Memory-Editing Drugs

Did you find director Michel Gondry's argument for his "Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind" movie too far-fetched?

Well... read on.


The Messy Future of Memory-Editing Drugs | Wired Science | Wired.com

The Messy Future of Memory-Editing Drugs

• By Brandon Keim
• April 10, 2009 |
• 3:10 pm |
• Categories: Brains and Behavior
• 
  

The development of a drug that controls a chemical used to form memories sparked heady scientific and philosophical speculation this week.

Granted, the drug has only been tested in rats, but other memory-blunting drugs are being tried in soldiers with post-traumatic stress disorder. It might not be long before memories are pharmaceutically targeted, just as moods are now.

Some think this represents an opportunity to eliminate the crippling psychic effects of past trauma. Others see an ill-advised chemical intrusion into an essential human facility that threatens to replace our ability to understand and cope with life's inevitabilities.

Oxford University neuroethicist Anders Sandberg spoke with Wired.com about the future of memory-editing drugs. In some ways, said Sandberg, our memories are already being altered. We just don't realize it.

Wired.com: Will these drugs, when they become available, work as expected?

Anders Sandberg: A lot of discussion is based on the false premise that they'll work as well as they would in a science fiction story. In practice, well-studied, well-understood drugs like aspirin have side effects that can be annoying or even dangerous. I think the same thing will go for memory editing.

Wired.com: How selective will memory editing be?

Sandberg: Current research seems to suggest that it can be pretty specific, but there will be side effects. It may not even be that you forget other memories. Small, false memories could be created. And we're probably not going to be able to predict that before we actually try them.

Wired.com: What's the right way to test the drugs?

Sandberg: The cautious approach works. Right now, there are small clinical trials using propranolol to reduce post-traumatic stress disorder, which is a good start. We should also find better ways of doing the trials, because we don't really know what we're looking for.

When testing a cancer drug, we look at side effects in terms of toxicity. Here we might want to look at all aspects of thinking, which is really hard, because you can't test for all of them.

In the future, since we're getting more technological forms of recording and documenting our lives, those will have a bigger part in testing the drugs. We'll be able to ask, How does this help in everyday life? How often do you get "tip of the tongue" phenomena? Does it increase in relation to the drug?

Wired.com:
It seems that it would be easy to test "tip of the tongue" drug effects on the sorts of small things one recalls on an everyday basis. But what if it's old, infrequently recalled but still-important memories that are threatened by side effects?

Sandberg: It's pretty messy to determine what is an important memory to us. They quite often crop up, but without us consciously realizing that we're thinking of the memory. That's probably good news, as every time you recall a memory, you also tend to strengthen it.

Wired.com: How likely is the manipulation of these fundamental memories?

Sandberg: Big memories, with lots of connections to other things we've done, will probably be messy to deal with. But I don't think those are the memories that people want to give up. Most people would want to edit memories that impair them.

Of course, if we want to tweak memories to look better to ourselves, we might get a weird concept of self.

Wired.com: I've asked about memory removal — but should the discussion involve adding memories, too?

Sandberg: People are more worried about deletion. We have a preoccupation with amnesia, and are more fearful of losing something than adding falsehoods.

The problem is that it's the falsehoods that really mess you up. If you don't know something, you can look it up, remedy your lack of information. But if you believe something falsely, that might make you act much more erroneously.

You can imagine someone modifying their memories of war to make them look less cowardly and more brave. Now they'll think they're a brave person. At that point, you end up with the interesting question of whether, in a crisis situation, they would now be brave.

Wired.com: You use another example of memory-editing drugs for soldiers in your article with S. Matthew Liao, that if the memory of a mistaken action is erased, a soldier might not learn from his remorse.

Sandberg: To some extent, we already have to deal with this. My grandfather's story of having been in the Finnish winter war as a volunteer shifted over time. He didn't become much braver from year to year, but there was a difference between the earlier and later versions.

We can't trust our memories. But on the other hand, our memories are the basis for most of our decisions. We take it as a given that we can trust them, which is problematic.

Wired.com: But this fluidity of memory at least exists in an organic framework. Might we lose something in the transition to an abrupt, directed fluidity?

