I would suggest a master's in some discipline of biology. Bioinformatics is the new buzzword among biology departments. Basically, if you can assist a department's researchers with datamining or creating the archtiecture to handle insane amounts of genome data, then you are set. The one caveat about getting into bioinformatics is to make sure that you actually understand the biological patterns you are dealing with on the computer side of things. Many, many bioinformatics meta-analyses yield results that have been known for many years but are new to the comp sci. crossover people. Also, try to focus your work on a sub-discipline of bioloy. For example, phylogentic theory and evolutionary data analyses have very different assumptions and demands than someone working on modeling neural pathways or signalling cascades. Become proficient in one biological domain to learn the big questions and departments would be willing to give you a look over others with less knowledge (we just went through this last spring with a job search, and I must stress that you need to know the biology!)
I have to agree with the parent's main sentiment that the iPod has acheived dominance by being the first out of the gate. Most people connect iPod with portable digital music the same way people still refer to "walkman's." I do not however see any great technological superiority of the iPod. I owned a first gen iPod and now own a 20 gb Dell DJ. My main reason for switching: battery life. The 20 plus hours I get with my DJ on a single charge can get me through a 16 hour day in the lab. Plus, I can actually use the scroll bar while wearing nitrile/latex gloves, whereas the relatviley new touchpad/wheel doesn't respond as well in that case. I see little difference in performance among the different hard drive music players, and I think that's why much of it is being driving by PR and word of mouth. If there was really a technological advatange of one over the other, then why do all the iPod ads feature trendy wankers with those crap white headphones and Bono telling you to buy it? There are some differences that make one more advantageous in some situations (such as long days in the lab as described above), but for most people the iPod looks good and gets the job done. Beyond that, I don't think even the slashdot crowd can make too many valid claims about the technological prowess of the iPod.
IIRC, they shot most of the scenes at odd times of the day. For example, the scene where the protagonist is walking around the streets at the beginning was shot very early on a Sunday morning.
Well you butchered that. A hypothesis is a possbile explanation for a phenomon (not a conclusion). Hypotheses are evaluated by research; the results of the research will either support or refute a hypothesis. If a hypothesis has stood up to a very large number of independent data sets and analyses, then that hypothesis may be raised to the level of a theory. It doesn't work the other way around...maybe you should leave science to us scientists.
Somebody please mod this idiot down! No mention of the moon prior to 1950? What the hell is wrong with you? I suppose that Galileo and Tycho Brahe were looking up their own asses with their telescopes then? Or was that the satelite sent it to orbit by the Illuminati or the Catholic Church? Get your head out of your ass, dipshit.
Actually, I don't see a conflict of interest. Its called research. They examined the hypothesis using one method available to them and published their results. Now they are planning to improve their methodology to collect data to support one hypothesis or the other. It would be a loss of credibility if nobody wanted to do a more rigorous investigation and simply accepted the results without further research.
OK, let's at least try to speak about these matters intelligently. I am so tired of people discussing hypotheses as if they are theories. First of all, it is a hypothesis that there are large slabs of ice at the lunar poles, not a theory. The latest data do not support this hypothesis. There is a big difference between a theory and a hypothesis, and it can be debated whether or not anything is ever "proved" or "disproved." As a website that provides "news for nerds" I am surprised that most of you can not correctly use basic, high school science class jargon.
Two things:
1.) The AD-blocking feature has been in NAV since at least 2002, and I have been using since then.
2.) As the parent suggests that it is something that is automatically installed and turned on, he is wrong. While your computer may come with NAV pre-loaded, the AD-blocker feature is turned off by default, at least it always has been on my installs.
I don't see the Ad-blocker as some threat the internet. I use it with Mozilla Firebird and it really cuts down on the crap that clutters websites. Personally, I view web ads a step above spam. My opinion is that if you can put ads on your website, I am allowed to completely ignore the ads, and if I want block them. IMHO once the data from your website hits my computer I can do whatever I feel like to it locally - so I don't see the problem. Now, if I agreed to view ads in order to use your service, the case would be different, but with most websites I never agreed to use your service with ads, so I feel like I have no reason to generate revenue for you by clicking on your ads (or even viewing them).
