I will go on the record predicting this research will widely be discredited within the next 5 years. I’m not saying there is no epigenome, but why would it work in an apparent anti-Lemarkin fashion, let alone anti-Darwinian? The implication is that nobody gets bad-genes, just that genes get shunted aside for multiple generations due to changes in the epigenome.

I think there is some huge motivation on the part of the research here to explain why certain segments of the population remain in a loop of poverty and violence. I think social factors can adequately explain the problems we see. Perhaps there is a genetic component as well to why some groups do better than others, but research of that kind routinely gets the authors in trouble. Here we can have a quasi -genetic predisposition explanation that does away with the shame of having bad genes and suggests that it is society’s fault for not preventing the stressors in earlier generations that lead current generations to underperform.

What is a little strange is the implication that the changes to the epigenome stay permanently, of course only if they are negative changes.

I had over a period of years formulated my own idea about the nature of the universe largely inspired by Conway's Game of Life simulation. There was speculation that if the space for a Game of Life was large enough and evolved enough, the cellular automata could evolve into true life or intelligent life in their own celluar atomation universe. At some point I had the thought that the the automana didn't need the computer to exist. The mathematical definitions that defined their potential existence gave them a real existence whether we ran the simulation or not on some giant computer. The simulation was like recreating something that already exists. If we assume an infinite number of universes exist as quantum mechanics seems to suggest, then we are just experiencing one branch of a solution, one parametric path, of an immense equation with near infinite or truly infinite independent variables.

Our universe and our existence would be the same. Nothing need exist except the rules of math. You don't ask what comes below the bottom of a parabola, the same with our universe. The start is just where the rules start from a singularity. There is nothing before it because time is just a parameter that has no meaning before the singularity. Just has -1 y means nothing to the parabola y = x^2. The start of the parabola universe is at x=0 and there is nothing before it. However the Parabola Universe is not complex enough to contain sentient creatures such as ourselves. But there are infinitely more definable universe all with real existence in a sense, but then again only those complex enough to contain thinking creatures might be called/perceived as real. Given the infinite universes that then exist, there would indeed be some running simulations that create simulations of our universe, but our existence doesn't depend on those simulations being run, it merely gives those universes a window into ours.

I had started on a few occasion to put pen to paper to write these ideas down, but it appears I was beaten to the punch by Max Tegmark and his Mathematical universe hypothesis

~ newly freed pervs ~

Not all SOs are perverts.

Take a leak in an alley when you're 15? You can get on the list.

Get a little drunk at a football game your freshman year and decide to streak across the field? You can get on the list.

~ it's right up there with the theory of gravity. I want to see these bozos go roof-side and test that one out for us.

The High Prophet Tim Minchin said it best (NSFW).

Otherwise you will DIAF.

I'm pretty sure the guy at the top was in on the ruse too.

By your comment, I'm pretty sure you've never worked a contract for government at a high level.

For a reality-based perspective, understand that silos are DEATH to most projects, and government structures are ALL SILOS. The fact that every single one of the "senior political figures" refused (make no mistake--it is always an active decision) is just par for the course.

So, how to change this? There are two key policies that must be implemented from the top:
1) The career of anyone who lies or fails to report bad news up the chain to those who need it is over, regardless of that person's position.
2) The reporting of bad news is to be treated as a problem to be solved, not an issue with the messenger (or the person who caused it).

Example: at a major metropolitan newspaper, a tech made a mistake and rm -rf * the website's home directory. He immediately reported it up the chain and the team dropped everything and worked on restoring the files. They then sat down and discussed how to mitigate the problem so that human error could not cause the same situation or how it could be restored quicker when it happened again. No retaliatory action was taken against the tech.

Hey, it could be your workplace next.

Um, I've been through enough M & As to know that businesses blow out all the time. I could care less, because it just means my commute and officemate wage slaves are going to change.

Whenever I get the memo that we're merging with someone else, that's when I start updating the resume and putting out feelers.

If I time it right, I can pick up the earlybird package before I leave for my next job, but if not, that's okay. The important thing is to get out before the water starts lapping at the Mezzanine deck, because that's when the panic sets in and the company starts prematurely pulling the trigger.

THEY WILL NOT SWITCH. Got to use what you like good for you.

Folks who live on the festering edge of technology will forever be in reactive mode.

They most likely live there because they don't know any better and have become "accustomed" to wearing their hair shirt.

There are a lot of customers of mine that love windows XP and there [sic] blackberrys.

Sure, and when Blackberry goes belly-up, they can suffer through a protracted outage while they scramble for a replacement. Nothing says success like a decision made in fear in panic. Or, they could start their planning and migration now and move as soon as they're ready.

Finally a use for tinfoil other than on my head: a GPS that cannot see the sky won't work. Or I could give it a nice coat of paint that has some aluminum powder mixed in. Or the wire powering the system could "wear out" by "rubbing" against another "moving part". ---- If they want to raise enough funds, all they have to do is eliminate all free curbside parking in the city. They don't even have to charge that much: $.25/hour will do it.

All freedom for me and none for thee. Some choice quotes from our idiot governor, Rick Perry:

Our view is that individuals and families can govern their lives better than bureaucrats.

Except when it comes to buying a car?

Conservatives are winning offices, and champions of big government are cleaning out their desks right now.

Since "convervatives" ARE "champions of big government", please clean out your desks and hit the road.

Americans want government that is leaner, more efficient, and less intrusive into their personal lives.

Yes, and that includes being able to test drive a car, you cretin.

In America, the people are not subjects of government, the government is subject to the people.

...but only Super People like PACs and Corps, right? Tiny Meat People don't count.

Remember your Fountainhead:

Once all the "Takers" are gone, then the "Producers" can frolic in unabashed glory in their new utopia as their products are no longer taken (or consumed) by people who want them.

And THEN the Morlocks will kill and eat all the Eloi.

Yeah, duh. The first thing you do is cut its wings off, then clip its fuel line and drain it out before tying it to your hood.

The master said it best:

The young specialist in English Lit, having quoted me, went on to lecture me severely on the fact that in every century people have thought they understood the universe at last, and in every century they were proved to be wrong. It follows that the one thing we can say about our modern "knowledge" is that it is wrong.

My answer to him was, "John, when people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
— Issac Asimov, The relativity of wrong

I used to run my own web site. The modest fees didn't bother me; but the image leaches did.

Translation: "I somehow figured out how to install IIS, and then I forgot how to use google, so I gave up and shut down."

Aren't you supposed to be back at 1025 F Street today?