Sandberg: There's some truth to that. We have authentic fake memories, in a sense. My grandfather might have made his memories a bit more brave over time, but that was affected by his personality and his other circumstances, and tied to who he was. If he just went to the memory clinic and wanted to have won the battle, that would be more jarring.

If you do that kind of jarring change, and it doesn't connect to anything else in the personality, it's probably not going to work that well.

Wired.com: In your article, you also bring up forgiveness. If we no longer remember when someone has wronged us, we might not learn to forgive them, and that's an important social ability.

Sandberg: My co-author is more concerned than I am, but I do think there's something interesting going on with forgiveness. It's psychological, emotional and moral — a complex can of worms.

I can see problems, not from a moral standpoint, but legal. What if I hit you with my car, and to prevent PTSD you take propranolol, and afterwards in court think it wasn't too serious? A clever lawyer might argue that the victim's lack of concern means the crime should be disregarded.

I'm convinced that we're going to see a lot of interesting legal cases in the next few years, as neuroscience gets involved. People tend to believe witnesses. Suppose a witness says, "I'd just been taking my Ritalin" — should we believe him more, because we've got an enhanced memory? And if a witness has been taking a drug to impair memory, is that a reason to believe that her account is not true?

With this kind of neuroscientific evidence, it's very early to tell what we can trust. We need to do actual experiments and see measure how drugs enhance or impair memory, or more problematically, introduce a bias. Some drugs might enhance emotional memories over unemotional, or vice versa.

Wired.com: Is it paranoid to worry that someday people will be stuck drifting in a sea of shifting and unreliable memories?

Sandberg: I think we're already in this sea, but we don't notice it most of the time. Most people think, "I've got a slightly bad memory." Then they completely trust what they remember, even when it's completely unreliable.

Maybe all this is good, because it forces us to recognize that the nature of our memory is quite changeable.

Tiny, Do-It-Yourself Satellites

1st Law Of Cybernetics:

"The unit
[which can be a person]
within the system
[which can be a situation or an organisation]
which has the most behavioural responses available to it

controls the system"

ACUMEN

Etymology

Latin acumen, sharp point

n.

acumen (plural acumens)

1. quickness of discernment or perception; penetration of mind; the faculty of nice discrimination

Quotations

• Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in The Adventure of the Missing Three-Quarter

  No, no, my dear Watson! With all respect for your natural acumen, I do not think that you are quite a match for the worthy doctor.

  
  

• 1991, Silence Of The Lambs

  Hannibal Lecter: Why do you think he removes their skins, Agent Starling? Enthrall me with your acumen.

Synonyms

Sharpness; penetration; keenness; shrewdness; acuteness; acuity.

The Grid, Our Cars and the Net: One Idea to Link Them All

The Grid, Our Cars and the Net: One Idea to Link Them All | Autopia

Autopia Planes, Trains, Automobiles and the Future of Transportation

By David Weinberger
May 8, 2009
11:57 am

Editor's note: Robin Chase thinks a lot about transportation and the internet, and how to link them. She connected them when she founded Zipcar, and she wants to do it again by making our electric grid and our cars smarter. Time magazine recently named her one of the 100 most influential people of the year. David Weinberger sat down with Chase to discuss her idea.

Robin Chase considers the future of electricity, the future of cars and the internet three terms in a single equation, even if most of us don't yet realize they're on the same chalkboard. Solve the equation correctly, she says, and we create a greener future where innovation thrives. Get it wrong, and our grandchildren will curse our names.

Chase thinks big, and she's got the cred to back it up. She created an improbable network of automobiles called Zipcar. Getting it off the ground required not only buying a fleet of cars, but convincing cities to dedicate precious parking spaces to them. It was a crazy idea, and it worked. Zipcar now has 6,000 cars and 250,000 users in 50 towns.

Now she's moving on to the bigger challenge of integrating a smart grid with our cars – and then everything else. The kicker is how they come together. You can sum it up as a Tweet: The intelligent network we need for electricity can also turn cars into nodes. Interoperability is a multiplier. Get it right!

Robin Chase

Chase starts by explaining the smart grid. There's broad consensus that our electrical system should do more than carry electricity. It should carry information. That would allow a more intelligent, and efficient, use of power.

"Our electric infrastructure is designed for the rare peak of usage," Chase says. "That's expensive and wasteful."

