BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Dissecting flu's deadly weaponry
This BBC summary is very well done. The science is clearly explained, we're given a good historical reference, and the threat outline is relatively balanced. The threat is significant, the key intervention is preventing (as much as possible) simultaneous infection with avian and non-avian flu, but the potential resources to meet this threat are also significant.
One caveat. Yes, mother-nature is the current biothreat champion -- but that's only for today. I think in 10 years we'll be able to outdo nature in self-annihilation, and in 20-30 years those techniques will be available to the terrorist organizations of 2045. The bright side? We probably needn't worry about social security. Maybe that's the real reasoning behind the Bush budgets -- spend now, for tomorrow ...
Monday, December 13, 2004
Sunday, December 12, 2004
19th century Minnesota winters: brutal
City Pages: Cruel and Unusual
Hop back two lifespans, and land in hell. These tales of the brutal winters of the 19th century are a good reminder of the natural state of humanity. We are all wimps compared to the least of these pionners.
BTW, in 1996 we were skiing north of Ely. It wasn't -60F there, but it was darned cold. My ski boot froze solid, and left me with a flaky toe tendon. Sniff.
Hop back two lifespans, and land in hell. These tales of the brutal winters of the 19th century are a good reminder of the natural state of humanity. We are all wimps compared to the least of these pionners.
BTW, in 1996 we were skiing north of Ely. It wasn't -60F there, but it was darned cold. My ski boot froze solid, and left me with a flaky toe tendon. Sniff.
Ideas of the year - NYT Magazine review
The New York Times > Magazine
NYT Magazine does an idea issue -- the fourth in an annual series. The interview with Stephen Hawkings is pretty weak (who came up with such a dumb list of questions?), but it can't all be bad.
NYT Magazine does an idea issue -- the fourth in an annual series. The interview with Stephen Hawkings is pretty weak (who came up with such a dumb list of questions?), but it can't all be bad.
Europe's contribution to the war on terror: dollars for heroin
BBC NEWS | World | South Asia | Afghanistan's opium problem
The Bush administration has a religious devotion to the idea that "markets" are "good". This is particularly ironic in a group that loathes "evolution"; of course both natural selection and market selection are fundamentally the same processes.
In the case of Afghanistan, and the US budget, the market has come up with some ingenious solutions to the problems faced by the Bush administration. I am genuinely curious as to whether Rumsfeld feels these are good solutions.
In the case of the US budget, the devaluation of the US currency seems to be transferring a chunk of the cost of funding our economic additions to europe and asia. This is a diabolically clever maneuver, yet it may have been invented by the market as much as by any Machiavellian operatives in Washington.
In the instance of Afghanistan, the US destroyed the Taleban, but enforced law (more or less) only in the capitol. The rest of the country was divided between warlords and tribes. Market forces were thus able to operate effectively, and the country rapidly rebuilt its primary comparative advantage -- the production of poppies, opium, and heroin for the european and Turkish markets.
Now Afghanistan is floating on a sea of drug dollars. Overall it seems to be doing better than expected. The Afghan people are resourceful, Karzai is a remarkable talent, the US keeps a low profile but has a powerful fighting force. Most of all, though, the money is flowing.
Where does the money to fund Afghanistan come from? Not from foreign governmental aid or investment. It comes from european drug addicts. A market solution.
So Bush, by design or by the genius of the marketplace, has funded the US economy and the post-war rehabilitation of Afghanistan through Europe (war and deficit) and (in the case of the deficit) China.
Fascinating.
PS. That insufferable idiot, David Brooks, wrote in the NYT the other day that we communistic liberals don't "trust" the marketplace. God, that man hurts my teeth. Is his continued existence at the NYT a sophisticated (but pointless) jab at the right? Maybe some eastern elite thinks displaying the idiocy of a "respected" right wing spokesman is a service to the nation.
Nahh, I think it's just another sign of the decay of the NYT. Brooks makes even Safire, now well into his dotage, look, if not good, at least not pointless.
