>Compounds like P53, which appear in high levels >in fetal tissue the body can't attack, or no >more babies would ever live to be born.
No more babies being born is not a mechanism of action, and the body dosen't seem to attack p53. p53 decreases the action of telomerase, which allows DNA to 'repair itself'.
I've got a few ideas. We just have to work on culturing and replinshing stem cells outside of the body, and work on developing thymus transplants (The thymus is a crucial part of the immune system that shrinks in old age).
Immortality shouldn't be impossible. After all, we overcome it by having children. And trees overcome it ( though trees are not as hurt by cancer and not as differentiated as humans) so that some trees live for over a millenia.
http://www.asco.org/prof/oc/html/m_kanaya0800.ht m
explains how p53 inhibits telomerase activity. Telomerase is the enzyme that puts the telomeres back on the ends of DNA. Eroded telomeres have
been considered a primary cause of aging.
What I don't understand is why single celled Eukaryotes aren't a lot more active in producing telomerase, thus making themselves immortal.
After all, if you're just one cell you don't have much to lose from cancer, do you? But Eukaryotes can 'age' and die like humans can. It makes no sense.
That's what I thought too, but the stuff was highly active in the womb when a baby is growing fastest, which seems to indicate that it dosen't directly slow cell replication. Or at least, not all cells.
It's correct that cross breeding most hybrid plants would result in dramatically reduced yeilds, (with some plants like squash being exceptions) but it's worth noting that there's nothing that makes hybrid breeding more productive than cross breeding. If you can find an actual experiemnt (rather than some pronouncement from an 'authority) which demonstrates the opposite, I'd like to see it. Hybridization is a form of 'copy protection'. End of story.
Incidentally, some plants such as Corn actually exibit the genotype of their seed in the phenotype, meaning that bad pollen can have an effect on your corn.
And remember that not all farmers rely on hybrid plants. Many third world farmers replant seeds. If their plants are polinated with pollen from monsanto's 'terminator' plants, their own seeds will be infertile and they won't find out till after planting time next year.
I like the metaphore of breaking into someone elses house because people tend to keep personal info on their hotmail accounts, etc and this metaphore plays up the violations being carried out.
I also like the metaphore because it emphasizes that government monitoring of private computer data (and most computer data is not actually private, I realize) without a warrant should be considered unlawful search and seizure if they violate your personal computer.
There are a lot of people who would do things if they thought they could get away with it, but wouldn't if they thought they would get caught. It's common sense.
is way too busy trying to hack into servers themselves.
"You say the kid did what? Hey, that's a pretty good idea. I should try that next time... Er, I mean we've had a lot of these lately. We just have to prioritize."
Yes, lifestyle changes can cure certain diseases. That dosen't mean people weren't genetically predisposed to the problems.
It's almost impossible for me to gain weight, for example, because of my genes. I can't get above 130 lbs without intensive exercise.
To change the emphasis of the sentance you cited;
The discovery could shed light on why some
people are more likely to develop common
diseases
Just because lifestyle can be changed to help with a disease dosen't mean that some people aren't a lot more succeptible to particular conditions. The fact that a particular substance can be used to cure a condition does not prove that lack of said substance therefore 'caused' the condition.
Yeah, I do use the software now.
But because I have clients and didn't want them to possibly be harrassed I had to waste some time making sure I could defend myself if Macromedia brought suit against me, etc.
One of the people I do work for is very concerned about keeping things legal, and EULAs have a tendency to scare ignorant businesspeople or make them skittish.
And Frontpage 2000 just didn't let me use the software. Not that I would go back and use it now, but the copy protection forced me to register the software online whenever I reinstalled it, and the second time I did so, it wouldn't 'register'. MS wanted me to give all kinds of personal information in order to get a confirmation code. That should be illegal, or at least there should be a crack for it.
You seem to misunderstand what I was saying.
Yes, Microsoft produced good software. I never said otherwise. It was 'best of breed', if you will. My point was that even if Microsoft had done _nothing_ to intentionally set up a monopoly, that it was likely to happen anyways.
I was suggesting that the reason for Microsoft's monopoly was the software market, not Microsoft itself.
