To continue this analogy, this is like you've got a Club Card, and decide you don't want it any more, so Safeway take it from you but secretly implant an RFID Club Card in your sinus cavity, all the while assuring you that you're no longer a Club Card holder.
Phlebotono... phebonomo... phleboton... imic... omic... oric... omics? The department at large biological research facilities which normally speciailises in collecting and handling bodily fluids. I expect NASA already has some sort of lab setup for this sort of work, albeit not at this sort of capacity or for quite this purpose. Having worked with millilitre volumes of rat piss a couple of times, I don't envy the guys who handle it in bulk.
So combined with the comment above that Ben Heck already did a PS3-based laptop, we find that the only accurate words in the headline are "toshiba", "launches", and "laptop".
I wasn't looking to pick favourites, just point out that the UK has a national healthcare system already, with all the perks and pains I'm sure Canadians feel.;)
Nothing wrong with your spelling, the spell checker you're using is clearly working perfectly. It's everything else which is throwing me. I mean, I'm not sure you're using the words you intend to, or in the right order.
As for the moon hoax stuff, I gobbled it up as a teenager, but then I started to learn about science and it fell apart before my eyes.
You had me at "Dick Tracy". I think you lost me again at "planette" though. I was going to cut you some slack because English clearly isn't your first language, but then I saw your username.
I assumed you were screwing with us on "lumpy gravitational field", but sure enough, "the positive gravitational anomalies associated with these impact basins indicate that some form of positive density anomaly must exist within the crust or upper mantle that is currently supported by the lithosphere". What a Douglas Adams universe we live in.
"2. Implement a "Snitch" mode for performance. Tell me why my computer takes 3 minutes to boot, and name Reliability and Performance Monitor names. Tell me why my computer takes 2 minutes to shut down, and name names."
I dunno if the Home branch has this, but in my Business version of Vista, there's a Diagnostics - Performance section in the Event Viewer which keeps a log of processes which take longer than expected to start or stop on sleep, wake, boot or shutdown. It also clocks boot/shut/wake/sleep time in total and whether it thinks the speed has degraded significantly since the last time. It'll pop up a window pointing a finger at an application if things are getting really sluggish.
I don't think you're actually meant to buy as many peripherals as will fit onto the console. I mean, controllers, wheels, etc. especially, you're only supposed to have one or two, and your friends will bring over theirs.;)
I'm not sure it was the innovation that attracted AT&T so much as the demand. People had been chomping at the bit for an iPod phone for a couple of years when it was announced, so whatever cell company was willing to bow to Apple's demands would have exclusive rights to a device predestined to sell like hot-cakes. Odds are that the decision was made at AT&T before Apple had a recognisable iPhone OS.
I think it's fair to say that if it's coming out of a university lab, it's not a "product" (uber or otherwise) yet. It's front-line science, not the new iPod With Bacon.
"seem to never actually make it to those of us who would be interested"
You say that as though all of the previous breakthrough announcements have turned out to be dead ends or something. Turning basic research into a product takes years, if not decades, so it shouldn't be surprising that you're having to wait a little.
I think it's a US vs. Commonwealth thing, rather than just a US vs. everyone else thing. I'm not a fan of the acronym-as-a-proper-noun style rule myself, though.
As a follow-on from Storm's questions about keeping the body and mind running: is it possible that the life-extending process would produce someone who isn't strictly human any more? Not just biologically, but in the sense that 20th century slobs like myself may readily recognise them as a sapient creature, or that they would not function properly in our existing society.
I forget whose pen name that was, but he wrote some satisfying, if pretty grim (as in "Outer Limits endings"), adolescent sf which I devoured when I was in my pre-teens. "A Rag, A Bone, and A Hank of Hair" was a personal favourite. No idea if they're good in their own right as I haven't re-read, but I liked the stories at that age.
"no idea how this got published... a similar article hadn't been published earlier"
I think you answered your own question there. Shockingly, they published a paper about something which, to the best of everybody's knowledge, hadn't been done before. Maybe you're sitting on 20 years of groundbreaking research which has created whole artificial chromosomes, but have chosen not to publish. You can hardly blame the rest of the research community for getting on with their lives and publishing what they've done.
Uh, you read the paper right? This was experimental confirmation that the complimentary strands paired spontaneously, selectively, and strongly. That's pretty important, IMO.
