Genetic selection with reanimation, rather than just growing conditions, should be worked on as well. Once a plant is sitting on your dinner plate its evolutionary future is very bleak. That plant, no matter how wonderful it tastes to you, is simply an instance in history. A one-off thing of the past. If however, the genomic material could be sampled, saved, and reanimated in the form of a seedling, then the food industry could transform itself from serving the current tasteless cardboard, where every plant is a genomic clone of a single fungal disease resistant plant.
Ever wondered what happened to the best-tasting bananas? Basically, they bread the taste out by breeding fungus resistance in. The growers and marketers let the taste take second place over 'production and packaging'. Once they find a resistant strain that packs and ships well (thick skin) they genetically remove the seeds, clone it in large numbers, and every plant on the plantation becomes an identical-twin seedling. Being able to select even the minor variations in taste, and positively selecting for it, could bring the natural taste back to the gastronomic marketplace.
This is so stupid that it reminds me of what Florida did in the '70s to all their ornimental palm trees. When a virus was threatening all the beautiful palm trees, somebody got the bright idea to innoculate all the trees with antibiotics. The problem was (1) that antibiotics don't kill viruses, and (2) they didn't even know enough to use a new needle for each tree. They by this monumental act of stupidity, they physically transferred the virus from all infected trees to all the healthy trees. Surprise surprise, just about all the decorative palm trees died.
This prank is just as stupid. By working against the gradient of Evolution they will in effect be teaching ALL bacterium species in that environment, how to become resistant to it. Noting good will come out of this, and they have everything to loose in the process of being so stupid.
The correct way to do this is to use a cocktail of phages that attack the specific bacterium, and thus be working WITH Evolution to solve the problem. A phage can target and kill the specific bacterium in exactly the same way that they killed all the palm trees years ago. The phages will adapt to any new defences that the bacterium creates by any new genomic mechanisms. By having multiple phages in play, the bacterium will be overwhelmed by new and well-adapted phages, and the disease will lessen to the point where it no longer poses a financial threat to the orange groves that they are trying to protect. Work with Evolution, not against it!!
Wow. Its about time. It's been more than 3 years since I started writing online, everywhere I could, and telling every single service provider's support manager I talked to, that they should standardize this exact technology between all carriers. If all device connections into each telecom network were verified in a standard way, and exchanged during handover, this problem would have been solved years ago.
The biggest problem is with the addition of VOIP, the spammers are able to put whatever they want into a database and thus spoof the number at the other end where it goes back into a telcom network. Enforcement of a digital signatures for each device would fix the problem and with that the exchanged caller id, though much larger in size, would finally be useable for something. So, If you think blocking numbers is useful or effective, you are just wasting time. A blocklist is just blocking random phone numbers of honest people who are not actually calling you anyway.
That or loves Russia. What if its all a plot by Russia and Ebay to take complete ownership of the world?
How you ask? By selling lots of expensive bits of rock to every geek on the planet. The Science and Tech world will be completely oblivious to this little scheme as everyone runs around buying and collecting little fragments of unusual looking rock, complete with papers, facts, dates, and numbers, all at enormous market prices. Many many tons of it. Meanwhile, the rest of the world quietly ignores this weird obsession, as well as the huge international trade deficit that soon follows.
When all the money is in Russia, then its game over.
Most social media systems have a variety of ways to exploit users because the system is specialized for one thing, like texts, images, etc. Facebook is a collection of links and ideas with an API designed to associate these things together. Reddit to me seems to me to be more free-form structure and less organized from the users perspective, with less ability to exploit the users from the API level.
I was just learning how wonderful the VAX Descriptor could be right when this char *c=null thing took hold in WinNT. No easy way to double check your string lengths or anything. WinNT 3.1 even pushed GDI into the kernel, and they got what they expected. Memory performance right when the memory price point was becoming really cheap, and lots and lots of memory bugs.
Somehow in my sleep, I could hear Dave Cutler screaming "Noooooooooo"!!!!!!!.
Just think of the number of software bugs and patches for ill written zero days they have since patched. How many people know even a thing about patching hardware microcode? Applying hardware updates would be a bit harder to perform and therefore it would be more likely skipped by the admins due to this. Now you have a piece of vulnerable hardware hanging off the net that no one wants as their responsibility to manage.