Changing that requires a smart grid. What we have is a dumb one. We ask for electricity and the grid provides it, no questions asked. A smart grid asks questions and answers them. It makes the meter on your wall a sensor that links you to a network that knows how much power you're using, when you're using it and how to reduce your energy needs – and costs.

Such a system will grow more important as we become energy producers, not just consumers. Electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids will return power to the grid. Rooftop solar panels and backyard wind turbines will, at times, produce more energy than we can store. A smart grid generates what we need and lets us use what we generate. That's why the Obama Administration allocated $4.5 billion in the stimulus bill for smart grid R&D.

This pleases Chase, but it also makes her nervous. The smart grid must be an information network, but we have a tradition of getting such things wrong. Chase is among those trying to convince the government that the safest and most robust network will use open internet protocols and standards. For once the government seems inclined to listen.

Chase switches gears to talk about how cars fit into the equation. She sees automobiles as just another network device, one that, like the smart grid, should be open and net-based.

"Cars are network nodes," she says. "They have GPS and Bluetooth and toll-both transponders, and we're all on our cell phones and lots of cars have OnStar support services."

That's five networks. Automakers and academics will bring us more. They're working on smart cars that will communicate with us, with one another and with the road. How will those cars connect to the network? That's the third part of Chase's equation: Mesh networking.

In a typical Wi-Fi network, there's one router and a relatively small number of devices using it as a gateway to the internet. In a mesh network, every device is also a router. Bring in a new mesh device and it automatically links to any other mesh devices within radio range. It is an example of what internet architect David Reed calls "cooperative gain" - the more devices, the more bandwidth across the network. Chase offers an analogy to explain it.

"Wi-Fi is like a bridge that connects the highways on either side of the stream," she says. "You build it wide enough to handle the maximum traffic you expect. If too much comes, it gets congested. When not enough arrives, you've got excess capacity. Mesh takes a different approach: Each person who wants to cross throws in a flat rock that's above the water line. The more people who do that, the more ways there are to get across the river."

Cooperative gain means more users bring more capacity, not less. It's always right-sized. Of course, Chase points out, if you're trying to go a long distance, you're ultimately forced back onto the broadband bridge where the capacity is limited. But for local intra-mesh access, it's a brilliant and counter-intuitive strategy.

Mesh networking as a broad-based approach to networking is growing. A mesh network with 240 nodes covers Vienna. Similar projects are underway in Barcelona, Athens, the Czech Republic and, before long, in two areas of Boston not far from the cafe we're sitting in. But the most dramatic examples are the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Today in Iraq and Afghanistan, soldiers and tanks and airplanes are running around using mesh networks," said Chase. "It works, it's secure, it's robust. If a node or device disappears, the network just reroutes the data."

And, perhaps most important, it's in motion. That's what allows Chase's plural visions to go singular. Build a smart electrical grid that uses Internet protocols and puts a mesh network device in every structure that has an electric meter. Sweep out the half dozen networks in our cars and replace them with an open, Internet-based platform. Add a mesh router. A nationwide mesh cloud will form, linking vehicles that can connect with one another and with the rest of the network. It's cooperative gain gone national, gone mobile, gone open.

Chase's mesh vision draws some skepticism. Some say it won't scale up. The fact it's is being used in places like Afghanistan and Vienna indicates it could. Others say moving vehicles may not be able to hook into and out of mesh networks quickly enough. Chase argues it's already possible to do so in less than a second, and that time will only come down. But even if every car and every electric meter were meshed, there's still a lot of highway out there that wouldn't be served, right? Chase has an answer for that, too.

"Cars would have cellular and Wi-Fi as backups," she said.

The economics are right, she argues. Rather than over-building to handle peak demand and letting capacity go unused, we would right-size our infrastructure to provide exactly what we need, when we need it, with minimum waste and maximum efficiency.

"There's an economy of network scale here," she says. "The traffic-light guys should be interested in this for their own purposes, and so should the power-grid folks and the emergency responders and the Homeland Security folks and, well, everyone. Mesh networks based on open standards are economically justifiable for any one of these things. Put them together - network the networks – and for the same exact infrastructure spend, you get a ubiquitous, robust, resilient, open communication platform — ripe for innovation — without spending a dollar more."

