by transferring the mouse cell nucleus to an oocyte and implanting it, resulting in an entire mouse; everything grew perfectly fine thus we know it can make everything.
They found a reset switch. They trigger it with gene therapy though and the mice produced have a much higher cancer rate and you might hit a useful gene you need. They found this reset switch by looking at actual ESCs. They need a way to trigger the cells without forcing some new genetic material in, leading to cancer and the like. The way to do that is more research. Ten years down the road this is going to be pretty important, and Takahashi et al. are probably going get a Nobel Prize for this.
Three things to remember: This breakthrough was the result of embryonic stem cell research. This needs more research to make it viable for any treatment which means more embryonic stem cell research. This breakthrough was made in Japan where they are allowed to conduct the research.
We fell behind, and though there are breakthroughs coming they aren't ours, nor are they as soon as they could have been.
Hardly. Frankly this is pretty interesting, and certainly would be useful for the getting stem cells for a person to grow a new body part. The question remains are these cells totopotent or pluripotent? Do they have the same range of use as ESC? Or just the range of ASC?
The answer is, we don't have an answer. We haven't done the leg work to find out what the range of use is on embryonic stem cells. This debate has nothing to do with ethics. No medical ethics are violated here, the debate is 100% about religion. The fact is, if one actually worried about the embryo, scientists would be happy to make lines by taking some cells from a developing embryo, then make a stem cell line out of those and implant the embryo and get an infant out of the deal. So rather than some embryo which would otherwise be medical waste, we would have a stem cell line and a child. Who could object? -- Um, religious folks; they still object.
It could very well be that ASCs are all we need and that we could dedifferentiate them easily with full usability, able to make everything from a new kidney to an embryo and a clone army. The problem however, is we just don't know because the research isn't there. The idea that a clump of 150 cells without any nerves at all is the ethical equivalent to a child, or that that clump of cells is more valued than somebody with a spinal cord injury whose treatments are being prolonged is a joke. A fly has 100,000 nerve cells and is by far the ethical superior of swaths of embryos.
Embryonic stem cells might not be any more useful. And we'll always have that "might" there until we do the research.
There's nothing about medical ethics which suggests some kind of soul thing jumps into a zygote at the moment the gametes join, and nothing to suggest that a couple cells aren't just that, some cells. If you read this story you must realize that there is no more ethics problems with ESCs then there is with scratching my ass. In fact, I'm bound to scratch away swaths more cells with the ass-scratch. Ethics? No. This is about religion and the unevidenced nonsense it advocates for no reason in particular. This research is useful, but it doesn't answer the actual questions we need answered.
The claims seem rather circular under the light of evolution. Some places tolerate more mutations and they change more. Well duh, that's evolution for you. If it had an intolerable mutation it would die off so the majority of mutations are going to happen in the most tolerated places like junk DNA and the ultra-conserved sections should be exceedingly intolerable for mutations (although a study a couple months had an odd problem with that).
This is about as amazing as getting a group of people who roll dice for a while and nobody rolls two 1s in a row when you shoot anybody who rolls one 1.
Better I would assume. If you've ever seen a capacitor pop you'd realize that ultracapacitors could be problematic. Wait until we use them to power cars, which would work fantastically, save the problem where when the suddenly discharge they would effectively produce as much pop as igniting all the gasoline at the same time. There's certainly, some blowing up issues.
Well, it's a little closer than that. There are clearly secondary purposes to the software. A better analogy would be if there existed a program called Mobtracker that could keep separate books with much less hassle (need the results to be equal and different fronts with different amounts). Well, that's a good feature and a nice application, but it certainly is foreseeable that one could use it for nefarious purposes.
Patent trolls usually patent general quite obvious things. GP tend to evolve actually innovative things. If they did it, they would get some good designs rather than the very general noninnovative designs that qualifies them as trolls. However, it is quite true that after getting a good design via GP you can patent it.
-- The sad thing is they butcher the government programs make them worse than having nothing... then argue that they should be disbanded because they don't work. FEMA was a fantastic agency under Clinton, on the ball and everything, they weren't posting guards to prevent help from getting to people needing help.
Kerosene is too expensive. I use to use it but the costs just outstrip the benefits. That's why I've switched to burning coal on them. Really cheap, really easy, and we don't have a limited supply like with kerosene and other such products. It's the wave of the future.
My friends cat sneezed 400 dollars in IT the other day. He just put the sucker together, booted it up, cat looked over the edge, sneezed... and the spark was fantastic. Managed to kill the Mobo and the CPU.
It isn't like it took much sleuthing. We are SCO we own Linux. Buy a license from us, we own the code that made it do the stuff it did before even though it doesn't that stuff on embedded devices... buy a license on the embedded device too. --- Hm, my spidey sense is tingling... I think they are full of crap.
