odd, I found even with the references, perl could be a PITA to do anything. Python may not include everything you need (and many things you don't) by default, but it throws help at you like it's going out of style. Aside from the excessive amount of electronic help python gives you, I'd say it beat perl in the bloat context hands down.
>>> import sys >>> import re >>> help("re") >>> help("sys")
Bloat is simply a lot of extra features you don't use.
Ex: I use EMacs a lot, but only for a few things that are hard to find conviniently together elsewhere. 90% of what it can do, I don't need. For me it's bloat, but for what it does, there's no replacement
Arguably Opera and Konqueror are slimmer than Firefox, but I much prefer what I get with Firefox, so I don't consider it bloat.
OpenOffice - All those features, nobody uses all of them, but it has what most people need. Bloated but useful for everyone.
Bloat is very dependant not just on what is in the software, but what you want, and what you want is different from anyone else. There's probably bloat in any software, it's just variant on the individual using it, otherwise everyone would have their own personal program for every taks, and no one else would use that program.
So... My list
Non-bloat that I like XMMS KMail Firefox FreeBSD sh
Hard to call non-bloat, but like it anyway OpenOffice KDE Windows Trillian Pidgin Emacs Python GCC bash
citation for what? WoW and EVE playing on Wine or Blizzard modifying the client so users weren't banned because the client thought they were cheating when they were actually running it in WINE?
How about Blizzard explicitly altering their anti-cheating stuff so that Linux users can play WoW? That's probably indicitive of at least a few hundred users.
Heck, I've played both WoW and EVE in Wine under FreeBSD. Only problem I had with either is that the galaxy map doesn't work properly in some modes in EVE.
To err is human. To really fuck up, you need to work for the government.
You've not seen the commercial sector much, have you?
Honestly, while this is bad, and the nuclear debris from the missles would have been a pain had the plane crashed, it's not what I would call a royal fuckup. You are more likely to win the lottery twice in a row than it would be for those bombs to go off if the plane crashed (nuclear warheads, are delicate, even if made from plutonium, and if those are uranium warheads, they are even more so).
Regardless, another three good disproofs to your comment: Sony. Microsoft. Apple.
Each of these companies had screwed up royally. One took decades to recover.
The goal was a treatment for personality disorders, but they were studying ammonia (or something similarly revolting sounding), and they had to put it with a co-molecule/atom to give it the right properties. They tried with several different associate atoms/moleculres. Anyway, the results showed no effect whatsoever, except with the co-molecule being lithium. They concluded the lithium was what they wanted, not the ammonia.
Well, if a "and never have been" is in there, that makes one of us.
OCKQUOTE>Embryonic stem cells however can change into anything, without any modification. They are much easier to work with,...
Just to put in some requisite corrections to some popular (mis) understandings...
The clause, 'without any modification' is flat out wrong, applied to either type of stem cell.
I'm not a stem cell researcher myself, but It's my understanding that adult stem (AS) cells are actually easier to work with. In addition they're clearly more readily available. That being said, this is all the bleeding edge of medical and life science and *nothing* is 'easy'
OK, reprhase - there's a lot of crap that is put onto the DNA (called methylataion) that turns off genes by blcoking transcription initiation sites. This, until recently, was not easy to remove.
Now, to cause a cell to differentiate, you grow it in a medium with the appropriate chemicals. By applying the right chemicals to an embryonic stem cell, you can differentiate it to ANYTHING that you can find in an adult body. Conversely, without removing the methyl groups from the DNA, you cannot do this with an adult stem cell.
That is what I meant, and until recently, that was not possible without also killing the cell.
And I was talking about this type of treatment, but research in general. This type of treatment is not the only thing that stem cells would be useful for. But without the understanding of growth and development found in ES cells, then they probably would *NOT* have gotten this far this quickly with the adult stem cells, because they would not have known the factors to cause the proper differentiations by now. It'd probably be a few more years off.
I do admit, the adult stem cells, due to rejection issues, are better for the treatments, but for understanding growth and development, ES cells are a lot easier to work with, and prior to being able to "undifferentiate" a cell, the only option.
