What is the point? Why do we need a copy of a human
They aren't trying to duplicate humans. They are trying to distill and reproduce essential aspects of biomotion e.g. skeletal muscle contraction. TFA is about a way to control the twitching of skeletal muscles without requiring a biological nervous system.
Ancient DNA has proven difficult to sequence or clone, because it is fragmentary, and most of it breaks down into single strands after it is extracted from bone.
However, a new technique developed at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, sequences single stranded DNA. Scientists just announced they used the technique to fully sequence Denisovan DNA from a bone fragment found in a cave in Siberia. They're going to go back to sequence their library of hundreds of Neandertal DNA specimens.
How long before they make Dolly Denisovan?
I showed the jurors that the two methods in software were not the same, nor could they be interchangeable because the hardware that was involved between the old processor and the new processor — you couldn't load the new software methodology in the old system and expect that it was going to work.
Those are good questions, antdude. I would like to learn more about the cartographic practices that resulted in the map they carried.
I wonder what Earhart and Noonan knew or presumed about the chart's accuracy with respect to islands when they were leaving New Guinea?
I wonder what they made of what happened when they were talking about it afterwards on Gardner island?
Duh... the reason Junk Mail is not valued by the recipient is because it is INTRUSIVE. Intrusiveness cannot be overcome by personalisation. More like enhanced. The more personalized the junk, the creepier the intrusion.
I wonder why that person from IBM predicts such a creepy future?
Why does IBM pay someone to publish creepy stuff like that?
I thought FireFox was such a positive force for open standards, in the days when IE was a monopoly.
But something happened. FireFox got to 20% market share, and they got a bunch of money (from Google) and fame. Then, Mozilla ceased to become an organization that was dedicated to an open web. It became, instead, an organization that knew better than the open web. It wasn't about implementing standards any more. It was about God's chosen web engineers determining what was best for the web.
The problem with Mozilla refusing to implement open standards that other browsers implement, is the same problem we had back when IE had disproportionate market share.
Chrome and Opera and Webkit don't suffer from this narcissism. They just get on with it and implement open standards.
Hooray for open standards!
New York... when civilization falls apart, remember, we were way ahead of you. - David Letterman