That's the amount of research it took. Then we applied the fact that IBM didn't have retards for lawyers and predicted a victory for IBM. This guy is pretending it took any research at all to come to the right opinion is an insult. It took five seconds of "hey these guys are lying through their teeth" to come to that conclusion. It's like finding an argument that concludes "Therefore, Bananas can fly." -- We don't need to know anything about the argument to know that it isn't sound.
Why should they? The processors have very little interaction with each other, and if the hardware is properly done it shouldn't matter if you have 13 or 17 cores. The impression given is that after 2 cores jumping to 4 gives the impression that there should be 2^n cores, but basically that would be a good suggestion just to keep your cores rectangular. The problem is there are occasional flaws in the silicon and as such some of the processors will be broken. So all AMD needs to do is turn that processor off and run a three core system. Making money from the chip rather than nothing. A similar thing to what happened with SX and DX when the built in math coprocessors came out. The SX was the exact same chip but there was a flaw in the coprocessor so it was turned off.
Three core chips are the same as a four core chip where one of the cores processes data at 0 processes a second. There's no point in taking a hit when 3/4ths of the CPU is fine.
Slashdot Mirror
Heh. That was the most worthless article on Slashdot all month.
Even then, we just pump the wind power into the grid and ask people on the tail-end to pay for the wind power. This is what Colorado does. The wind is added to the grid, and the extra cost gets dished out to people who pay for the wind generated energy. In the end it is the same result. Although, a year or so back the wind power dropped below the "brown power" and the program was pretty much capped at that point.
You don't need to have any experience to understand the power grid at the level of pump power in, and other generator will smooth out the power generation. We couldn't convert the entire grid to wind, or to solar, but mix those in with a good amount of baseline power (I'd recommend nuclear) and you have a green energy portfolio without crashing everything.
Yeah, this is the most worthless article to make slashdot for nearly a day.
Oddly enough, P.Z. Myers of Pharyngula actually had a good write up on this paper. It turns out that they are in fact totopotent. They proved it by transferring the mouse cell nucleus to an oocyte and implanting it, resulting in an entire mouse; everything grew perfectly fine thus we know it can make everything.
They found a reset switch. They trigger it with gene therapy though and the mice produced have a much higher cancer rate and you might hit a useful gene you need. They found this reset switch by looking at actual ESCs. They need a way to trigger the cells without forcing some new genetic material in, leading to cancer and the like. The way to do that is more research. Ten years down the road this is going to be pretty important, and Takahashi et al. are probably going get a Nobel Prize for this.
Three things to remember:
This breakthrough was the result of embryonic stem cell research.
This needs more research to make it viable for any treatment which means more embryonic stem cell research.
This breakthrough was made in Japan where they are allowed to conduct the research.
We fell behind, and though there are breakthroughs coming they aren't ours, nor are they as soon as they could have been.
Earths core is solid, probably nickel and iron.
You're demonstrably wrong. In all of one short line of text.
Hardly. Frankly this is pretty interesting, and certainly would be useful for the getting stem cells for a person to grow a new body part. The question remains are these cells totopotent or pluripotent? Do they have the same range of use as ESC? Or just the range of ASC?
The answer is, we don't have an answer. We haven't done the leg work to find out what the range of use is on embryonic stem cells. This debate has nothing to do with ethics. No medical ethics are violated here, the debate is 100% about religion. The fact is, if one actually worried about the embryo, scientists would be happy to make lines by taking some cells from a developing embryo, then make a stem cell line out of those and implant the embryo and get an infant out of the deal. So rather than some embryo which would otherwise be medical waste, we would have a stem cell line and a child. Who could object? -- Um, religious folks; they still object.
It could very well be that ASCs are all we need and that we could dedifferentiate them easily with full usability, able to make everything from a new kidney to an embryo and a clone army. The problem however, is we just don't know because the research isn't there. The idea that a clump of 150 cells without any nerves at all is the ethical equivalent to a child, or that that clump of cells is more valued than somebody with a spinal cord injury whose treatments are being prolonged is a joke. A fly has 100,000 nerve cells and is by far the ethical superior of swaths of embryos.
Embryonic stem cells might not be any more useful. And we'll always have that "might" there until we do the research.
There's nothing about medical ethics which suggests some kind of soul thing jumps into a zygote at the moment the gametes join, and nothing to suggest that a couple cells aren't just that, some cells. If you read this story you must realize that there is no more ethics problems with ESCs then there is with scratching my ass. In fact, I'm bound to scratch away swaths more cells with the ass-scratch. Ethics? No. This is about religion and the unevidenced nonsense it advocates for no reason in particular. This research is useful, but it doesn't answer the actual questions we need answered.
