Google Health has been permanently discontinued. All data remaining in Google Health user accounts as of January 2, 2013 is being systematically destroyed, and Google is no longer able to recover any Google Health data for any user. To learn more about this announcement, see our blog post, or answers to frequently-asked questions below. Frequently-asked questions
Is there any way to retrieve my Google Health data from Google?
No -- all remaining user data is being permanently and irrevocably deleted from the Google Health system starting on January 2, 2013. Google is no longer able to recover any Google Health data for any user.
What happened to my Google Health data after January 1, 2013?
All Google Health user accounts have been deactivated, and all data stored in them is being systematically deleted from Google’s systems starting on January 2, 2013.
Don't patents have a 'must defend' clause in them for them to continue to be valid? By doing this, instead of (say) licencing them at a dollar per, haven't they invalidated their own patents and made them able to be used by anyone - including those not in good faith?
And if you continue reading past the first paragraph - you find that that is only true if the blood is no longer in your body. The blood pressure of a live person means the blood does not boil at any pressure, as the pressure inside the blood exceeds the boiling point - even if the skin is under vacuum.
that he invented the classification system for organisms. And there are a _LOT_ of stub articles for the Lesser Spotted Garden Slimy Thing, that link to 'biological classification' and hence Carls page. (can you tell I can't spell his second name?
It's not really been done. I'm more talking about what comes after educational research, when you've got two alternatives that seem reasonable. At the moment, a policy gets either implemented, or not, perhaps after testing it in one school with no control group.
You pick 20 schools. Now, at 10 of them randomly, you implement policy A. At the other 10, policy B. Now you actually have reasonable statistics to use to see which one works.
Education is not done at the moment in general in a rational manner.
The process is typically that a politician gets an idea. (which they may even believe). They then either implement this in their area of influence, or if they are especially progressive, do a poorly setup trial, which they then ignore before rolling it out.
The problem is things that seem reasonable often produce the exact opposite result.
Take for example 'Scared Straight' programs - where troubled teens are taken on prison visits, to see what future awaits them and to help turn their life around. Seems obvious it'll work, so nobody checked. Unfortunately, when they did: 'A study by Anthony Petrosino and researchers at the Campbell Collaboration analyzed results from nine Scared Straight programs and found that such programs generally increased crime up to 28 percent in the experimental group when compared to a no-treatment control group.... found that youth who participate in Scared Straight and other similar deterrence programs have higher recidivism rates than youth in control groups.'
There is real debate as to the best way to teach kids to read. Proper statistics measuring outcomes for each way answers this.
Should this data ever be available outside education, and should there be extreme penalties for using such data in such contexts as insurance- of course not, and yes!. (I'd start at a million dollars per offence)
It was broken by 'Waste anything but time' - and it hasn't recovered. Space launch has - from about the 60s till comparatively recently (last decade) cost $10K/lb or so to orbit. 'SLS - NASAs most recent rocket design - will cost around this. This is not due to physics. All governmental space efforts are unfortunately in general not actual space programs, they are welfare programs.
At current prices of launch on commercial vendors, the cost of developing SLS to its first couple of flights would launch 4000 tons to low earth orbit. With plausible near-term launchers (SpaceX falcon heavy), even neglecting the reusability options - this same budget would launch 11000 tons. The same mass as a WWII aircraft carrier.
It's reasonable to assume that energy usage per viewing of a media stream will drop significantly over time - which greatly negates the benefits of the DVD.
It couldn't have been that for 3 of those working days, they were able to gain interest on that money. I mean - they're bankers - they couldn't be doing it for profit alone?
It's not in low earth orbit. Technically there isn't a real reason why. The problems basically boil down to it'd be too expensive to do it well. And that there is very interesting science to be done on the follow-on mission.
