It suggests that heavier atoms are created during supernovae, as well as in the ISM during "day to day operations." Maybe the relative lack of heavier atoms in space has something to do with the fact they are all sucked into black holes?
If Microsoft wanted to beat down the RIAA it would have more money backing and more lawyers and the potential to destroy any DRM schemes that Sony or anyone else wants to put on Windows.
Somewhere Orrin Hatch just raised an eyebrow.
No company can position themselves in digital music distribution without DRM, at least not in today's political climate. Microsoft made their choice and is running with it; their intention is not to rid the world of MP3s, nor to convert the world's MP3s to WMAs. They want the partnerships and the file conversion is more likely a condition of the RIAAs than their desire to lock out Mac/Linux users.
Plain and simple, they want you to use Windows. If they supported other OSes, then you'd have choice. The only choice Microsoft wants you to have is the one between XP Home or XP Pro.
Well, yeah, but it's equally relevant that there's no DRM with MP3s. Microsoft and Verizon are Big Businesses (TM). They can't afford to tick off the Powers That Be (TM).
It's sad that the music industry didn't get behind digital delivery before things got out of hand. DRM makes a certain amount of sense... but it's way too late. If they had made their catalogs available digitally pre-Napster, consumers might have become accustomed to it and they might have gotten it to work, but at that point they were so consumed with protecting their CD margins that their window of opportunity closed.
Now they're screwed, everything's free if you know what you're doing, and we all get to suffer their litigation. Just another example of corporate greed doing no one any good, including the corporation itself.
Well, that's sort of what they did. It's just a slam piece dressed up because it came from a "lab."
They started by saying Windows is just as good as Linux.
The tests, which found that Windows performed as well as Linux on legacy hardware when installed and run out-of-the-box, were done in part to give Microsoft the data it needed to effectively "put to rest the myth that Linux can run on anything.
Then they say there's a common misconception that Linux can do something people are giving it credit for (run on legacy hardware) and provided an explanation that couldn't really be disputed but really wasn't correct, either.
Asked why he believed there was such a pervasive belief that Linux could run on older hardware, Hilf said the technical capability to modify Linux, to strip it down to run with a minimal set of services and software so that it could run on all sorts of hardware devices, had generated that larger assumption that any type of Linux distribution could run on all sorts of hardware devices.
Then they gave an example of what Linux can't do, neglecting to mention that no modern Windows system couldn't do it, either.
"Memory prevented the successful installation on a typical 1997 system, as 32MB of memory is not enough to install most Linux distributions or to run desktop applications with acceptable performance. A memory upgrade could prolong the life of such hardware, but the cost and effort of locating old memory and installing it onto all corporate clients significantly reduces the potential savings," Hilf said.
Just another rutabega from the ol' FUD farm. Nothing to see here, folks, move along.
Networks like ATM and TENET have special layers to define the properties of a data stream independently from the source and the sink. There is no equivalence in Windows or UNIX for those. There are some tacked on QoS-parameters for certain network devices (to handle the QoS of the networks connected), but this is not a design principle for all the not networked devices.
Beh. ATM was a dog. It was supposed to be this voice/data/video panacea but all it ended up being was an incredibly inefficient way to pass data around. Defining class of service on a cell/packet is one of those ideas that makes sense, but is ultimately meaningless based on the nature of data transmission.
QOS prioritizes packets, that's it. It has no effect except during congestion. It will not "create" bandwidth. If you're a carrier and your backbone is clogged, QOS isn't going to help you very much because the buffers on your routers can only store so much. You're going to start dropping packets all over the place and your customers will be most displeased. That's why carriers overprovision backbones.
If you're a customer and you don't have enough pipe to your house to really support a video stream (which with modern-day streaming technology isn't very much), Linux/Windows won't be the problem. You won't be able to prevent your downloads from interrupting your video stream with prioritization, as that would have to occur at the carrier side before the packets crossed the wire. And why would the carrier do that for you? Buy a fat pipe, they'll suggest. After all that's what they had to do.
Cable companies and telecoms have been grappling with this for years. Ultimately they've found the only tenable solution is capacity.
In fact, we constantly do things for inexplicable reasons. We watch our own lives and imagine that we are making ourselves act, but in truth we're deluding ourselves. Our "will" is just a fantasy, no less of a reaction to what's going on around us than our emotions are.