The claims seem rather circular under the light of evolution. Some places tolerate more mutations and they change more. Well duh, that's evolution for you. If it had an intolerable mutation it would die off so the majority of mutations are going to happen in the most tolerated places like junk DNA and the ultra-conserved sections should be exceedingly intolerable for mutations (although a study a couple months had an odd problem with that).
This is about as amazing as getting a group of people who roll dice for a while and nobody rolls two 1s in a row when you shoot anybody who rolls one 1.
Better I would assume. If you've ever seen a capacitor pop you'd realize that ultracapacitors could be problematic. Wait until we use them to power cars, which would work fantastically, save the problem where when the suddenly discharge they would effectively produce as much pop as igniting all the gasoline at the same time. There's certainly, some blowing up issues.
Well, it's a little closer than that. There are clearly secondary purposes to the software. A better analogy would be if there existed a program called Mobtracker that could keep separate books with much less hassle (need the results to be equal and different fronts with different amounts). Well, that's a good feature and a nice application, but it certainly is foreseeable that one could use it for nefarious purposes.
It must have worked in a different dimension. That's the way string theory works. If it doesn't work, it did work... but in a different dimension.
Or was the article just overstating things again?
Patent trolls usually patent general quite obvious things. GP tend to evolve actually innovative things. If they did it, they would get some good designs rather than the very general noninnovative designs that qualifies them as trolls. However, it is quite true that after getting a good design via GP you can patent it.
We're from the government and we're here to help!
-- The sad thing is they butcher the government programs make them worse than having nothing... then argue that they should be disbanded because they don't work. FEMA was a fantastic agency under Clinton, on the ball and everything, they weren't posting guards to prevent help from getting to people needing help.
>>Most people (apart from the saintly) want money!
Um, I've met "saintly" people... they want money too. But they swear it will go towards saintly goals.
Oddly, Gates himself is giving the money and funding proper causes that I doubt they could do better, and I'm fairly sure would do far worse.
Kerosene is too expensive. I use to use it but the costs just outstrip the benefits. That's why I've switched to burning coal on them. Really cheap, really easy, and we don't have a limited supply like with kerosene and other such products. It's the wave of the future.
My friends cat sneezed 400 dollars in IT the other day. He just put the sucker together, booted it up, cat looked over the edge, sneezed... and the spark was fantastic. Managed to kill the Mobo and the CPU.
What part of the entire "article" didn't suggest it was a militant Mac-OS-ism follower looking for converts?
Now, Mac OS has this IDE and that other program, runs Photoshop and loves children... you'll love it.
That's why the faked the moon landings. They didn't want to do the paperwork.
Yeah, sadly 2k3 and 2k7 are pretty much exactly the same, save 2k7 has more bloat. OOo all the way.
There are 10 types of women in the world!
Those who understand binary and those who don't!
Users are permitted to upgrade from Vista to XP.
See, fixed.
Which code is infringed? We can sort this out pretty fast. We'll remove whatever it is, just show us what you own.
-- "NAUH! I AIN'T GONNA!"
It isn't like it took much sleuthing. We are SCO we own Linux. Buy a license from us, we own the code that made it do the stuff it did before even though it doesn't that stuff on embedded devices... buy a license on the embedded device too. --- Hm, my spidey sense is tingling... I think they are full of crap.
That's the amount of research it took. Then we applied the fact that IBM didn't have retards for lawyers and predicted a victory for IBM. This guy is pretending it took any research at all to come to the right opinion is an insult. It took five seconds of "hey these guys are lying through their teeth" to come to that conclusion. It's like finding an argument that concludes "Therefore, Bananas can fly." -- We don't need to know anything about the argument to know that it isn't sound.
Eh, sounds about right... I thought to myself.
Apparently, it's even native 3 cores. Eh, just as good.
Why should they? The processors have very little interaction with each other, and if the hardware is properly done it shouldn't matter if you have 13 or 17 cores. The impression given is that after 2 cores jumping to 4 gives the impression that there should be 2^n cores, but basically that would be a good suggestion just to keep your cores rectangular. The problem is there are occasional flaws in the silicon and as such some of the processors will be broken. So all AMD needs to do is turn that processor off and run a three core system. Making money from the chip rather than nothing. A similar thing to what happened with SX and DX when the built in math coprocessors came out. The SX was the exact same chip but there was a flaw in the coprocessor so it was turned off.
Three core chips are the same as a four core chip where one of the cores processes data at 0 processes a second. There's no point in taking a hit when 3/4ths of the CPU is fine.