I haven’t had a chance to look through some of the new predictions, but I know there were some issues with predicting the structure for membrane bound proteins previously. PDB hardly contains any.
Does the new set of predictions contain a bunch of membrane bound protiens?
Why would he be very far from that? Also, I haven't read the book but from the synapsis it doesn't seem particularly disruptive.
He already has ships named Of Course I Still Love You, Just Read the Instructions, A Shortfall of Gravitas. If anything, I'd expect him to name a ship No More Mr Nice Guy or Falling Outside The Normal Moral Constraints, or for that matter, the Mistake Not My Current State Of Joshing Gentle Peevishness For The Awesome And Terrible Majesty Of The Towering Seas Of Ire That Are Themselves The Milquetoast Shallows Fringing My Vast Oceans Of Wrath
War on a scale that deserves a ship name from the Culture is as yet out of reach for humanity. Didn't the "Mistake Not ..." (or one of its siblings) slice a star in half at one point? There's also a point in Excession where one of the Minds notes that a point blank supernova is not really problematic for ships of its class.
Musk was re using ships from Iain Banks’ Culture series where ships are sentient.
Voice Of The Whirlwind is from The Expanse series, where a human colony finds ancient aliens tech and builds a class of warship called the Magnetar-class shops. They use an intense magnetic weapon to literally dissociate an Earth station as a show of force.
I've read one book in that series, "Surface Detail", and really enjoyed it. I tried reading the first one in the series and got bored... any others in the series you can strongly recommend? Player of Games maybe?
My opinion: The Player of Games was kind of lousy. It sounds like you haven't read Consider Phlebas, which is the first book in the series (at least according to Audible). That was pretty good.
Depends on what you like. I remember Consider Phlebas as a series of vignettes, while Player of Games is a coherent story. I like the coherent stories and also think Excession is quite good.
It’s entirely possible I don’t understand how technology works, but I don’t understand how some sort of government encryption backdoor of various protocols would work.
Software, devices, protocols etc are not just used in a single country. They are used worldwide. If a backdoor needs to be supported for a several dozen governments, each with various levels of security practices, there’s no way it stays secret for long. It’s only a matter of time before a country or state like Georgia gets it’s old poorly configured IT infrastructure hacked and the attackers now have access to some backdoor keys. How do governments revoke old keys and create new ones across all applicable devices? It’d be pretty hard to do that without going to companies and saying “fix” or “get me that” with some type of warrant or court order. That is kinda like what we have now which is mostly limited user information located in the cloud somewhere.
I think the larger issue is that there is a coordinated push to get complete government access to everything. This is happening at a time where dystopian surveillance is not only quickly becoming possible, but also profitable. The government has the right to pretty much everything legally, but the potential for misuse in situations where the government gets access everything is really high. The ability for citizens to combat that misuse is reduced the more government gets.
This is my understanding of things. Let me know how I’m wrong.
It's not really about backdoors; they just want everything to go through servers which will archive unencrypted copies of everything so that it can be subpoenaed later.
Maybe excess energy could be used to recycle limited and precious elements from landfills via Santa Claus machine-like disassembly with very hot plasma. Horribly energy inefficient but may be useful in some situations.
Disclaimer: I’m not a scientist, but I want to be.
For things like cancer cells which from a cell surface perspective, can look a lot like healthy cells, I don’t know how one only modifies DNA/RNA expression in only cancer cells. It would have to be all cells with maybe some cellular diagnosis logic in the DNA/RNA itself. Even then cancer evolves. It would have to done multiple times with something like cell descendents information.
Targeting doesn’t have to occur at the cell surface does it?
Perhaps something like introducing tumour suppressor genes to every cell. They’ll have no effect on healthy cells yet detect “badness” in cancerous cells and terminate them.
I think the author is just another oh so popular mainframe evangelist as he's stated. He could have easily made the same case for any properly managed distributed system.
Where I disagree with him is that I don't think right out of college professionals should be working in a mainframe environment. As a person who has spent the past 3.5 years (right out of college) working in mainframe capacity planning and performance, I think mainframe technology can be pretty niche and I very nervously wonder if my very specific mainframe systems engineering experience will translate anywhere else. I feel as though getting a new tech professional started in their career would be better in an environment that is popular and they are familiar with, and then working from there.
I'm a Systems Engineer Currently doing work in Mainframe Performance and capacity planning. I've got a background in analysis/math, but I'm looking for more of a Data Engineer or software development role. I'd be open to other possibilities as well.
I'm not OP, but what about the realm outside of rational protien design? DNA base paring rules are pretty well understood and we should be able to build useful tools using them. Is there any work out there using only for computation?
Yep - and because DNA's base pairing rules are so well-studied, so predictable, and information-carying, we can use DNA for its material properties in addition to or even separate from its genetic properties. In terms of software, Shawn Douglas built CADNano [1] - software to do precisely that. By using DNA as a material it can be useful in its own right - with all sorts of interesting 3D structures, 3D logic, and with atomic precision, built into the encoded base pairs. But these structures generally do not interact with DNA at a genetic level in an organism.
In terms of protein design at that atomic level, the computation traditionally has relied on knowing or guessing at the structure (atomic arrangement) of the protein. And without that, there's not much to do (that's where our work picks up). A lot of that kind of protein design computation work is being done with software like Rosetta [2].
They come in waves and go away when ad exchanges figure out how to block them. It isn't usually tied to a single publisher, as they are bought and sold across ad exchanges that reach most of the ad funded web. They are extremely difficult for even manual reviewers to spot and reproduce, so the whole industry works to stop them together. Then new ones pop up.
Does the new set of predictions contain a bunch of membrane bound protiens?