Reblogged:Friday Hodgepodge

[Gus Van Horn blog]

Four Random Things

1. In the course of listening to this Genetic Literacy Project podcast, I learned that we have the technology to make CRISPR-edited hypoallergenic cats.

Luddites and regulations stand in the way of this getting to market, of course, but in the meantime, there is a cat food that helps neutralize the allergenic protein in cat saliva. (This is the same protein that would get edited out for the "CRISPR critters," as Kevin Folta and Cameron English put it on their excellent podcast.):

Image by Alex.g, via Wikimedia Commons, public domain.

Focusing on the root cause of the allergen, the Purina team set out to create a nutritional cat food that could neutralize this protein in a cat's saliva, essentially stopping it in its tracks.

By adding a specific protein sourced from egg to the ingredients in Pro Plan LiveClear, Satyaraj's team devised a way for that protein to bind to Fel d 1 and neutralize it -- while not altering the cat's physiology at all. By switching over to this diet, cats could groom to their heart's content without spreading as much active Fel d 1 onto their hair, or more importantly, into the environment shared with their owners. [link added]

The Van Horn family might be back in the cat business soon. My mildly allergic wife and very allergic mother-in-law will appreciate this product.

2. Here is the best short description of how and why the user experiences of Windows and MacOS differ:

Mac OS has always been an application switching interface, and Windows has been a window switching interface. Takes getting used to the paradigm shift.

I use Windows rarely and MacOS almost never, so this will help me remember how to navigate MacOS the next time I encounter it.

3. The last rabbit hole I fell into yielded the following from a list of "(almost) company sinking engineering mistakes:"

A telling incident: the company needed to deploy an emergency fix to the mobile app. The only machine authorized to publish to the app store was a laptop that the owner of the acquired company had left at home overseas. To complete the deploy, he needed to call his wife and walk her through the publication process over the phone.

File that one under big opportunity for some; sign that it's time to leave for most.

4. During a recent Disney trip, we stayed in a resort hotel themed on the Cars movies. After passing a Chevron station on the way home, I recalled the cars from the Techron campaign and, realizing I didn't remember very well what they looked like, looked them up.

I also found an interesting explanation for why Pixar didn't base the Cars franchise on the Chevron cars -- to which Disney also has the rights:

From the very beginning of this project, John Lasseter had it in his mind to have the eyes be in the windshield. For one thing, it separates our characters from the more common approach where you have little cartoon eyes in the headlights. For another, he thought that having the eyes down near the mouth at the front end of the car made the character feel more like a snake. With the eyes set in the windshield, the point of view is more human-like, and made it feel like the whole car could be involved in the animation of the character.

Until then, I didn't realize Disney owned the Chevron cars, either.

It's getting to the point that it might be easier to list what the company doesn't own.

-- CAV

Link to Original