I humbly bow to my
'schlocky ad salesmen' (Google, Yahoo!, etc) and the 'monopolist plumbers'
Re:Have you tried coding anything hard?
on
The End of Native Code?
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Hmm.. as well. I worked on a team that developed a DB app that was nine PETABYTES and growing constantly. (Our little test database was 60 terabytes.) It will soon be one of the five largest databases in the world, and could extend into the exabyte range (you can guess who it's for.) We use Java and ASP.NET on the server and Java and an AJAX solution on the client. We throw shitloads of big boxes at it and we don't give a damn, because it works. Do not get me started on how analytically complex the algorthms are that use that data...
The issue for researchers involves the ability of the stem cells they are using to differentiate into the desired cell type, as played out by their gene expression amongst other attributes. Embryonic stem cells are generally considered "omnipotent" -- they can become any type of cell. Other stem cells fall into a spectrum of "pluripotency", meaning that they can form many types of cells within their spectrum of differentiation. Others are barely pluripotent or unipotent, thereby limiting their general utility, but leaving them still very important (think human glial cells, astrocytes, neurons, renal nephrons, even hepatocytes).
Re:This would be really helpful for someone I know
on
Stem Cells in the Heart?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Also refer to the NIH Hematopoietic Stem Cells. There's tons of research going on, so tell your friend to hang on...
However, there is promising research that shows that myovascular cell structures can be grown from pluri- or omni-potent stem cells, particularly from bone marrow. Also, advances are being made in developing more and more complex organ systems using "bio-scaffolding" -- in effect put myovascular stem cells in an aorta shaped matrix an grow them in vitro, then "install".
Never say Never.
You're right, LVAD's are not new. However they suffer from the same shortcomings that all other cardiac assistance and replacement devices do -- they crush blood cells and eventually cause strokes thereby. They are great in the short term, but if you can get the natural organ working more quickly and efficiently, all to the better. BTW, LVADs are often used as only a bridge to a transplant, which does not produce a long-living prognosis. One's own heart, even if it does not function quite as well in terms of rhythm and ejection fraction, is still much friendlier to the rest of your body.
TFA didn't really go into any depth, but the news, if there is any, would depend upon how pluripotent the stem cells are; that is, what types of fully-formed cells they can produce. For a heart to regenerate after an insult such as an infarction, numerous cell types must be regenerated, from cardiac myocytes to the specialized neurons that synchronize the heartbeat (e.g. the sino-atrial complex). So, depending on what they can get to regenerate Real Soon Now, it may in fact be news.
No Shit.
For mathematically-intensive uses the Cell Processor blows everything else out of the water, by far. Given that faster might actually be better in such contexts, what would you buy? Granted, it's backed by a little-known company by the name of IBM, which may actually have its shit together on chip design.
How about "aspirin", Bayer's trademarked name for acetylsalicylic acid. Trademarks and other names get subsumed by society. Northern Europeans, have you Hoovered your carpets lately?
NASA is so bloated and bureaucratized that it should be in all lower case, at 2-pt. font. I have known numerous engineers and scientists that worked there in some capacity, and in private conversations they are all ashamed at what it has become.
There are none among us who are "indespensable", but we can become "difficult to be dispensed with". Be smart, kind, respectful to your peers, and all those other trite things, then wait for death or life. And of course, wear sunscreen.
I agree with everything you posted, except that we do not know that any black holes are singularities, even of the Kerr-Newman type. We are pretty sure that they have an event horizon, but what's beyond that has not been empirically verified.
No, no, no. The kind of black hole created by a particle accelerator would decay so quickly via Hawking radiation that we would be lucky to see the tracks and even know that it was "there". It would be far too small to absorb mass/energy faster than it lost it. Such micro-black holes may indeed have already been created by the RHIC in Brookhaven.
It's late and I am tired, but IAANP.
I agree with you. Out here in the West we cannot find (good).NET/C# developers nearly fast enough. Our salaries and cost of living are not as high as NYC, but still "commanding". I interview 20 ".NET" programmers for every one who has ever heard of delegates or is otherwise competent, and I look more for problem-solving skills than technical specifics, but damn, it's tough. Still that one of twenty can easily provide themselves a very good living, and provide profit for the firm they work for.
I agree with the OP, but only to a point (actually almost all of it.)
First, the parts I agree with -- learn to design, code, and conceptualize algorithms independent of any language. Then, be realistic and honestly assess if you are a designer/programmer with the innate talent that is will take,
I speak from some experience -- I have designed languages and libraries in my twenty years of practicing this art/profession, and seen them come to fruition. I am an expert at.NET way beyond the drone coder level, but only because I knew what SHOULD be there in the framework.
In the end, the only people that can meaningfully contribute (and make $$) are those that have "learned how to learn" and will continue to do so. IMO, that is how it should be. Not all.NET (or any of artificial categorization of) programmers are created equal. I should be that way.
That being said, software development is becoming a field of specialists, as much if not more than the field of medicine. There is value in mastering a technology, so long as you don't lose the essential idea that the fundamentals of computer science, logical thinking, and pattern recognition/problem solving will be the essence of your career.
Work, work, work. Think thrice as much.
J
The problem is not so much finding the relevant data, although that is very important. The "holy grail" is being able to exchange the data in a meaningful way - to be able to the mine the data that exists across disparate researchers and their systems. This is not in the search engine solution space. The EU and the US are making some slow progress on this, but it is remains a vexing problem. (I am not a Mirobiologist, but I do help them _try_ to design compatible systems -- NOT easy.)
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, for *optimal* fuel consumption it travels at 0 kph.