Things we do repeatedly we imagine we do based on our inclinations and from these inclinations we construct personality, but in reality they are just things that happen to us more often than others.
Things we do that we don't like or can't explain we blame on "the unconscious," "insanity," "God's will" or some other mysticism where a nebulous force acts on us from beyond (or within). In truth, some of us have purposes that are quite unpleasant to experience in the context of society.
No. If you wanted singles, you could have just bought the singles. If you wanted album tracks, well that's another story.
I know what a single is. So I guess because I like a song on an album that's not the popular choice, then I should fork over and shut up, huh?
I like cookies - but those asshole cookie manufacturers have the distribution mechanism locked up so I have to buy an entire pack at once!
It's more like buying a 12-pack and getting one Heineken and eleven National Bohemians. If you want to get twelve Heinekens, you'll have to buy twelve 12-packs. Yes, they could sell you a 12-pack of Heineken and yes, they could sell you a single. But they don't. You have to buy the 11 Natty Bos to get the Heinken. Would you do that? I guess you would. Otherwise all those poor bottlers would go hungry.
Look if you don't mind ripping off the artists, engineers & producers who make all that music you like so much thats fine by me - it's your morality after all.
Thank you for that gesture. If it gives those artists any pleasure to know that I'm enjoying to their music when I otherwise wouldn't, that's cool. If all they want is my money, oh well. At least I'm happy. Doo do doo.
I remember creating a list of CDs I wanted. They'd be prioritized. Some CDs would have multiple songs on them I liked; I'd buy those first. Others would have only one song.
Every once in a while, I'd splurge. I'd create a "mix tape", which was in fact a cassette tape with several singles recorded on it (yes, I'm old). This would require plunking down $15 on several CDs with only one song on it I like. Creating a mix tape like that would require somewhere in the neighborhood of $300. That was the only option to get those singles I enjoyed.
The RIAA had it good for years by monopolizing the means of distribution. Then the Net stepped in and I haven't forked down a penny for a CD in years. It started with FTP servers and search engines (remember share ratio?), migrated to Napster, then to the other P2P networks that operate without a central authority. I don't feel a speck of a guilt. The RIAA has been paid in full, as far as I'm concerned. In fact, they owe me.
This loathesome bullying is typical of an industry that was jerking the public around for years and now is getting it back in spades. I'm glad. Let us eat cake.
We're the MPAA. Our profits are slipping. What's the problem?
Maybe $10 for a movie ticket, $7 for a tub of popcorn, $5 for a soda or candy bar is a little much. Nah, couldn't be it.
Maybe laser pointers, cell phones and chatty kathies are ruining the experience. Nah, couldn't be it.
Maybe big-screen TVs make watching movies at home more enjoyable. Nah, couldn't be it.
Maybe showing 15 commercials before the movie starts is a little obnoxious. Nah, couldn't be it.
Maybe we're putting out absolute drivel that no one in their right mind would sit through. Nah, couldn't be it.
Maybe it's the online pirates, sucking down our profits over high-speed Internet connections. Yes, that's it! That's why no one goes to the movies anymore!
Someone else feel free to correct me if I am wrong.
Ok.
One cannot forge an IP address for an established TCP connection.
Wrong. You need to be on an L2 net between the forged sender address and recipient address, at which point it's trivial. But generally more trouble than it's worth.
There is one way one can sort of forge IP addresses, but this technique is more accurately termed as hijacking. Spammers have been known to do this, they abuse BGP which automaticly queries neighboring routers for the networks they manage, and then use this date to decide where to route packets.
No. I don't know where you get the term "hijacking" and spammers don't have any claim over this technique. Injecting more-specific routes into BGP to divert traffic away from where it should be going is a drastic maneuver that can take any site on the web down. It requires having access to a router at a major NAP or within a network that peers with other major networks without filtering. That's not simple and I don't know that it's happened very often, if at all.
One could also hijack a users connection or computer using malware, or alternatively you could perhaps intercept their DSL line between their house and the ISP.
I don't know what you mean by "intercept their DSL line". You can't tap a DSL line.
And finally, there are ways to mask, or make it diffuclt to find one's originating IP, this can be done by bouncing your TCP connection through one or more servers. Serious hackers use this technique, so for example, a hacker in Russia connects to a server in Brazil, then from Brazil to a server in Europe, and finally from that server in Europe through to the U.S. server he hacks.
