Of course, we also have all those things that never arrived, and where we could claim that it should have been totally obvious that it wasn't practical, although maybe theoretically possible. Fission-powered cars, anyone?
True, but both the space elevator approach and the approach of an almost immediate impulse launch (versus a conventional rocket) would be that we don't have to lift the fuel. The elevator has the added benefit of a possible counter-balance, but the main point is still that all current rockets use lots of fuel to lift other fuel.
This would naturally also make any kind of "power beaming" technology interesting, even if it would be quite inefficient, as long as it could be transformed into significant thrust easily in the receiver.
Why? Well, don't expect those bikers to watch TV while doing it, if you want a positive output. (Ok, it can get better than that, but I think we're way off from being able to sustain one person's electricity usage from less than 24 hours of biking. And, yes, that is sort of a problem. If we are going to use mammals, we obviously need to use something that doesn't want any comfort.)
Yes, this is from a Western perspective, but it's not very viable in developing countries either.
Well, reactor damage may not be important, but the fact that you're losing heat (and mass) by the same process that's then damagin the reactor wall makes this development interesting for simply maintaining the reaction in a more efficient manner.
For a far larger lense than in any pocket camera, that is. (Not mentioning any possibility for optimization of the crystal structure to accomodate for this large-scale diffusion.)
Note that we don't see the planet. We see that we see less of the light from the star. If the planet would be Earth-like (or a reasonably dense gas giant), we wouldn't get any absorption spectra clues for the chemical composition, as all wavelengths would be absorbed in the "eclipsed" region of the star's disc.
Exactly what species are you thinking about that would:
a) care
b) be able to celebrate (considering what our extinction might also mean for the rest of this planet)
c) have the cognitive abilities to celebrate?
As a bonus television makes your eyes focus on a very narrow depth of field which is surprising similar to a hypnotic state. Television is successful mostly because it puts people in a mildly hypnotic state during which they are prone to suggestions.
*staring at the screen* *feeling a bit dizzy* You're absolutely right!
The only slightly relevant thing I can imagine would be any FUD regarding possible overheating in the real case, as if that wouldn't be solvable in the coming months. Of course, one such solution would be downclocking the machine, but that would hardly be too relevant with a machine that's anyway not going to compete by its raw performance merits.
I would generally agree (if it could go higher, they would let it to). However, as long as Yonah is a mobile chip, they have no reason to test specs that would mean raising the voltage and frequency too much, as that simply won't work in a laptop (Pentium 4 M wasn't too popular). It should be obvious that we can nearly promise reliability at higher frequencies if we allow a higher Vcore, and appropriate cooling. Part of the big win with Conroe will of course be that they change that tradeoff, and optimize any critically slow paths in the current design; aside from the changes making the architecture wider and so on.
It still requires manual intervention. What I'm wondering right now if whether this could be turned into a "preview-only exploit" if Outlook (not Outlook Express) is configured to use the Word engine as an email editor.
True, rearrangements do happen and, true, there is some chance that you have two lucky mutations in the same chromosome that each by itself is lethal. On the other hand, almost all haploid subsets of your genome are carrying lethal traits. So, what you request is sequencing of both copies. We want to get there, sometime, but if we should look for errors, I think the issues of being sure that the full contig sequence is the "true" one are more important, especially in repeat-rich sections.
The current data is, counted just in correct base pairs vs. any human, probably over 99 % good. That's good enough to do a lot of cool analysis, and that work will keep the theorists happy while the boring prep work of sequencing more genomes, other species and more human individuals, goes on.
In addition to what's already been mentioned, there are some highly characteristic start sequences "upstream" from the actual coding sequence, including what's called a "TATA box", a sequence of about eight nucleotides, where the most preserved part is TATA. The individual nucleotides vary a little, but it's still quite detectable in the overall noise.
In addition, we have other effects. For example, there is a varying stability between GC and AT pairs, which gives a tendency to a biased ratio in "junk". This stability issue will naturally also possibly give a contribution to the coding sequence, but there, the selection towards specific function will often dominate. This means that you'll, generally, see a difference in GC/AT ratio between coding and non-coding.
