Comment Re:Good (Score 1) 11
What evil? Solving violent crime is evil now? Did I wake up in the dark mirror universe or something?
What evil? Solving violent crime is evil now? Did I wake up in the dark mirror universe or something?
First off, fuck you. Second what's your beef with Axon? Got caught on camera doing something nefarious?
I'm on a budget I can only afford brown/black agents. Hey I don't make the rules ok.
That started in the late ’80s and ’90s, when Microsoft discovered you could ship software the way a raccoon ships garbage: everywhere, immediately, full of bugs, and with zero intention of coming back for it. Shame was deprecated. Embarrassment got a service pack and was never seen again.
Then the frameworks showed up. Visual Basic. PowerBuilder. Tools designed so that if your IQ matched room temperature, you could still drag a button onto a form and ruin someone’s afternoon. Coding was no longer a profession. It was a hobby you could pick up between meetings and a mild head injury.
The real extinction event was Java, especially its GUI framework. Swing didn’t just lower the bar. It buried the bar, held a funeral, and invited the criminally unwell and the sadistic business analyst to give the eulogy. Suddenly anyone with a corporate login and a grudge could produce “software” (term used the way “artisan” is used on a gas-station sandwich) that your overlord would then force the entire building to click until their souls filed a ticket.
Remember that?
99.9% of that can be solved with allowing the construction of new designs of reactors instead of booting the old ones back up.
Ironically, restoring the old methylation pattern may increase, not decrease, the risk of cancer. Here's why. When you get older, the risk of a cell's DNA accumulating damage increases. Sometimes, this damage can provide the mutations to make the cell cancerous. In order to prevent that, the cell silences gene expression by methylating sections of the DNA. Reference: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fa...
Now when you go and do a fool thing like "restore the reduced DNA methylation patterns typically found in young cells" (without repairing the damaged DNA)
Upon reading the paper I quickly realized, predictably, that it's all baloney. By new heart they mean methylation patterns imprinted in the DNA. Is methylation anything to give a shit about when it comes to the heart? Most likely no. At best you could fool someone like Peter Thiel I suppose. What makes your heart give out is muscle wasting and narrowed or cholesterol'd up blood vessels
I didn't know I was so interesting there'd be 12 GB of shit on me.
If this is timesharing, give me my share right now.