Not sure what civilization you are referring to, but here in the good ole' US-of-A everyone is primarily concerned about buying beer, their heroin addiction, and gay marriage.
The price of admission for us geeky folks to support the infrastructure responsible for the bread-and-circuses is that they have to throw a little bone (less than 1% of GDP) to things we think are cool. Otherwise we would all be cyberterrorists and commies.
Probably not - at least in this case. They are looking at a specific form of cancer, lymphoma. Lymphomas do span the gamut from being indolent to extremely aggressive, hence the need for accurate diagnosis, but we have a fairly good idea of what the natural history of each subtype is. This system is not designed to mow through a bunch of clinical data and pop out a 'cancer' diagnosis.
That said, TFA is incredibly poorly written. It is anything but clear WHAT information they are using (pathology slides? DNA samples? Chart notes?) and it is most certainly not AI.
While over diagnosing pre clinical cancers is a concern, this particular methodology won't make that worse. In fact, if it actually does work, it might decrease what are essentially false positive diagnoses by linking the testing component to the natural history of the disease (eg, 'this particular cancer is mostly harmless, don't worry about it much').
It's meant to warn nerds of the dangers associated with female companionship
I suppose it is useful to have purely theoretical discussions around here from time to time.
Ewww. Gross. A 'ketchup smoothie'. Just thinking about that makes me nauseated.
Thankyouverymuch.
I take it that Windows 2000 keyboards don't have a return key?
And a wonderful world it is. I have a 500 GB SSD and a 1 TB spinning HD stuffed in my (now aging) 17" MacBook Pro. A wonderful combo for serious work. I might have to look at the Dell when this thing finally dies as Apple has decided that svelte trumps strength and that nobody needs more than 15 inches. Having two drives (or at least 1.5 TB of storage) is going to be a requirement.
Let them have my cache. They can eat it, too.
The cache is a lie.
"Waist not, want not."
Is that a peculiarly American turn of phrase?
Yep, the point and click version of SUDO.
And Gatekeeper is fine (for individual use, it's not an Enterprise solution). If you don't understand the concept of walled garden or malware, then the DEFAULT secure position is to protect you from you lack of computer sophistication.
If you pass computer kindergarten and can now walk along the road unchaperoned, then you are one simple click away from freedom.
A perfectly sensible approach. I suspect that anyone posting here using OS X has unclicked Gatekeeper, but we are not it's target audience. Remember, it is still Eternal September out there.
Slashdot needs a "+1 Hey everybody, look at this idiot!" moderation.
No we don't - it's just assumed.
But, in the case of measles remember it also tends to cause men to be sterile if caught at the wrong age.
Close, no cigar. You're thinking of mumps (the other 'M' in MMR).
No, but we did ask Bennet Haselton.
No, the science community doesn't need to do anything. Your thesis that once a paper passes peer review it is automatically inserted into the canon is just completely wrong. You need to understand what science is.
I believe the anti-vaccine group do not say ALL vaccines are bad. They are saying that they suspect that one of the vaccines or a some yet undetermined factor(s) coupled with a particular vaccine may cause autism. This study indicates that the MMR vaccine is not the culprit. The pertussis vaccine was a notorious vaccine that caused high fevers in many children. If it has been studied and found to be safe (which I doubt), I hope someone will educate me. Does everyone here believe all vaccines are absolutely safe?
Nothing is absolutely safe. Absolutely nothing. Pertussis is a straw-man argument; Yes the OLD vaccine caused fevers and discomfort, no, the fevers and discomfort were not particularly dangerous. No one has used whole cell pertussis vaccine for a couple of decades now.
Is the risk-benefit ratio highly skewed towards benefit with general pediatric vaccinations - yes.
If all else fails, lower your standards.