The 'technology fixes' referred to are not hardware. They are instead of operating it pointed all the time at the normal bit of sky - which it can do, but now with two wheels only at ruinous cost in fuel - to instead point it at some point along the solar system equator. It can do this for up to 80 days at a time, before the sun gets too close to the imager. There are all sorts of interesting things it can do when pointed at these targets. The 'usual' planet hunting - though restricted in the case of single 80 day campaigns to finding planets of under 80 days orbit. Studies of microlensing,...
The bits of sky it can look at - near the galactic core - for example are very different to the Kepler Field - where all the planetary discoveries so far have been. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G... is a fascinating follow-on of sorts. This will scan a billion stars over 5 years. It will detect some massive planets -
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu... 'blocking facial afference with botox selectively slows comprehension of emotional sentences. Therefore, theories of cognition should account for emotion-language interactions above the level of explicit emotion words, and the role of peripheral feedback in comprehension. '
To continue with a european theme - cellphones may not work to call emergency services in some countries. In the UK, they do not, for example without a SIM.
An interesting argument is that it's basically the same way we do anything else. Numerous studies have shown that if you for-example watch someone moving their arm, you partially understand this by using the same area of your brain that deals with your arms. Same with emotion - microexpressions where you have a fleeting subtle echo of expressions on others faces which aids your understanding - botox actually can impair your ability to perceive well the emotions of others.
Consciousness - or more accurately the illusion of a self can be reasonably understood as the reuse of an evolutionary device originally used to understand others actions. When applied to ourselves, this guesses our 'intent' from internal actions, and provides reasons and justifications for actions, which may be entirely specious.
For example, direct brain stimulation does not 'feel' like an external input - it feels like a 'natural' thought that you had - and people will often rationalise reasons for the most unusual behaviour due to direct brain stimulation, rather than the simple answer 'you applied a pulse of electricity to my brain' - because that's not how it feels.
Then there is the interesting question of why having a career as an astronaut should be safer than having a career as a deep-sea fisherman, or a lumberjack. If I have the numbers correct - from http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshnoti... - fishery workers have around 100 deaths per 100000 per year - or 1 death per 1000 years worked. If an astronaut flys once a year, then the rocket only needs to get to 99.9% safety - not 99.9999.
Six nines would make it considerably safer than a career in a library. (0.3 deaths per 100K)
You're assuming that the doodlers PSU is used at 100% of capacity. This may or may not be true. In principle, better insulation could help somewhat too - though this is tricky while avoiding melt-back.
'As soon as people learn that they can print a new battery cover for a remote control, or replace a small broken part of a kid's favorite toy, or some amazing thing no one has yet thought of, they'll start picking up.'
But they can't. Unless that was your point. Take your average consumer, and give them a 3d modelling package. Ask them to make a battery cover. It needs to fit precisely in the hole - often to +-0.2mm tolerances or it won't slide in right. It needs to have a properly designed 'spring' or it's going to fall off again. They don't have an accurate metrology thing that would let them measure the size of the hole. They are at best inexperienced when trying to run 3d modelling software, much of which is at best challenging to use.
It's going to take most people quite a while before they can actually print something that fits.
This may well be too high a barrier to entry.
Printing things from thingiverse et al is another matter.
At the moment, a 'Customers not impressed with CNC lathes' story would make almost as much sense.
5K for a 24kWh battery that lasts 8 years - under any circumstances - that is unlikely. At that price, I'm buying one for off-grid use. That is noticably cheaper than lead-acid cells.
Regular superglue (neglecting that it's actually dermabobond) forms a healed wound with several layers. You get the two sides of the wound somewhat reacting and generating an abnormal layer, and you have bits of plastic in the wound.
The technique mentioned essentially makes the cut surfaces into glue, with a non-toxic additive. There will not be a scar due to reaction between the glue and the flesh - because there is no glue in that sense. The scar tissue will be very limited - as the flesh is clamped together along the whole length of the cut, without anything in between it.
There are out there honeypot machines, which log all inbound and outbound packets. They can run retrospective analysis of these packets to work out if undetected exploit probes have occurred.
