The problem is (b) changes over time.
The ongoing research into DNA (for example) is revealing processes and mechanisms which now make certain propositiions previously dismissed using your criteria at least "not impossible".
I have no problem with using a quick'n'dirty filter to go over such things. The problems start when you don't update it.
Arthur C. Clarke had it spot on when asked what it was that seemed to drive new ideas.
"Old people die."
I love a good statistical anomaly before lunch. Brian
Still not sure what data you are worrying about. Name, address, phone number, email are essentially public domain. Date of birth is not all that concealed.
Blood group, some medical history, DNA: not much interest to "commercial" hackers. I don't see drug companies targeting me personally if they did get through anonymisation.
I don't disagree that there is a bit of a minefield out there with medical (and social) records. But I can see some good epidemiology coming out of BioBank in the long term.
Most farmers these days are very tech-savvy and business-minded. They have to be.
Bill
That's why the global warming fiasco will continue until the proponents retire.
It was the same with plate tectonics. It needed the old geologists to go before it could be accepted.
Bill
Or all the glaciers start growing again, along with the polar ice caps.
Doubtless someone will be along shortly to deny there being any possibility of either melting glaciers or polar ice-caps. Just another hoax perpetrated using photoshopped images, very convincing polystyrene models, carefully faked meteorological data and bribed media executives.
michael adams
...
I hope your chickens are aware of this..
Climate change is scientifically, and linguistically much more accurate.
I wonder if any pennys are dropping amongst those who keep such quantities of animals in such close proximity and the potential damage so doing poses the rest of the world ... that it might not be such a good idea?
Cheers, T i m
I remember pointing out to a young lady I knew well many years ago that she definitely had biorhythms at a 28 day cycle - but it wasn't _exactly_ 28 days... which made the calculations useless.
She was quite put out by my mentioning it. Even though we were on the same Biology degree course.
Andy
Yup. It's like all those who don't believe in brain lateralisation when anyone having a stroke generally demonstrates it perfectly. That's not to say that the two hemispheres can't also cover the roles that would normally be ... or be focused in the other (by default), because often they can. The disbelievers just work from the generic artistic / logical stereotype and (or the left brainers anyway) can't see how it could work. Functional MRI scans are starting to see it though ... and who knows how much better they might when the technology improves. [1]
Yup. ... <sigh>. Just like diets or many things where we can react differently. They also refer to chimps to prove (or disprove, whatever their crusade) something when genetics also provides for 'outlier's ... that don't really fit the general rules (and so are neither proof nor indication of anything solid).
Bingo. ;-)
Just because science thinks it can prove or fully understands something, doesn't always mean it actually can or does, *yet*.
Cheers, T i m
[1] As a sort of aside on that, I was looking at ANPR solutions. Nothing heavy, just a RPi based experiment. Standing on the shoulders of giants it's interesting to see all the steps from (real-time) image capture to valid content isolation, image post processing, OCR and data presentation. Not something one might have thought possible from something that small a few years ago. ;-)
It's not the open data, it's the closed data which can be associated with the individual.
No?
I tried a quick check to see if anything particularly important has come out UK Biobank in the 14 years since its inception (or perhaps only 8 years since the data have become available for researchers). Something which has introduced new, or changed and improved current therapy, for example. I couldn't find anything, but maybe I was expecting too much.
No, it just means they can include unusual cold events in the scam, as well.
Climate changes. It's what it does.
And is subtle in a very Orwellian fashion: 'All animals are equal' >>
'All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others'
One's weather; the others climate.
One's specific; the others an average.
michael adams
...
It looks like you're struggling to find problems that are not there.
We've been part of the research since UK Biobank's inception and have no qualms about what is done and how it's done.
7.8 Billion people are quite capable of doing plenty of damage on their own.
Hardly - until yesterday I didn't even know the Biobank existed. I think it will take more than a day to find anything positive or negative about it.
Fine.
Of course, but outside of other / previous catastrophic events (eg, not the burning of all the fossil fuels that took millions of years to lay down in just over 100 and most long before we were here) when has the earth seen a 'change of use' to the levels it's currently seeing?
Cheers, T i m
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required