Sigh. Markets are not "good" or "bad". They are the most effective ways of solving local minimization problems using distributed processing. Markets are a computing technique. They are "good" or "bad" in the same way that a particular alogrithm is "good" or "bad". Markets do not have souls, they do not go to Hell or Heaven. Markets are not divine. Markets do not have values or ethics. Markets are good at "solving" problems. People, who (to a working approximation) have to decide if they like the solutions the markets deliver.
The Bush administration has a religious devotion to the idea that "markets" are "good". This is particularly ironic in a group that loathes "evolution"; of course both natural selection and market selection are fundamentally the same processes.
In the case of Afghanistan, and the US budget, the market has come up with some ingenious solutions to the problems faced by the Bush administration. I am genuinely curious as to whether Rumsfeld feels these are good solutions.
In the case of the US budget, the devaluation of the US currency seems to be transferring a chunk of the cost of funding our economic additions to europe and asia. This is a diabolically clever maneuver, yet it may have been invented by the market as much as by any Machiavellian operatives in Washington.
In the instance of Afghanistan, the US destroyed the Taleban, but enforced law (more or less) only in the capitol. The rest of the country was divided between warlords and tribes. Market forces were thus able to operate effectively, and the country rapidly rebuilt its primary comparative advantage -- the production of poppies, opium, and heroin for the european and Turkish markets.
Now Afghanistan is floating on a sea of drug dollars. Overall it seems to be doing better than expected. The Afghan people are resourceful, Karzai is a remarkable talent, the US keeps a low profile but has a powerful fighting force. Most of all, though, the money is flowing.
Where does the money to fund Afghanistan come from? Not from foreign governmental aid or investment. It comes from european drug addicts. A market solution.
So Bush, by design or by the genius of the marketplace, has funded the US economy and the post-war rehabilitation of Afghanistan through Europe (war and deficit) and (in the case of the deficit) China.
Fascinating.
PS. That insufferable idiot, David Brooks, wrote in the NYT the other day that we communistic liberals don't "trust" the marketplace. God, that man hurts my teeth. Is his continued existence at the NYT a sophisticated (but pointless) jab at the right? Maybe some eastern elite thinks displaying the idiocy of a "respected" right wing spokesman is a service to the nation.
Nahh, I think it's just another sign of the decay of the NYT. Brooks makes even Safire, now well into his dotage, look, if not good, at least not pointless.
Sigh. Markets are not "good" or "bad". They are the most effective ways of solving local minimization problems using distributed processing. Markets are a computing technique. They are "good" or "bad" in the same way that a particular alogrithm is "good" or "bad". Markets do not have souls, they do not go to Hell or Heaven. Markets are not divine. Markets do not have values or ethics. Markets are good at "solving" problems. People, who (to a working approximation) have to decide if they like the solutions the markets deliver.
Cheating in sports ...
Cheating Athletes - Who dopes, why they dope, and who it hurts. By Bill Gifford
I think this is comforting nonsense. For female athletes in particular, the benefits of male-like blood chemistry are enormous, enough to take someone from the middle of the pack to the top of the pack. A female athlete has the same basic tissue structure as a male athlete -- all they're missing is some chemistry.
In contrast, this may not be true for young male athletes. I suspect most young ultra-elite male athletes are working near the limits of human tissue structures. Revving the engines may have little effect and may even decrease performance.
Men in their 30s and 40s though, are more like the female situation -- their chemistry is in decline and their core potential may be underutilized. Of course their hearts and vessels may not survive the stress of a youngster's chemistry.
Who are the cheaters? Again, by and large they are not the dominant figures in their sports; they're the the wanna-bes, the almost-weres, and a fair number of has-beens. Indeed, even the 40-year-old Bonds might well have retired by now, far short of Hank Aaron's career home run record. In cycling, at least, there are indications that the most rampant cheating takes place in the amateur ranks, where riders are desperate to make the pros. In the past few years, literally dozens of European amateurs have dropped dead from suspicious causes, some as young as 20 years old.
I think this is comforting nonsense. For female athletes in particular, the benefits of male-like blood chemistry are enormous, enough to take someone from the middle of the pack to the top of the pack. A female athlete has the same basic tissue structure as a male athlete -- all they're missing is some chemistry.
In contrast, this may not be true for young male athletes. I suspect most young ultra-elite male athletes are working near the limits of human tissue structures. Revving the engines may have little effect and may even decrease performance.
