News of the day

Atavachron wrote: That's an obnoxious, rather unneighborly article, ay?

Buncha hosers.



Edited by Slartibartfast - December 30 2011 at 08:44

Slart, just curious how  do the Fox ratings compare to MSNBC head to head?  Any idea?

Hackers plan space satellites to combat censorship By David Meyer - Technology reporter Computer hackers plan to take the internet beyond the reach of censors by putting their own communication satellites into orbit. The scheme was outlined at the Chaos Communication Congress in Berlin. The project's organisers said the Hackerspace Global Grid will also involve developing a grid of ground stations to track and communicate with the satellites. Longer term they hope to help put an amateur astronaut on the moon. Hobbyists have already put a few small satellites into orbit - usually only for brief periods of time - but tracking the devices has proved difficult for low-budget projects. The hacker activist Nick Farr first put out calls for people to contribute to the project in August. He said that the increasing threat of internet censorship had motivated the project. "The first goal is an uncensorable internet in space. Let's take the internet out of the control of terrestrial entities," Mr Farr said. [...]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16367042

Poll Finds "Progressive" is the Most Positively Viewed Political Label in America

The Doctor wrote: 67% view progressive positively, yet 62% view conservative positively ().  Conclusion:  Some conservatives don't know what progressive means, or some progressives don't know what conservative means.

Neither label makes much sense really (unless you are talking about conservative economic policies).

Scientists grow mouse sperm in laboratory.

They hope to extend this to human sperm to diminish infertility obviously. The article only briefly mentions the biggest issue I see which is possible genetic damage to the material. I'm too lazy to do a literature search right now to see what the study actually has to say about this.


EDIT:

Another cool linky, Scientific American ranks the most science friendly GOP candidates.

The short list,

1)  Newt
2)  Romney
3)  Paul

I think Newt represents a guy who just read a lot of comic books and more a caricature of science, but I don't really disagree so much with the list.


Edited by Equality 7-2521 - January 03 2012 at 08:54

so the next Moon landing will happen under a Santorum lead White House, or shal we say Mars landing

Mice No Match for Mountain Dew - ABC News

wow.

Well I for one rank using my iPhone right up there with reading Ezekiel 1:13. And I'm typing this on a MacBook Pro, which I consider more or less equivalent to Revelation 17:2.