Hope I’ll see some of you at the Space Access conference in Phoenix next month.
[Update at 9:30 AM]
Attendees will get to hear John Carmack talk about cool vehicles like this one.
Hope I’ll see some of you at the Space Access conference in Phoenix next month.
[Update at 9:30 AM]
Attendees will get to hear John Carmack talk about cool vehicles like this one.
Hope I’ll see some of you at the Space Access conference in Phoenix next month.
[Update at 9:30 AM]
Attendees will get to hear John Carmack talk about cool vehicles like this one.
Hope I’ll see some of you at the Space Access conference in Phoenix next month.
[Update at 9:30 AM]
Attendees will get to hear John Carmack talk about cool vehicles like this one.
A fascinating and very useful article on the value of waste. It’s must reading for anyone who wants to entrepreneur on the web, in my opinion. I found the byline amusing:
Chris Anderson (canderson@wired.com) is the editor in chief of Wired and author of The Long Tail
. His next book, FREE, will be published in 2009 by Hyperion.
Will he be giving the book away?
[Via Geek Press]
A fascinating and very useful article on the value of waste. It’s must reading for anyone who wants to entrepreneur on the web, in my opinion. I found the byline amusing:
Chris Anderson (canderson@wired.com) is the editor in chief of Wired and author of The Long Tail
. His next book, FREE, will be published in 2009 by Hyperion.
Will he be giving the book away?
[Via Geek Press]
A fascinating and very useful article on the value of waste. It’s must reading for anyone who wants to entrepreneur on the web, in my opinion. I found the byline amusing:
Chris Anderson (canderson@wired.com) is the editor in chief of Wired and author of The Long Tail
. His next book, FREE, will be published in 2009 by Hyperion.
Will he be giving the book away?
[Via Geek Press]
The snows of Kilimanjaro are back.
Not to mention that the arctic icepack is growing.
Dan Walters writes that the Dems fear train-wreck scenarios.
And I’ll keep the corn popping.
Apparently “identical” twins don’t even have identical genetics:
Identical twins emerge when a zygote — the fertilized egg that develops into an embryo — splits into two embryos. As such, they should have the same genomes. The researchers speculate that as the cells making up each embryo divide over and over again during development in the womb, mistakes occur as dividing cells shuffle copies of their DNA into daughter cells.
But genetic differences between identical twins might also accumulate after development over a twin’s life as well. “I think all our genomes are under constant change,” Bruder told LiveScience.
I think that this has implications for cloning as well. It may not be possible to exactly clone an individual, and the differences could turn out to be quite noticeable.
[Update in the evening]
Per some comments, the key point in this story is that it has long been known that there are differences in twins (personality, eyesight, fingerprints, etc.). But those are things that can arise even from an identical genome. The genes are not a blueprint, but rather a recipe, and even if a recipe is followed carefully, the results are not always guaranteed to be the same. The point of the article is that, contrary to previous theories that obvious differences in twins could be attributed solely to different environments, that the genome itself wasn’t necessarily the same. That is new.
Michael Kinsley has the best take so far on McCain and the New York Times:
I have come under some criticism for my criticism of the New York Times for its criticism of Sen. John McCain. Many readers of last week’s New York Times article about McCain, including me, read that article as suggesting that McCain may have had an affair with a lobbyist eight years ago. The Times, however, has made clear that its story was not about an affair with a lobbyist. Its story was about the possibility that eight years ago, aides to McCain had held meetings with McCain to warn him about the appearance that he might be having an affair with the lobbyist. This is obviously a much more important question. To be absolutely clear: The Times itself was not suggesting that there had been an affair or even that there had been the appearance of an affair. The Times was reporting that there was a time eight years ago when some people felt there might be the appearance of an affair, although others, apparently including McCain himself, apparently felt that there was no such appearance.
Read all.