Just because we observe small incremental changes, doesn't mean that these changes will add up to much.
They don't have to, DNAs have coding zones and non-coding ("dead") zones separated by start/end markers. If a mutation happens that makes a non-coding zone coding or a coding zone non-coding, macroscopic modifications may be extreme.
lowered levels of light reaching the photosensitive proteines (the photosensitive cells are facing the brain, not the light)
blood vessels and nerves on top of the photosensitive cells, further blocking light from the retina
"black hole" caused by the blood vessels and nerves having to go through the retina
low adhesion of the retina itself to it's substrat, leading to such thing as retinal detachment
Squids and octopus have "normal" (non backward) retinas with photosensitive cells pointing forward, which means that they maximize the available light's use efficiency, donc have any blind spot and since the nerves go through the layer under the retina to form the optic nerve behind it retinal detachment is near impossible.
Except that a squid's eye (a fucking squid's eye for fuck's sake, that thing's only fit for being deep fried!) doesn't have the various mamalian eye issues...
Okay here's one for you: explain the eye. It either works or it doesn't.
Funny how that flawed and wrong argument rises every time ID is involved. Darwin may have said, 150 years ago, that the eye could be difficult to fit in his theory, but 150 years is a long time, and the theory of evolution has evolved a lot since Darwin, and explanations to the formation of the eye have been found for a long time.
Fact is, that statement is completely and utterly wrong, and an evolutionary path can very well be found to the current "superior" "top of the line" eye:
Many single-celled organisms (bacteria, flaggelates) contain tiny pigment granules that react to light by sending electrical signals able to alter the cell's behaviour.
Some species of flaggelates are colonial, which means that they form "huge" colonies. One of these colonial light-sensitive species is Volvox. In colonies of Volvox, the individuals on the "sunny" side of the colony move at a different rate than the ones on the "dark" side, which guides the swimming of the whole colony... a colony of Volvox is a colony of eyes already...
Some flatworms (the most primitive worms one can find) have photosensitive cells on the top of the body. For some species, the whole dorsal surface is photosensitive. This primitive photoreceptor can be used for the worm to tell if he's (for example) partly or totally above ground, hence at the mercy of various predators. It can help him know in which direction to "flee" if he's partially above ground. Evolutionary advantage, keep the photosensitive cells if you have any.
Next step, pit a patch of photosensitive cells: not only are they now protected from abrasion, but the total surface of photoreceptors can increase without increasing the size of the "eyespot" (which would be the outer hole), hence precision improvement that allow for a much more sensitive light gradation (full light, shadow, night,...). Such "eyes" can be found in a variety of mollusks such as Patella
If you surround the photoreceptive cells with light-insulating cells, the patches of cell become selectively sensitive to light based on the direction: ability to start discerning forms and movements. Nearly a pin-hole camera eye.
Although this primitive eye exists it has a poor quality and, worse than everything, the open "eye pit" is a cavity in which sand and dust can enter, as well as parasite, and the open structure may collapse. Filling the cavity with a clear gooey secretion that can keep the retina protected is an obvious evolutionaty advantage. On top of this, if the secretion has a different index of refraction than water (or air), it becomes a primitive lens and improves the precision and focus of the image, giving the animal more details and the ability to spot shorter movements. 2 evolutionary advantages in one !
Since a lens-like object is in place, the eye can be closed with a layer of transparent cell that covers the jelly solution and further protects the retina.
Then, a second (inner) layer of transparent skin may appear, trapping part of the solution with the ability to harden or contract (reshape), a full fledged variable lens is generated, not only further improving the image quality and resolution but allowing for much better focuses since the focus can be modified. The Helix snail shows such an eye.
The addition of non-transparent distordable cells around the center of vision becomes a diaphragm, allowing the animal to change the amount of light that reaches the retina, in order to handle from full light to complete darkness. Once again, obvious evolutionary advantage.
Hardening the previous variable lens into what we know as the cornea yields the eye of the Sepia cuttlefish, and a mere inches from the (very similar) human eye.
Sadly, the record companies expect you to spend that money on 90% crap; that's how they put their business model together.
Nah, there is also the lower-than-dirt album with a single good song. If you ever buy the album because of the song, you realise you're screwed big time. Having the ability to listen to the full album and not a few selected parts of it endangers this part of the current business model even more.
Hitler was elected as Chancelor, the President was still Hindenburg.
He then named himself Führer und Reichskanzler (Leader and Chancellor) in 34, at Hindenburg's death (instead of holding new presidential elections) and was approved by 90% of the german population in a mid-august plebiscite (Hindenburg's death was on the 2nd of August).
While a plebiscite is by no mean a vote, he'd probably have managed to get his position of Führer und Reichskanzler through popular vote anyway.
That's also how I work (albeit mostly for music), P2P gives me "free tries", if i'm not interrested I delete the file and don't buy the disc period, if I like the group album I buy the CD.
