I bought a UK copy of PC Gamer recently when I heard they had a preview of Overgrowth in it. I was surprised to know that they'd have different content fro the US PC Gamer magazine, but I was shocked to find the entire magazine was bigger (like those old Life magazines in my grandparent's basement), longer, had many more features, and had a bonus disk. The US version looked positively emaciated next to it.
I suspect that isn't the only overwrought element here. In my, admittedly limited, search I have yet to find reputable sources confirming any but the barest of details in this story; let alone "Kill Half Humanity" (Wikipedia's already infected, care of rt.com.)
The Canadian Press, which brings us the Winnipeg Free Press article, fails to provide anything real to back up its statements. I can't really follow it any more than looking up the organizations provided and looking for related news postings (of which I found none.)
Subsequent searching leads me to a Gizmodo article (links provided for those who wish to follow my searches.) Of it, there are two meaningful citations (that is, not links to the about pages of the source in question.) Science Insider and a pdf announcement detailing the schedule of the September influenza conference in Malta, in which this announcement is quoted as having been made.
The first thing I noticed within the pdf (aside from the garish design) is the absence of any announcement on GM influenza, (or Ron Fouchier, or his organization.) Admittedly, this hardly means this didn't occur; merely that this (what is essentially a flier) is not a meaningful source of information.
As for the Science Insider, it provides few additional details, mostly regarding vaguely related discussions on the classification/pre-approval of these sorts of studies. The closest thing it provides to something interesting is a (Dutch language) greenlight for what is supposed to be Ron's project.
Indeed, the Dutch link does concern GM influenza, and is an answer to a question on procedure for studying this sort of thing (of which they already apparently had a license to do.) It does not corroborate any of the stand out details of this article (how could it, considering it's from 2007.) Of minor note, there is no mention of ferrets; only standard embryonated [sic. Google Translation] chicken eggs.
You can't take back what you broadcast. Radio wave communication is sufficiently simple that it's not all together unlikely other civilizations wouldn't have at least used it at some point. Sure, eventually they may move beyond it. However, if we're receiving their radio signals just now, it's quite plausible they are now far more advanced than us. But, at the same time, in the time it takes for the signals to reach us (assuming they're even powerful enough to not get lost in the background) they could have easily wipe themselves out.
I came off a project not long ago which involved a web app-running browser embedded in a native app. There was even a decent reason why: Users could pre-enroll online or walk-in at a dedicated station. Either way, the same steps had to be preformed at least once, before the rest of the application (which was native because it involved special hardware) did the rest.
All I can say was, it was...er, an experience.
To begin, the Web application was powered by Java while the Native application was run by C#/.Net. Don't let anyone tell you these two play nice, because they certainly don't; there were bizarre display issues present in the Native app that didn't happen in any other browser we were testing on (including IE.) Nevermind the challenges presented by getting the two applications to communicate and coordinate in order to provide a seamless integrated interface; we really should have relied more on Web Services than we did (but the reasons behind that are a whole other story.) Most importantly, in order to integrate the two well, you need a developer or developers who understand how to write good web apps as well as good native apps (also, in this case a developer who knows C# and Java, which I eventually came to.) I think you hit the nail on the head with your post; these are two very different things with their own strength domains. I'll just add that mixing them is questionable for most solutions, difficult for all of them (Fun, though!)
Too small, too small; think bigger! Soon, I shall have all the components I need to complete my electro-luminal brain! No more cumbersome, slow chemical interface at the synapse; the entire brain will run at the speed of light!
Co-Sponsors:
Sen Alexander, Lamar [TN]
Sen Blumenthal, Richard [CT]
Sen Blunt, Roy [MO]
Sen Coons, Christopher A. [DE]
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA]
Sen Franken, Al [MN] (Say it ain't so, Franky!)
Sen Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [NY]
Sen Graham, Lindsey [SC]
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA]
Sen Hatch, Orrin G. [UT]
Sen Klobuchar, Amy [MN]
Sen Kohl, Herb [WI]
Sen Rubio, Marco [FL]
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY]
Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [RI]
However, the vote was merely to put it on the Senate calendar. I don't believe there's records for how that proceeded in the Judiciary Committee. If your interested in the individuals currently on this Committee and how it functions, I suggest this wikipedia article.