I humbly bow to my 'schlocky ad salesmen' (Google, Yahoo!, etc) and the 'monopolist plumbers'
Hmm.. as well. I worked on a team that developed a DB app that was nine PETABYTES and growing constantly. (Our little test database was 60 terabytes.) It will soon be one of the five largest databases in the world, and could extend into the exabyte range (you can guess who it's for.) We use Java and ASP.NET on the server and Java and an AJAX solution on the client. We throw shitloads of big boxes at it and we don't give a damn, because it works. Do not get me started on how analytically complex the algorthms are that use that data...
Actually you are not quite correct with regard to neural stem cells. See Hypography or Nature among other researches.
The issue for researchers involves the ability of the stem cells they are using to differentiate into the desired cell type, as played out by their gene expression amongst other attributes. Embryonic stem cells are generally considered "omnipotent" -- they can become any type of cell. Other stem cells fall into a spectrum of "pluripotency", meaning that they can form many types of cells within their spectrum of differentiation. Others are barely pluripotent or unipotent, thereby limiting their general utility, but leaving them still very important (think human glial cells, astrocytes, neurons, renal nephrons, even hepatocytes).
Also refer to the NIH Hematopoietic Stem Cells. There's tons of research going on, so tell your friend to hang on...
However, there is promising research that shows that myovascular cell structures can be grown from pluri- or omni-potent stem cells, particularly from bone marrow. Also, advances are being made in developing more and more complex organ systems using "bio-scaffolding" -- in effect put myovascular stem cells in an aorta shaped matrix an grow them in vitro, then "install". Never say Never.
You're right, LVAD's are not new. However they suffer from the same shortcomings that all other cardiac assistance and replacement devices do -- they crush blood cells and eventually cause strokes thereby. They are great in the short term, but if you can get the natural organ working more quickly and efficiently, all to the better. BTW, LVADs are often used as only a bridge to a transplant, which does not produce a long-living prognosis. One's own heart, even if it does not function quite as well in terms of rhythm and ejection fraction, is still much friendlier to the rest of your body.
TFA didn't really go into any depth, but the news, if there is any, would depend upon how pluripotent the stem cells are; that is, what types of fully-formed cells they can produce. For a heart to regenerate after an insult such as an infarction, numerous cell types must be regenerated, from cardiac myocytes to the specialized neurons that synchronize the heartbeat (e.g. the sino-atrial complex). So, depending on what they can get to regenerate Real Soon Now, it may in fact be news.
I've contacted the tooth fairy and he's got a team right on it.
No Shit. For mathematically-intensive uses the Cell Processor blows everything else out of the water, by far. Given that faster might actually be better in such contexts, what would you buy? Granted, it's backed by a little-known company by the name of IBM, which may actually have its shit together on chip design.
If the chip runs fast with some hand-optimization, then it will get done. Just follow the money. Sheesh!
How about "aspirin", Bayer's trademarked name for acetylsalicylic acid. Trademarks and other names get subsumed by society. Northern Europeans, have you Hoovered your carpets lately?
No, No, It's on our list, right after we catch Bin Laden
NASA is so bloated and bureaucratized that it should be in all lower case, at 2-pt. font. I have known numerous engineers and scientists that worked there in some capacity, and in private conversations they are all ashamed at what it has become.
... for any Unabomber types who get pissed off at Fed EX
There are none among us who are "indespensable", but we can become "difficult to be dispensed with". Be smart, kind, respectful to your peers, and all those other trite things, then wait for death or life. And of course, wear sunscreen.
I agree with everything you posted, except that we do not know that any black holes are singularities, even of the Kerr-Newman type. We are pretty sure that they have an event horizon, but what's beyond that has not been empirically verified.
No, no, no. The kind of black hole created by a particle accelerator would decay so quickly via Hawking radiation that we would be lucky to see the tracks and even know that it was "there". It would be far too small to absorb mass/energy faster than it lost it. Such micro-black holes may indeed have already been created by the RHIC in Brookhaven. It's late and I am tired, but IAANP.
I agree with you. Out here in the West we cannot find (good) .NET/C# developers nearly fast enough. Our salaries and cost of living are not as high as NYC, but still "commanding". I interview 20 ".NET" programmers for every one who has ever heard of delegates or is otherwise competent, and I look more for problem-solving skills than technical specifics, but damn, it's tough. Still that one of twenty can easily provide themselves a very good living, and provide profit for the firm they work for.
I agree with the OP, but only to a point (actually almost all of it.) First, the parts I agree with -- learn to design, code, and conceptualize algorithms independent of any language. Then, be realistic and honestly assess if you are a designer/programmer with the innate talent that is will take, I speak from some experience -- I have designed languages and libraries in my twenty years of practicing this art/profession, and seen them come to fruition. I am an expert at .NET way beyond the drone coder level, but only because I knew what SHOULD be there in the framework.
In the end, the only people that can meaningfully contribute (and make $$) are those that have "learned how to learn" and will continue to do so. IMO, that is how it should be. Not all .NET (or any of artificial categorization of) programmers are created equal. I should be that way.
That being said, software development is becoming a field of specialists, as much if not more than the field of medicine. There is value in mastering a technology, so long as you don't lose the essential idea that the fundamentals of computer science, logical thinking, and pattern recognition/problem solving will be the essence of your career.
Work, work, work. Think thrice as much.
J
Addendum: Prova is great but not surprisingly BioGrid is not the be all and end all.
The problem is not so much finding the relevant data, although that is very important. The "holy grail" is being able to exchange the data in a meaningful way - to be able to the mine the data that exists across disparate researchers and their systems. This is not in the search engine solution space. The EU and the US are making some slow progress on this, but it is remains a vexing problem. (I am not a Mirobiologist, but I do help them _try_ to design compatible systems -- NOT easy.)