The time is right, too. There's $7.2 billion in the stimulus bill for broadband, $4.5 billion for the smart grid and about $5 billion for transportation technology. The Transportation Reauthorization bill is coming up, too. At $300 billion it is second only to education when it comes to federal discretionary spending. We are about to make a huge investment in a set of networks. It will be difficult to gather the political and economic will to change them once they are deployed.

"We need to get this right, right now," Chase says.

Build each of these infrastructures using open networking standards and we enable cooperative gain at the network level itself. Get it wrong and we will have paved over a generational opportunity.

David Weinberger is a fellow at Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society. E-mail him at self@evident.com.

Wolfram on Wolfram Alfa

Wolfram|Alpha Is Coming!

March 5, 2009

Stephen Wolfram

"Some might say that Mathematica and A New Kind of Science are ambitious projects.

But in recent years I’ve been hard at work on a still more ambitious project—called Wolfram|Alpha.

And I’m excited to say that in just two months it’s going to be going live:

Mathematica has been a great success in very broadly handling all kinds of formal technical systems and knowledge.

But what about everything else? What about all other systematic knowledge? All the methods and models, and data, that exists?

Fifty years ago, when computers were young, people assumed that they’d quickly be able to handle all these kinds of things and that one would be able to ask a computer any factual question, and have it compute the answer.

But it didn’t work out that way. Computers have been able to do many remarkable and unexpected things. But not that.

I’d always thought, though, that eventually it should be possible. And a few years ago, I realized that I was finally in a position to try to do it.

I had two crucial ingredients: Mathematica and NKS. With Mathematica, I had a symbolic language to represent anything—as well as the algorithmic power to do any kind of computation. And with NKS, I had a paradigm for understanding how all sorts of complexity could arise from simple rules.

But what about all the actual knowledge that we as humans have accumulated?

A lot of it is now on the web—in billions of pages of text. And with search engines, we can very efficiently search for specific terms and phrases in that text.

But we can’t compute from that. And in effect, we can only answer questions that have been literally asked before. We can look things up, but we can’t figure anything new out.

So how can we deal with that? Well, some people have thought the way forward must be to somehow automatically understand the natural language that exists on the web. Perhaps getting the web semantically tagged to make that easier.

But armed with Mathematica and NKS I realized there’s another way: explicitly implement methods and models, as algorithms, and explicitly curate all data so that it is immediately computable.

It’s not easy to do this. Every different kind of method and model—and data—has its own special features and character. But with a mixture of Mathematica and NKS automation, and a lot of human experts, I’m happy to say that we’ve gotten a very long way.

How can I say it?

"But, OK. Let’s say we succeed in creating a system that knows a lot, and can figure a lot out. How can we interact with it?

The way humans normally communicate is through natural language. And when one’s dealing with the whole spectrum of knowledge, I think that’s the only realistic option for communicating with computers too.

Of course, getting computers to deal with natural language has turned out to be incredibly difficult. And for example we’re still very far away from having computers systematically understand large volumes of natural language text on the web.

But if one’s already made knowledge computable, one doesn’t need to do that kind of natural language understanding.

All one needs to be able to do is to take questions people ask in natural language, and represent them in a precise form that fits into the computations one can do.

Of course, even that has never been done in any generality. And it’s made more difficult by the fact that one doesn’t just want to handle a language like English: one also wants to be able to handle all the shorthand notations that people in every possible field use.

I wasn’t at all sure it was going to work. But I’m happy to say that with a mixture of many clever algorithms and heuristics, lots of linguistic discovery and linguistic curation, and what probably amount to some serious theoretical breakthroughs, we’re actually managing to make it work.

Neverending trillions

"Pulling all of this together to create a true computational knowledge engine is a very difficult task.

It’s certainly the most complex project I’ve ever undertaken. Involving far more kinds of expertise—and more moving parts—than I’ve ever had to assemble before.

And—like Mathematica, or NKS—the project will never be finished.

But I’m happy to say that we’ve almost reached the point where we feel we can expose the first part of it.

It’s going to be a website: www.wolframalpha.com. With one simple input field that gives access to a huge system, with trillions of pieces of curated data and millions of lines of algorithms.

We’re all working very hard right now to get Wolfram|Alpha ready to go live.

