Lab Monkey

Eric Suh. Graduate Student. Simian with opposable thumbs.

Drop him a line.

Evolution always wins. Always.

If you don’t pay your respects to natural selection and the population biologists that study it, you’ll get burned:

So a scientific advisory panel urged the Environmental Protection Agency to strengthen the second line of defense against resistance, and demand large refuges on non-Bt corn. They proposed that farmers be allowed to plant Bt corn with this new gene on no more than half of their corn acres.

Monsanto argued that such a large refuge wasn’t necessary, and the EPA agreed. In 2003, the agency decided to allow farmers to plant this new product on 80 percent of their corn acres.

The scientists who called for caution now are saying “I told you so,” because there are signs that a new strain of resistant rootworms is emerging.

(via @BoraZ)

The Reason Android is Laggy

I am not an Android developer, so I have no way to verify what this guy is saying. That said, it does sound quite plausible:

It’s not GC pauses. It’s not because Android runs bytecode and iOS runs native code. It’s because on iOS all UI rendering occurs in a dedicated UI thread with real-time priority. On the other hand, Android follows the traditional PC model of rendering occurring on the main thread with normal priority.

[….]

This is the same reason why Windows Mobile 6.5, Blackberry OS, and Symbian have terrible touch screen performance. Like Android, they were not designed to prioritise UI rendering. Since the iPhone’s release, RIM, Microsoft, and Nokia have abandoned their mobile OS’s and started from scratch. Android is the only mobile OS left that existed pre-iPhone.

Patient sues dentist over gag order, gets Medical Justice to backtrack

a.k.a. scoundrels get their just deserts:

The filing is a class-action lawsuit, representing Lee and all other Makhnevich patients who have signed Medical Justice-style contracts. It asks the court to declare that forcing patients to sign the contract constitutes a breach of “fiduiary duty and violations of dental ethics.” It also argues that the contract deceives patients by promising not to use patient information for marketing purposes, despite the fact that (according to the complaint) such disclosures are already barred under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. And it asks the court to declare that the contract is unconscionable and void under New York law.

As for the copyright claims, the complaint asks the court to declare that, even if the copyright assignment is valid, the posting of the reviews is allowed by copyright’s fair use doctrine.

Finally, it seeks a declaration that Lee’s online posts are nondefamatory, and it seeks compensation for Makhnevich’s failure to submit the insurance paperwork as promised.