And most of my friends do the same, it's a convenient way to build a collection you *really* like without having to blow your money on 90% of crap.
oh puh-lease... since when is MS so interested in the user's best interest? Did someone fall asleep here???
The subject is not Microsoft here, it's the IE team. Go to the IE blog, read everything that was written since the blog started, and you'll see humans that are mostly genuinely nice and interrested in providing a good experience for the user.
While that won't get me switch back to MSIE, I think there is no point in bashing the guys for doing good things.
If you had followed the IEBlog during this summer, you'd know that PNG is fixed, CSS1 should be completely implemented as well as HTML 4.01, and big parts of CSS2.1 should be available in IE7.
While the 'under the hood' part is definitely important, one must not downgrade the sheer necessity for interfaces to be nice, understandable and coherent.
The various browser teams have already decided to implement a coherent visual style for secure connections (last month or so), implementing more common interface features for common functionalities is a good thing as it'll allow the user (you) to switch much more easily from a browser to another one, and i'm not even talking about your mother here.
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
Not everything can be used directly:
>>> 5.__add__(3)
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
That doesn't work because of the floats syntax, Python's trying to build a float with decimal part "__add__(3)", which doesn't work too well...
This kind of syntax is usually frowned upon though, since methods with double pre and postfixing underscores are "magic methods" used to implement specific operations of the interpreter.
Last time I checked, compiled binaries didn't mean that you had to distribute the binaries themselves, distribute the compilable source, let the client sort it out, done.
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
not true in python by the way
That statement is false, since technically everything in python is written in a file, a file is a module, and a module is an object.
Now, that's stretching it, and you can indeed write structured, functional or aspect-oriented code in Python, instead of having to write OO even when it's inconvenient. I (and most pythonistas) consider that it's a good thing, actually.
The code is recompiled in memory and profiled to ensure it gets faster the longer it runs
I know, that's JIT compiling, and it doesn't change anything to the RAM consumption...
Can't do that with compiled binaries.
... and it can't be faster than binaries that went through and optimizing compiler.
JIT allows you to get within an order of magnitude of compiled languages, faster for some tasks when the compiled code is not that good (or the compiler blows, but that's pretty much long past us by now unless you're using a relic of the Dark Ages), but you won't get faster on average.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh, yeah, right...
Nay, you'll get an error, ID is a virtual package and therefore can't be installed.
The only suitable package known to man is the creationism package, though.
They don't have to, DNAs have coding zones and non-coding ("dead") zones separated by start/end markers. If a mutation happens that makes a non-coding zone coding or a coding zone non-coding, macroscopic modifications may be extreme.
backwards retina (and photosensitive cells) yielding:
Squids and octopus have "normal" (non backward) retinas with photosensitive cells pointing forward, which means that they maximize the available light's use efficiency, donc have any blind spot and since the nerves go through the layer under the retina to form the optic nerve behind it retinal detachment is near impossible.
Except that a squid's eye (a fucking squid's eye for fuck's sake, that thing's only fit for being deep fried!) doesn't have the various mamalian eye issues...
And it's not a survival disadvantage but a reproductive disadvantage anyway.
As in, you know, an iron-furred invincible rat without balls won't help the next generation much.
Funny how that flawed and wrong argument rises every time ID is involved. Darwin may have said, 150 years ago, that the eye could be difficult to fit in his theory, but 150 years is a long time, and the theory of evolution has evolved a lot since Darwin, and explanations to the formation of the eye have been found for a long time.
Fact is, that statement is completely and utterly wrong, and an evolutionary path can very well be found to the current "superior" "top of the line" eye:
Many single-celled organisms (bacteria, flaggelates) contain tiny pigment granules that react to light by sending electrical signals able to alter the cell's behaviour.
Some species of flaggelates are colonial, which means that they form "huge" colonies. One of these colonial light-sensitive species is Volvox. In colonies of Volvox, the individuals on the "sunny" side of the colony move at a different rate than the ones on the "dark" side, which guides the swimming of the whole colony... a colony of Volvox is a colony of eyes already...
Some flatworms (the most primitive worms one can find) have photosensitive cells on the top of the body. For some species, the whole dorsal surface is photosensitive. This primitive photoreceptor can be used for the worm to tell if he's (for example) partly or totally above ground, hence at the mercy of various predators. It can help him know in which direction to "flee" if he's partially above ground. Evolutionary advantage, keep the photosensitive cells if you have any.
Next step, pit a patch of photosensitive cells: not only are they now protected from abrasion, but the total surface of photoreceptors can increase without increasing the size of the "eyespot" (which would be the outer hole), hence precision improvement that allow for a much more sensitive light gradation (full light, shadow, night, ...). Such "eyes" can be found in a variety of mollusks such as Patella
If you surround the photoreceptive cells with light-insulating cells, the patches of cell become selectively sensitive to light based on the direction: ability to start discerning forms and movements. Nearly a pin-hole camera eye.