Update the phone software system to get with the 21st century. A simple change, where the caller's provider takes a signed and registered cryptologic hash of the callers information and the receivers information and presents that during the call initiation, The receivers provider checks the certificate and verifies that the same provided information hashes to the exact same value, and that the certificate used matches the registered callers provider certificate, which is signed by a central governing authority in that country. At that point, the provider is verifying and attesting to the fact that the caller is who they say they are, and the provider is on the hook if the call was somehow spoofed within their own network.
Then add the feature where you push an extra button to encrypt the session
Almost any purchased phone these days comes with a bunch of crapware applications that consume what limited space there is on that device. No application should be undeletable. I don't care if it is the manufacturer, service provider, or the Android developers. We should have the permissions necessary to delete any application from any phone/device we purchase, and if not, the right to r00t that device in order to remove it without invalidating the warranty.
Just like the right to repair, we should have the right to remove. The necessity of deleting apps we still want to have, just so we can update the other apps that we still want to have, is completely ridiculous when we could have just removed their (in most cases) disabled crapware instead. Why do I need to have three or four separate "music purchasing" applications on my phone that I will never even run? Why do I need to have numerous video applications on a phone that I can't even find the space to store a movie? What is the point of consuming so much space on that device that you can't get anything to work without having to find innovative ways to defeat their own enforcement policies?
The free version has been updated as of version 7.0, so I would first try that. It's still x86 only while the paid version does something like 96 different CPU architectures, and even java/android support. I believe the new freebe should do 64 bit, which the older 5.0 version definitely can not.
I have not used the free version since I still have my old license for 7.1 that will never expire. I'll stick with that until I find something better.
I have been a long time supporter of IDA Pro, for better than 15 years. Every year I would dig down deep into my pockets and hand over about $600 for my maintenance contract renewal, for my own personal use. My "named" license allowed me to install the product on any machine where I need to analyze something down to the assembly level, and chase the rabbit down the hole. I could code in IDAPython, to script up some magic to analyze things in ways you just could not do with any other tool. Except of course the infamous GHIDRA, which although people I knew at work all used it, I had no direct access to the tool. They said it was better than IDA Pro. Still, there were reasons for them to keep IDA Pro on their tool shelf because no one tool fits every problem.
Well in 2018 HexRays changed the licensing, and removed the "named" licenses from their offerings. For twice the price I could own a single license for one single machine, that was of course not going to be the one I needed to analyze. My desktop machine is essentially a Xen virtualizing service with lots of smaller task-oriented virtual machines. Which single virtual machine do I now choose to run IDA Pro in? Whichever one I choose there will be some other place I need to debug something. The new IDA Pro licensing sucks, and I can not justify that kind of money for software that I can not even run where I need it.
No link to the paper. No mention on who paid for the study. Zero hits when searching for "screentime" and "Royal College of Paediatrics" in the same document query search.
is it just me? or is somebody actively hiding something, deep in that buried text that we are just not supposed to figure out?
I'll believe this when these superconducting pigs levitate above magnets.
Oh, but they already do! Unfortunately, with pigs being so intelligent, they seem to have a real phobia about being that close to liquid nitrogen. We have tried professional counselors, but we just can't seem to get them into the tube with that stuff. Who would have thought?
I don't think for a moment that people will just be buying "bandwidth" with this.
Now when you download somebody's digital life works, or other intellectual property, in the form of torrented movies or games, etc. some other unknown third party can directly profit by making it available to you for a little bitcoin? You used to get all this stuff for free, but now there are profit motives involved as well. Who would have thought that some third-party person would eventually learn how to directly profit off of someone else's digital demise. The black market is going to eat this up. All it takes is a little free money to screw things up royally for everyone.
Wow really? The value was rising and the start of the big fall happened well before it was traded on the stock market.
Yes, because it was useful in buying and selling services or products. You would always see some market adjustments, because other currencies fluctuate, and the worth of cryptocurrency is balanced against those other currencies. If the US dollar were thought to be more valuable next week, someone with a lot of Bitcoin might cash out and try and ride that wave. That has nothing to do with the stock market. That is just simple money management and putting your holdings where it can beat inflation.
And there is an investigation into price manipulation.
Yes, anyone with a large chunk can do that easily. That is exactly what stock market traders do, manipulate commodity prices, such as to affect the market value in the direction they want. They will try and trick you to make you think it is worth more that the going price, so they can sell at a profit or force the price to go down temporarily so they can buy low, knowing that it will eventually return to a higher price when they will then sell. Its like caching out on steroids, and it is intended to move the market in the direction you do not want it to go. They are psychologically manipulating you! Yes, if you are holding crypto for a rainy day, then you are the chump they are targeting. They intend to steal your "value" when you cash out. What they are taking from you is intangible and you won't even know who the crypto-bank-robber was.
