Let's assume that you mean activation patterns at the level of single cells. Aside from the ethical issues which make it virtually impossible to obtain the full set of data, there is also the fact that the exact timing of expression is one of the major ways in which development produces variability in phenotype and so can vary wildly between individuals. The closest we have right now might be HUBMAP [0] or HCA [1], but I don't think that those had as objectives covering multiple developmental timepoints.
This is incorrect. You can write a parser for org. See for example https://github.com/tgbugs/laundry. Work toward standardization has been stalled because I (among others) have not had time to circle back to work on it. In part this is because the lack of a standard has not blocked most use cases since emacs is open source and can run almost anywhere.
I wonder if there are existing data sources that could be used to implement an optimal pot hole patching priority lists at scale.
Identify pot hole locations. Combine with traffic metrics for those locations. Then use a combination of some pot hole nuisance metric (size, depth, location in lane, number of cars that could hit it per unit time based on traffic metrics), a cost to repair for a given repair type metric (should include traffic disruption cost estimates), then have an estimate for future degradation if it is not repaired and the cost of that applied at a few time points .... I'm sure there are plenty of implementations of various versions of the algorithm, but I wonder whether there are open data sources ....
A quick search suggests that most approaches are municipality based crowd sourcing efforts. A stream from the radars from various vehicles could provide something that was up-to-date enough to avoid false positives that had already been fixed .... Things like streetview and various aerial photography datasets probably update too slowly ... though I know of some potholes that have existed through multiple recaptures.
I guess the days of citizens grabbing their shovels and going to fix the roads are becoming a thing of the past. Which is a shame because the total cost of asphalt needed to fix most potholes is less than the cost of a single tire repair.
One way to work around the heat dissipation issues in space (and also on earth) is to move to computing systems that operate entirely at cryogenic temperatures to take advantage of superconducting circuitry.
I've heard stories that over a decade ago teams inside hyperscalars had calculated that running completely cryogenically cooled data centers would be vastly cheaper than what we do now due to savings on resistive losses and the cost of eliminating waste heat. You don't have to get rid of heat that you don't generate in the first place.
The issue is that at the moment there are very few IC components and processes that have been engineered to run at cryogenic temperatures. Replicating the entirety of the existing data center stack for cryogenic temps is nowhere near reality.
That said, once you have cryogenic superconducting integrated circuits you could colocate your data centers and your propellant/oxidizer depots. Not exactly "data centers off in deep space" since propoxd tend to be the highest traffic areas.
It is [0]. All the pages are generated from org sources. If you scroll to the bottom of any page there is a link. Also tec used to have an overlay that would show you the org source directly, but ultimately it was decided that it should not be enabled because it required javascript and could be confusing.
This points to a potential answer to a long standing question I've had about why some hairs stop growing at certain lengths. If the force is being generated by cellular migration then control over when to stop growing can be mediated by a signal that tells the cells to stop migrating, and that could be based on time or vibration amplitude or something else that correlates with hair length. For hair that grows continually you just ... never turn off cell migration.
I like to compare these to CENTENNIA [0,1], which was the first program like this that I ever encountered (back in 6th grade). My test, is to see whether the program records the Napoleonic wars. This one does not.
A fully psychometric version of this that explores more than just the fovea could be created by varying the scale parameter (if you crank it up high enough you can see the movement in the periphery). The additional component you would need is to have trials where the subjects has to report whether a particular region (could even be cued with a red circle, I don't think it needs to be random) is actually moving or not while fixated on the center. There are clearly cells that detect this kind of motion in the periphery but they need larger visual input, possibly because the receptive fields of the cells that feed in are larger out there.
One science museum that is not like that is the Deutsches Technikmuseum Berlin, at least when I was there (shudder) about a decade ago.
It was a museum that was designed for parents to explain to children. The written material for any given piece in an exhibit went into sufficient detail and successive sections of writing would build on each other without necessarily requiring that the previous section had been read.
Back then the museum had an exhibition on the longitude problem and time keeping, precision, drift, etc. that walked you through the development of increasingly accurate chronometers, the practical reasons why, etc. It was an absolute masterwork exhibit, and it expected the adults to be actively engaged with helping digest the material with the kids.
I think about this every single time I drive by a stretch of road that has these. You can't have public goods when the value of those goods in private hands is greater than the risk of, ahrm, converting those public goods into private goods.
When a society fails to provide sufficient opportunity for all its members then those who have been left behind can simply make up the difference by retrieving their share of the common wealth by other means.
The cost of trying to police this (ignoring entirely the moral and ethical implications of such policing) at the scale of e.g. all roads with guardrails is more than the value if replacing the rails, and likely substantially more than just providing the missing opportunity and removing the sources of wealth inequality that make wealth redistribution in the form of guard rails an inevitability.
I'm going to ignore the issues of mind/body dualism since they are
orthogonal to the argument I want to make about Nagel's bat.
The short version is that if we can approximate the sensory experience
and the motor experience of an organism, and we can successively
refine that approximation as measured by similarity in behavior
between bat and man-bad, then I would argue that we can in fact
imagine what it is like to be a bat.
In short, it is a Chinese Bat Room argument. If you put a human
controlling a robot bat and a bat in two boxes and then ask someone to
determine which is the human and which is the bat, when science can no
longer tell the difference (because we have refined the human/bat
interface sufficiently) you can ask the human controlling the robot
bat to write down their experience and it would be strikingly similar
to what the bat would say if we could teach it English.
The bat case is actually easier than one might suppose, similarly say,
a jumping spider, because we can translate their sensory inputs to our
nervous system and if we tune our reward system and motor system so
that we can get even an approximate set of inputs and similar set of
actuators, then we can experience what it is like to be a bat.
Further, if I improve the fidelity of the experimental man-bat
simulation rig, the experience will likewise converge. While we will
not be able to truly be a bat since that is asymptotically mutually
exclusive with our biology, the fact that we can build systems that
allow progressive approach to bat sensory motor experience means that
we actually do have the ability to image the experience of other
beings. That is, our experiences are converging and differ only due to
our lack of our technical ability to overcome the limitations of our
biological differences.
The harder case is when we literally don't have the molecule that is
used to detect something, as in the tetrachormat case. That said one
of my friends has always wanted to find a way to do an experiment
where a trichromat can somehow have the new photo receptor expressed
in one eye and see what happens.
The general argument about why we would expect something similar to
happen should the technical hurdles be overcome is because basically
all nervous systems wire themselves up by learning. Therefore, as long
as the input and output ranges can be mapped to something that a human
can learn, then a human nervous system should likewise converge to be
able to sense and produce those inputs and outputs (modulo certain
critical periods in neural development, though even those can be
overcome, e.g. language acquisition by slowing down speech for adults).
Some technical hurdle examples. Converting a trichromat into a
tetrachormat by crispering someone's left eye. Learning dolphin by
slowing down dolphin speech in time while also providing a way for
humans to produce dolphin high frequency speech via some transform on
the human orofacial vocal system. There are limitations when we can't
literally dilate time, but I supposed if we are going all the way, we
can accelerate the human to the fraction of the speed of light that
will compensate for the fact that the human motor system can't quite
operate fast enough to allow a rapid fire conversation with a dolphin.
0. https://portal.hubmapconsortium.org/ 1. https://data.humancellatlas.org/