I think it’s going to be pretty exciting. A new paradigm for using computers and the web.

That almost gets us to what people thought computers would be able to do 50 years ago!

Due Soon: Wolfram Alpha

Wolfram Alpha is an answer-engine developed by the international company Wolfram Research. The service will be an online computational data engine based on intuitive query parsing, a large library of algorithms, and A New Kind of Science approach to answering queries.^[1] It was announced in March 2009 by British physicist Stephen Wolfram, to be launched in May 2009.

Wolfram Alpha differs from search engines in that it does not simply return a list of results based on a keyword, but instead computes answers and relevant visualizations from a collection of known information. Other new search engines, known collectively as semantic search engines, have developed alpha applications of this type, which index a large amount of answers, and then try to match the question to one. Examples of companies using this strategy include True Knowledge, and Microsoft's Powerset.

Wolfram Alpha has many parallels with Cyc, a project aimed at developing a common-sense inference engine since the 80s, though without producing any major commercial application. Cyc founder Douglas Lenat was one of the few given an opportunity to test Wolfram Alpha before its release:

It handles a much wider range of queries than Cyc, but much narrower than Google; it understands some of what it is displaying as an answer, but only some of it ... The bottom line is that there are a large range of queries it can't parse, and a large range of parsable queries it can't answer
-Douglas Lenat^[2]

Wolfram's earlier flagship product Mathematica encompasses computer algebra, numerical computation, visualization and statistics capabilities and can be used on all kinds of mathematical analysis, from simple plotting to signal processing, but will not be included in the alpha release, due to computation-time problems.^[3]

I love this !

Amazon.com
We're Building Earth's Most Customer-Centric Company

Loxodromehead

Crochet Loxodrome Hat
by www.flickr.com/photos/crochetcottage/

There's Something About Denmark

Two recent studies found Danes to be the world's happiest people. The new reputation along with media attention have led to a national discussion

Three years ago, if you had asked a person from Denmark the secret to happiness, you probably would have gotten back a blank stare. The same question today, however, likely would be answered with knowing laughter and any one of several explanations.

Being recognized as the world's happiest people simply takes some getting used to.

Since 2006, Denmark, a largely homogenous country of 5 million people on Europe's stormy northern coast, has been anointed the happiest place on earth by two very different surveys. The studies' findings have upended dated international perceptions of Denmark as a quaint but chilly dairy exporter with a high suicide rate, recasting the country instead as a model of social harmony that is thriving in an era of globalization.

The country's improbable new standing—and the significant media attention it has engendered—may have had an even more profound effect on the Danes themselves by prompting a national conversation about how they live their lives. "It has given us a chance to reflect on how well-balanced a country we really are," says Dorte Kiilerich, the managing director of VisitDenmark, Denmark's official tourism organization.

In early 2006, Denmark was what it had been for ages: a quiet, stable country, better known as the home of Hans Christian Andersen, Tivoli Gardens, and the setting for Shakespeare's Hamlet than for being an epicenter of bliss. Tourism had been in decline for a decade, and an international controversy was raging over a series of cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammed, which months before had been printed in a Danish newspaper.

Social Safety Net

Then in July of that year, a researcher at England's University of Leicester released a ranking of the world's happiest countries after analyzing data from various sources. The report concluded that economic factors related to health care, standards of living, and access to basic education were determining characteristics of a nation's overall attitude. Denmark, with its free universal health care, one of the highest per-capita GDPs in the world, and first-rate schools, came in first (BusinessWeek.com. 10/11/06).

The news spread quickly. Niels Martiny, a 26-year-old social anthropology student at the University of Aarhus in Denmark's second-largest city, spent last year in Peru doing research. Even there, word about the survey had gotten around to locals. "They were quite surprised," Martiny says with a laugh. "They had this idea about Nordic people being very reserved and very serious."

Foreigners weren't the only ones scratching their heads at the results. Danes were equally confounded. "A lot of my friends were surprised," says Martiny, who considers himself quite happy in his own life but thought that the study must have made some mistake. Danes, he says, tend not to express their emotions outwardly the way people in some other cultures do.