Now? Maybe. It would require a lot more effort though (there are methylation sites on the DNA that "turn off" genes, and these methyl groups need to be taken off, but only some, not all if I remember correctly. There may be other factors as well. And this has to be done without killing the cell.
the point of embryonic stem cells isn't to make the replacements (although, they could make batches of low-antigen factors), the point is to understand the growth and development of the tissues in the body.
So it wouldn't be to grow you a new heart valve, but to understand how the heart valves grow.
A lot more money is being thrown at adult stem cell research - it's really not comparible which is more useful from the start.
You put $10B into research on ethanol from corn, vs $100K into research for ethanol from cane... Which one will show up better? Which one is actually better?
The scales were weighted and the measurement isn't good.
embryonic are omni-potential, instead of just pluripotential.
Until the last two or three years (if I remember correctly, the time frame may be off), with adult stem cells, they can grow a limited set of tissues only. Even now it takes work to make adult stem cells able to differentiate into any other cells. Embryonic stemm cells however can change into anything, without any modification. They are much easier to work with, and as of a couple of years ago they were the only option.
I can't remember if they can now make adult stem cells omni-potential, or just increase their potential to add just a few more cell types.
at that point you are interfering with a legal institution intended to help people and save their lifes - wasting their time and putting people in danger.
Trust me, you don't want the fines and possible jail time that could get you.
Slashdot Mirror
No one knows, they've never found a hard drive that can fit the result...
Errr, wait, they have hard drives that can fit Vista... So, YES!
(Don't flame me for picking on emacs, it's my favorite editor, even if it uses 20MB of memory on my system)
odd, I found even with the references, perl could be a PITA to do anything. Python may not include everything you need (and many things you don't) by default, but it throws help at you like it's going out of style. Aside from the excessive amount of electronic help python gives you, I'd say it beat perl in the bloat context hands down.
>>> import sys
>>> import re
>>> help("re")
>>> help("sys")
Or the mother of all bloat software?
0 utility, therefore its 100% bloat. And it manages to be quite small while doing it.
maybe you'd be better with true and false
int main(){return 0;}
int main(){return 1;}
Bloat is simply a lot of extra features you don't use.
Ex: I use EMacs a lot, but only for a few things that are hard to find conviniently together elsewhere. 90% of what it can do, I don't need. For me it's bloat, but for what it does, there's no replacement
Arguably Opera and Konqueror are slimmer than Firefox, but I much prefer what I get with Firefox, so I don't consider it bloat.
OpenOffice - All those features, nobody uses all of them, but it has what most people need. Bloated but useful for everyone.
Bloat is very dependant not just on what is in the software, but what you want, and what you want is different from anyone else. There's probably bloat in any software, it's just variant on the individual using it, otherwise everyone would have their own personal program for every taks, and no one else would use that program.
So... My list
Non-bloat that I like
XMMS
KMail
Firefox
FreeBSD
sh
Hard to call non-bloat, but like it anyway
OpenOffice
KDE
Windows
Trillian
Pidgin
Emacs
Python
GCC
bash
Why spend the money and effort to develop a Linux client, when Wine does the job for them, at no cost to them?
down religeous db fanatic! down!
both have their pros and cons, now stop trying to take a stupid joke an make it into your personal database soapbox
You mean... My row based MySQL tables can't wash my dishes for me?
Closest I can find on a quick search. Maybe they didn't alter the client to not trigger alerts on WINE users, but I thought they did.
/ 1652222/ 1525230
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/15
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/22
citation for what? WoW and EVE playing on Wine or Blizzard modifying the client so users weren't banned because the client thought they were cheating when they were actually running it in WINE?
How about Blizzard explicitly altering their anti-cheating stuff so that Linux users can play WoW? That's probably indicitive of at least a few hundred users.
Heck, I've played both WoW and EVE in Wine under FreeBSD. Only problem I had with either is that the galaxy map doesn't work properly in some modes in EVE.
maybe because the article presumes a certain intellegence of /.ers that is mostly lacking - hence adding the fiction to the science.
Or it could be the Alien theory.
You've not seen the commercial sector much, have you?
Honestly, while this is bad, and the nuclear debris from the missles would have been a pain had the plane crashed, it's not what I would call a royal fuckup. You are more likely to win the lottery twice in a row than it would be for those bombs to go off if the plane crashed (nuclear warheads, are delicate, even if made from plutonium, and if those are uranium warheads, they are even more so).