While I think widespread Linux use is unlikely I'm glad Linux is around just to nip at Microsoft's heels and act as some small threat to keep them from abusing customers too badly.
I think that if Linux became the industry standard, it wouldn't be quite as bad in the monopolistic sense because there wouldn't be the same high cost of entry for a new company looking to produce operating systems. I could take the best-of-breed linux OS, make some modifications and put them on the market and my competitors would have to respond.
I wasn't advocating anything.
I was discussing (asking a question) regarding federal intervention in software companies, not advocating intervention in software systems. There is a subtle but important difference.
And it seems clear that the government is going to intervene in a software company which I will not name. I just want to know how they plan to acomplish their goals, given a market that that dosen't seem to want to work with them.
If your car turns out to be defective off the lot, you can claim fraud.
Not so with software.
If your car bursts into flames like the pinto, you can sue.
If your computer crashes, you can flame the company.
And when I buy a car, I don't have to sign a contract regarding whose house I can drive it to, whether or not I can drive it to work or whether honda owns the work that I produce when I get to work.
When I bought software from macromedia as a student, the shrinkwrap liscense said that I couldn't use the stuff for commercial purposes and the store said they wouldn't accept the product for a refund as the EULA said they would if I didn't agree with it.
It seems that in industries with high costs of initial production and extremly low costs of replication (i.e. Software), there seems to be an unusually large incentive for becoming a monopoly and an unusually powerful advantage in maintaining that monopoly once formed.
Short of open source, what measures need to be taken to in order to insure that one monopoly (Microsoft or another) isn't dethroned simply to be replaced by a different monopoly?
Maybe this raid was a result of post sept 11 international cooperation. Maybe it was a result of increased police powers. It's nieve to assume that these enhanced powers will only be used to fight terrorists. Leaders are increasingly doing intelligence on their adversaries. Clinton looked at his opponent's FBI files. Bush Senior was head of the CIA for chrissakes (yes, I know they're not the FBI but they are an intelligence organization)
It should be assumed that any new powers granted to the police will eventually be used for whatever the hell the state wants to use them for. In the US, this means continued dominance of the two major political parties.
Warez are just a secondary issue in all this. Personally, I've used them since I've gotten tired of being dicked around by software companies. For example, I bought a macromedia suite of software as a student. When I installed it I got the message that it was for 'educational use only' and could not be used for commercial projects despite the fact that I had paid somthing like $200 for it (can't remember the exact figure). I tried to return it, as the EULA said that I should do and the store refused. I tried contancting Macromedia and they gave me the run around. " fax the information to us." "Our fax is broken" etc.
Microsoft did the same for Frontpage (yeah, my fault for buying the *$%&). They refused to remotly enable the software and wanted personal information before they'd let me use it.
Somehow I doubt the FBI is going to raid Macromedia, and the government seems to be calling off it's 'raid' on Microsoft.
The legitimacy of the law comes from the fact that it's applied equally to all people. Without that, it's just a bunch of men in blue with riot gear.
Hey, lets all celebrate 100 years of intellecutal property theft or at least the questionable appropriation by Marconi of technology that many consider Tesla's.
In the early days of the automotive industry, GM was effectivly immune to lawsuits (what's good for GM is good for America!). In the earliest part of this century, there was an attempt by the publishing industry to prevent the resale of books. Similar events are now happening in the tech sector with attempts by the BSA to ward off liability issues related to software, laws against software resale, and even new problems such as patenting of genes and other expansions of IP law inconsistent with the goal of moving information into the public domain while rewarding its creator.
My question is; will the influence of the software industry fade as these new technologies become less new or will these trends, which seem to contradict legal precedent, only gain legitimacy as they establish a precident of their own?
Ultrasonic testing uses sound waves to detect imperfections in material and to measure material properties.
Ultrasounds can be used for testing material imperfections in other things besides people (though of course things like x-rays are better and are often used on non-living objects). All the same, I'd be interested in seeing how cheap this is. If it's significantly less expensive than previous ultrasounds (and it looks like it might be) then drop in cost can make a lot of things 'possible' that weren't before. DNA fingerprinting was possible before PCR in 1992, but PCR made it cheap enough for common use.