"Serious hacker"? I don't know what a serious hacker is. There are so many compromised boxes out there, on cable modem / DSL networks, in universities and other institutions, that anyone who wants to cover their tracks and knows the right people can simply hop from machine to machine. I don't know if this is what you mean by "bouncing your TCP connection"; that seems to imply your packets are hopping from one place to another, when in fact you're logging into one place, then to another, then to another, etc., the final connection being made from a machine which is not your own and any trace efforts requiring the participation of every machine in the path you created to get there.
The way you forgot to mention is the use of an open proxy that doesn't log, of which there are dozens out there.
Google Power Supplies?
Google "Crimp Your Own Cables" Kit?
Google "That Stuff in a Can You Use to Clean Keyboards" Stuff?
Google "Bow Down to the Overlords of the Internet" Mousepads?
As soon as they make a Clippy, will Slashdot declare them evil? No! Never! We won't do it!
Anyways, don't let that fire die and don't be scared to fall for sarcasm if it will mean leaving something like that unanswered. When stuff like that goes unanswered, things will go from bad to worse very rapidly. G/L and great post. I'm with you.
Thank you. It's not the first time I've been called an ass, nor will it be the last. Such is life.
I'm getting fed up of these irresponsible companies backing up sensitive data with NO ENCRYPTION. We're talking about International companies here, sending plain-text data around on tapes. Sometimes, companies have been caught sending tapes through UPS!
The reason that tapes are sent offsite in the first place is to guard against disasters at the home office, e.g. fire, flood, etc.
If you encrypt the data and the encryption keys are stored at the office and that office is destroyed, then you've reduced your backups to garble. Same goes if your backup server goes out completely. You can make backups of your keys and send those offsite I suppose, but most backup software virtualizes the encryption process and most backup operators aren't clued to those mechanisms (and most senior SAs avoid backup operators like the plague).
News flash, dude: The people who work in government don't care about us. They don't sit around all day and worry about what's in our best interests. They sit around all day and worry about themselves, like 99.999% of people on the face of the Earth. You think your safety means a damned thing to them? All they care about is keeping their incredibly high-paying and powerful jobs. If your safety happens to help them do that, then OK, but that's the only reason. They just don't care.
I don't know why people think politicians are such great guys. All they do is tell you what you want to hear; they don't understand you. Most of them are tremendously wealthy people, multi-multi-millionaires, who don't have a clue about what it's like to earn a real living or live a life outside of country clubs and fund raisers. How many people like that do you come into contact with on a daily basis? They are supposed to be civil servants, put in place to do the business of the country, pushing paper around, shaking hands, protecting the citizenry. Nothing special. We are supposed to define this country, not them. Instead we've made them demigods, leaders of our culture, and turned this country into not only a business, but a moneymaking machine. Stupid.
And now people like this dope want to give them absolute power. Even more stupid.
Very few criminals are intelligent or innovative. Most survive by a code of silence and a threat of violence.
This "code of silence" you reference is the reason you never met any criminals that have anything to them. Street hustlers don't steal backup tapes. They run game on undergraduate writers with romanticized notions about crime.
Well, at least our friendly Bush administration has something in common with Communist China
Oh, but there is one very big thing that they do not have in common. The Chinese government hates Christianity. There's something about empowering the lowly that threatens them. In fact, they are so anti-Christian, that the leader of the free world had to put on his pastor's frock and preach over there:
Still, I think it's pretty far from "common sense." Once you see it, it makes sense, but if you ask most people what properties they want they'll probably say the dark blues.
Any property a multiple of 7 away from Go would be the most commonly hit. That's the result that's most likely to result from two die, and, therefore, is common sense.
I worked for a bioinformatics company ...
on
Biotech Data Mining
·
· Score: 3, Informative
... and I'm not sure this data is that useful.
What they're hoping for is to find commonalities among individuals with certain traits, genetic diseases obviously, but also predisposition for certain drug therapies. Medications work for some people and not for others. It would be marvelous if you could do a genetic scan of someone and predict whether a certain drug therapy would work on them. It could also bring drugs to market that aren't already because they don't help some people and are in fact dangerous to others.
Great idea, but there are serious obstacles. First, the dataset that comes off a DNA sample is enormous. You can currently sample DNA in about 500,000 places, each location represented by letters, those letters representing the type of molecule present in a certain position on the double helix. There are about a half-dozen of those, so what you end up with is half a million of these letters juxtaposed. And it's not as easy as "if there's an n at position 232.922, this drug won't work for you." It's more like "if there's a series of letters in one place, and there's a series of letters in another, then you can either have a series in this place or a series that one, etc.".