Well, it still does to me. I live in Ohio at a latitude only a few minutes south of Rome's and we rarely see Aurora borealis. I admit that a aurora borealis being observed in Rome may not be incredibly unusual, I found it striking that it was observed in Rome and Hawaii and Havana. From reading some other stuff on this topic, it seems that the Northern Lights were also seen in Honduras and Panama, which would make this really a global event (as it was seen very far to the north in the Southern hemisphere as well). So maybe it wasn't Aurora borealis in this event, but rather Aurora tellus (or something).
Amazon's new feature is identical to the full text search feature on JSTOR. Using the full text search on JSTOR you find all sorts of publications that you never knew existed. Personally, as an author I think it is in every author's best interest to have this type of service. I have already used it to find some new books on Bayesian methods for phylogenetic analysis. But I do understand how it could be a problem for some authors to have there work so freely available. Maybe Amazon could circumvent this problem by limiting the number of searches an individual (I.P. address maybe?) could do within a certain period of time on one book. It may hamper the ability to really evaluate that book, but it would certainly make it much more difficult to get an entire copy of the internet. Something like this would only expand the current first few page preview that Amazon has had for a long time, and make it a much more usable feature. I don't know, but it just seems like too good of a research tool to not make it available, at least for those authors who opt in.
Check out the following statements about Virtual PC for Mac from the Microsoft site:
"It has a great Mac OS X user interface and it takes advantage of the stability in Mac OS X."
Are the guys at MS indirectly saying that Windows is not stable? Seems they could be finally saying it!
Also, if Virtual PC supports Mac OSX, couldn't it also support some of the BSDs since OSX has at least some BSD components underneath?
Listen, I realize that "KDE is not a monopoly." That's no fucking answer to why it employs the sort of funcionality that sooo many people had a problem with in MS Windows. I just find it completely ironic that the golden child desktop of the open source community is like some bastard mix of Windows and OSX. Personally, I use the command line or fluxbox. I guess that people miss one side effect in my comment - if it was illegal for MS to integrate Internet Explorer, then why is it not illegal for KDE to integrate Konqueror (even if you can change it through a window or config file)? It just seems to me that people who look at these issues are just way too illogical - which is pretty funny considering that some people are at least programmers and should understand logic. If it was wrong for MS to deceptively make people use IE by making it the default, it is equally wrong for KDE to do it with Konqueror, regardless of the size of the company.
Actually, you are both right. Depending on whether or not you have a pluralistic view of species or a monistic view. I take a pluralistic view of species concepts. That is, in some cases a biological species concept may apply (the one about the breeding barrier), and in other cases a better species concept may be a genetic similarity/dissimilarity approach may be best. For example, the biological species concept doesn't work too well with too many organisms, especially plants. There are literally hundreds of ways to define a species, from the various phylogenetic species concepts based on synapomorphies or autapomorphies (or other criteria) to ecologically defined species. Don't just assume that there is one species concept - its a fallacy. The world is more complicated than that, and the patterns and mechanisms of evolutionary more diverse than any single concept can accomodate (IMHO).
"It seems that we are 'discovering' new species of something all the time - so either new species are being created or we're just doing a half-ass job in classification:)"
As much as non-biological science people think we know about the organisms on this planet, we really don't know jack. The reason we are always finding more species is a result of two different phases of taxonomic research; Alpha and Beta. Alpha taxonomy is that basic, initial "I found this and it is different" phase. Usually, this happens in relatively unexplored areas (such as the oceans), or in relatively unexplored groups of organisms, such as Oomycetes or Tropical microlepidoptera (or in fishes). There really are a lot of places filled with organisms previously unknown to science. For example, I am currently describing three new species of ferns from Cuba, one from Jamaica, and five from the Chaco of Paraguay and Bolivia. Humans don't know everything.
A lot of species today are found through further taxonomic research (i.e., Beta taxonomy). For example, many taxa are morphologically very similar, but genetically disparate. Each year in the United States a large number of species are discovered because of this type of research.
And to those who may think that there is something wrong or shocking that we keep finding new species, just stop to think about how many people actually do this kind of research. For example, I study fern systematics, and there are less than 20 people who are actively doing this research in the world. When you get in to many animal groups, the ratio of species to scientists is much worse, so we will be discovering new species for a very long time, unless of course we wipe them all out!
