As a kid I learned Basic before learning english. Language was not a barrier at all. the only prpblem is that i would say "If we go out THEN lets GOTO the movies" and 30 years later i still think of those keywords first in a code context.

According to wikipedia on cell reprogramming, these gene expression changes are erased from offspring: "After fertilization the paternal and maternal genomes are once again demethylated and remethylated (except for differentially methylated regions associated with imprinted genes). This reprogramming is likely required for totipotency of the newly formed embryo and erasure of acquired epigenetic changes." See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reprogramming

yes I had that [norton?] antifreeze program too over 15 years ago. It gave you the option to jump out of an infinite loop (at your own risk) and most of the time that was good enough to unfreeze the entire (16 bit) computer, save your files.

Better send it on WHITE font (with deep black background of course)

They had a "Report" button months ago. I just checked and they still have it, so I guess that wasnt working well. Besides, it would at most only ban that IP and not the user, since there is no user/login on the site (which is one of its features, of course)

It didnt take them 500 years. If you RTFSummary, it says the bones were found in 1995.

Reformatting the hard disk is not enough. The rootkid could hide on some device's firmare or even the graphics card memory. http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Security/Black-Hat-Demonstrations-Shatter-Hardware-Hacking-Myths/

is another way to say it.

I am a "vegetarian" that eats fish and seafood for exactly that reason. Its NOT about how the animal dies. Most animals have always died in horrible ways killed slowly by predators. ITS ABOUT HOW THEY LIVE their entire lives, not about how they die in the last minutes of their lives. Im sure the fish I eat had a full, free life, had sex, kids, etc and wandered arround in open seas until it was killed. *Being killed is part of normal life* On the other hand, suffering through your entire life being treated horribly, abused and possibly in a cage all your life (and who knows what they feed them), is just so horrible to me, that I cant understand why most people simply close their eyes to that huge issue and think that its fine to eat whatever they want. I wont go on coz this is almost offtopic, but ive convinced many people to stop eating cows and chicken with just this argument. Just think about all the suffering that u are made of i.e. what you eat and what you cause. Its NOT the fault of the factories that grow and mistreat the animals, its YOUR fault for financing them and asking them to give you that. (and yea, i know that some seafood is farmed, but I avoid that too.)

Ok, I also use "if (!ptr)", but what I meant is that is "more" correct because the algorithm would be more easily portable to another language. Of course it will always work in C because it guarantees NULL===0. But writting (!p) involves a hidden cast to a boolean operator, while (p!=NULL) does not, and it ports to other languages.

The "more" correct way to write such code is: if (ptr!=NULL){...} Ive worked at proyects where that was enforced. It really doesnt matter in C because NULL is defined to be zero, but its better to use "ptr!=NULL" anyways, since ptr is not a boolean value. Its an abuse of the fact that NULL==0 to write "!ptr".

Of course the is scientific consensus about this. Take a look at this: (maybe you are confusing politicians with scientists??) http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2008/07/how_to_talk_to_a_sceptic.php and in particular to this section: http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2006/02/there-is-no-consensus.php where you will find that the following groups endorse the global warming theory:

National Academy of Sciences (United States of America)

Royal Society of Canada

Chinese Academy of Sciences

Academié des Sciences (France)

Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)

Indian National Science Academy

Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)

Science Council of Japan

Russian Academy of Sciences

Royal Society (United Kingdom)

Australian Academy of Sciences

Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts

Caribbean Academy of Sciences

Indonesian Academy of Sciences

Royal Irish Academy

Academy of Sciences Malaysia

Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand

Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

Academia Brasiliera de CiÃncias (Bazil)

...among others.

Definitely take a look at the first link if you want to know how to talk to a global warming sceptic.

Hmm, they "claim to be scientists"? PLEASE! of course the is scientific consensus about global warming. Take a look at this:

All answers for global warming sceptics:

http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2008/07/how_to_talk_to_a_sceptic.php

and in particular to this section:

http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2006/02/there-is-no-consensus.php

where you will find that the following groups endorse the global warming theory:

National Academy of Sciences (United States of America)

Royal Society of Canada

Chinese Academy of Sciences

Academié des Sciences (France)

Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)

Indian National Science Academy

Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)

Science Council of Japan

Russian Academy of Sciences

Royal Society (United Kingdom)

Australian Academy of Sciences

Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts

Caribbean Academy of Sciences

Indonesian Academy of Sciences

Royal Irish Academy

Academy of Sciences Malaysia

Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand

Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

Academia Brasiliera de CiÃncias (Bazil)

...among others.

Definitely take a look at the first link if you want to know how to talk to a global warming sceptic.

Ok, most comments are heavily critizising carbon credits, so, risking being bashed, I will write a little about the goods of carbon credits, from a perspective of a peruvian citizen. First, of course its not the ideal solution. Many in slashdot want either ideal or nothing. The best solution is for factories to stop polluting. However, in the real world, this is not currently achievable, as most of us continue to buy products that we ask those factories to make for us. Factories are just the intermediaries, we are the ones that demand more stuff. if you really want *factories* to stop polluting, *stop buying* their stuff, reduce, reuse, and recycle, and have less kids. That said, the Kyoto protocol is at least a starting point, which formalized the mechanism for carbon credits. its a way for factories to continue polluting, BUT with two new advantages: 1) Some countries now put a price on that pollution, and factories now must pay for that, or must reduce their pollution. The best incentive is always money. In Europe this does work. And 2) not only do they have to pay, but that money goes towards projects that are good for the environment. As an example, here in Peru where I live, its actually a good business to plant and maintain a forest, because we get $ from carbon credits. This would have been impossible before Kyoto, and I can tell you first-hand that nobody gives a crap here about forests unless they receive some money in exchange, and the government does nothing to stop deforestation, so its left to private business to do something. In fact our rainforest is being heavily devastated mostly by coca plantations that destroy it. At least the carbon credits offset that a little bit. Hopefully as the cost of a carbon credit goes up, so will the business of making and maintaining forests. I also have a lot of criticism for carbon credits, but nobody was saying what its good for, so I had to.

Are there Darwin awards for websites?