Unfortunately, you don't know how long the series is and you don't know where, you don't know what depends on what. You just don't know. It's a statistical nightmare. You should see the algorithms they throw at those things.
And of course, environment may play a role in such things, too, so you don't even know if what you're looking for means anything.
Slashdot Mirror
I found this on NASA's web site: http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/teachers/lessons /xray_spectra/background-elements.html
It suggests that heavier atoms are created during supernovae, as well as in the ISM during "day to day operations." Maybe the relative lack of heavier atoms in space has something to do with the fact they are all sucked into black holes?
Somewhere Orrin Hatch just raised an eyebrow.
No company can position themselves in digital music distribution without DRM, at least not in today's political climate. Microsoft made their choice and is running with it; their intention is not to rid the world of MP3s, nor to convert the world's MP3s to WMAs. They want the partnerships and the file conversion is more likely a condition of the RIAAs than their desire to lock out Mac/Linux users.
Well, yeah, but it's equally relevant that there's no DRM with MP3s. Microsoft and Verizon are Big Businesses (TM). They can't afford to tick off the Powers That Be (TM).
It's sad that the music industry didn't get behind digital delivery before things got out of hand. DRM makes a certain amount of sense ... but it's way too late. If they had made their catalogs available digitally pre-Napster, consumers might have become accustomed to it and they might have gotten it to work, but at that point they were so consumed with protecting their CD margins that their window of opportunity closed.
Now they're screwed, everything's free if you know what you're doing, and we all get to suffer their litigation. Just another example of corporate greed doing no one any good, including the corporation itself.
Bring on the apologists!
They started by saying Windows is just as good as Linux.
The tests, which found that Windows performed as well as Linux on legacy hardware when installed and run out-of-the-box, were done in part to give Microsoft the data it needed to effectively "put to rest the myth that Linux can run on anything.
Then they say there's a common misconception that Linux can do something people are giving it credit for (run on legacy hardware) and provided an explanation that couldn't really be disputed but really wasn't correct, either.
Asked why he believed there was such a pervasive belief that Linux could run on older hardware, Hilf said the technical capability to modify Linux, to strip it down to run with a minimal set of services and software so that it could run on all sorts of hardware devices, had generated that larger assumption that any type of Linux distribution could run on all sorts of hardware devices.
Then they gave an example of what Linux can't do, neglecting to mention that no modern Windows system couldn't do it, either.
"Memory prevented the successful installation on a typical 1997 system, as 32MB of memory is not enough to install most Linux distributions or to run desktop applications with acceptable performance. A memory upgrade could prolong the life of such hardware, but the cost and effort of locating old memory and installing it onto all corporate clients significantly reduces the potential savings," Hilf said.
Just another rutabega from the ol' FUD farm. Nothing to see here, folks, move along.
Beh. ATM was a dog. It was supposed to be this voice/data/video panacea but all it ended up being was an incredibly inefficient way to pass data around. Defining class of service on a cell/packet is one of those ideas that makes sense, but is ultimately meaningless based on the nature of data transmission.
QOS prioritizes packets, that's it. It has no effect except during congestion. It will not "create" bandwidth. If you're a carrier and your backbone is clogged, QOS isn't going to help you very much because the buffers on your routers can only store so much. You're going to start dropping packets all over the place and your customers will be most displeased. That's why carriers overprovision backbones.
If you're a customer and you don't have enough pipe to your house to really support a video stream (which with modern-day streaming technology isn't very much), Linux/Windows won't be the problem. You won't be able to prevent your downloads from interrupting your video stream with prioritization, as that would have to occur at the carrier side before the packets crossed the wire. And why would the carrier do that for you? Buy a fat pipe, they'll suggest. After all that's what they had to do.
Cable companies and telecoms have been grappling with this for years. Ultimately they've found the only tenable solution is capacity.
If you need a hookup, I've got 1,039 contacts.
In fact, we constantly do things for inexplicable reasons. We watch our own lives and imagine that we are making ourselves act, but in truth we're deluding ourselves. Our "will" is just a fantasy, no less of a reaction to what's going on around us than our emotions are.