Achieving the Right Balance

But the results were no fluke. Earlier this summer, the Stockholm-based World Values Survey, which uses a very different methodology, reported that it also found Danish people to be the world's most contented. That study concluded that the surest measures of a country's well-being are the freedom to choose how to live one's life, encouragement of gender equality, and tolerance for minorities. Once again, on every count, Denmark took top prize.

What is it about Denmark that the rest of us have failed to grasp?

Achieving the right balance is probably what most sets the country apart, suggests VisitDenmark's Kiilerich. Happiness in most Nordic societies, all of which ranked high on both studies' lists of happiest countries, hinges on an ineffable combination of economic strength and social programs. Denmark's approach relies on high taxes and aggressive redistribution of wealth—anathema to many free-market Americans—which results in a broad range of social services like health care, retirement pensions, and quality public schools. Yet remarkably, the country has managed to make this model work without crushing economic growth or incentives to succeed. "Denmark has a head and a heart," Kiilerich says.

The strong social safety nets that cradle Danish citizens from birth until death are welcoming to foreigners, too. Kate Vial, a 55-year-old American expat who has lived and worked in Denmark for more than 30 years, passed up opportunities over the years to return to the U.S., choosing instead to raise her three children in Denmark. Vial knows she will never be rich, but says that she valued family, the ability to travel, and simple economic security above all else. "I just chose a simpler lifestyle, one where I could ride my bike all over and where I don't have to make a great living to survive," she says.

Some people attribute the prevailing attitude among Danes to something less tangible, called hygge (pronounced "hooga"). Danes say the word is difficult to translate—and to comprehend—but that it describes a cozy, convivial sentiment that involves strong family bonds. "The gist of it is that you don't have to do anything except let go," says Vial. "It's a combination of relaxing, eating, drinking, partying, spending time with family."

Denmark again

World's Best Cities

No. 11: Copenhagen

Denmark

Mercer score: 106.2 (max. = 108; NYC = 100)
2007 rank: No. 11
GDP: $204.6 billion (2007 est.)
Population: 5,484,723 (total country); 1, 086,762 (total city)
Life expectancy: 78.13 years

Nyhavn at dusk
Photographer: Izzet Keribar

The World's Happiest Countries

A British researcher merged dozens of statistical metrics to rank nations on the elusive notion of contentment

By Marina Kamenev

Feeling blue? Perhaps you live in the wrong country. A recent study from Britain's University of Leicester used a battery of statistical data, plus the subjective responses of 80,000 people worldwide, to map out well-being across 178 countries. Heading up the list: Denmark, which rose to the top thanks to its wealth, natural beauty, small size, quality education, and good health care. Five other European countries, including Switzerland, Austria, and Iceland, came out in the top 10, while Zimbabwe and Burundi pulled up the bottom.

With a high standard of living, negligible poverty, and a broad range of public and social services, it's easy to see why Denmark tops the happiness map. There's a high level of education; public schools are top-quality and private ones are affordable. The low population gives the nation a strong sense of identity. And Denmark's physical beauty forms a great backdrop to daily life. The weather is a bit tough, though.

Not surprisingly, the countries that are happiest are those that are healthy, wealthy, and wise. "The most significant factors were health, the level of poverty, and access to basic education," White says. Population size also plays a role. Smaller countries with greater social cohesion and a stronger sense of national identity tended to score better, while those with the largest populations fared worse. China came in No. 82, India ranked 125, and Russia was 167. The U.S. came in at 23. But there were a few surprises along the way, too.

Capitalism — sometimes criticized for its heartlessness — was far from a source of discontent, though the top-scoring capitalist countries also tended to have strong social services. And the U.S. ranked only 23rd, due to nagging poverty and spotty health care.

No. 5: Bahamas
Population: 303,800
Life Expectancy: 65.6 years
GDP Per Capita: $20,200

Bahamanians know how to enjoy life. “Maybe it's our 'Bahama Mamas,' our sweet sea breeze, our conch salad, and fun loving people,” suggests Kendenique Campbell-Moss, a senior executive at the Bahamas Tourism Ministry. Although the poverty rate, at 9.3%, is relatively high, the beautiful weather and laid-back lifestyle keep Bahamas' citizens smiling. Campbell-Moss also reckons the fusion of African and European cultures, strong family values, and Christianity contribute to the happy vibe in the Caribbean country.