It's hardly a brain and certainly not a complete one. It's more like a (presumably basic) approximation of the neural networks cells in the brain form in order to preserve stimuli. It's less a conscious memory being stored and more the raw sensory input.
Oh, I love to play with definitions; let me give this a try!
Technically, the definition specifies "unselfish" behavior. Being that selfish behavior is categorized as caring solely for one's self regardless of others, I would say that true altruism need not be entirely unreasoned or disinterested in one's own benefit. So long as that caring for one's self is done with regards to other people, I think it matches the technical definition of altruistic behavior just fine.
People can have faith (believe, trust) in Science, but that doesn't make Science a Faith (recently developed synonym for a religion or religious belief.) This is just nonsensical word play, bereft of any real argumentative value; regardless of one's views on Science or Religion.
{Full Disclosure: I was diagnosed ADD (nowa-a-days called ADHD-I) at an early age and have been on Adderall since then. Today, I choose to continue recieving the prescription.}
Not to be disrespectful or contrarian or anything, but are these drugs really intrinsically bad? Even under a misdiagnosis, isn't it possible that these drugs can provide tangable benefits for the child? I don't want to jump right on and say that there is, but shouldn't we at least examine the possibility that these drugs could provide benefits and (assuming they do even for the misdiagnosed) allow the parents (and the child once he's of an appropriate age) to choose whether to administer the medication?
What's really wrong with these drugs? Yes they have side-effects, and yes there are consequences and very different reactions in people who don't have what they are prescribed for, but should we jump to the conclusion that these are not worth it or that only those whom the drugs were researched for can benefit from them?
What? No, I don't have answers to any of these questions. I want to know people's opinions. I am of the opinion that it is neither right nor wrong to let nature take its course or to intervene. Of course, this simple opinion presupposes a lot about the point of views I may be arguing about. I want to here those views and understand them as well.
1. Solutions to issues ballast issues have long been explored. A combination of heating up or cooling down the lifting gas as well as collection of condensation via condensors can provide most if not all the ballast control the airship would need. Better yet, these solutions are both achievable through clever use of the exaust gas produced by engines, so they actually contribute very little additional load. No need to waste precious lifting gas. Checkout Buoyancy Compensator for additional information.
2. The article is about a hybrid air vehicle. These use a combining of helium lift, aerodynamic lift, a hovercraft landing system and vectored thrust, so it's not entirely reliant on maintaining bouyancy.
From March through May of 2010, MyType surveyed over 20,000 of its users on Facebook
As much as I want to describe my self as a "self-directed young [person] who look[s] down on conformity and [is] interested in videogames, computers, electronics, science and the internet," I can't say that this study is even remotely non-baised.
I tried running your statement through the deciphering-AI, but the process killed itself before completion. I checked the debug logs, but the weren't very helpful. Just a bunch of 'e's, 'y's, 'a's, and some 'r's and 'g's strung together.
Former Curator and original collector of many of the bones in the cache, "Skippy," was unavailable for comment. However his lawyers, have stated that he is not pleased with this "discovery" by the human scientists and will be submitting an injunction against removal of any bones after his "walkies."
Slashdot Mirror
So, when do the new T-shirts come out?
Beautiful sentiment. If only it were not just a day after my mod points expired... Mr. Armstrong will be greatly missed.
At last, our technology is starting to catch up to 1940s cartoons! I can't wait for my portable hole...
I bought a UK copy of PC Gamer recently when I heard they had a preview of Overgrowth in it. I was surprised to know that they'd have different content fro the US PC Gamer magazine, but I was shocked to find the entire magazine was bigger (like those old Life magazines in my grandparent's basement), longer, had many more features, and had a bonus disk. The US version looked positively emaciated next to it.
I suspect that isn't the only overwrought element here. In my, admittedly limited, search I have yet to find reputable sources confirming any but the barest of details in this story; let alone "Kill Half Humanity" (Wikipedia's already infected, care of rt.com.)