Things we do repeatedly we imagine we do based on our inclinations and from these inclinations we construct personality, but in reality they are just things that happen to us more often than others.
Things we do that we don't like or can't explain we blame on "the unconscious," "insanity," "God's will" or some other mysticism where a nebulous force acts on us from beyond (or within). In truth, some of us have purposes that are quite unpleasant to experience in the context of society.
Keep that nonsense to yourself and ye shall be thanked.
I know what a single is. So I guess because I like a song on an album that's not the popular choice, then I should fork over and shut up, huh?
I like cookies - but those asshole cookie manufacturers have the distribution mechanism locked up so I have to buy an entire pack at once!
It's more like buying a 12-pack and getting one Heineken and eleven National Bohemians. If you want to get twelve Heinekens, you'll have to buy twelve 12-packs. Yes, they could sell you a 12-pack of Heineken and yes, they could sell you a single. But they don't. You have to buy the 11 Natty Bos to get the Heinken. Would you do that? I guess you would. Otherwise all those poor bottlers would go hungry.
Look if you don't mind ripping off the artists, engineers & producers who make all that music you like so much thats fine by me - it's your morality after all.
Thank you for that gesture. If it gives those artists any pleasure to know that I'm enjoying to their music when I otherwise wouldn't, that's cool. If all they want is my money, oh well. At least I'm happy. Doo do doo.
I remember creating a list of CDs I wanted. They'd be prioritized. Some CDs would have multiple songs on them I liked; I'd buy those first. Others would have only one song.
Every once in a while, I'd splurge. I'd create a "mix tape", which was in fact a cassette tape with several singles recorded on it (yes, I'm old). This would require plunking down $15 on several CDs with only one song on it I like. Creating a mix tape like that would require somewhere in the neighborhood of $300. That was the only option to get those singles I enjoyed.
The RIAA had it good for years by monopolizing the means of distribution. Then the Net stepped in and I haven't forked down a penny for a CD in years. It started with FTP servers and search engines (remember share ratio?), migrated to Napster, then to the other P2P networks that operate without a central authority. I don't feel a speck of a guilt. The RIAA has been paid in full, as far as I'm concerned. In fact, they owe me.
This loathesome bullying is typical of an industry that was jerking the public around for years and now is getting it back in spades. I'm glad. Let us eat cake.
We're the MPAA. Our profits are slipping. What's the problem?
Maybe $10 for a movie ticket, $7 for a tub of popcorn, $5 for a soda or candy bar is a little much. Nah, couldn't be it.
Maybe laser pointers, cell phones and chatty kathies are ruining the experience. Nah, couldn't be it.
Maybe big-screen TVs make watching movies at home more enjoyable. Nah, couldn't be it.
Maybe showing 15 commercials before the movie starts is a little obnoxious. Nah, couldn't be it.
Maybe we're putting out absolute drivel that no one in their right mind would sit through. Nah, couldn't be it.
Maybe it's the online pirates, sucking down our profits over high-speed Internet connections. Yes, that's it! That's why no one goes to the movies anymore!
Call the lawyers!
Ok.
One cannot forge an IP address for an established TCP connection.
Wrong. You need to be on an L2 net between the forged sender address and recipient address, at which point it's trivial. But generally more trouble than it's worth.
There is one way one can sort of forge IP addresses, but this technique is more accurately termed as hijacking. Spammers have been known to do this, they abuse BGP which automaticly queries neighboring routers for the networks they manage, and then use this date to decide where to route packets.
No. I don't know where you get the term "hijacking" and spammers don't have any claim over this technique. Injecting more-specific routes into BGP to divert traffic away from where it should be going is a drastic maneuver that can take any site on the web down. It requires having access to a router at a major NAP or within a network that peers with other major networks without filtering. That's not simple and I don't know that it's happened very often, if at all.
One could also hijack a users connection or computer using malware, or alternatively you could perhaps intercept their DSL line between their house and the ISP.
I don't know what you mean by "intercept their DSL line". You can't tap a DSL line.
And finally, there are ways to mask, or make it diffuclt to find one's originating IP, this can be done by bouncing your TCP connection through one or more servers. Serious hackers use this technique, so for example, a hacker in Russia connects to a server in Brazil, then from Brazil to a server in Europe, and finally from that server in Europe through to the U.S. server he hacks.
