Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:What is MetaData? (Score 1) 337

by ankhank (#44024517) Attached to: Snowden NSA Claims Partially Confirmed, Says Rep. Jerrold Nadler

> Think of what can be learned by applying modern pattern analysis to that data set.

Got nothing? Think again. Think harder.

Still nothing?

Congratulations, you are excludable from the jury, as he may only be tried by a jury of his peers.

Still no clear idea what can be learned by applying modern pattern analysis to that data set?

You're not one of his peers. Excused ....

Comment: Re:A thought experiment (Score 3, Interesting) 214

by ankhank (#43997853) Attached to: Supreme Court: No Patents For Natural DNA Sequences

! yep

We already know that's the case for antibiotics. And we know plants compete with one another by suppressing competitors' growth.

Seems to me Thomas's comment is intended to add a loophole -- "we created this cDNA and patented it, so we have the patent, so if you claim you found the exact same thing out there in nature somewhere, it must be you stole it from us." Betcha.

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1215093
The Future of Antibiotics and Resistance
Brad Spellberg, M.D., John G. Bartlett, M.D., and David N. Gilbert, M.D.
N Engl J Med 2013; 368:299-302January 24, 2013DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1215093
----------------
"... after billions of years of evolution, microbes have most likely invented antibiotics against every biochemical target that can be attacked — and, of necessity, developed resistance mechanisms to protect all those biochemical targets. Indeed, widespread antibiotic resistance was recently discovered among bacteria found in underground caves that had been geologically isolated from the surface of the planet for 4 million years.2 Remarkably, resistance was found even to synthetic antibiotics that did not exist on earth until the 20th century. These results underscore a critical reality: antibiotic resistance already exists, widely disseminated in nature, to drugs we have not yet invented.

"Thus, from the microbial perspective, all antibiotic targets are “old” targets...."
-----------------

Comment: Re:Yeah... No ... (Score 1) 1105

by ankhank (#43755411) Attached to: 97% of Climate Science Papers Agree Global Warming Is Man-made

You've confused the total with the excess. The total amount in the atmosphere, oceans, and biogeochemical cycles doesn't vary much, or very fast -- except for the last century during which there's been an extremely rapid rate of increase from fossil fuel burning. See http://www.aip.org/history/climate/index.htm

As he says there:
"If you want basic facts about climate change, or detailed current technical information, you might do better using the links page. But if you want to use history to really understand it all..." -- read http://www.aip.org/history/climate/

Among other things you learn why logic and common sense didn't solve the puzzles in the detail needed; computers made it possible.

Comment: PS, so let the damn computer learn to read script (Score 2) 100

If the computer's good enough to get the right letter out of a vague approximation of position on a mini keyboard, it ought to be able to read my handwriting.

Want to do input on a tiny little area or just by waving your hands in the air?

Penmanship. Just make the computer able to read handwriting.

Comment: brain mapping dystonia (Score 2) 100

This is guaranteed to screw up people's ability to accurately place their fingers.

Same reason I turn off AutoCorrect -- because when the user can just wave and poke at the approximate area of the keyboard -- and get the right letter supplied -- the brain fuzzes over its map of the keyboard and the finger placement becomes imprecise. Or rather exactly precise enough to get the desired result -- which is pretty damn sloppy when the computer's taking care of the final accuracy.

'oogle brain mapping dystonia -- lots of academic work on this, it's a serious problem.

Sorry, CMU, this is going to cripple people if you implement it.
Not right away, it'll take some time before the damage is apparent.

Comment: Re:This is the company that reads our email, right (Score 1) 274

by ankhank (#43511645) Attached to: Google Forbids Advertising On Glass

"... the reason for everything must publicly appear. Every man is a proprietor in government, and considers it a necessary part of his business to understand. It concerns his interest, because it affects his property. He examines the cost, and compares it with the advantages; and above all, he does not adopt the slavish custom of following what in other governments are called LEADERS.

It can only be by blinding the understanding of man, and making him believe that government is some wonderful mysterious thing, that excessive revenues are obtained...."

http://www.ushistory.org/paine/rights/c2-03.htm

Comment: Re:This is the company that reads our email, right (Score 1) 274

by ankhank (#43511577) Attached to: Google Forbids Advertising On Glass

http://www.mercurynews.com/politics-government/ci_23067322/silicon-valley-companies-quietly-try-kill-internet-privacy

"... A recent letter signed by 15 companies and trade groups -- including TechAmerica, which represents Google, Facebook, Microsoft and other technology companies -- demanded that the measure's author, Assemblywoman Bonnie Lowenthal, D-Long Beach, drop her bill. They complain it would open up businesses to an avalanche of requests from individuals as well as costly lawsuits.