Ultrasound does have engineering applications
"The comparison between the original and final thickness converted to strain readings and plotted on thickness strain diagrams. The thickness is measured by pointed micrometers, or by ultrasound gage. From the final thickness and original thickness ratio, TF / TO, an actual strain level can be developed based on constant volume and plotted on a thickness strain diagram." (Hogarth, D.J., Gregoire, C.A., Caswell, S. L., 1991, p. 88).
Abstract: Circulation calculations, which have traditionally been performed by taking the line integral of the velocity around a closed path, require detailed knowledge of the flow field. An ultrasound method for circulation measurements has been under development at WPI for several years and it has the advantage of allowing for the direct measurement of circulation without the need for the velocity field data. This time-of-flight method employs counter-propagating ultrasonic pulses. The time difference between the counter-propagating pulses around the closed path is linearly proportional to the circulation enclosed by the ultrasound path. The ultrasound method of circulation measurement does not require any calibration constants and can be non-invasive. The reliability of the method was assessed by comparing the directly measured circulation values with those deduced from the lift of a symmetric airfoil. Examples will also be presented where the ultrasound technique has been applied to the vortical flow over a delta wing and a tip vortex. Owing to its simplicity and ease of operation, the technique may be utilized in the future as a sensor in closed-loop active flow control systems.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe they said that's why they did it. I think the second movie (3rd in trilogy) is already done, but it is not yet 'timely' to release it.
>Compounds like P53, which appear in high levels >in fetal tissue the body can't attack, or no >more babies would ever live to be born.
No more babies being born is not a mechanism of action, and the body dosen't seem to attack p53. p53 decreases the action of telomerase, which allows DNA to 'repair itself'.
I've got a few ideas. We just have to work on culturing and replinshing stem cells outside of the body, and work on developing thymus transplants (The thymus is a crucial part of the immune system that shrinks in old age).
Immortality shouldn't be impossible. After all, we overcome it by having children. And trees overcome it ( though trees are not as hurt by cancer and not as differentiated as humans) so that some trees live for over a millenia.
Apparently this should have been expected.
t m
This link
http://www.asco.org/prof/oc/html/m_kanaya0800.h
explains how p53 inhibits telomerase activity. Telomerase is the enzyme that puts the telomeres back on the ends of DNA. Eroded telomeres have
been considered a primary cause of aging.
What I don't understand is why single celled Eukaryotes aren't a lot more active in producing telomerase, thus making themselves immortal.
After all, if you're just one cell you don't have much to lose from cancer, do you? But Eukaryotes can 'age' and die like humans can. It makes no sense.
That's what I thought too, but the stuff was highly active in the womb when a baby is growing fastest, which seems to indicate that it dosen't directly slow cell replication. Or at least, not all cells.
... "US Punishes self because Ukraine supports piracy".
After all, the Ukrainains aren't the ones with a huge surplus of productive capacity, the US is.
It's correct that cross breeding most hybrid plants would result in dramatically reduced yeilds, (with some plants like squash being exceptions) but it's worth noting that there's nothing that makes hybrid breeding more productive than cross breeding. If you can find an actual experiemnt (rather than some pronouncement from an 'authority) which demonstrates the opposite, I'd like to see it. Hybridization is a form of 'copy protection'. End of story.
Incidentally, some plants such as Corn actually exibit the genotype of their seed in the phenotype, meaning that bad pollen can have an effect on your corn.
And remember that not all farmers rely on hybrid plants. Many third world farmers replant seeds. If their plants are polinated with pollen from monsanto's 'terminator' plants, their own seeds will be infertile and they won't find out till after planting time next year.
The tanks that were being used to guard the
iMacs got sent over to Afghanistan.
I like the metaphore of breaking into someone elses house because people tend to keep personal info on their hotmail accounts, etc and this metaphore plays up the violations being carried out.
I also like the metaphore because it emphasizes that government monitoring of private computer data (and most computer data is not actually private, I realize) without a warrant should be considered unlawful search and seizure if they violate your personal computer.
There are a lot of people who would do things if they thought they could get away with it, but wouldn't if they thought they would get caught. It's common sense.
