Did these academics even cite the FAQ?
Did these academics even cite the FAQ?
Oboy. Do we finally have something that can make a big sphere strong enough and light enough that when pumped to a vacuum it will work as a lifting body?
Not to mention, strong enough to make a deep sea diving bell strong enough that it won't crush?
Same principle. Oh please
.... a review with praise in Common Dreams, a self-identified "Progressive" website, about the surprise winner in Virginia's Republican primary:
"... Republican Dave Brat, a college economics professors who spoke about GOP hypocrisy and railed against Wall Street greed, unseated House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in a primary challenge.
âoeAll of the investment banks, up in New York and D.C., they should have gone to jail.â
The national media is buzzing about Bratâ(TM)s victory, but for all of the wrong reasons...."
The media will talk about anything except the real problem
Look, if Ben Franklin had understood this "electricity" thing better, he'd have defined the Post Office program -- that allowed "a Republic, if you can keep it" to work, by putting every citizen within equal reach of every other citizen -- to include it explicitly.
That's Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution, that gave us the Post Office.
In his day, they did it with horses.
Now, we do it with electronics.
Same difference. Ought to be the same anyhow.
You'll find the same problem mentioned by flashlight modders (candlepowerforums.com, budgetlightforums.com) -- some multi-level lights have quite annoying PWM.
> Just tell people what you're doing.
> Make sure that it's legal and ethical.
> Don't be shy of what you're doing.
> Then we might accept it.
---- Signed, your government.
> Think of what can be learned by applying modern pattern analysis to that data set.
Got nothing? Think again. Think harder.
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
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.
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...."
Outgassing from the plastic and electronics, I'll bet.
Nice new routers, I'll bet. Loaded with stuff that's volatile.
Did they try a Faraday Cage to rule out the radio waves?
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.
Is that an "autocorrect what you typed" feature, or an "autocomplete before you type anything more" feature?
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.
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.
You can do this in a number of ways. IBM chose to do all of them. Why do you find that funny? -- D. Taylor, Computer Science 350