Is anyone aware of this being done for heartbleed?
It would be interesting if - for example - it went from no exploits to most honeypots probed 3 months ago.
The problem is that doesn't work. This would work if you place the converter just in front of the retina. (but then it wouldn't work as the eye is not transparent to IR) If you place it in front of the eye lens - contact lenses count - then you need the output visible light to be going in the same direction as the input IR light. There are no common physical processes that can do this. Hence, unfortunately, you need to actually have lenses and separate emitters.
In principle, this might change if you could have phase preserving detectors at 100nm resolution across the front of the 'contact lens' and phase preserving emitters at 100nm resolution across the back.
Naively, this will require significant computation and processing at 500000GHz *10000 megapixels.
So, not in the near term. (I would be astounded if it happens in the next 50 years)
A feature being ineffectual generally does not mean that it's not relevant, unless the law specifically says that the feature must be effective against skilled attackers.
http://www.aliexpress.com/item... is a typical example. (I have no relationship with this seller, they were the first hit for a large device on 'sms modem'.
They are basically little 'phone' modules hooked up to a power supply, antennas, and SIM connectors. You simply insert 32 SIMs into the device, and you have 32 completely normal phones (from the networks point of view) that you can spam SMSs with.
They are not base-stations, they simply connect to the network as normal phones.
Base stations would induce other phones to connect to them, pretending to be the phone network. The SMSs are in fact sent over the normal network, in the normal way.
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.google.com/intl/en-...
Google Health has been discontinued
Google Health has been permanently discontinued. All data remaining in Google Health user accounts as of January 2, 2013 is being systematically destroyed, and Google is no longer able to recover any Google Health data for any user. To learn more about this announcement, see our blog post, or answers to frequently-asked questions below.
Frequently-asked questions
Is there any way to retrieve my Google Health data from Google?
No -- all remaining user data is being permanently and irrevocably deleted from the Google Health system starting on January 2, 2013. Google is no longer able to recover any Google Health data for any user.
What happened to my Google Health data after January 1, 2013?
All Google Health user accounts have been deactivated, and all data stored in them is being systematically deleted from Google’s systems starting on January 2, 2013.
Don't patents have a 'must defend' clause in them for them to continue to be valid?
By doing this, instead of (say) licencing them at a dollar per, haven't they invalidated their own patents and made them able to be used
by anyone - including those not in good faith?
And if you continue reading past the first paragraph - you find that that is only true if the blood is no longer in your body.
The blood pressure of a live person means the blood does not boil at any pressure, as the pressure inside the blood exceeds the boiling point - even if the skin is under vacuum.
His idea would have been just as revolutionary if there had been a thousand species, not millions.
His ranking would be considerably lower.
that he invented the classification system for organisms.
And there are a _LOT_ of stub articles for the Lesser Spotted Garden Slimy Thing, that link to 'biological classification' and hence Carls page. (can you tell I can't spell his second name?
It's not really been done.
I'm more talking about what comes after educational research, when you've got two alternatives that seem reasonable.
At the moment, a policy gets either implemented, or not, perhaps after testing it in one school with no control group.
You pick 20 schools. Now, at 10 of them randomly, you implement policy A. At the other 10, policy B.
Now you actually have reasonable statistics to use to see which one works.
Done right - yes, the kids.
Education is not done at the moment in general in a rational manner.
The process is typically that a politician gets an idea. (which they may even believe).
They then either implement this in their area of influence, or if they are especially progressive, do a poorly setup trial, which they then ignore before rolling it out.
The problem is things that seem reasonable often produce the exact opposite result.
Take for example 'Scared Straight' programs - where troubled teens are taken on prison visits, to see what future awaits them and to help turn their life around. Seems obvious it'll work, so nobody checked. ... found that youth who participate in Scared Straight and other similar deterrence programs have higher recidivism rates than youth in control groups.'
