The reason for the 50 years of oil, as I heard it explained, is that this is how far ahead the oil companies plan. They look for enough oil to cover the timeframe they plan for. When they have that covered, they don’t look, until they need more. When they need more, they go and find it.
I use Pocketbook. It opens just about anything - epub, mobi, pdf, pdb, and many more formats. Just get a book anywhere and copy it via USB. Or send it as an email attachment to your special address and it will download automatically. You can even replace the reading app with another relatively easily, if you want.
Frankly? Yes, a bit. I wouldn’t have expected Tesla to make it that high and I would expect Google somewhere near the top. And I guess it focused only on american companies, or I would be much more surprised.
Oh, that sounds reasonable.
Thank you! It looks like it needs more people for more excitement, but on the other hand, one-man projects look possible. Should be fun :-)
So… What is it exactly?
This seems like a great source, thanks a lot for posting it.
I didn’t read the original paper yet, perhaps it’s there, but it isn’t in the linked article nor its source Ars Technica article. Can authors themselves upload their papers to these archives, and if so, how to do it correctly to make it findable both by DOI and other means? Does anyone know?
I see. You can open just about anything, something like 18 formats, it’s on their website. I prefer epub, but it can open Kindle’s mobi etc. That’s why I bought it, I got a large library of pdbs.
I have Touch HD 3, I had some Touch Lux before. I had it for a while, don’t know their newest models. But yes, not only would I buy it again, I already did, just bought a newer version. Unless I was looking for something for hand note taking, I wouldn’t change. What I dislike is that when you break the screen, it’s expensive to replace, so I just bought a new one instead. Nothing you wouldn’t be used to from phones. And I’d very much like to have an option to disable the touch layer of the screen by long press of one of the physical buttons, but it’s a minor issue. What I like is the tunable intensity and colour temperature of the light and I’m quite happy with everything else. You can upload books by sending them as an attachment to a special email. If you don’t like the interface for reading the books, you can even quite easily replace it with Cool reader. I tried it before, but I didn’t do it in the newest one. You can use dictionaries, some are preinstalled, or use notes and highlights, but I don’t have experience with that.
I agree with the other reply that pdfs are terrible for e-readers. That being said, Pocketbooks can open them (which is not that common) and it is possible to read them, although it isn’t so comfortable, especially for A4 pdfs. It can also open wide range of other formats and I’m quite happy with it in general. You can connect it to a computer and simply copy your books there, among other means of getting books there. But I have to say I have no first hand experience with competition.
deleted by creator
Wow, thank you, this is a great source! So less than 90% of the income is used to run the companies and do all the R&D. Honestly, that’s less than I thought and shows how greedy they are. If I read it right, they are more profitable than other large companies. Wow. So a state-owned non-profit pharma company could in theory produce new medicine 10 % cheaper and still be fine. Provided that state-owned company could be as efficient as a private one…
You don’t need profit in the sense of making lots of extra money compared to how much money you actually put in. I would be very interested in how much net profit is compared to gross in relative numbers. It’s a lot in absolute numbers, but I suspect not so much in relative. The problem why drug development is so very expensive is that you don’t just pay large sums for the drugs that are developed, but also for all those that are not, because they prove not useful during the testing. And there is way, way more than the successful ones, perhaps 100 to 1? I don’t have numers at hand. So in the end, you have to charge a lot of extra money above the production cost if you want to have enough money to develop any drugs at all.
Of course, that isn’t true for old drugs. Which is a reason why generics are so much cheaper. And also why patents need to exist.
I’m sure pharma companies abuse the system as much as they can, but not as much as it might appear at a first glance.
A state doesn’t have this kind of money to burn. If they did it, the money would have to come from somewhere. So either you increase taxes, decrease spending elsewhere, or start a business making a lot of money. Such as, say, selling the newly developed medications at a markup… It’s sad, but I’m not aware of a better way.
That being said, the cost of medications in the US is utterly ridiculous.
Not as far s I know. Motivating people to go into debt often is not a common policy. At least not in Europe, but I think it’s very unusual worldwide.
I would like just to thank you for writing to title that it’s US-specific. I mean, it was clear by the time I finished the title, but that’s not always the case and I was really glad that you put it there.
I would just add that it’s a gradient of transcription factor(s), proteins that regulate production of other proteins. Some of the regulated proteins are other thranscription factors that create finer gradients, like repeated stripes of gradients. along the initial, single gradient. This can be repeated on multiple levels so that pretty much every point of the body has unique combination of transcription factors. This combination triggers all the other proteins, including structural that create the form of the body. and of course, all this doesn’t just happen in 3D, but also changes with time. It’s complicated.
For illustration and possible direction for some particular interesting cases wrapped in a very entertaining package, I recommend this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydqReeTV_vk
I wonder why I’m being downvoted. I very much welcome discussion. If you want to tell me why I’m wrong, like that cryptochromes cannot be used in sensing magnetic field upon closer look etc., I’d be excited. Disagreement without pointing out any mistakes I did brings me nothing.
If it’s just disbelief, I would’ve preferred being asked for sources. Even wikipedia mentions some of what I wrote (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetoreception) and while I admit my source isn’t primary literature, it is a monography about senses and I would’ve made an effort to track down at least some of the original papers.
That’s the case for most species.
As a very specific and highly functional example of critical viral proteins in other organisms, there wouldn’t be any placental mammals without viruses. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placenta