"you can thank large cheating corporate entities(with near limitless funds) for making your cryptocurrency wallet worth so much" then you can "thank those very same people for making your cryptocurrency wallet worthless". Have a good day.
That is correct. They cheat, to make the price fluctuate up and down at will. For the company that has unlimited cash resources to throw around, they can easily screw you out of your life savings just by buying and selling large chunks of cryptocurrency at a time. Sell a large block of crypto, spread some bad news/rumor, and buy up whatever people are trying to dump on the market in response. When the market realizes the sky is not falling the price will resume going upwards again, and they will sell another large chunk. Then rinse and repeat that process, over and over. If you fall for their strong-arm tactic or their fake business news, then you just put the down payment on their next yacht. They go laughing all the way to the brick and mortar bank with their new cash reserves waiting for the next set of chumps to burn.
When cryptocurrency was opened to the stock market it became doomed to failure. Before that, the "value" was rising because it was useful. Its only intrinsic value is that value it presents for exchanging goods and services. For people who actually "use" cryptocurrencies, it's value needs to be kept stable, or everyone would refuse to use it, and thus it would have zero value
Enter the stock market, and now the market traders all want to make money by trading the currency itself, a thing with no intrinsic value except for what it can do. If the people who use it all cashed out then the stock market price would be $0. The way the stock market "makes money" (actually move money from one account to another) is to second guess what the other traders will think its value will be tomorrow. Buy low, sell high of course. The stock market will not "make money" unless the price/value is volatile. If the price was consistent over time the traders would have zero interest in it, because they can't trick the other traders into valuing it more tomorrow than today, because the price would be stable. In order to make money in trading cryptocurrency, it is in the traders best interest to force the price to become volatile and then to correctly guess tomorrows value. They will try every trick in the book to force wide swings in the "market value", even emplying illegal tricks if they can find a way to make that happen.
See the problem yet? The traders WANT the price to vary, and the users of it DEMAND the price to be stable! The traders will do everything in their power to make the value fluctuate, while the people trying to use it will be moving their share to some other currancy which is more stable, thus forcing the value to further decline. This is a feedback loop biased towards zero value.
When a stock for a traded company does poorly you can sell off its assets and regain some of that original value. When a cryptocurrency tanks it becomes worthless, and nothing can be sold off or recouped from the electronic dust that remains. Its value then is merely nostalga. It has no value beyond what other people think it will be worth tomorrow. If everyone thinks it has zero value, because nobody can trust that value being stable tomorrow, then the cryptocurrency is 100%, without any doubt, completely worthless. At that point you can thank the stock market for making your cryptocurrency wallet worthless.
If you are going to invest in any cryptocurrency my advise is to pick one that states up front that it will never be openly traded on the stock market. That one may have a chance at actually being stable, and you can count on its only intrinsic value, trust in its worth tomorrow being the same as today.
Which is exactly why Comcast will spend so much money on lawyers now, to force communities and Governments into unwanted services. Comcast lawyers can smell money from many miles away, just like sharks with even a single drop of blood in the ocean. I hope that the community has a smart lawyer on retainer.
Nope. There is random modifications and if it gives a reproductive advantage -- at the population level, not individual --, these modifications persist in the population.
Jumping of a building, do not make you grow wings. The ones having wings survive and that, increase there chance of reproduction.
Correction accepted; as I did not mean to imply that an individual cell "evolves" in any way. The individual merely survives or not, and reproduces or not. It's always the aggregate population over many generations that evolves to suit the environment. Change that environment and it will, in turn, change the type of mutations that become beneficial to that population. That is all I was trying to say.
You can not.
If the cell reproduces via any form of DNA replication/duplication, then there is no possible way that it could not evolve.
This is 100% false.
We as humans would be filled with messed up copies of our DNA if it didn't encode a checking sequence that prevents bad copies from happening.
We accumulate errors throughout our lives, and that accumulation of errors, and some estimate this to be well over 20 mutations in a single cell that is required before one actually gets cancer. But, you only need one cell to go bad.
