Tuesday, September 12, 2006

Google search technics

New search tech. from Ambar Pansari.

From time to time, we run live experiments on Google — tests visible to a relatively few people -- to discover better ways to search. We do this because there’s no good substitute for understanding how real people, in real-world situations, actually operate. Theories are fine, but “improving the user experience” really happens best when we understand what people do online.

So to learn more, we sometimes randomly select a group of people to see a possible improvement to search options. Or we may select a group of people and try out a new element while they're searching. If you ever wonder why your Google site looks slightly different from that of the person sitting next to you, this is why...


full version here: _http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/04/this-is-test-this-is-only-test.html

Thursday, August 31, 2006

Suddenly the U.S. isn't the center of the physics universe

Can This Machine Rescue Physics?
Suddenly the U.S. isn't the center of the physics universe. The answer: build the International Linear Collider—one of the most powerful (and expensive) pieces of equipment on Earth



When the world’s biggest particle accelerator, the Large Hadron Collider, opens next year near Geneva, the focal point of the high-energy physics world will shift from U.S. soil for the first time in half a century. Bummer, indeed. But America’s brightest are busy devising a rescue plan. In April, a panel of U.S. science and business leaders presented a bold comeback strategy: to build the biggest particle accelerator yet, a multibillion-dollar, 19-mile-long piece of mega-machinery called the International Linear Collider (ILC) that can smash particles together at near light speed.
Detractors in the physics commu-nity say a push for the ILC could smother less glamorous projects. And the last time the U.S. took on a science research project of this scope—flash back to the Superconducting Super Collider, circa 1993—Congress canceled it partway through construction and shifted most of the funds to other areas. Bitter memories of the SSC’s demise and the ensuing money crunch still linger.

But not pursuing the ILC, the National Research Council panel argues, could prove devastating. “It would mean giving up on the most fundamental area of science there is,” says Harold Shapiro, president emeritus of Princeton University and chair of the panel.

The ILC will collide together electrons and positrons (fundamental particles with no constituent parts), enabling physicists to fully explore the kind of brain-bruising questions that would keep even Einstein up at night. Sure, we believe “dark matter” makes up most of the universe, but what the heck is it? Supersymmetric particles, or something else? While we’re at it, how did the universe begin? How will it evolve? Does it have 10 dimensions? Eleven dimensions? More?

Although Switzerland’s Large Hadron Collider, or LHC, will certainly chip away at these questions as it smashes protons together, scientists will need the more precise measurements of the ILC to fully answer them. Whereas the LHC might prove, say, the existence of the famed Higgs boson—the so-called God particle that gives matter its mass—the cleaner collisions at the ILC would let scientists figure out how the elusive particle actually works.

Aside from solving some of nature’s toughest puzzles, the panel’s report concludes that hosting one of history’s most ambitious physics experiments will draw talent to the U.S. from all over the globe, offer more opportunities to U.S.researchers, and inspire American kids to take up careers in science.

All good things. Yet at what cost? The panel suggests that the U.S. spend $500 million over the next five years simply researching the technology required to build the ILC—a mere $30 million less than the total U.S. contribution to the entire LHC project. (Because the host for the ILC will be chosen by a multinational panel, a kind of International Olympic Committee for physics, such a nicety should put the U.S. in a strong position to bid for it.) The current estimate for the whole shebang: $12 billion, with the host country probably picking up 50 percent of the tab.

Norman Augustine, a former chair of Lockheed Martin and a member of the panel, says the initial half-billion-dollar investment, at least, is a must. “The U.S. has from day one been the global leader of the field,” he explains. “If we miss the ILC, that will be tantamount to folding our hand.”

-----------------------------

from : http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/
4e52af1f64fec010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html

Tuesday, August 22, 2006

Nice! Kin-Kong : new look on the old character...

Thursday, August 17, 2006

Nice illusion




these lines are ... EQUAL!

Tuesday, August 15, 2006

Google's gift

Found an interesting article:

Google is about to give its hometown a wonderful gift: a municipal wireless network covering the entire city of Mountain View, with free Internet access for both residents and visitors.

I checked out the network last week, now getting fine-tuned ahead of its imminent public launch, and I'm delighted to report it works better than advertised.

Not that I'm above looking a gift horse in the mouth. Google's grand gesture is incomplete in one crucial way -- the company will not provide live human tech support, which is often crucial for first-time users.

Google said last year it would build the network out of its own pocket, giving only vague explanations. As a way of learning about muni wireless systems, the company sometimes says, or as a perk for its roughly 1,000 employees who live in Mountain View.

My guess is that Google, young and immensely profitable, simply has more money than sense. Whatever the motivation, Google has pledged it would install the network -- at a cost of at least several million dollars -- and operate it for five years.

----------------
Google makes very smart gift`s - they will make it one of the biggest adv. network at the earth and will earn much more they spend. Google is not wasting cash, do they?

Sunday, August 13, 2006

Web Ads Show Just How Sexy These Clothes Make You Feel

The Internet is rapidly changing the rules of advertising — but using naked people to sell clothes?A French clothier is testing the limits of the maxim that sex sells with online commercials that use hard-core pornography to hawk $100 T-shirts.

The campaign by Shai clothing depicts French porn stars frolicking on a circular bed, clothed, at least initially, in the brand's latest styles.Shai's effort also foreshadows a trend in interactive marketing: giving viewers the ability to click on moving images in a commercial to buy clothing, movie tickets and other goods on screen. Rolling the mouse pointer over a piece of apparel in the Shai clip stops the video and pulls up a chart with price and size information.

full version here : http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-sexads13aug13,0,235688.story?coll=la-home-headlines
---------------------
Personally, i dont think pornstars in advertizing is good idea.. maybe for teenagers.. just imagine - someone is watching porn and say - hmm, nice T-short.. let`s buy some :-)))

Saturday, August 12, 2006

First of all

First of all - let me explain why i decided to name my blog - myforthblog. Well actually, it`s my first blog - and i wished to name it myfirstblog -BUT - yeah, this name was taken already :-))

So i mooved with mysecondblog and e.t.c. - the first one which was available - myforthblog.
So this is my first blog, which is named myforthblog :-))

Enjoy reading!
Hi all! this is my first blog. Hope you`ll enjoy reading it :-))