Men in their 30s and 40s though, are more like the female situation -- their chemistry is in decline and their core potential may be underutilized. Of course their hearts and vessels may not survive the stress of a youngster's chemistry.
CIA is corrupt and compromised by neocons? So what?
Salon.com News | Dogmatic intelligence
The Atlantic ran an essay on this topic a few months ago; that article detailed this story. It's old news. So Rumsfeld and Cheney steamrolled the CIA. So Rove/Bush think the CIA is a bunch of intellectuals who yearned for Kerry. So one of our nation's primary defenses has been degraded by our government, leaving us in a persistent state of delusion.
Who cares?
Not me. I'm moving to another planet as soon as my ship arrives ...
A senior CIA analyst who was once decorated for his work on weapons proliferation in the Middle East has accused the spy agency of ruining his career as punishment for his refusal to adhere to official prewar 'dogma' on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. In a lawsuit filed in a U.S. district court, the unnamed agent, described as a 22-year veteran of the agency's counterproliferation department, accuses his former supervisors of demanding that he alter his intelligence reporting to conform to the views of CIA management in the run-up to the war on Iraq.
The action marks the first time the CIA, which proclaimed that Saddam Hussein had stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, has been publicly accused by one of its employees of exerting pressure to produce reports that would help the Bush administration make its case to go to war on Saddam. However, one former CIA employee said the process described by the analyst -- pressure and retaliation -- was a familiar bureaucratic response to agents who did not conform.
The agent's refusal to tailor his reports had, he claims, a disastrous effect on a career that had previously been marked by regular promotions and a CIA medal for the operative's recruitment of moles who penetrated a nuclear weapons program in another Middle Eastern country. 'The complaint alleges that there was a prewar dogma at the CIA concerning weapons of mass destruction, and my client's reports were contrary to the dogma,' said Roy Krieger, who represents the agent. 'My client was told to conform to the dogma. He refused and retribution followed.'
The Atlantic ran an essay on this topic a few months ago; that article detailed this story. It's old news. So Rumsfeld and Cheney steamrolled the CIA. So Rove/Bush think the CIA is a bunch of intellectuals who yearned for Kerry. So one of our nation's primary defenses has been degraded by our government, leaving us in a persistent state of delusion.
Who cares?
Not me. I'm moving to another planet as soon as my ship arrives ...
Rice Park rink -- refrigerated outdoor skating in Saint Paul
Capital City Partnership - Saint Paul, MN
Great spot for a date!
An outdoor, mechanically chilled ice skating rink, Wells Fargo WinterSkate, has opened in Landmark Plaza next to the Landmark Center and Rice Park in downtown St. Paul at 6th Street and St. Peter Street. It will be open for skating, hockey, and broomball through late February.
Skating is FREE to everyone and hours of operation include:
Tuesdays & Thursdays: 5:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. St. Paul Co-Ed Broomball League
Fridays: 5:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. Weekend Open Skate
Saturdays:
11:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. Family Open Skate
3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. Hockey and Figure Skating Clinics by Minnesota Wild and St. Paul Skating Club
5:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. Weekend Open Skate
Sundays:
11:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. Open Skate-"Waltz on Water" sponsored by MPR
3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. Hockey and Figure Skating Clinics by Minnesota Wild and St. Paul Figure Skating Club
5:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. Weekend Open Skate
The rink can be reserved for Mondays thru Thursdays from 4:00 pm to 9:00 pm.
Admission is free. A warming tent, skate rental, and concession stand are on-site. Skate rental is $2, free for Wells Fargo customers who show their check card or credit card.
Great spot for a date!
Saturday, December 11, 2004
Why did Kerick withdraw?
Kerik withdraws from homeland security nomination
Yeah, sure, nanny stuff. Not to mentiona very spotty record in Saudi Arabia, some serious suspicion about his earnings, and no evidence that the guy was good at what he did. Most of all, weren't there some recent high level resignations in homeland security? I wonder if the guys that do the real work were in panic mode. Kerik looked like a ridiculous choice.
The real loser, as Emily says, is Giuliani. He'd pushed Kerik relentlessly. Bush is not a forgiving man. Giuliani has a lot to make up for.