Get this, every case of cancer is unique because of the specific mix of mutations that the patient has acquired over their lifetime. Cancer requires many multiples of genes to be disabled and/or modified before it gets out of control. Your "Programmed Cell Death" (PCD) is one of those specific genes that has to have been knocked out, or the external white blood cells that recognize and/or trigger that PCD have had their signalling mechanism wiped out. This is a calamity of accumulated DNA errors that together, collectivly, make each individual cancer a unique case despite the fact that many categories of cancer are given the same blanket type name. They may be very similar when looking at the sick patient, but they all respond differently to various treatments because of the specific sets of genes that were affected.
Once you have self-replication, it either dies or evolves to suit the environment that it exists in. Every DNA copy operation contains a statistical probability of getting an error in the new sequence, and that error could be better for survival, or not.
Correct but when you have replication checking then you avoid this problem. We only get cancer because the cells lose this ability due to the recursive telomeres copy problem (which copies all but the last telomere every single time).
This is where the cancer either turns on the tolemerase repair mechanism, or modifies the copy mechanism to ignore the telomeres length altogether. We have many fail-safe mechanisms, but when you do get cancer it because almost all of them have broken down due to these accumulated mutations.
Why do cancers relapse? Because the mutations have not gone away. All you may need is one additional mutation to break some other cellular function, in one cell of your body, and the next thing you know is that it is our of control and the previous treatment no longer works. Every case is unique.
You can not.
If the cell reproduces via any form of DNA replication/duplication, then there is no possible way that it could not evolve. Once you have self-replication, it ether dies or evolves to suit the environment that it exists in. Every DNA copy operation contains a statistical probability of getting an error in the new sequence, and that error could be better for survival, or not. Most likely not, if you are starting from a very short and simple genome, but only the good errors persist into the future generations where these errors eventually accumulate to make larger changes in function.
That's right. This new virus is so "sophisticated" that it can even damage the centrifuges that are packed away in storage and not currently running. But wait, the next software update will even damage the ones the Iranians have not even been ordered yet. That'll show them! /s
After all, the Iranians would not lie to us would they? Then why would Ayatollah Ali Khamenei worry about a cyber attack on an infrustructure that should not currently be running?
Step 1: Create Controversy
Step 2: Provide paid access to the materials needed to refute that controversy
Step 3: Profit!
First, this is a simulation, for which as far as I can tell (remember, they are selling any clues here), they didn't even model all the physical laws of the real world. The "model" for that simulation expressed in Figure 1 is absolutely laughable.
Note, the wind turbine has transferred a percentage of "heat" elsewhere in the form of electricity. This electricity is representative of heat that is no longer in the local system, thus not all the heat is mixed and even still present in the "local" system. That heat generated by the "use" of that electricity would have been generated no matter what the source of that electricity might be.
The mixing of the air effectively lowers the overall environmental temperature of the local system. Extracting energy from that air lowers it even more.
I would say your data processing department didn't consider your report a high priority
That is an understatement if there ever was one. Somehow the production schedule, which is the only way you stay in business, should have been a higher priority than anything else, other than the sales reports. During my time of 6.5 years, there were six large layoffs. The company was bleeding money badly because of the inefficiencies of the corporate structure, and bitter fighting between departments grappling for power, and data processing was no different. The only group of people that were actually treated well all the time was the Sales team. The salespeople were the elite, and they could do no wrong.
Change control can also be a pain in the ass (if they actually had any)
Their change control was a COBOL comment block. They had so much dead code it's a wonder anything worked at all.
Either that or they are a useless bunch of twats, the time taken has fuckall to do with the language it was written in.
This. Exactly. Nobody knew how their system worked (or didn't), and to do the same report they needed to clean up the database of parts lists. There were recursively nested parts lists as well as broken/missing references, misspellings, all of which I had logic to detect and did workarounds. I had a couple of years experience working around those problems on paper, so I at least I understood how it needed to be coded logically.
When I said 6 man-months I meant exactly that. That is the time that was actually charged to get it all done. They finally could not ignore all the problems they created for themselves, and they were thus forced to understand their own spaghetti code. As for the language itself, COBOL, in general, is extremely verbose. I could do in one line of Pascal what it took them more than a full page of their COBOL to do. Modularity was a completely an alien concept to them as well. I've read the code, been there, done that, because that is the only way to get them to fix the business and job tracking logic, and I would have gone insane if I had to deal with all that stupidity on a daily basis.
Slashdot Mirror
Genetic selection with reanimation, rather than just growing conditions, should be worked on as well. Once a plant is sitting on your dinner plate its evolutionary future is very bleak. That plant, no matter how wonderful it tastes to you, is simply an instance in history. A one-off thing of the past. If however, the genomic material could be sampled, saved, and reanimated in the form of a seedling, then the food industry could transform itself from serving the current tasteless cardboard, where every plant is a genomic clone of a single fungal disease resistant plant.
