Revolutionary Error

You get what you pay for, I guess. Microsoft’s new marketing campaign against Apple is trying to paint the Macintosh as a snobby, over-priced computer that users only buy because it’s shiny. Luckily, lots of people are taking a closer look at the comparisons Microsoft is making.

In the latest ad, Giampaolo buys an HP Pavilion HDX instead of a MacBook. The Apple Insider breaks down the features that “G” was looking for. Here’s a quick summary.

Portability
HP: 16″ screen, 1.7″ thick, 7.3 lbs
MacBook: 13.3″ screen, .95″ thick, 4.5 lbs
MacBook Pro: 15.4″ screen,.95″ thick, 5.5 lbs

Battery Life
HP: >3 hrs (>2 hrs in reviews)
MacBook: ~5 hrs
MacBook Pro:~5 hrs

Power
HP: 2.13 GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB 533MHz DDR2 RAM
(and if he’s not running 64-bit Windows, he only gets to use about 3GB of that RAM)
MacBook: 2.0 or 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo, 2-4GB 1066MHz DDR3 RAM
MacBook Pro: 2.4 or 2.53GHz Core 2 Duo, 2-4GB 1066MHz DDR3 RAM

And let’s not forget the poor 1366×768 resolution on a 16″ screen. Or the hours of time Giampaolo will spend looking for drivers, updating his virus software, and uninstalling bloatware. Try again, MS.

(via MEdical News Today)

Hey guys todally check this out! This is fricking coll man, so awesome. TUrns out tha if you drink red wine it;ll totally mnake you think better! Yeah! I dunno man, there’s some sturff that scienctists gave poepole from wine taht sends more bloods to your brain or soemthing. I don’t really getit, but it makes sense riight? I mean, when I drank red wine sometimes I can feel blood rush to my head and things seem totally clearrer, you know? It’s like, I dunno, it relazes my minds or osmething and the toughts just come easy. It’s porbably why I’m more clever and fun to be around haveing a good time when I drink wine.

I’ves gtta stsart doing that more otfem. the red winee I meen, S:Tarting to day. I mean WTF??? IT”S SCICENSE BITCHES!!!!

http://tinyurl.com/culyan5
-or-
http://www.hugeurl.com/?YmMzMzI1M2NkMDgzMzA2YWU5NzU2NWIyODZhOD
Q3MjcmMTQmVm0wd2QyUXlVWGxWV0d4V1YwZDRXRmxVU205V01WbDNXa
2M1VjFac2JETlhhMk0xWVd4S2MxZHFRbFZXYkhCUVZqQmFZV015U2tWVWJHaG
9UVlZ3VlZadGNFZFpWMDE1VTJ0V1ZXSkhhRzlVVjNOM1pVWmFjVkZ0UmxSTmF6
RTFWVEowVjFaWFNraGhSemxWVm0xb1JGWldXbUZrUjFaSFYyMTRVMkpIZHpG
V2EyUXdZekpHYzFOdVVtaFNlbXhXVm1wT1QwMHhjRlpYYlVaclVqQTFSMXBG

YkdodlYwWmtTR0ZHYUZwaVdHaG9WbTE0YzJNeGNFaFBWbVJUWWtWd1dsWkhl
R3BPVmxsNFYyNU9hbEpGU21oV2JHUk9UVlphV0dNemFGaFNiRm94V1RCYWEx
UnRSbk5YYkZaWFlUSlJNRlpFUms5VFJrcHlXa1pLYVZKdVFuZFdha0poVXpB
MWMxZHJaRlpoTWxKWFZGWmFkMDFHVm5Sa1J6bFdVbXh3TUZaWE5VTldiVVp5
VjJ0NFZrMXVhSEpXYWtaaFpFWktjMWRyTlZkaVdHTjRWbXhrTkdJeVRYaFhi
azVZWVRGd1ZWbHJaRzlYUm14WVkzcEdhMkpIZUZkV01qRkhZV3hhY21OSWNG
aGhNWEIyVm1wS1MyTnNUbkppUm1SWFlsWkZkMVl4V21GWGJWWkhWRzVLV0dK
Rk5WaFZiRnBXVGxFOVBRPT0=

(via NewScientist)

I am just a poor boy, though my story’s seldom told
I have guessed that the resistance,
of a smaller box of equal weight is heavier.
All lies and jest!
Still a man lifts what he wants to lift and disregards the rest.

A study done at Dalhousie University in Canada says that someone who lifts two boxes of equal weight but different size, will estimate that the smaller box is heavier. They will do this even after examining the contents of the box. What’s even weirder is that a lifter will equalize the amount of force they use to lift each box even while maintaining that one is heavier than the other.

Why do we make this mistake? Well, the researchers were able to reverse a volunteer’s estimations through training so that they would think a larger box was heavier than a smaller box of equal weight. This suggests that our estimations are based on previous experiences.

Makes sense, right? Think back to a time (perhaps as a child) when you struggled to lift a large pitcher of iced tea that your mom made for a big dinner. Next time you went to lift that pitcher out of the fridge, you probably put a little more muscle into it to compensate for what you experienced the first time. And what happens the next day when you decide a little more iced tea might be nice? You grab the pitcher with confidence and smash it into the shelf above. Why? Because your brain stored a short-cut for how to approach that pitcher.

Well, your brain does the same thing with the boxes. Smaller objects tend to be lighter than big ones. So, when faced with two boxes, you put a little more oomph into the larger box and a little less into the smaller which makes the smaller one feel a little heavier since it weighed more than you expected.

The researchers conclude that our sensorimotor system (how our muscles move) and our perceptual system (what we experience with our senses) estimate weight differently. Our muscles act as though they are lifting boxes of equal weight while we consciously think the boxes are weighted differently.

This also seems to show that the way we react to lifting a box has little to do with our reason and more to do with some automated calculations performed by our brains.

PS - My apologies to Paul Simon.

We know, thanks to advances in psychology and neuroscience, that the human mind functions as a hyper-pattern-recognition system; finding causal chains even where there are none. We also know that the human mind tends to twist and reinterpret evidence in order to confirm the beliefs that we already hold. Thanks to the study of statistics we know that, given a large enough system and a great enough umber of events, coincidences and other statistical anomalies are to be expected.

Still, most of us are ever-ready to accept as obvious the interpreted meaning of a few coincidental events. Even if they require that we evoke some vague, supernatural causal chain.

So, to give balance to Gingi Edmonds’ conclusion about this recent plane crash, I have worked up a few alternate explanations.

Scenario 1 - A Naturalist Perspective:
The pilot of the single prop airplane was an extreme anti-abortionist who was aware of the family ties his passengers had. In an act of self-sacrificing glory that can only be described as terrorism, the pilot changed course and then drove the plan down into the ground as close to an abortion memorial as he could manage.

Scenario 2 - A Spiritual Perspective:
God, who apparently enjoys toying with us, caused this plan to crash, killing the family of a family planning clinic owner near an abortion memorial. He then inspired Gingi Endmonds to use the crash as a warning to abortionists thereby showing the cold heartlessness of man by exposing the incredible hypocrisy of thos who claim to defend life and love the unlovable, yet still take some joy in the death and grief of others as long as it gives them some smug sense of superiority.

Scenario 3:
Some people got in a plane and it crashed which is extremely sad, but unfortunately, people die in strange ways all the time. We should leave this poor man to grieve with those who care about him.