Actually, that's incorrect. Individual variations account for the amount of alcohol and time required to reach certain BAC level, but they have little effect on the resulting impairment.

0.00 is unreasonable (you're hitting endogenous alcohol background). 0.01 is prohibition level. 0.05 is already close to the upper scale of reasonableness.

Again, we CAN describe the function of about 70% of junk - it simply wants to replicate itself as much as possible. Google for "retrotransposons". Non-junk actually _has_ a purpose - it's used to encode the cell functions.

There is junk DNA. Read about SINEs and LINEs for a start.

I'm extremely familiar with genetic algorithms. Pure junk is generally useless because you're no better off than starting from scratch. You need at least something that is _almost_ junk or a way to create imperfect copies of existing functional elements within a genome.

Unsurprisingly, there are mechanism for both of these. And they don't need junk DNA - bacteria can evolve just fine and they have virtually no junk DNA.

Then the question: "why junk DNA?" and the answer so far is that it has negligible fitness penalty, any observable effects become noticeable only when DNA grows to humongous size (20-30Gb) because it takes very long to replicate it.

Next question: "Then why does this plant has so little junk?". That's probably because it has some rogue transposable element that chews portions of DNA randomly.

Oh no. Not ENCODE junk again.

ENCODE detected that at some point in the life of cell about 80% of DNA was translated into RNA. That doesn't mean it's functional in any way - it's just transcribed. Also, I'd like to see your source for the 50% evolutionary conservation of junk DNA - the top estimate is about 15% of the whole genome ( http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/349505/description/Reports_of_junk_DNAs_demise_were_based_on_junky_logic_and_dubious_definitions ).

Wrong! Most of junk DNA is... wait for it... JUNK!

We can tell the composition of the junk for approximately 66% of the human genome. There is a small amount of regulatory elements mixed with all this junk, but the junk itself is not necessary for anything.

Even without the extreme examples such as bladderwort we readily observe 10x variability in the amount of DNA between fairly recently separated species.

Lots of tissue media (and enzymes) are so expensive because there's no large-scale demand for them, so vendors have to recoup their R&D by jacking up the prices. I know for a fact that a couple of very expensive enzymes used in preparation of DNA libraries are sold with 20x markup. Yet it's barely enough to get even because it took tens of millions of dollars to develop them.

I used to work in a company that grows animal tissue cultures. You certainly CAN grow lots of tissue types without horse serum or any animal-related products. In fact, lots of lab protocols require that.

Right here: http://images.apple.com/iphone/business/docs/iOS_Security_Oct12.pdf - grep for the 'keybag' section.

Dudes, Apple holds your encryption key in escrow to allow device restores. That's even disclosed in their freaking policy.

Are you stupid? Apple holds your encryption keys in escrow so you can restore them if you accidentally forget them. Everybody with a couple of functioning brain cells should know that if a company can restore password for you then they can do this for law enforcement as well.

I'm planning to create a blog with description and probably post it on Slashdot someday. I'll put everything on Github once I deal with a couple of issues.

Yes, I absolutely hate and detest CSS and Zen Garden. Their so called 'designs' are filled with absolute pixel sizes and assume a lot about fonts used - set fonts to 250% and lots of these 'designs' become unintelligible. That crap has set us back at least 10 years in UI design.

It has only recently became possible to use CSS to create table-like sites, and it's still NOT possible to create non-trivial sites that resize themselves based on content.

Actually, I do base some of my purchases on personalities. Especially for movies - I'm not going to watch the "Oblivion" because of that Shitentology crap that Tom Cruise is fond of. I won't go to see "Pain and Gain" because it's based on real events, I'll try not to buy anything associated with Mormon church.