The Canadian Press, which brings us the Winnipeg Free Press article, fails to provide anything real to back up its statements. I can't really follow it any more than looking up the organizations provided and looking for related news postings (of which I found none.) Subsequent searching leads me to a Gizmodo article (links provided for those who wish to follow my searches.) Of it, there are two meaningful citations (that is, not links to the about pages of the source in question.) Science Insider and a pdf announcement detailing the schedule of the September influenza conference in Malta, in which this announcement is quoted as having been made.
The first thing I noticed within the pdf (aside from the garish design) is the absence of any announcement on GM influenza, (or Ron Fouchier, or his organization.) Admittedly, this hardly means this didn't occur; merely that this (what is essentially a flier) is not a meaningful source of information.
As for the Science Insider, it provides few additional details, mostly regarding vaguely related discussions on the classification/pre-approval of these sorts of studies. The closest thing it provides to something interesting is a (Dutch language) greenlight for what is supposed to be Ron's project.
Indeed, the Dutch link does concern GM influenza, and is an answer to a question on procedure for studying this sort of thing (of which they already apparently had a license to do.) It does not corroborate any of the stand out details of this article (how could it, considering it's from 2007.) Of minor note, there is no mention of ferrets; only standard embryonated [sic. Google Translation] chicken eggs.
Color me skeptical, to say the least.
You can't take back what you broadcast. Radio wave communication is sufficiently simple that it's not all together unlikely other civilizations wouldn't have at least used it at some point. Sure, eventually they may move beyond it. However, if we're receiving their radio signals just now, it's quite plausible they are now far more advanced than us. But, at the same time, in the time it takes for the signals to reach us (assuming they're even powerful enough to not get lost in the background) they could have easily wipe themselves out.
The cold war truly is over. I wonder how long until the US and Russia have a relationship like Britain and France.
Also: In Post-Soviet Russia, you link up transcontinental railway. In America, transcontinental railway links up you!
Haven't you heard? Valve can't count to 3.It's really true!
I should clarify that. I meant Java as far as the technology stack goes. So, Richfaces, JSF, served up by Tomcat, backed by Java classes.
I came off a project not long ago which involved a web app-running browser embedded in a native app. There was even a decent reason why: Users could pre-enroll online or walk-in at a dedicated station. Either way, the same steps had to be preformed at least once, before the rest of the application (which was native because it involved special hardware) did the rest.
All I can say was, it was...er, an experience.
To begin, the Web application was powered by Java while the Native application was run by C#/.Net. Don't let anyone tell you these two play nice, because they certainly don't; there were bizarre display issues present in the Native app that didn't happen in any other browser we were testing on (including IE.) Nevermind the challenges presented by getting the two applications to communicate and coordinate in order to provide a seamless integrated interface; we really should have relied more on Web Services than we did (but the reasons behind that are a whole other story.) Most importantly, in order to integrate the two well, you need a developer or developers who understand how to write good web apps as well as good native apps (also, in this case a developer who knows C# and Java, which I eventually came to.) I think you hit the nail on the head with your post; these are two very different things with their own strength domains. I'll just add that mixing them is questionable for most solutions, difficult for all of them (Fun, though!)
Too small, too small; think bigger! Soon, I shall have all the components I need to complete my electro-luminal brain! No more cumbersome, slow chemical interface at the synapse; the entire brain will run at the speed of light!
You're correct, at present we've only managed to find quasi-monopoles.
Large-scale cousin of elusive 'magnetic monopoles' found
I'm eager to see if the MoEDAL Experiment manages to pull of a find of true magnetic monopoles, though.
Err, perhaps petroleum contributed to the process of development, but Fertilizer is not petroleum based
S.968 via Thomas
Sponsor: Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT]
Co-Sponsors:
Sen Alexander, Lamar [TN]
Sen Blumenthal, Richard [CT]
Sen Blunt, Roy [MO]
Sen Coons, Christopher A. [DE]
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA]
Sen Franken, Al [MN] (Say it ain't so, Franky!)