No. 8: Bhutan
Population: 2.3 million
Life Expectancy: 55 years
GDP Per Capita: $1,400

Here's a surprise: The small Asian nation of Bhutan ranks eighth in the world, despite relatively low life expectancy, a literacy rate of just 47%, and a very low GDP per capita. Why? Researchers credit an unusually strong sense of national identity. Plus, the country has beautiful scenery and a largely unspoiled culture, thanks to strict governmental limits on tourism, development, and immigration. Pretty counterintuitive, but Bhutan seems to have found a recipe for happiness.

The incredible Evangelegolists !

Evangelegolists 2

More Evangelegolists

People were getting stoned all the time, then, you know...

But the question is: are they meaningful ?

(for those cases, try Wikipedia!)

To sell or not to sell

Dear Wikipedia friends,

I'm answering to Jimmy Wales appeal and and making a donnation to Wikipedia.

But I really can not understand what is the big deal with having some Google links in a quiet sidebar and have them pay for your explendid work and for the service it renders to all of us (I was going to write "mankind", thought it too grandiouse, but I do think you guys are doing something remarkable for all mankind).

I certainly would hate having pop-ups, banners, stupid-things-flying-over-the-

page, and the likes at Wikipedia, but I honestly can see no harm in a few, discrete, well-behaved, sometimes thought-provoking, Google (or any other's) links on the sidebar. All major free content providers -- PBS, BBC etc. -- have some sort of funding from advertising. It is just common sense.

Additionally, I think you guys are not giving the necessary thought to finding a second alternative to donnation, other than advertising (though I appreciate and constantly buy at the memorabilia online store). For instance: what if you had other sites, where it would be all too natural to insert advertising or to charge for content? Something with quizzes, tests, homework/research support or a number of other type of content that do not occur to me right now.

Though I'm making my donation, I sort of feel I'm placating the thirst of the drunkard.

All the best,

Top 10 scientific breakthroughs of 2008

Ian Sample, science correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 18 December 2008 19.05 GMT

Skin cells can be regressed to make stem cells, which in turn
can be grown into a range of replacement tissues and organs.
Photograph: Getty

A feat of biological alchemy that offers scientists the hope of growing replacement organs from patients' own skin cells has been named the scientific breakthrough of the year.

Cellular reprogramming allows scientists to rewind the developmental clock of adult cells to produce stem cells, which can then be grown into completely different tissues, such as neurons and beating heart cells.

The technique is already being used to gain unprecedented insights into debilitating and incurable diseases such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease, but ultimately scientists hope they will be able to treat patients by reprogramming their cells to make healthy replacement tissues and organs.

The discovery leads a top ten of major advances announced by the prestigious US journal Science. It was chosen because it "opened a new field of biology almost overnight and holds out hope of life-saving medical advances," said Robert Coontz, an editor on the publication.

Scientists first showed they could transform adult cells into stem cells in experiments on mice two years ago. This year, they built on the work and made spectacular progress in humans.

In July, researchers at the Harvard Stem Cell Institute in Boston plucked skin cells from an 82-year-old woman with motor neurone disease and reprogrammed them into stem cells, before turning these into spinal cord nerves. By watching the nerves grow in the lab, the scientists can see how the disease takes hold and progresses, which is impossible to observe in a living patient.

Only a week later, another team created stem cells from patients with 10 other medical conditions, including muscular dystrophy, type 1 diabetes and Down's syndrome. Researchers are now focusing on boosting the safety and efficiency of the technique.

Second place on the list of breakthroughs was awarded for the first direct observation of a planet beyond our own solar system. Scientists first confirmed that there were worlds orbiting other stars in the 1980s, though they did so indirectly. The majority of the more than 300 "extrasolar planets" now known were spotted by watching the tiny wobble in stars' position as enormous, Jupiter-sized planets swung around them.

This year, scientists announced that they had seen shimmers of light from the planets themselves. They are just faint pinpricks of light in space, but they will give astronomers clues to what those distant planets are made of and how they formed.

The remaining eight breakthroughs are not ranked in any particular order but cover the breadth of science from the genetics of cancer and renewable sources of energy, to an unprecedented understanding of "good fat", and a way of calculating the mass of the universe.