I'm making the massive, massive assumption that you're not berating a piece of research based soley on the press release, though.
"Actually, I made a living for a number of years doing research with PCR."
It's not my fault you did such a good job of hiding that. If you're going to snipe at other people's science, "most people would only have a vague idea what my post means anyway" is no excuse for technical inaccuracy. Be specific, be general, but in either case get it right.
As for these guys, it's a proof of concept rather than anything genuinely useful or surprising, but that doesn't make it any less interesting. The characterisation was important, if nothing else - I'd hate to live in a world where we just took for granted that the dimerisation of synthetic DNA was energetically comparable to that of the natural, intuitive though it may be.
You seem to conflate several rather mundane processes without having a clue what they are or how they relate to the story at hand. Also FYI DNA is not just "sugars"
PCR, the polymerase chain reaction, takes a quantity of DNA and "multiplies it" so you have more to work with Everything in your jar is replicated blindly.
DNA fingerprinting chops up a mixture of DNA strands at specific base sequences, then the resultant mulch is labelled (radioactively or otherwise) at other specific base pair sequences, and the whole mess is sorted by fragment size to produce a unique fingerprint. Again, this is a blind process.
DNA sequencing allows one to obtain the sequence of bases in a DNA strand by a process tangentally related to DNA fingerprinting, but far more time consuming and finnicky as you want to make sure you're sequencing the right stuff.
Actually building a DNA single strand, with a specific sequence of perhaps six nucleotides, from raw feedstocks, was until fairly recently a nightmarish process involving umpteen protective groups and studying it caused me to swear off organic chemistry for good. Fortunately there are much simpler automated processes available but of course that wouldn't have made for a very challenging university module.
However, those oh-so-efficient processes are optimised for oligonucleotide chains of your common or garden five NA bases. This team have created a DNA double-helix using entirely synthetic bases which is a pretty novel thing IMO.
Slashdot Mirror
To continue this analogy, this is like you've got a Club Card, and decide you don't want it any more, so Safeway take it from you but secretly implant an RFID Club Card in your sinus cavity, all the while assuring you that you're no longer a Club Card holder.
Phlebotono... phebonomo... phleboton... imic... omic... oric... omics? The department at large biological research facilities which normally speciailises in collecting and handling bodily fluids. I expect NASA already has some sort of lab setup for this sort of work, albeit not at this sort of capacity or for quite this purpose. Having worked with millilitre volumes of rat piss a couple of times, I don't envy the guys who handle it in bulk.
So combined with the comment above that Ben Heck already did a PS3-based laptop, we find that the only accurate words in the headline are "toshiba", "launches", and "laptop".
I'm sure people under the paths of space planes would get neurotic about the prospect of an RPG too.
I'm not a large island off mainland Europe? Thank goodness!
I wasn't looking to pick favourites, just point out that the UK has a national healthcare system already, with all the perks and pains I'm sure Canadians feel. ;)
Two not-entirely-seperate goals.
Nothing wrong with your spelling, the spell checker you're using is clearly working perfectly. It's everything else which is throwing me. I mean, I'm not sure you're using the words you intend to, or in the right order.
As for the moon hoax stuff, I gobbled it up as a teenager, but then I started to learn about science and it fell apart before my eyes.
Because they don't have that in the UK. Hang on...
You had me at "Dick Tracy". I think you lost me again at "planette" though. I was going to cut you some slack because English clearly isn't your first language, but then I saw your username.
I assumed you were screwing with us on "lumpy gravitational field", but sure enough, "the positive gravitational anomalies associated with these impact basins indicate that some form of positive density anomaly must exist within the crust or upper mantle that is currently supported by the lithosphere". What a Douglas Adams universe we live in.
"2. Implement a "Snitch" mode for performance. Tell me why my computer takes 3 minutes to boot, and name Reliability and Performance Monitor names. Tell me why my computer takes 2 minutes to shut down, and name names."
I dunno if the Home branch has this, but in my Business version of Vista, there's a Diagnostics - Performance section in the Event Viewer which keeps a log of processes which take longer than expected to start or stop on sleep, wake, boot or shutdown. It also clocks boot/shut/wake/sleep time in total and whether it thinks the speed has degraded significantly since the last time. It'll pop up a window pointing a finger at an application if things are getting really sluggish.
