There have been many hallmark publications on cancer research, which usually involve at the very least extensive animals studies. Many involve human subjects. The cost to test drugs or theories on humans is extensive. Most scientists don't have the funds to redo these experiments, and wouldn't want to either -- the grant money they receive would be towards building on previous results. No funding agency would give money to re-verify a study already published.

At the very least, the authors could make ALL data available for someone to check. Data can be misrepresented very easily, especially in statistics, so having an independent group to verify results would be very welcome.

+1, totally agree. Typical tablets aren't great for taking notes. Maybe for annotating PDFs, but beyond that, not much use. If Onenote was ported to Android or Apple then it might be OK, but still limited by the OS.

A tablet PC is much better, as it's a real computer with a touch screen. Combine that with Microsoft Onenote and you have a very powerful (albeit expensive) note taking machine. Onenote is excellent at digitizing your scribbles so you can search for it later. It even has audio transcription, but I've never tried it. You can have Onenote documents open over multiple computers (via Dropbox or Microsoft's own service) and they all update seamlessly.

I'm not a big fan of Microsoft's bloated products, but Onenote is a wonderful program.

Mod parent up. I've seen countless reports of drugs or techniques that work in immuno-compromised mice or other animals that fail to work when translated to human trials, or worse, cannot be replicated by other labs.

This report, while interesting, is not news -- it's a stepping stone to gain further funding by the researchers for the next step. Once this works decently in humans, then we have a story...

Apple isn't a patent troll. They own the patents to devices they created. If another company bought their patents then sued people, then that would be patent trolling.

I dislike Apple's aggressive stance and believe it hinders advancement, but, they have the right to do this within the law.

The authors and musicians are busy doing whatever they've been doing BECAUSE they have someone fighting for them. Do you think that if the RIAA/MIAA didn't rally for piracy measures, the artists would just shrug their shoulders? Maybe some.

I don't agree with how things are handled either, but change takes time. We're headed for a different type of media system anyways, with people buying less "tangible" items such as dvds and cds, and going to more streaming/digital media.

Actually patents still protect the small inventor. A startup has a much better chance of succeeding, and getting funding from VCs or angel investors if it has a patent protecting the invention. But I agree generally that the patents are also stifling research, and it's not the companies fault -- it's the fault of the USPTO (and other patent granting agencies) that are granting patents on some fairly obvious ideas, most of which are incremental improvements to other patents.

Based on your submitted text, you might want to work on your English skills if you want to work in the business field. English is very common in HK (other languages are definitely an asset). Lack of language skills is generally ignored (and accepted) in IT, but you better be able to write properly in business.

I'm involved in an very early stage startup. Having protected IP is almost an essential component of a startup in the medical industry for two reasons:

1) Funding -- many investors (angel and VC) won't fund projects that don't have patents (submitted or otherwise).
2) Competitive edge -- A big name company could see what you're doing, take the idea and invest huge resources to make it faster than you could. Then you're done.

For an established company, protected IP is not really a big deal. But for a small startup, it can make a huge difference in making it, and making it as a startup is quite difficult as it is.

Mod parent up. I also grew up searching for stuff on BBS's. It was very tame, in fact similar to what you'd probably find on late tv tonight.

The filters are great for preventing children from accessing something accidentally. But if they really want something, they'll find it, either by themselves or more likely through their friends.

What about grotesque images? Most 7-8 year olds are scared of things under their bed or in their closet -- they would be scared shitless of seeing mutilated bodies on the internet. For example, do a search for Porsche girl, a fairly benign phrase, you'll see whats been plastered all over the internet. Then theres images of pets being tortured, something that will likely scar any little child ...

And for sexuality -- seeing a boob is natural no big deal (as a youngin I was exited to come across a Playboy!). Seeing a girl bound and gagged while being gang-banged is not really appropriate for a young child and is easily accessible on the internet.

There's extremes for everything -- don't lump all sexuality into the same group. Some exposure is good, and natural to avoid being a freak later on in time, but no need to scar them at this point.

I have tried to use open alternatives to Word, but they just don't cut it when trying to collaborate with others. Cross compatibility with Word is poor, particularly for long manuscripts that are edited extensively with track changes. It just isn't worth the headache, and trying to convince academics to convert to something else is nearly impossible.

And LaTeX is not an option, most people I collaborate use Word for manuscript prep. And I will preemptively state that many journals we submit to openly state they prefer manuscripts written in Word, but will accept LaTeX...

How long have you been using echofs? I did a search and couldn't find any mention of people using it other than this thread.

What a ridiculous statement. Copyright law in some form is required. Otherwise people could go sell other peoples pictures, movies and music without ever paying a cent to make it, with no compensation to the original artists.

Only on slashdot would this get modded up...

Do yo have a reference? Cells can be stored for several years at liquid nitrogen temperatures and still be viable upon thawing. In fact, I just thawed some from 2008 and they were fine.

Researchers typically do work for the greater good, but also want to reap rewards for their hard work. Generally people in this situation will cash in on the royalties and such, but not make it so expensive that it will be unavailable to most people. If these treatments work out, the hardest hit financially will be the insurance companies and hospitals, not individuals.