"Serious hacker"? I don't know what a serious hacker is. There are so many compromised boxes out there, on cable modem / DSL networks, in universities and other institutions, that anyone who wants to cover their tracks and knows the right people can simply hop from machine to machine. I don't know if this is what you mean by "bouncing your TCP connection"; that seems to imply your packets are hopping from one place to another, when in fact you're logging into one place, then to another, then to another, etc., the final connection being made from a machine which is not your own and any trace efforts requiring the participation of every machine in the path you created to get there.
The way you forgot to mention is the use of an open proxy that doesn't log, of which there are dozens out there.
I'm at 127.0.0.1 ...
Google "Crimp Your Own Cables" Kit?
Google "That Stuff in a Can You Use to Clean Keyboards" Stuff?
Google "Bow Down to the Overlords of the Internet" Mousepads?
As soon as they make a Clippy, will Slashdot declare them evil? No! Never! We won't do it!
Thank you. It's not the first time I've been called an ass, nor will it be the last. Such is life.
Only those who go to Heaven (TM) get to play Duke Nukem Forever.
The reason that tapes are sent offsite in the first place is to guard against disasters at the home office, e.g. fire, flood, etc.
If you encrypt the data and the encryption keys are stored at the office and that office is destroyed, then you've reduced your backups to garble. Same goes if your backup server goes out completely. You can make backups of your keys and send those offsite I suppose, but most backup software virtualizes the encryption process and most backup operators aren't clued to those mechanisms (and most senior SAs avoid backup operators like the plague).
Good in theory, bad in practice.
I don't know why people think politicians are such great guys. All they do is tell you what you want to hear; they don't understand you. Most of them are tremendously wealthy people, multi-multi-millionaires, who don't have a clue about what it's like to earn a real living or live a life outside of country clubs and fund raisers. How many people like that do you come into contact with on a daily basis? They are supposed to be civil servants, put in place to do the business of the country, pushing paper around, shaking hands, protecting the citizenry. Nothing special. We are supposed to define this country, not them. Instead we've made them demigods, leaders of our culture, and turned this country into not only a business, but a moneymaking machine. Stupid.
And now people like this dope want to give them absolute power. Even more stupid.
This "code of silence" you reference is the reason you never met any criminals that have anything to them. Street hustlers don't steal backup tapes. They run game on undergraduate writers with romanticized notions about crime.
Too, file storage systems are so redundant nowadays that backup tapes are seldom referenced.
Marriott soon-to-be-ex SA: "Um, didn't they already come this week?"
Wow. I mean ... wow. Unbelievable what you read on here sometimes. You go with that, dude. My hat is off to you.
Next thing you tell me some dude that died 2,000 years ago is making the world go round.
Oh, but there is one very big thing that they do not have in common. The Chinese government hates Christianity. There's something about empowering the lowly that threatens them. In fact, they are so anti-Christian, that the leader of the free world had to put on his pastor's frock and preach over there:
http://www.bennyhinn.org/yourlife/InTheNews-Christ ian-Persecution/Bush-Challenges-China-on-Religious -Freedom.html
Church and state? Who said what?
Odd that the Godless and the Godfull preach the same repression Gospel, isn't it? It's almost as if their intentions were the same. Hmmm.
Any property a multiple of 7 away from Go would be the most commonly hit. That's the result that's most likely to result from two die, and, therefore, is common sense.
What they're hoping for is to find commonalities among individuals with certain traits, genetic diseases obviously, but also predisposition for certain drug therapies. Medications work for some people and not for others. It would be marvelous if you could do a genetic scan of someone and predict whether a certain drug therapy would work on them. It could also bring drugs to market that aren't already because they don't help some people and are in fact dangerous to others.
Great idea, but there are serious obstacles. First, the dataset that comes off a DNA sample is enormous. You can currently sample DNA in about 500,000 places, each location represented by letters, those letters representing the type of molecule present in a certain position on the double helix. There are about a half-dozen of those, so what you end up with is half a million of these letters juxtaposed. And it's not as easy as "if there's an n at position 232.922, this drug won't work for you." It's more like "if there's a series of letters in one place, and there's a series of letters in another, then you can either have a series in this place or a series that one, etc.".
Unfortunately, you don't know how long the series is and you don't know where, you don't know what depends on what. You just don't know. It's a statistical nightmare. You should see the algorithms they throw at those things.
And of course, environment may play a role in such things, too, so you don't even know if what you're looking for means anything.
Great idea, hope it works, not holding my breath.