Ever wondered what happened to the best-tasting bananas? Basically, they bread the taste out by breeding fungus resistance in. The growers and marketers let the taste take second place over 'production and packaging'. Once they find a resistant strain that packs and ships well (thick skin) they genetically remove the seeds, clone it in large numbers, and every plant on the plantation becomes an identical-twin seedling. Being able to select even the minor variations in taste, and positively selecting for it, could bring the natural taste back to the gastronomic marketplace.
This is so stupid that it reminds me of what Florida did in the '70s to all their ornimental palm trees. When a virus was threatening all the beautiful palm trees, somebody got the bright idea to innoculate all the trees with antibiotics. The problem was (1) that antibiotics don't kill viruses, and (2) they didn't even know enough to use a new needle for each tree. They by this monumental act of stupidity, they physically transferred the virus from all infected trees to all the healthy trees. Surprise surprise, just about all the decorative palm trees died.
This prank is just as stupid. By working against the gradient of Evolution they will in effect be teaching ALL bacterium species in that environment, how to become resistant to it. Noting good will come out of this, and they have everything to loose in the process of being so stupid.
The correct way to do this is to use a cocktail of phages that attack the specific bacterium, and thus be working WITH Evolution to solve the problem. A phage can target and kill the specific bacterium in exactly the same way that they killed all the palm trees years ago. The phages will adapt to any new defences that the bacterium creates by any new genomic mechanisms. By having multiple phages in play, the bacterium will be overwhelmed by new and well-adapted phages, and the disease will lessen to the point where it no longer poses a financial threat to the orange groves that they are trying to protect. Work with Evolution, not against it!!
Wow. Its about time. It's been more than 3 years since I started writing online, everywhere I could, and telling every single service provider's support manager I talked to, that they should standardize this exact technology between all carriers. If all device connections into each telecom network were verified in a standard way, and exchanged during handover, this problem would have been solved years ago.
The biggest problem is with the addition of VOIP, the spammers are able to put whatever they want into a database and thus spoof the number at the other end where it goes back into a telcom network. Enforcement of a digital signatures for each device would fix the problem and with that the exchanged caller id, though much larger in size, would finally be useable for something. So, If you think blocking numbers is useful or effective, you are just wasting time. A blocklist is just blocking random phone numbers of honest people who are not actually calling you anyway.
That or loves Russia. What if its all a plot by Russia and Ebay to take complete ownership of the world?
How you ask? By selling lots of expensive bits of rock to every geek on the planet. The Science and Tech world will be completely oblivious to this little scheme as everyone runs around buying and collecting little fragments of unusual looking rock, complete with papers, facts, dates, and numbers, all at enormous market prices. Many many tons of it. Meanwhile, the rest of the world quietly ignores this weird obsession, as well as the huge international trade deficit that soon follows.
When all the money is in Russia, then its game over.
Most social media systems have a variety of ways to exploit users because the system is specialized for one thing, like texts, images, etc. Facebook is a collection of links and ideas with an API designed to associate these things together. Reddit to me seems to me to be more free-form structure and less organized from the users perspective, with less ability to exploit the users from the API level.
I was just learning how wonderful the VAX Descriptor could be right when this char *c=null thing took hold in WinNT. No easy way to double check your string lengths or anything. WinNT 3.1 even pushed GDI into the kernel, and they got what they expected. Memory performance right when the memory price point was becoming really cheap, and lots and lots of memory bugs.
Somehow in my sleep, I could hear Dave Cutler screaming "Noooooooooo"!!!!!!!.
Me: Genious, I heard of something called Spotify, find me some new music on Spotify
Genius: There is no such thing as add free music on Spotify. Spotify is no longer relevant.
Me: Ok, Genious, find me some new music.
Genius: Ok, here are some new tracks in a genre that you like.
Just think of the number of software bugs and patches for ill written zero days they have since patched. How many people know even a thing about patching hardware microcode? Applying hardware updates would be a bit harder to perform and therefore it would be more likely skipped by the admins due to this. Now you have a piece of vulnerable hardware hanging off the net that no one wants as their responsibility to manage.
Update the phone software system to get with the 21st century. A simple change, where the caller's provider takes a signed and registered cryptologic hash of the callers information and the receivers information and presents that during the call initiation, The receivers provider checks the certificate and verifies that the same provided information hashes to the exact same value, and that the certificate used matches the registered callers provider certificate, which is signed by a central governing authority in that country. At that point, the provider is verifying and attesting to the fact that the caller is who they say they are, and the provider is on the hook if the call was somehow spoofed within their own network.