One early consequence of the heavy lobbying: A hearing on the bill, AB1291, scheduled for last week, has been pushed to next month.

The American Civil Liberties Union, a co-sponsor of the Right to Know Act, accuses the business groups of overreacting to hide their true intentions: to keep out of the public's eye the lucrative practice of amassing personal information on people who use online services, computer apps, social networking sites and other portals that track people's locations, buying habits, favorite foods and movies, and even their sexual orientation.... ... ... The push for the new law comes as tech, banking and marketing firms find more ways to mine vast amounts of personal information on consumers to target their specific needs. Some websites have installed as many as 100 tracking tools that kick in when consumers visit them, according to the bill's analysis.

Many Facebook apps tap into their users' and their friends' profiles, including sections on religious, political and sexual preferences; race; income; and health concerns. Third-party advertising and marketing companies buy, sell and trade personal information that they get from mobile phones, financial institutions and social media sites.

Some mobile applications share location information and phone numbers of users -- a concern to advocates of domestic violence victims.
Consumers who live in 27 countries that belong to the European Union already have the right to know what data companies have on them -- laws that are being complied by Facebook, Google and others that are opposing the California legislation.

Google did not reply to requests for an interview; a Facebook spokesman declined to talk about the bill. The California Chamber of Commerce referred all calls to TechAmerica, the trade group that represents major Internet companies...."

Comment: Re:This is the company that reads our email, right (Score 1) 274

by ankhank (#43486577) Attached to: Google Forbids Advertising On Glass

I don't misunderstand the business model.
It's to collect money from advertisers by pushing stuff at viewers.

"I'm feeling lucky" now tells me I'm feeling hungry and gives me a map of restaurants near where I am.
Dagnabbit, when I want food, I -know- how to search for food I want.
I'm a living organism. We do this instinctively.

Google's business could have been search: making sellers more competent at describing what they have to sell, where, when, and how, and on what terms, so they can be found by people who want something -- so someone can find something simply, straightforwardly, least effort for best result.

Google could have been a reference librarian for the marketplace, helping people by narrowing a search interactively, even querying the potential seller to improve their information if people keep asking for something Google figures out is probably what the seller wants to sell, as well as querying the potential buyer.

Go to a good library. Talk to a good reference librarian. Say you want something very specific that you don't know how to find.

Google could be that.

Instead the web becomes more and more layers of repeated stuff, and readers go through clicking page after page after page.
And the more pages are presented, the more the advertiser's stuff shows up, the more chances there are for clicks. $$PROFIT$$ eh?
Gubbish.

Google's business could have been search. I'd gladly buy from a seller that made the effort -- one that paid Google to help make their information clearer, more distinctive, and more easily discoverable (what searches do people do trying to find this sort of thing?). Save me time, save me trouble, save me from distraction, make search better.

Instead the model is to stuff the web with more stuff I have to work harder to ignore all the time, eating up the time I have to live.

Why, yes, I am old enough to remember when signs didn't glare, pages didn't shout, and I could go to Usenet and -ask- for something
and if I asked cleverly enough, showing I"d done my homework, people would answer - and then everyone else could find the answer later.
Like, as Borges says somewhere, going into a dark huge library and shouting my question -- and hearing answers coming back.

Google could have been that library.

Someone will, eventually.

Comment: Re:This is the company that reads our email, right (Score 1) 274

by ankhank (#43483479) Attached to: Google Forbids Advertising On Glass

Google has nothing except user data to sell.
They may not disclose individual data.
But they definitely sell it.

Google got their approach backward.
If they'd stayed with search, they could've charged companies by how successfully, quickly, easily, and uniquely people -found- the company's products when they wanted to solve a problem or fill a need and went searching for good answers.

Make what you sell good, and well and accurately and easily described, in a way that explains what need it satisfies -- and search will enable people to find it easily; Google should have gone the route of finding a way to charge for the success Google provided the company -- success at being found.

Companies that make crap, poorly described, misleading stuff that needs advertising -- not stuff you want to find -- is the model they chose instead.

My contribution: block all the ads I can, and resolve never to buy -anything- that gets pushed in my face when I don't want it.
If you want me to buy something from you, describe it clearly and fully and if I need it, I'll be able to find it.

Killfile web ads now, same as it was used for Usenet posts.
If it makes you angry or crazy or distracted and wastes your time --- Killfile it, AdBlock it, NoScript it.
Don't get caught by the crap, ignore the crap.

I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen

Working...