If someone wanted to break into my house, all they'd have to do is smash the window. Is it my fault for having windows?
People _don't_ break in to other's houses because;
1. They have some modicium of morality.
2. They respect the law or fear the police.
3. They're worried that I might be home
and I would hurt them. And I would.
is way too busy trying to hack into servers themselves.
"You say the kid did what? Hey, that's a pretty good idea. I should try that next time... Er, I mean we've had a lot of these lately. We just have to prioritize."
Yes, lifestyle changes can cure certain diseases. That dosen't mean people weren't genetically predisposed to the problems.
It's almost impossible for me to gain weight, for example, because of my genes. I can't get above 130 lbs without intensive exercise.
To change the emphasis of the sentance you cited;
The discovery could shed light on why some
people are more likely to develop common
diseases
Just because lifestyle can be changed to help with a disease dosen't mean that some people aren't a lot more succeptible to particular conditions. The fact that a particular substance can be used to cure a condition does not prove that lack of said substance therefore 'caused' the condition.
Yeah, I do use the software now.
But because I have clients and didn't want them to possibly be harrassed I had to waste some time making sure I could defend myself if Macromedia brought suit against me, etc.
One of the people I do work for is very concerned about keeping things legal, and EULAs have a tendency to scare ignorant businesspeople or make them skittish.
And Frontpage 2000 just didn't let me use the software. Not that I would go back and use it now, but the copy protection forced me to register the software online whenever I reinstalled it, and the second time I did so, it wouldn't 'register'. MS wanted me to give all kinds of personal information in order to get a confirmation code. That should be illegal, or at least there should be a crack for it.
You seem to misunderstand what I was saying.
Yes, Microsoft produced good software. I never said otherwise. It was 'best of breed', if you will. My point was that even if Microsoft had done _nothing_ to intentionally set up a monopoly, that it was likely to happen anyways.
I was suggesting that the reason for Microsoft's monopoly was the software market, not Microsoft itself.
While I think widespread Linux use is unlikely I'm glad Linux is around just to nip at Microsoft's heels and act as some small threat to keep them from abusing customers too badly.
I think that if Linux became the industry standard, it wouldn't be quite as bad in the monopolistic sense because there wouldn't be the same high cost of entry for a new company looking to produce operating systems. I could take the best-of-breed linux OS, make some modifications and put them on the market and my competitors would have to respond.
I wasn't advocating anything.
I was discussing (asking a question) regarding federal intervention in software companies, not advocating intervention in software systems. There is a subtle but important difference.
And it seems clear that the government is going to intervene in a software company which I will not name. I just want to know how they plan to acomplish their goals, given a market that that dosen't seem to want to work with them.
If your car turns out to be defective off the lot, you can claim fraud.
Not so with software.
If your car bursts into flames like the pinto, you can sue.
If your computer crashes, you can flame the company.
And when I buy a car, I don't have to sign a contract regarding whose house I can drive it to, whether or not I can drive it to work or whether honda owns the work that I produce when I get to work.
When I bought software from macromedia as a student, the shrinkwrap liscense said that I couldn't use the stuff for commercial purposes and the store said they wouldn't accept the product for a refund as the EULA said they would if I didn't agree with it.
It seems that in industries with high costs of initial production and extremly low costs of replication (i.e. Software), there seems to be an unusually large incentive for becoming a monopoly and an unusually powerful advantage in maintaining that monopoly once formed.
Short of open source, what measures need to be taken to in order to insure that one monopoly (Microsoft or another) isn't dethroned simply to be replaced by a different monopoly?
Moderation Totals: Flamebait=1, Troll=1, Insightful=1, Interesting=1, Informative=1, Overrated=1, Total=6.
Seems I struck a nerve
Maybe this raid was a result of post sept 11 international cooperation. Maybe it was a result of increased police powers. It's nieve to assume that these enhanced powers will only be used to fight terrorists. Leaders are increasingly doing intelligence on their adversaries. Clinton looked at his opponent's FBI files. Bush Senior was head of the CIA for chrissakes (yes, I know they're not the FBI but they are an intelligence organization)
It should be assumed that any new powers granted to the police will eventually be used for whatever the hell the state wants to use them for. In the US, this means continued dominance of the two major political parties.