Sen Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [NY]
Sen Graham, Lindsey [SC]
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA]
Sen Hatch, Orrin G. [UT]
Sen Klobuchar, Amy [MN]
Sen Kohl, Herb [WI]
Sen Rubio, Marco [FL]
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY]
Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [RI]
However, the vote was merely to put it on the Senate calendar. I don't believe there's records for how that proceeded in the Judiciary Committee. If your interested in the individuals currently on this Committee and how it functions, I suggest this wikipedia article.
It's hardly a brain and certainly not a complete one. It's more like a (presumably basic) approximation of the neural networks cells in the brain form in order to preserve stimuli. It's less a conscious memory being stored and more the raw sensory input.
They've grown an organic pre-processing buffer.
See a doctor. My informed (through television) opinion is that you may be pregnant and not know it.
Oh, I love to play with definitions; let me give this a try!
Technically, the definition specifies "unselfish" behavior. Being that selfish behavior is categorized as caring solely for one's self regardless of others, I would say that true altruism need not be entirely unreasoned or disinterested in one's own benefit. So long as that caring for one's self is done with regards to other people, I think it matches the technical definition of altruistic behavior just fine.
People can have faith (believe, trust) in Science, but that doesn't make Science a Faith (recently developed synonym for a religion or religious belief.) This is just nonsensical word play, bereft of any real argumentative value; regardless of one's views on Science or Religion.
I've done a bit of work with Sharepoint. Even with the snazzy new stuff included with 2010, prepare for disappointment :(
I really, REALLY want to know what happened under the table, what's still happening under the table, what McAfee has that 15 cheap startups don't
Some people'll pay real good money to own something as simple as a name. Others'll pay good money just because it's from somebody with those names.
{Full Disclosure: I was diagnosed ADD (nowa-a-days called ADHD-I) at an early age and have been on Adderall since then. Today, I choose to continue recieving the prescription.}
Not to be disrespectful or contrarian or anything, but are these drugs really intrinsically bad? Even under a misdiagnosis, isn't it possible that these drugs can provide tangable benefits for the child? I don't want to jump right on and say that there is, but shouldn't we at least examine the possibility that these drugs could provide benefits and (assuming they do even for the misdiagnosed) allow the parents (and the child once he's of an appropriate age) to choose whether to administer the medication?
What's really wrong with these drugs? Yes they have side-effects, and yes there are consequences and very different reactions in people who don't have what they are prescribed for, but should we jump to the conclusion that these are not worth it or that only those whom the drugs were researched for can benefit from them?
What? No, I don't have answers to any of these questions. I want to know people's opinions. I am of the opinion that it is neither right nor wrong to let nature take its course or to intervene. Of course, this simple opinion presupposes a lot about the point of views I may be arguing about. I want to here those views and understand them as well.
1. Solutions to issues ballast issues have long been explored. A combination of heating up or cooling down the lifting gas as well as collection of condensation via condensors can provide most if not all the ballast control the airship would need. Better yet, these solutions are both achievable through clever use of the exaust gas produced by engines, so they actually contribute very little additional load. No need to waste precious lifting gas. Checkout Buoyancy Compensator for additional information.
2. The article is about a hybrid air vehicle. These use a combining of helium lift, aerodynamic lift, a hovercraft landing system and vectored thrust, so it's not entirely reliant on maintaining bouyancy.
From March through May of 2010, MyType surveyed over 20,000 of its users on Facebook
As much as I want to describe my self as a "self-directed young [person] who look[s] down on conformity and [is] interested in videogames, computers, electronics, science and the internet," I can't say that this study is even remotely non-baised.
I tried running your statement through the deciphering-AI, but the process killed itself before completion. I checked the debug logs, but the weren't very helpful. Just a bunch of 'e's, 'y's, 'a's, and some 'r's and 'g's strung together.
I...I think it was screaming...
Former Curator and original collector of many of the bones in the cache, "Skippy," was unavailable for comment. However his lawyers, have stated that he is not pleased with this "discovery" by the human scientists and will be submitting an injunction against removal of any bones after his "walkies."