And what do you mean you don't get to name the species you discover? Of course you do, that's how they get named!
I began using Linux and FreeBSD about three months ago, and I was shocked to discover that in KDE the Konqueror browser is used in the same manner as IE in MS Windows. Personally, I dislike both IE and Konqueror and hate that they are the medium for interacting with the file system. However, I have never seen anybody complain about the similarity in function of KDE's Konqueror and MS Internet Explorer. In my opinion, if Microsoft has to keep their integrated browser from providing default fundtions in the desktop environment, then every other desktop environment needs to keep their integrated browser from providing similar functionality. Otherwise, every person who uses KDE and complains about Microsoft's integration of IE is bordering on being a hypocrite.
I have frequently used a usb light with my laptop. The real usefullness, I have found, is not to light the keyboard, but to illuminate documents, books, etc. while working in a dark environment. For example, the light has come in very handy on long plane flights at night when the cabin is dark to see editorial comments on papers, or while working in my lab when somebody needs the main lights turned off.
Slashdot Mirror
I would suggest a master's in some discipline of biology. Bioinformatics is the new buzzword among biology departments. Basically, if you can assist a department's researchers with datamining or creating the archtiecture to handle insane amounts of genome data, then you are set. The one caveat about getting into bioinformatics is to make sure that you actually understand the biological patterns you are dealing with on the computer side of things. Many, many bioinformatics meta-analyses yield results that have been known for many years but are new to the comp sci. crossover people. Also, try to focus your work on a sub-discipline of bioloy. For example, phylogentic theory and evolutionary data analyses have very different assumptions and demands than someone working on modeling neural pathways or signalling cascades. Become proficient in one biological domain to learn the big questions and departments would be willing to give you a look over others with less knowledge (we just went through this last spring with a job search, and I must stress that you need to know the biology!)
I have to agree with the parent's main sentiment that the iPod has acheived dominance by being the first out of the gate. Most people connect iPod with portable digital music the same way people still refer to "walkman's." I do not however see any great technological superiority of the iPod. I owned a first gen iPod and now own a 20 gb Dell DJ. My main reason for switching: battery life. The 20 plus hours I get with my DJ on a single charge can get me through a 16 hour day in the lab. Plus, I can actually use the scroll bar while wearing nitrile/latex gloves, whereas the relatviley new touchpad/wheel doesn't respond as well in that case. I see little difference in performance among the different hard drive music players, and I think that's why much of it is being driving by PR and word of mouth. If there was really a technological advatange of one over the other, then why do all the iPod ads feature trendy wankers with those crap white headphones and Bono telling you to buy it? There are some differences that make one more advantageous in some situations (such as long days in the lab as described above), but for most people the iPod looks good and gets the job done. Beyond that, I don't think even the slashdot crowd can make too many valid claims about the technological prowess of the iPod.
IIRC, they shot most of the scenes at odd times of the day. For example, the scene where the protagonist is walking around the streets at the beginning was shot very early on a Sunday morning.
Well you butchered that. A hypothesis is a possbile explanation for a phenomon (not a conclusion). Hypotheses are evaluated by research; the results of the research will either support or refute a hypothesis. If a hypothesis has stood up to a very large number of independent data sets and analyses, then that hypothesis may be raised to the level of a theory. It doesn't work the other way around ...maybe you should leave science to us scientists.
Somebody please mod this idiot down! No mention of the moon prior to 1950? What the hell is wrong with you? I suppose that Galileo and Tycho Brahe were looking up their own asses with their telescopes then? Or was that the satelite sent it to orbit by the Illuminati or the Catholic Church? Get your head out of your ass, dipshit.
Actually, I don't see a conflict of interest. Its called research. They examined the hypothesis using one method available to them and published their results. Now they are planning to improve their methodology to collect data to support one hypothesis or the other. It would be a loss of credibility if nobody wanted to do a more rigorous investigation and simply accepted the results without further research.