Yeah, sure, nanny stuff. Not to mentiona very spotty record in Saudi Arabia, some serious suspicion about his earnings, and no evidence that the guy was good at what he did. Most of all, weren't there some recent high level resignations in homeland security? I wonder if the guys that do the real work were in panic mode. Kerik looked like a ridiculous choice.
The real loser, as Emily says, is Giuliani. He'd pushed Kerik relentlessly. Bush is not a forgiving man. Giuliani has a lot to make up for.
Thursday, December 09, 2004
Why is Japan always the future?
ASIAN POP The Gadget Gap / Why does all the cool stuff come out in Asia first?
Young Japanese are tech crazy. It's not clear that their behavior increases income or leisure time, it seems to be that high tech devices are an end in themselves.
I wonder how much this is driven by the pervasive reality of Japanese existence -- limited space. Tech gadgets, especially those sold in Japan, consume very little space.
And so the Japanese gizmo market is far ahead of our boring, dull, tech market. Always has been, always will be. It's not clear to me that even the Koreans or Chinese will ever be as excited by novel gadgets.
By comparison, Americans are far ahead in ..... gasoline and fat consumption? Political bloviation? Hmmm.
Here in the U.S., corporate buying tends to drive innovation -- technology goes where business wants it to go. In Japan, technology is largely driven by individual consumers. They save a lot, but when they spend, they buy the best. I mean, Louis Vuitton racks up over a third of its total global sales in Japan, and that's true for a lot of the luxury brands.'
Young Japanese are tech crazy. It's not clear that their behavior increases income or leisure time, it seems to be that high tech devices are an end in themselves.
I wonder how much this is driven by the pervasive reality of Japanese existence -- limited space. Tech gadgets, especially those sold in Japan, consume very little space.
And so the Japanese gizmo market is far ahead of our boring, dull, tech market. Always has been, always will be. It's not clear to me that even the Koreans or Chinese will ever be as excited by novel gadgets.
By comparison, Americans are far ahead in ..... gasoline and fat consumption? Political bloviation? Hmmm.
Walter Mossberg is fed up with Windows XP, he prefers OS X
Personal Technology -- Personal Technology from The Wall Street Journal.
Interesting. Mossberg is very powerful in the PC world, his WSJ column is widely read. This week he rips into Microsoft, claiming that XP and IE's security issues have made XP a step backwards from Windows 98. Instead he favors Apple. I think he overstates the stability of OS X however -- Apple has a lot of work to do with their QA process for patch releases.
Meanwhile, the company's historic rival, Apple Computer, has been making giant strides in ease of use. The Macintosh, with its OS X operating system, is rock solid. It is elegant, and -- when you do a feature-by-feature price comparison with Windows competitors -- it's surprisingly affordable.
The Mac is also packed with extras that Windows lacks. It has a suite of easy, free, multimedia programs that can't be matched on Windows at any price. It has a better free browser and e-mail program than Windows. It can read and create PDF files without requiring the purchase of any extra software.
Apple upgrades its operating system far more often than Microsoft does. The company's new iMac G5 model is the single best desktop computer I have ever reviewed. And Apple is the only computer company whose business is focused on consumers and small businesses.
Best of all, the current Mac operating system has never been attacked by a successful virus, and almost no spyware can run on it. This is largely because the Mac's small market share presents an unattractive target for digital criminals. But it's partly because the Mac operating system is harder to penetrate. I'm sure there will eventually be viruses that afflict Mac users, but nowhere near the 5,000 new Windows viruses that appeared in just the first six months of this year.
In terms of ease of use, Apple has opened a greater lead over Microsoft than at any time since the late 1980s, when the Mac was pioneering the graphical user interface and Microsoft users were stuck with crude, early versions of Windows.
Interesting. Mossberg is very powerful in the PC world, his WSJ column is widely read. This week he rips into Microsoft, claiming that XP and IE's security issues have made XP a step backwards from Windows 98. Instead he favors Apple. I think he overstates the stability of OS X however -- Apple has a lot of work to do with their QA process for patch releases.
Wednesday, December 08, 2004
Our glorious leader
221104bilboard.jpg (JPEG Image, 500x245 pixels)
I've seen the light. I repent. I embrace GWB as my leader. Honest.