Unfortunately, when they did:
'A study by Anthony Petrosino and researchers at the Campbell Collaboration analyzed results from nine Scared Straight programs and found that such programs generally increased crime up to 28 percent in the experimental group when compared to a no-treatment control group.
There is real debate as to the best way to teach kids to read.
Proper statistics measuring outcomes for each way answers this.
Should this data ever be available outside education, and should there be extreme penalties for using such data in such contexts as insurance- of course not, and yes!.
(I'd start at a million dollars per offence)
https://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojj...
It was broken by 'Waste anything but time' - and it hasn't recovered.
Space launch has - from about the 60s till comparatively recently (last decade) cost $10K/lb or so to orbit.
'SLS - NASAs most recent rocket design - will cost around this.
This is not due to physics.
All governmental space efforts are unfortunately in general not actual space programs, they are welfare programs.
At current prices of launch on commercial vendors, the cost of developing SLS to its first couple of flights would
launch 4000 tons to low earth orbit.
With plausible near-term launchers (SpaceX falcon heavy), even neglecting the reusability options - this same budget would launch 11000 tons.
The same mass as a WWII aircraft carrier.
It's reasonable to assume that energy usage per viewing of a media stream will drop significantly over time - which greatly negates the benefits of the DVD.
It couldn't have been that for 3 of those working days, they were able to gain interest on that money.
I mean - they're bankers - they couldn't be doing it for profit alone?
It's not in low earth orbit.
Technically there isn't a real reason why.
The problems basically boil down to it'd be too expensive to do it well.
And that there is very interesting science to be done on the follow-on mission.
The 'technology fixes' referred to are not hardware. ...
They are instead of operating it pointed all the time at the normal bit of sky - which it can do, but now with two wheels only at ruinous cost in fuel - to instead point it at some point along the solar system equator.
It can do this for up to 80 days at a time, before the sun gets too close to the imager.
There are all sorts of interesting things it can do when pointed at these targets. The 'usual' planet hunting - though restricted in the case of single 80 day campaigns to finding planets of under 80 days orbit.
Studies of microlensing,
The bits of sky it can look at - near the galactic core - for example are very different to the Kepler Field - where all the planetary discoveries so far have been.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G... is a fascinating follow-on of sorts.
This will scan a billion stars over 5 years.
It will detect some massive planets -
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu...
'blocking facial afference with botox selectively slows comprehension of emotional sentences. Therefore, theories of cognition should account for emotion-language interactions above the level of explicit emotion words, and the role of peripheral feedback in comprehension. '
To continue with a european theme - cellphones may not work to call emergency services in some countries.
In the UK, they do not, for example without a SIM.
An interesting argument is that it's basically the same way we do anything else.
Numerous studies have shown that if you for-example watch someone moving their arm, you partially understand this by using the same area of your brain that deals with your arms. Same with emotion - microexpressions where you have a fleeting subtle echo of expressions on others faces which aids your understanding - botox actually can impair your ability to perceive well the emotions of others.
Consciousness - or more accurately the illusion of a self can be reasonably understood as the reuse of an evolutionary device originally used to understand others actions. When applied to ourselves, this guesses our 'intent' from internal actions, and provides reasons and justifications for actions, which may be entirely specious.
For example, direct brain stimulation does not 'feel' like an external input - it feels like a 'natural' thought that you had - and people will often rationalise reasons for the most unusual behaviour due to direct brain stimulation, rather than the simple answer 'you applied a pulse of electricity to my brain' - because that's not how it feels.
http://brainsciencepodcast.com... - is interesting on this exact topic.
I heartily agree on this.
And, indeed, would sign up tomorrow to do so at substantially worse odds than fishermen.
Then there is the interesting question of why having a career as an astronaut should be safer than having a career as a deep-sea fisherman, or a lumberjack.