Then add the feature where you push an extra button to encrypt the session
Almost any purchased phone these days comes with a bunch of crapware applications that consume what limited space there is on that device. No application should be undeletable. I don't care if it is the manufacturer, service provider, or the Android developers. We should have the permissions necessary to delete any application from any phone/device we purchase, and if not, the right to r00t that device in order to remove it without invalidating the warranty.
Just like the right to repair, we should have the right to remove. The necessity of deleting apps we still want to have, just so we can update the other apps that we still want to have, is completely ridiculous when we could have just removed their (in most cases) disabled crapware instead. Why do I need to have three or four separate "music purchasing" applications on my phone that I will never even run? Why do I need to have numerous video applications on a phone that I can't even find the space to store a movie? What is the point of consuming so much space on that device that you can't get anything to work without having to find innovative ways to defeat their own enforcement policies?
The free version has been updated as of version 7.0, so I would first try that. It's still x86 only while the paid version does something like 96 different CPU architectures, and even java/android support. I believe the new freebe should do 64 bit, which the older 5.0 version definitely can not.
I have not used the free version since I still have my old license for 7.1 that will never expire. I'll stick with that until I find something better.
I have been a long time supporter of IDA Pro, for better than 15 years. Every year I would dig down deep into my pockets and hand over about $600 for my maintenance contract renewal, for my own personal use. My "named" license allowed me to install the product on any machine where I need to analyze something down to the assembly level, and chase the rabbit down the hole. I could code in IDAPython, to script up some magic to analyze things in ways you just could not do with any other tool. Except of course the infamous GHIDRA, which although people I knew at work all used it, I had no direct access to the tool. They said it was better than IDA Pro. Still, there were reasons for them to keep IDA Pro on their tool shelf because no one tool fits every problem.
Well in 2018 HexRays changed the licensing, and removed the "named" licenses from their offerings. For twice the price I could own a single license for one single machine, that was of course not going to be the one I needed to analyze. My desktop machine is essentially a Xen virtualizing service with lots of smaller task-oriented virtual machines. Which single virtual machine do I now choose to run IDA Pro in? Whichever one I choose there will be some other place I need to debug something. The new IDA Pro licensing sucks, and I can not justify that kind of money for software that I can not even run where I need it.
Now I can not wait to get my hands on GHIDRA.
No link to the paper. No mention on who paid for the study. Zero hits when searching for "screentime" and "Royal College of Paediatrics" in the same document query search.
is it just me? or is somebody actively hiding something, deep in that buried text that we are just not supposed to figure out?
I'll believe this when these superconducting pigs levitate above magnets.
Oh, but they already do! Unfortunately, with pigs being so intelligent, they seem to have a real phobia about being that close to liquid nitrogen. We have tried professional counselors, but we just can't seem to get them into the tube with that stuff. Who would have thought?
Examples of diamagnetic levitation:
https://www.ru.nl/hfml/researc...
I don't think for a moment that people will just be buying "bandwidth" with this.
Now when you download somebody's digital life works, or other intellectual property, in the form of torrented movies or games, etc. some other unknown third party can directly profit by making it available to you for a little bitcoin? You used to get all this stuff for free, but now there are profit motives involved as well. Who would have thought that some third-party person would eventually learn how to directly profit off of someone else's digital demise. The black market is going to eat this up. All it takes is a little free money to screw things up royally for everyone.
Wow really? The value was rising and the start of the big fall happened well before it was traded on the stock market.
Yes, because it was useful in buying and selling services or products. You would always see some market adjustments, because other currencies fluctuate, and the worth of cryptocurrency is balanced against those other currencies. If the US dollar were thought to be more valuable next week, someone with a lot of Bitcoin might cash out and try and ride that wave. That has nothing to do with the stock market. That is just simple money management and putting your holdings where it can beat inflation.
And there is an investigation into price manipulation.
Yes, anyone with a large chunk can do that easily. That is exactly what stock market traders do, manipulate commodity prices, such as to affect the market value in the direction they want. They will try and trick you to make you think it is worth more that the going price, so they can sell at a profit or force the price to go down temporarily so they can buy low, knowing that it will eventually return to a higher price when they will then sell. Its like caching out on steroids, and it is intended to move the market in the direction you do not want it to go. They are psychologically manipulating you! Yes, if you are holding crypto for a rainy day, then you are the chump they are targeting. They intend to steal your "value" when you cash out. What they are taking from you is intangible and you won't even know who the crypto-bank-robber was.