I don't think you're actually meant to buy as many peripherals as will fit onto the console. I mean, controllers, wheels, etc. especially, you're only supposed to have one or two, and your friends will bring over theirs. ;)
I'm not sure it was the innovation that attracted AT&T so much as the demand. People had been chomping at the bit for an iPod phone for a couple of years when it was announced, so whatever cell company was willing to bow to Apple's demands would have exclusive rights to a device predestined to sell like hot-cakes. Odds are that the decision was made at AT&T before Apple had a recognisable iPhone OS.
You even quoted the statement so I'm not sure how you could have confused the term "power" with the term "efficiency", but there it is.
I think it's fair to say that if it's coming out of a university lab, it's not a "product" (uber or otherwise) yet. It's front-line science, not the new iPod With Bacon.
"seem to never actually make it to those of us who would be interested"
You say that as though all of the previous breakthrough announcements have turned out to be dead ends or something. Turning basic research into a product takes years, if not decades, so it shouldn't be surprising that you're having to wait a little.
WMP10 (11?) and later did away with overlays in Windows a couple of years ago. I forget what the replacement's called.
I think it's a US vs. Commonwealth thing, rather than just a US vs. everyone else thing. I'm not a fan of the acronym-as-a-proper-noun style rule myself, though.
As a follow-on from Storm's questions about keeping the body and mind running: is it possible that the life-extending process would produce someone who isn't strictly human any more? Not just biologically, but in the sense that 20th century slobs like myself may readily recognise them as a sapient creature, or that they would not function properly in our existing society.
I forget whose pen name that was, but he wrote some satisfying, if pretty grim (as in "Outer Limits endings"), adolescent sf which I devoured when I was in my pre-teens. "A Rag, A Bone, and A Hank of Hair" was a personal favourite. No idea if they're good in their own right as I haven't re-read, but I liked the stories at that age.
"no idea how this got published... a similar article hadn't been published earlier"
I think you answered your own question there. Shockingly, they published a paper about something which, to the best of everybody's knowledge, hadn't been done before. Maybe you're sitting on 20 years of groundbreaking research which has created whole artificial chromosomes, but have chosen not to publish. You can hardly blame the rest of the research community for getting on with their lives and publishing what they've done.
Uh, you read the paper right? This was experimental confirmation that the complimentary strands paired spontaneously, selectively, and strongly. That's pretty important, IMO.
I'm making the massive, massive assumption that you're not berating a piece of research based soley on the press release, though.
"Actually, I made a living for a number of years doing research with PCR."
It's not my fault you did such a good job of hiding that. If you're going to snipe at other people's science, "most people would only have a vague idea what my post means anyway" is no excuse for technical inaccuracy. Be specific, be general, but in either case get it right.
As for these guys, it's a proof of concept rather than anything genuinely useful or surprising, but that doesn't make it any less interesting. The characterisation was important, if nothing else - I'd hate to live in a world where we just took for granted that the dimerisation of synthetic DNA was energetically comparable to that of the natural, intuitive though it may be.
You seem to conflate several rather mundane processes without having a clue what they are or how they relate to the story at hand. Also FYI DNA is not just "sugars"
PCR, the polymerase chain reaction, takes a quantity of DNA and "multiplies it" so you have more to work with Everything in your jar is replicated blindly.
DNA fingerprinting chops up a mixture of DNA strands at specific base sequences, then the resultant mulch is labelled (radioactively or otherwise) at other specific base pair sequences, and the whole mess is sorted by fragment size to produce a unique fingerprint. Again, this is a blind process.
DNA sequencing allows one to obtain the sequence of bases in a DNA strand by a process tangentally related to DNA fingerprinting, but far more time consuming and finnicky as you want to make sure you're sequencing the right stuff.
Actually building a DNA single strand, with a specific sequence of perhaps six nucleotides, from raw feedstocks, was until fairly recently a nightmarish process involving umpteen protective groups and studying it caused me to swear off organic chemistry for good. Fortunately there are much simpler automated processes available but of course that wouldn't have made for a very challenging university module.
However, those oh-so-efficient processes are optimised for oligonucleotide chains of your common or garden five NA bases. This team have created a DNA double-helix using entirely synthetic bases which is a pretty novel thing IMO.