(Pseudo-genes, that is, simplified, genes that won't be transcribed anymore because they're slightly broken, are of course often quite hard to discriminate from real genes, how hard depends on the mechanism by which they were created.)
I don't see why you would mention alternate alleles as something different. They're just SNPs kept closely together, or even indels within the coding sequence. (And some other traits have been shown to actually be varying repeat lengths, as well.) From a phenotypic perspective different alleles are naturally different than "hidden" markers, and of course we have a significant selection pressure on that material, but they're still not a different kind of variation.
That suggests some organization. It's more like why one patch in the sky contains more stars than another. Of course, there are some patterns, like the original Milky Way streak towards the center of the galaxy, but most of it is just a coincidence without any real "reason".
Another way to put it is that there has obviously not been enough of a disadvantage to have varying chromosome sizes, alternatively some slight advantage in maintaining something similar to the current layout. (Of course, significant chromosomal changes are a quite rare event, as they generally result in infertility, even if it would just be a rearrangement without any "real" damage.)
Considering nanotechnology is, so far, often just a fancy name for thin-film application of chemicals, of course it should be governed by the regulations applying to those chemicals. The FDA certainly has some say in that.
To maintain the illusion that it didn't change from the previous definition, perharps (to within the accuracy of measurements at the time)? Of course, the final decimals were probably a bit of a hack, but a serious attempt to make the match as good as possible.
However, the micro kernels are slow in ways that are among the bottlenecks still on the machines of today, like requiring significant memory copies (or very flexible page mapping), context switches and so on. If an everyday and "mundane" task like copying files to an iPod (or, worse, another harddrive) is slowed down significantly, the debate gets far less theoretical.
Well, a prepared exploit is of course dependent on the architecture. But that's not the ONLY thing it needs. It would reasonably also need some system call (or be highly dependent on the specific calling convention the application was compiled with, to modify the stack to indirectly trick other code into full exploitation). Those will generally still be different.
Actually, temperature "is" the distribution among the possible energy states. The heavier the current distribution favors the lowermost states, the lower the temperature is. The somewhat odd result of this is that you can achieve a negative temperature if the higher states are more populated than the lower ones. Basically, minus infinity and plus infinity are (just about) identical states, while -0 and +0 K are widely different.
Well, you DO have the near-field solution for transmission/reflection in any interface with a difference in refraction index. Depending on point of view and how you misuse "common sense", you may get that to have a complex or negative speed. (It's an attenuating exponential instead of a cyclic sin/cos solution, hence the "near" part, as it goes to zero very quickly.)
As long as the user is able to perceive any response time, we are obviously not user-bound. It doesn't matter that the CPU is idle most of the time -- as long as we aren't smart enough to prefetch/precalc the effects of a command when the user has yet to click the button, we have a total and mad race to execute that command.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, we also have all those things that never arrived, and where we could claim that it should have been totally obvious that it wasn't practical, although maybe theoretically possible. Fission-powered cars, anyone?
This would naturally also make any kind of "power beaming" technology interesting, even if it would be quite inefficient, as long as it could be transformed into significant thrust easily in the receiver.
Yes, this is from a Western perspective, but it's not very viable in developing countries either.
That's why you should stay seated during take-off and landing.
Nah, they've just tightened down security -- now even www.company.com gives a 403 response!
Well, reactor damage may not be important, but the fact that you're losing heat (and mass) by the same process that's then damagin the reactor wall makes this development interesting for simply maintaining the reaction in a more efficient manner.
For a far larger lense than in any pocket camera, that is. (Not mentioning any possibility for optimization of the crystal structure to accomodate for this large-scale diffusion.)
Note that we don't see the planet. We see that we see less of the light from the star. If the planet would be Earth-like (or a reasonably dense gas giant), we wouldn't get any absorption spectra clues for the chemical composition, as all wavelengths would be absorbed in the "eclipsed" region of the star's disc.
a) care
b) be able to celebrate (considering what our extinction might also mean for the rest of this planet)
c) have the cognitive abilities to celebrate?