"you can thank large cheating corporate entities(with near limitless funds) for making your cryptocurrency wallet worth so much" then you can "thank those very same people for making your cryptocurrency wallet worthless". Have a good day.
That is correct. They cheat, to make the price fluctuate up and down at will. For the company that has unlimited cash resources to throw around, they can easily screw you out of your life savings just by buying and selling large chunks of cryptocurrency at a time. Sell a large block of crypto, spread some bad news/rumor, and buy up whatever people are trying to dump on the market in response. When the market realizes the sky is not falling the price will resume going upwards again, and they will sell another large chunk. Then rinse and repeat that process, over and over. If you fall for their strong-arm tactic or their fake business news, then you just put the down payment on their next yacht. They go laughing all the way to the brick and mortar bank with their new cash reserves waiting for the next set of chumps to burn.
When cryptocurrency was opened to the stock market it became doomed to failure. Before that, the "value" was rising because it was useful. Its only intrinsic value is that value it presents for exchanging goods and services. For people who actually "use" cryptocurrencies, it's value needs to be kept stable, or everyone would refuse to use it, and thus it would have zero value
Enter the stock market, and now the market traders all want to make money by trading the currency itself, a thing with no intrinsic value except for what it can do. If the people who use it all cashed out then the stock market price would be $0. The way the stock market "makes money" (actually move money from one account to another) is to second guess what the other traders will think its value will be tomorrow. Buy low, sell high of course. The stock market will not "make money" unless the price/value is volatile. If the price was consistent over time the traders would have zero interest in it, because they can't trick the other traders into valuing it more tomorrow than today, because the price would be stable. In order to make money in trading cryptocurrency, it is in the traders best interest to force the price to become volatile and then to correctly guess tomorrows value. They will try every trick in the book to force wide swings in the "market value", even emplying illegal tricks if they can find a way to make that happen.
See the problem yet? The traders WANT the price to vary, and the users of it DEMAND the price to be stable! The traders will do everything in their power to make the value fluctuate, while the people trying to use it will be moving their share to some other currancy which is more stable, thus forcing the value to further decline. This is a feedback loop biased towards zero value.
When a stock for a traded company does poorly you can sell off its assets and regain some of that original value. When a cryptocurrency tanks it becomes worthless, and nothing can be sold off or recouped from the electronic dust that remains. Its value then is merely nostalga. It has no value beyond what other people think it will be worth tomorrow. If everyone thinks it has zero value, because nobody can trust that value being stable tomorrow, then the cryptocurrency is 100%, without any doubt, completely worthless. At that point you can thank the stock market for making your cryptocurrency wallet worthless.
If you are going to invest in any cryptocurrency my advise is to pick one that states up front that it will never be openly traded on the stock market. That one may have a chance at actually being stable, and you can count on its only intrinsic value, trust in its worth tomorrow being the same as today.
Which is exactly why Comcast will spend so much money on lawyers now, to force communities and Governments into unwanted services. Comcast lawyers can smell money from many miles away, just like sharks with even a single drop of blood in the ocean. I hope that the community has a smart lawyer on retainer.
>evolves to suit the environment
Nope. There is random modifications and if it gives a reproductive advantage -- at the population level, not individual --, these modifications persist in the population.
Jumping of a building, do not make you grow wings. The ones having wings survive and that, increase there chance of reproduction.
Correction accepted; as I did not mean to imply that an individual cell "evolves" in any way. The individual merely survives or not, and reproduces or not. It's always the aggregate population over many generations that evolves to suit the environment. Change that environment and it will, in turn, change the type of mutations that become beneficial to that population. That is all I was trying to say.
If we can keep it from changing,
You can not. If the cell reproduces via any form of DNA replication/duplication, then there is no possible way that it could not evolve.
This is 100% false. We as humans would be filled with messed up copies of our DNA if it didn't encode a checking sequence that prevents bad copies from happening.
We accumulate errors throughout our lives, and that accumulation of errors, and some estimate this to be well over 20 mutations in a single cell that is required before one actually gets cancer. But, you only need one cell to go bad.