Regardless, another three good disproofs to your comment:
Sony. Microsoft. Apple.
Each of these companies had screwed up royally. One took decades to recover.
I thought it was something different.
The goal was a treatment for personality disorders, but they were studying ammonia (or something similarly revolting sounding), and they had to put it with a co-molecule/atom to give it the right properties. They tried with several different associate atoms/moleculres. Anyway, the results showed no effect whatsoever, except with the co-molecule being lithium. They concluded the lithium was what they wanted, not the ammonia.
Well, if a "and never have been" is in there, that makes one of us.
Just to put in some requisite corrections to some popular (mis) understandings...
The clause, 'without any modification' is flat out wrong, applied to either type of stem cell.
I'm not a stem cell researcher myself, but It's my understanding that adult stem (AS) cells are actually easier to work with. In addition they're clearly more readily available. That being said, this is all the bleeding edge of medical and life science and *nothing* is 'easy'
OK, reprhase - there's a lot of crap that is put onto the DNA (called methylataion) that turns off genes by blcoking transcription initiation sites. This, until recently, was not easy to remove.
Now, to cause a cell to differentiate, you grow it in a medium with the appropriate chemicals. By applying the right chemicals to an embryonic stem cell, you can differentiate it to ANYTHING that you can find in an adult body. Conversely, without removing the methyl groups from the DNA, you cannot do this with an adult stem cell.
That is what I meant, and until recently, that was not possible without also killing the cell.
And I was talking about this type of treatment, but research in general. This type of treatment is not the only thing that stem cells would be useful for. But without the understanding of growth and development found in ES cells, then they probably would *NOT* have gotten this far this quickly with the adult stem cells, because they would not have known the factors to cause the proper differentiations by now. It'd probably be a few more years off.
I do admit, the adult stem cells, due to rejection issues, are better for the treatments, but for understanding growth and development, ES cells are a lot easier to work with, and prior to being able to "undifferentiate" a cell, the only option.
more recently than a year or two ago? No.
Now? Maybe. It would require a lot more effort though (there are methylation sites on the DNA that "turn off" genes, and these methyl groups need to be taken off, but only some, not all if I remember correctly. There may be other factors as well. And this has to be done without killing the cell.
the point of embryonic stem cells isn't to make the replacements (although, they could make batches of low-antigen factors), the point is to understand the growth and development of the tissues in the body.
So it wouldn't be to grow you a new heart valve, but to understand how the heart valves grow.
A lot more money is being thrown at adult stem cell research - it's really not comparible which is more useful from the start.
You put $10B into research on ethanol from corn, vs $100K into research for ethanol from cane... Which one will show up better? Which one is actually better?
The scales were weighted and the measurement isn't good.
*ahem*
./get --amount=more --type=coffee
s/fetal/embryonic/
embryonic are omni-potential, instead of just pluripotential.
Until the last two or three years (if I remember correctly, the time frame may be off), with adult stem cells, they can grow a limited set of tissues only. Even now it takes work to make adult stem cells able to differentiate into any other cells. Embryonic stemm cells however can change into anything, without any modification. They are much easier to work with, and as of a couple of years ago they were the only option.
I can't remember if they can now make adult stem cells omni-potential, or just increase their potential to add just a few more cell types.
Quite incorrect. The fundies only dislike fetal stem cells and full-organism cloning. This shouldn't cause an issue with them.
if 200,000 eliptical galaxies jumped off of a cliff... would you?
at that point you are interfering with a legal institution intended to help people and save their lifes - wasting their time and putting people in danger.
Trust me, you don't want the fines and possible jail time that could get you.
Give them a number starting in 411, i.e. (area code)-411-whatever, such as (419)-411-4321
They won't know the difference, but the locale should transfer them to information.
(1) that post was obvious troll - I've seen the same thing c&ped two or three times already.
(2) You can easily ask numbers how they feel. Ex. my account number is a happy number (yes those exist, check out Wikipedia)
Ok, 2 was a bad joke, but please don't feed the trolls.
Agreed.
The grades aren't important, the learning is.
You want to make math and sciences easier, train your teachers to do a better job.