The only slightly relevant thing I can imagine would be any FUD regarding possible overheating in the real case, as if that wouldn't be solvable in the coming months. Of course, one such solution would be downclocking the machine, but that would hardly be too relevant with a machine that's anyway not going to compete by its raw performance merits.
I would generally agree (if it could go higher, they would let it to). However, as long as Yonah is a mobile chip, they have no reason to test specs that would mean raising the voltage and frequency too much, as that simply won't work in a laptop (Pentium 4 M wasn't too popular). It should be obvious that we can nearly promise reliability at higher frequencies if we allow a higher Vcore, and appropriate cooling. Part of the big win with Conroe will of course be that they change that tradeoff, and optimize any critically slow paths in the current design; aside from the changes making the architecture wider and so on.
It still requires manual intervention. What I'm wondering right now if whether this could be turned into a "preview-only exploit" if Outlook (not Outlook Express) is configured to use the Word engine as an email editor.
The current data is, counted just in correct base pairs vs. any human, probably over 99 % good. That's good enough to do a lot of cool analysis, and that work will keep the theorists happy while the boring prep work of sequencing more genomes, other species and more human individuals, goes on.
In addition, we have other effects. For example, there is a varying stability between GC and AT pairs, which gives a tendency to a biased ratio in "junk". This stability issue will naturally also possibly give a contribution to the coding sequence, but there, the selection towards specific function will often dominate. This means that you'll, generally, see a difference in GC/AT ratio between coding and non-coding.
(Pseudo-genes, that is, simplified, genes that won't be transcribed anymore because they're slightly broken, are of course often quite hard to discriminate from real genes, how hard depends on the mechanism by which they were created.)
I don't see why you would mention alternate alleles as something different. They're just SNPs kept closely together, or even indels within the coding sequence. (And some other traits have been shown to actually be varying repeat lengths, as well.) From a phenotypic perspective different alleles are naturally different than "hidden" markers, and of course we have a significant selection pressure on that material, but they're still not a different kind of variation.
Another way to put it is that there has obviously not been enough of a disadvantage to have varying chromosome sizes, alternatively some slight advantage in maintaining something similar to the current layout. (Of course, significant chromosomal changes are a quite rare event, as they generally result in infertility, even if it would just be a rearrangement without any "real" damage.)
Considering nanotechnology is, so far, often just a fancy name for thin-film application of chemicals, of course it should be governed by the regulations applying to those chemicals. The FDA certainly has some say in that.
To maintain the illusion that it didn't change from the previous definition, perharps (to within the accuracy of measurements at the time)? Of course, the final decimals were probably a bit of a hack, but a serious attempt to make the match as good as possible.
However, the micro kernels are slow in ways that are among the bottlenecks still on the machines of today, like requiring significant memory copies (or very flexible page mapping), context switches and so on. If an everyday and "mundane" task like copying files to an iPod (or, worse, another harddrive) is slowed down significantly, the debate gets far less theoretical.
On the other hand, it's easy to introduce endian dependencies in C/C++ code. Those will be a non-issue for a MacTel-only port.
Well, a prepared exploit is of course dependent on the architecture. But that's not the ONLY thing it needs. It would reasonably also need some system call (or be highly dependent on the specific calling convention the application was compiled with, to modify the stack to indirectly trick other code into full exploitation). Those will generally still be different.
Actually, temperature "is" the distribution among the possible energy states. The heavier the current distribution favors the lowermost states, the lower the temperature is. The somewhat odd result of this is that you can achieve a negative temperature if the higher states are more populated than the lower ones. Basically, minus infinity and plus infinity are (just about) identical states, while -0 and +0 K are widely different.
Well, you DO have the near-field solution for transmission/reflection in any interface with a difference in refraction index. Depending on point of view and how you misuse "common sense", you may get that to have a complex or negative speed. (It's an attenuating exponential instead of a cyclic sin/cos solution, hence the "near" part, as it goes to zero very quickly.)
As long as the user is able to perceive any response time, we are obviously not user-bound. It doesn't matter that the CPU is idle most of the time -- as long as we aren't smart enough to prefetch/precalc the effects of a command when the user has yet to click the button, we have a total and mad race to execute that command.