Although this primitive eye exists it has a poor quality and, worse than everything, the open "eye pit" is a cavity in which sand and dust can enter, as well as parasite, and the open structure may collapse. Filling the cavity with a clear gooey secretion that can keep the retina protected is an obvious evolutionaty advantage. On top of this, if the secretion has a different index of refraction than water (or air), it becomes a primitive lens and improves the precision and focus of the image, giving the animal more details and the ability to spot shorter movements. 2 evolutionary advantages in one !
Since a lens-like object is in place, the eye can be closed with a layer of transparent cell that covers the jelly solution and further protects the retina.
Then, a second (inner) layer of transparent skin may appear, trapping part of the solution with the ability to harden or contract (reshape), a full fledged variable lens is generated, not only further improving the image quality and resolution but allowing for much better focuses since the focus can be modified. The Helix snail shows such an eye.
The addition of non-transparent distordable cells around the center of vision becomes a diaphragm, allowing the animal to change the amount of light that reaches the retina, in order to handle from full light to complete darkness. Once again, obvious evolutionary advantage.
Hardening the previous variable lens into what we know as the cornea yields the eye of the Sepia cuttlefish, and a mere inches from the (very similar) human eye.
Voila, a ful
Nah, there is also the lower-than-dirt album with a single good song. If you ever buy the album because of the song, you realise you're screwed big time. Having the ability to listen to the full album and not a few selected parts of it endangers this part of the current business model even more.
Hitler was elected as Chancelor, the President was still Hindenburg.
He then named himself Führer und Reichskanzler (Leader and Chancellor) in 34, at Hindenburg's death (instead of holding new presidential elections) and was approved by 90% of the german population in a mid-august plebiscite (Hindenburg's death was on the 2nd of August).
While a plebiscite is by no mean a vote, he'd probably have managed to get his position of Führer und Reichskanzler through popular vote anyway.
That's also how I work (albeit mostly for music), P2P gives me "free tries", if i'm not interrested I delete the file and don't buy the disc period, if I like the group album I buy the CD.
And most of my friends do the same, it's a convenient way to build a collection you *really* like without having to blow your money on 90% of crap.
This was also on Slashdot last week, they're just reposting it for guys like you who missed the first iteration
The Atari Lynx would be prior art.
Why not, is there any operation about them that'd REQUIRE a "true" GUI instead of command-line tools?
That's super duper, and do you send it only with the, as the specifications require, application/xhtml+xml or application/xml MIME types?
The subject is not Microsoft here, it's the IE team. Go to the IE blog, read everything that was written since the blog started, and you'll see humans that are mostly genuinely nice and interrested in providing a good experience for the user.
While that won't get me switch back to MSIE, I think there is no point in bashing the guys for doing good things.
If you had followed the IEBlog during this summer, you'd know that PNG is fixed, CSS1 should be completely implemented as well as HTML 4.01, and big parts of CSS2.1 should be available in IE7.
While the 'under the hood' part is definitely important, one must not downgrade the sheer necessity for interfaces to be nice, understandable and coherent.
The various browser teams have already decided to implement a coherent visual style for secure connections (last month or so), implementing more common interface features for common functionalities is a good thing as it'll allow the user (you) to switch much more easily from a browser to another one, and i'm not even talking about your mother here.
That doesn't work because of the floats syntax, Python's trying to build a float with decimal part "__add__(3)", which doesn't work too well...
This kind of syntax is usually frowned upon though, since methods with double pre and postfixing underscores are "magic methods" used to implement specific operations of the interpreter.
BTW working example for 5+3
Yeah, it's probably that they don't even consider us worth communicating with.
Try passing a function/method as an argument to another function (GUI callback for example)
Without using strange patterns that only exist as crutches to the language.
Last time I checked, compiled binaries didn't mean that you had to distribute the binaries themselves, distribute the compilable source, let the client sort it out, done.
That statement is false, since technically everything in python is written in a file, a file is a module, and a module is an object.
Now, that's stretching it, and you can indeed write structured, functional or aspect-oriented code in Python, instead of having to write OO even when it's inconvenient. I (and most pythonistas) consider that it's a good thing, actually.
I know, that's JIT compiling, and it doesn't change anything to the RAM consumption...
... and it can't be faster than binaries that went through and optimizing compiler.
JIT allows you to get within an order of magnitude of compiled languages, faster for some tasks when the compiled code is not that good (or the compiler blows, but that's pretty much long past us by now unless you're using a relic of the Dark Ages), but you won't get faster on average.
I must say that I don't quite care, Nokia's Series 60 phones can be developped for in Python and THAT rocks my socks
Duh? Python has never (EVER) been designed to "process text", please check your sources.
While it has acceptable text-processing abilities that's clearly not where it shines (you want Perl for that).
Python and Ruby are not quite "scripting languages" today, they're full fledged programming languages that strive for cleanness and readability.