Two things: 1.) The AD-blocking feature has been in NAV since at least 2002, and I have been using since then. 2.) As the parent suggests that it is something that is automatically installed and turned on, he is wrong. While your computer may come with NAV pre-loaded, the AD-blocker feature is turned off by default, at least it always has been on my installs. I don't see the Ad-blocker as some threat the internet. I use it with Mozilla Firebird and it really cuts down on the crap that clutters websites. Personally, I view web ads a step above spam. My opinion is that if you can put ads on your website, I am allowed to completely ignore the ads, and if I want block them. IMHO once the data from your website hits my computer I can do whatever I feel like to it locally - so I don't see the problem. Now, if I agreed to view ads in order to use your service, the case would be different, but with most websites I never agreed to use your service with ads, so I feel like I have no reason to generate revenue for you by clicking on your ads (or even viewing them).
Are the guys at MS indirectly saying that Windows is not stable? Seems they could be finally saying it!
Also, if Virtual PC supports Mac OSX, couldn't it also support some of the BSDs since OSX has at least some BSD components underneath?
Listen, I realize that "KDE is not a monopoly." That's no fucking answer to why it employs the sort of funcionality that sooo many people had a problem with in MS Windows. I just find it completely ironic that the golden child desktop of the open source community is like some bastard mix of Windows and OSX. Personally, I use the command line or fluxbox. I guess that people miss one side effect in my comment - if it was illegal for MS to integrate Internet Explorer, then why is it not illegal for KDE to integrate Konqueror (even if you can change it through a window or config file)? It just seems to me that people who look at these issues are just way too illogical - which is pretty funny considering that some people are at least programmers and should understand logic. If it was wrong for MS to deceptively make people use IE by making it the default, it is equally wrong for KDE to do it with Konqueror, regardless of the size of the company.
Actually, you are both right. Depending on whether or not you have a pluralistic view of species or a monistic view. I take a pluralistic view of species concepts. That is, in some cases a biological species concept may apply (the one about the breeding barrier), and in other cases a better species concept may be a genetic similarity/dissimilarity approach may be best. For example, the biological species concept doesn't work too well with too many organisms, especially plants. There are literally hundreds of ways to define a species, from the various phylogenetic species concepts based on synapomorphies or autapomorphies (or other criteria) to ecologically defined species. Don't just assume that there is one species concept - its a fallacy. The world is more complicated than that, and the patterns and mechanisms of evolutionary more diverse than any single concept can accomodate (IMHO).
As much as non-biological science people think we know about the organisms on this planet, we really don't know jack. The reason we are always finding more species is a result of two different phases of taxonomic research; Alpha and Beta. Alpha taxonomy is that basic, initial "I found this and it is different" phase. Usually, this happens in relatively unexplored areas (such as the oceans), or in relatively unexplored groups of organisms, such as Oomycetes or Tropical microlepidoptera (or in fishes). There really are a lot of places filled with organisms previously unknown to science. For example, I am currently describing three new species of ferns from Cuba, one from Jamaica, and five from the Chaco of Paraguay and Bolivia. Humans don't know everything.
A lot of species today are found through further taxonomic research (i.e., Beta taxonomy). For example, many taxa are morphologically very similar, but genetically disparate. Each year in the United States a large number of species are discovered because of this type of research.
And to those who may think that there is something wrong or shocking that we keep finding new species, just stop to think about how many people actually do this kind of research. For example, I study fern systematics, and there are less than 20 people who are actively doing this research in the world. When you get in to many animal groups, the ratio of species to scientists is much worse, so we will be discovering new species for a very long time, unless of course we wipe them all out!
And what do you mean you don't get to name the species you discover? Of course you do, that's how they get named!
I began using Linux and FreeBSD about three months ago, and I was shocked to discover that in KDE the Konqueror browser is used in the same manner as IE in MS Windows. Personally, I dislike both IE and Konqueror and hate that they are the medium for interacting with the file system. However, I have never seen anybody complain about the similarity in function of KDE's Konqueror and MS Internet Explorer. In my opinion, if Microsoft has to keep their integrated browser from providing default fundtions in the desktop environment, then every other desktop environment needs to keep their integrated browser from providing similar functionality. Otherwise, every person who uses KDE and complains about Microsoft's integration of IE is bordering on being a hypocrite.
I have frequently used a usb light with my laptop. The real usefullness, I have found, is not to light the keyboard, but to illuminate documents, books, etc. while working in a dark environment. For example, the light has come in very handy on long plane flights at night when the cabin is dark to see editorial comments on papers, or while working in my lab when somebody needs the main lights turned off.