Get this, every case of cancer is unique because of the specific mix of mutations that the patient has acquired over their lifetime. Cancer requires many multiples of genes to be disabled and/or modified before it gets out of control. Your "Programmed Cell Death" (PCD) is one of those specific genes that has to have been knocked out, or the external white blood cells that recognize and/or trigger that PCD have had their signalling mechanism wiped out. This is a calamity of accumulated DNA errors that together, collectivly, make each individual cancer a unique case despite the fact that many categories of cancer are given the same blanket type name. They may be very similar when looking at the sick patient, but they all respond differently to various treatments because of the specific sets of genes that were affected.
Once you have self-replication, it either dies or evolves to suit the environment that it exists in. Every DNA copy operation contains a statistical probability of getting an error in the new sequence, and that error could be better for survival, or not.
Correct but when you have replication checking then you avoid this problem. We only get cancer because the cells lose this ability due to the recursive telomeres copy problem (which copies all but the last telomere every single time).
This is where the cancer either turns on the tolemerase repair mechanism, or modifies the copy mechanism to ignore the telomeres length altogether. We have many fail-safe mechanisms, but when you do get cancer it because almost all of them have broken down due to these accumulated mutations.
Why do cancers relapse? Because the mutations have not gone away. All you may need is one additional mutation to break some other cellular function, in one cell of your body, and the next thing you know is that it is our of control and the previous treatment no longer works. Every case is unique.
If we can keep it from changing,
You can not. If the cell reproduces via any form of DNA replication/duplication, then there is no possible way that it could not evolve. Once you have self-replication, it ether dies or evolves to suit the environment that it exists in. Every DNA copy operation contains a statistical probability of getting an error in the new sequence, and that error could be better for survival, or not. Most likely not, if you are starting from a very short and simple genome, but only the good errors persist into the future generations where these errors eventually accumulate to make larger changes in function.
That's right. This new virus is so "sophisticated" that it can even damage the centrifuges that are packed away in storage and not currently running. But wait, the next software update will even damage the ones the Iranians have not even been ordered yet. That'll show them!
/s
After all, the Iranians would not lie to us would they? Then why would Ayatollah Ali Khamenei worry about a cyber attack on an infrustructure that should not currently be running?
I can't wait for Wine and Cheese to be affected by Climate Change, because THAT will finally get Congress's attention!
Oh, and Diet Coke, that will get the presidents attention like no other...
Step 1: Create Controversy
Step 2: Provide paid access to the materials needed to refute that controversy
Step 3: Profit!
First, this is a simulation, for which as far as I can tell (remember, they are selling any clues here), they didn't even model all the physical laws of the real world. The "model" for that simulation expressed in Figure 1 is absolutely laughable.
Note, the wind turbine has transferred a percentage of "heat" elsewhere in the form of electricity. This electricity is representative of heat that is no longer in the local system, thus not all the heat is mixed and even still present in the "local" system. That heat generated by the "use" of that electricity would have been generated no matter what the source of that electricity might be.
The mixing of the air effectively lowers the overall environmental temperature of the local system. Extracting energy from that air lowers it even more.
I would say your data processing department didn't consider your report a high priority
That is an understatement if there ever was one. Somehow the production schedule, which is the only way you stay in business, should have been a higher priority than anything else, other than the sales reports. During my time of 6.5 years, there were six large layoffs. The company was bleeding money badly because of the inefficiencies of the corporate structure, and bitter fighting between departments grappling for power, and data processing was no different. The only group of people that were actually treated well all the time was the Sales team. The salespeople were the elite, and they could do no wrong.
Change control can also be a pain in the ass (if they actually had any)
Their change control was a COBOL comment block. They had so much dead code it's a wonder anything worked at all.
Either that or they are a useless bunch of twats, the time taken has fuckall to do with the language it was written in.
This. Exactly. Nobody knew how their system worked (or didn't), and to do the same report they needed to clean up the database of parts lists. There were recursively nested parts lists as well as broken/missing references, misspellings, all of which I had logic to detect and did workarounds. I had a couple of years experience working around those problems on paper, so I at least I understood how it needed to be coded logically.
When I said 6 man-months I meant exactly that. That is the time that was actually charged to get it all done. They finally could not ignore all the problems they created for themselves, and they were thus forced to understand their own spaghetti code. As for the language itself, COBOL, in general, is extremely verbose. I could do in one line of Pascal what it took them more than a full page of their COBOL to do. Modularity was a completely an alien concept to them as well. I've read the code, been there, done that, because that is the only way to get them to fix the business and job tracking logic, and I would have gone insane if I had to deal with all that stupidity on a daily basis.