I've seen the light. I repent. I embrace GWB as my leader. Honest.
Rat brain flies plane -- organic neural network
William Gibson
When I was a youngster at CIT, one of my profs, a Dr. Hudspeth, was keen on neural networks. Back then those were arrays of silicon. Later neural networks were emulated in software. Now we build them from ... neural networks.
Gibson's blog post on this piece is a mini-snapshot of the near future.
A few months ago I posted on another use of rat brains, that time more of an intact structure. Or maybe it was a fly's neural network. Heck, I can't keep track any more.
I feel the dank chill of the nearing Singularity ...
Florida scientists have grown a brain in a petri dish and taught it to fly a fighter plane.
The "brain", grown from 25,000 neural cells extracted from a single rat embryo, has been taught to fly an F-22 jet simulator by scientists at the University of Florida. It was taught to control the flight path, even in mock hurricane-strength winds...
When I was a youngster at CIT, one of my profs, a Dr. Hudspeth, was keen on neural networks. Back then those were arrays of silicon. Later neural networks were emulated in software. Now we build them from ... neural networks.
Gibson's blog post on this piece is a mini-snapshot of the near future.
A few months ago I posted on another use of rat brains, that time more of an intact structure. Or maybe it was a fly's neural network. Heck, I can't keep track any more.
I feel the dank chill of the nearing Singularity ...
God created the parathyroid to challenge our faith
BBC NEWS | Health | Gill theory of human glands
Can't be evolution in action. Must be a ploy by God to detect those of weak faith.
The human parathyroid glands, which regulate the level of calcium in the blood, probably evolved from the gills of fish, say researchers. ...
... The researchers supported their theory by carrying out experiments comparing the parathyroid gland of chickens and mice and the gills of zebrafish and dogfish.
They found both develop from the same type of tissue in the embryo, called the pharyngeal pouch endoderm.
Both structures also express a gene called Gcm-2, which is crucial for their proper development.
The researchers also found a gene for parathyroid hormone in fish, and they discovered that this gene is expressed in the gills.
Professor Graham said: 'The parathyroid gland and the gills of fish are related structures and likely share a common evolutionary history.
'This new research suggests that in fact, our gills are still sitting in our throats - disguised as our parathyroid glands.'
Can't be evolution in action. Must be a ploy by God to detect those of weak faith.
Sequencing dinosaur DNA -- the jungle fowl
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Chicken gives up genetic secrets
Yes, scales. As in dinosaur scales. Keen sense of smell -- like dinosaurs. It will be interesting to compare these sequences to other legacies of the dinosaur era. Although humans have more base-pairs, the number of genes between bird and man are remarkably similar. Does this mean we are of roughly equal complexity? I wonder how much of the DNAis apparently non-coding? There's going to be a heck of a lot of fascinating science coming from this ...
Scientists have published a detailed analysis of the chicken genome, the biochemical "code" in the bird's cells that makes the animal what it is.
... The primary subject for the study was the red jungle fowl (Gallus gallus), the wild species from which domestic poultry was bred several thousand years ago.
... There are about 1.1 billion base-pairs in the chicken genome wound into 40 distinct bundles, or chromosomes. Written in the DNA are roughly 20-23,000 genes ... In the human genome, there are 3 billion base-pairs and 20-25,000 genes ...
... The analysis reveals that just 2.5% of the human code can be matched to chicken DNA.
It is an important finding. This small portion contains genes that have been largely preserved over the 310 million years since humans and birds shared a common ancestor.
... On a pure research level, though, there are some real gems in the chicken genome.
These include the realisation that the birds have a keen sense of smell. Scientists can also see genes related specifically to feathers, claws and scales - code sequences that are absent in humans.
Yes, scales. As in dinosaur scales. Keen sense of smell -- like dinosaurs. It will be interesting to compare these sequences to other legacies of the dinosaur era. Although humans have more base-pairs, the number of genes between bird and man are remarkably similar. Does this mean we are of roughly equal complexity? I wonder how much of the DNAis apparently non-coding? There's going to be a heck of a lot of fascinating science coming from this ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)