Warez are just a secondary issue in all this. Personally, I've used them since I've gotten tired of being dicked around by software companies. For example, I bought a macromedia suite of software as a student. When I installed it I got the message that it was for 'educational use only' and could not be used for commercial projects despite the fact that I had paid somthing like $200 for it (can't remember the exact figure). I tried to return it, as the EULA said that I should do and the store refused. I tried contancting Macromedia and they gave me the run around. " fax the information to us." "Our fax is broken" etc.
Microsoft did the same for Frontpage (yeah, my fault for buying the *$%&). They refused to remotly enable the software and wanted personal information before they'd let me use it.
Somehow I doubt the FBI is going to raid Macromedia, and the government seems to be calling off it's 'raid' on Microsoft.
The legitimacy of the law comes from the fact that it's applied equally to all people. Without that, it's just a bunch of men in blue with riot gear.
Hey, lets all celebrate 100 years of intellecutal property theft or at least the questionable appropriation by Marconi of technology that many consider Tesla's.
http://www.mercury.gr/tesla/marcen.html
... They killed Turing!
Those Bastards!
In the early days of the automotive industry, GM was effectivly immune to lawsuits (what's good for GM is good for America!). In the earliest part of this century, there was an attempt by the publishing industry to prevent the resale of books. Similar events are now happening in the tech sector with attempts by the BSA to ward off liability issues related to software, laws against software resale, and even new problems such as patenting of genes and other expansions of IP law inconsistent with the goal of moving information into the public domain while rewarding its creator.
My question is; will the influence of the software industry fade as these new technologies become less new or will these trends, which seem to contradict legal precedent, only gain legitimacy as they establish a precident of their own?
Actually, I think Danny Divito would be a better Gnome mascot. I mean, he kinda looks like one. Doncha think?
There's a page out there where you can download the font for the various tolkein languages.
http://home.earthlink.net/~darrenv/tolkein.html
It dosen't look quite as cool as the guilded cursive elven runes on all the merchandise, but what do you want for free?
>For its part, ICANN said it does not agree or >disagree with the federal appeals court decision.
This is why it's called ICANN and not IWILL
Ultrasonic testing uses sound waves to detect imperfections in material and to measure material properties.
y /html/t.html
m l
Ultrasounds can be used for testing material imperfections in other things besides people (though of course things like x-rays are better and are often used on non-living objects). All the same, I'd be interested in seeing how cheap this is. If it's significantly less expensive than previous ultrasounds (and it looks like it might be) then drop in cost can make a lot of things 'possible' that weren't before. DNA fingerprinting was possible before PCR in 1992, but PCR made it cheap enough for common use.
Ultrasound does have engineering applications
"The comparison between the original and final thickness converted to strain readings and plotted on thickness strain diagrams. The thickness is measured by pointed micrometers, or by ultrasound gage. From the final thickness and original thickness ratio, TF / TO, an actual strain level can be developed based on constant volume and plotted on a thickness strain diagram." (Hogarth, D.J., Gregoire, C.A., Caswell, S. L., 1991, p. 88).
http://nsmwww.eng.ohio-state.edu/Stamping_Glossar
Abstract: Circulation calculations, which have traditionally been performed by taking the line integral of the velocity around a closed path, require detailed knowledge of the flow field. An ultrasound method for circulation measurements has been under development at WPI for several years and it has the advantage of allowing for the direct measurement of circulation without the need for the velocity field data. This time-of-flight method employs counter-propagating ultrasonic pulses. The time difference between the counter-propagating pulses around the closed path is linearly proportional to the circulation enclosed by the ultrasound path. The ultrasound method of circulation measurement does not require any calibration constants and can be non-invasive. The reliability of the method was assessed by comparing the directly measured circulation values with those deduced from the lift of a symmetric airfoil. Examples will also be presented where the ultrasound technique has been applied to the vortical flow over a delta wing and a tip vortex. Owing to its simplicity and ease of operation, the technique may be utilized in the future as a sensor in closed-loop active flow control systems.
http://ase.tufts.edu/mechanical/calendar/mar99.ht