If I have the numbers correct - from http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshnoti... - fishery workers have around 100 deaths per 100000 per year - or 1 death per 1000 years worked.
If an astronaut flys once a year, then the rocket only needs to get to 99.9% safety - not 99.9999.
Six nines would make it considerably safer than a career in a library. (0.3 deaths per 100K)
You're assuming that the doodlers PSU is used at 100% of capacity.
This may or may not be true.
In principle, better insulation could help somewhat too - though this is tricky while avoiding melt-back.
'As soon as people learn that they can print a new battery cover for a remote control, or replace a small broken part of a kid's favorite toy, or some amazing thing no one has yet thought of, they'll start picking up.'
But they can't.
Unless that was your point.
Take your average consumer, and give them a 3d modelling package.
Ask them to make a battery cover.
It needs to fit precisely in the hole - often to +-0.2mm tolerances or it won't slide in right.
It needs to have a properly designed 'spring' or it's going to fall off again.
They don't have an accurate metrology thing that would let them measure the size of the hole.
They are at best inexperienced when trying to run 3d modelling software, much of which is at best challenging to use.
It's going to take most people quite a while before they can actually print something that fits.
This may well be too high a barrier to entry.
Printing things from thingiverse et al is another matter.
At the moment, a 'Customers not impressed with CNC lathes' story would make almost as much sense.
5K for a 24kWh battery that lasts 8 years - under any circumstances - that is unlikely.
At that price, I'm buying one for off-grid use.
That is noticably cheaper than lead-acid cells.
Regular superglue (neglecting that it's actually dermabobond) forms a healed wound with several layers.
You get the two sides of the wound somewhat reacting and generating an abnormal layer, and you have bits of plastic in the wound.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com... (image)
The technique mentioned essentially makes the cut surfaces into glue, with a non-toxic additive.
There will not be a scar due to reaction between the glue and the flesh - because there is no glue in that sense.
The scar tissue will be very limited - as the flesh is clamped together along the whole length of the cut, without anything in between it.
There are out there honeypot machines, which log all inbound and outbound packets.
They can run retrospective analysis of these packets to work out if undetected exploit probes have occurred.
Is anyone aware of this being done for heartbleed?
It would be interesting if - for example - it went from no exploits to most honeypots probed 3 months ago.
The problem is that doesn't work.
This would work if you place the converter just in front of the retina. (but then it wouldn't work as the eye is not transparent to IR)
If you place it in front of the eye lens - contact lenses count - then you need the output visible light to be going in the same direction as the input IR light.
There are no common physical processes that can do this.
Hence, unfortunately, you need to actually have lenses and separate emitters.
In principle, this might change if you could have phase preserving detectors at 100nm resolution across the front of the 'contact lens' and phase preserving emitters at 100nm resolution across the back.
Naively, this will require significant computation and processing at 500000GHz *10000 megapixels.
So, not in the near term.
(I would be astounded if it happens in the next 50 years)
A) Thermal imagers have not required cooling since approximately 1980.
(for other than extremely specialised applications.
B) Having a sensor does not magically mean it can be used in a contact lens.
You need electronics, LEDs, and focussing optics in order to get it into the eye in a coherent image.
By this exact same argument, many house-locks deployed are not 'security', and breaking them is therefore not a crime.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... - I recommend.
A feature being ineffectual generally does not mean that it's not relevant, unless the law specifically says that the feature must be effective against skilled attackers.
http://www.aliexpress.com/item... is a typical example. (I have no relationship with this seller, they were the first hit for a large device on 'sms modem'.
They are basically little 'phone' modules hooked up to a power supply, antennas, and SIM connectors.
You simply insert 32 SIMs into the device, and you have 32 completely normal phones (from the networks point of view) that you can spam SMSs with.
They are not base-stations, they simply connect to the network as normal phones.
Base stations would induce other phones to connect to them, pretending to be the phone network.
The SMSs are in fact sent over the normal network, in the normal way.