Scientists at the European Molecular Biology Laboratory in Heidelberg, Germany, made the top 10 list for developing a laser microscope to capture the dance of cells inside a fertilised egg as it grows into an embryo. By rewinding the video of a zebrafish embryo, the researchers were able to trace the origin of cells that formed specific tissues, such as the retina at the back of the eye.

The year saw a flurry of genomes published, from that of the woolly mammoth to individual cancer patients, a feat aided by a surge in new genetic sequencing techniques, which also made the top ten. Joining them was research on two of the deadliest cancers, pancreatic and brain tumours, which revealed dozens of mutations that had made the cells go awry.

Another notable breakthrough involved research into brown fat tissue, which burns "bad" white fat to generate heat for the body. Scientists found that brown fat is remarkably similar to muscle, a discovery that could lead to new treatments for obesity.

The remaining top 10 scientific discoveries included a new family of superconductors that can carry electricity without resistance; a way to watch proteins at work; a catalyst that can split water into hydrogen and oxygen, and so provide renewable energy; and a calculation that predicts the mass of two of the building blocks of matter, the proton and neutron.

Tequila turned into diamonds

Ian Sample, science correspondent The Guardian, Thursday 13 November 2008

Tequila contains the perfect mix of alcohol and water to create diamonds.

Photograph: David Sillitoe/Guardian

Farmers in Mexico have been given another reason to grow agave, the cactus-like plant used to produce the country's most potent export. In the bar room equivalent of alchemy, scientists have turned shots of tequila into diamonds.

The surprise use for the national tipple emerged when researchers at the National Autonomous University experimented with making ultra-thin films of diamond from organic solutions, such as acetone and ethanol. The mix that worked best, 40% alcohol and 60% water, was similar to the proportions used in tequila.

Diamond films are extremely durable and heat resistant and can be used to coat cutting tools. By carefully adding impurities to the films, it is also possible to make diamond semiconductors for use in electronic circuits.

Luis Miguel Apátiga, a member of the team, brought a bottle of cheap tequila into the lab to see if it could be turned into diamond. When he heated a shot to 800C it vaporised and broke down into its atomic constituents, producing a fine layer of carbon on nearby metal trays.

Close examination of the films at high magnification revealed that the carbon had formed into crystal structures identical to diamond. Each was around one thousandth of a millimetre across.
"It's true that the fact it's tequila has a certain charm. It's a Mexican product and Mexican researchers developed the project, but a businessman can say to me: 'Great, how pretty! But how can I use it?'," Apátiga said. "It would be very difficult to obtain diamonds for a ring."
The researchers plan to make tequila-based diamonds on an industrial scale from 2011, a move that could see agave growing expand beyond the tequila market.

A Remarkable Company

Remarkable was set up by Edward Douglas Miller in 1996 to start to look at what could be made from UK recycled materials.

He began by experimenting with plastic cups with the aim of trying to turn one plastic cup into a pencil. Why? Because it had never been done before and it would prove to the world that you could take one everyday, throwaway item that would usually just go straight to landfill and, instead, turn it into a new product which was fun, functional and had a long second life.

During the first two years of research & development - even before it had been sent out to potential clients - the Remarkable Pencil had started to generate interest and intrigue from many quarters, so much so in fact that it started to take on a life of its own. The Remarkable story had already begun… and the rest, as they say, is history... click here to read.

Our philosophy at Remarkable is to create recycled items that are well-designed, great quality and a joy to own.

As well as their environmental credentials - all our products are made using only UK recycled materials - we want people to choose Remarkable because they like what we are doing; making products that instil a sense of fun and intrigue, and because all our products evoke a feeling of purpose, passion and excitement.

By highlighting what an item was in its previous life, we feel we are showing what can be made with UK waste - that we are generating a positive interest in recycling and environmental issues. Using the fascination of what an item once was is a new and fun way of communicating the recycled message.

In brief, we don't want people to think that recycling is dull. It can, in fact, be very cool!

The principles of Remarkable Environmental Activities include:

• To develop technology and provide products that will be sensitive to the earth's finite resources and environment through the use of recycled and sustainable materials.
• To promote energy-saving activities considering all aspects of the product's life cycle in order to minimize the environmental impact of raw materials and components whilst conserving natural resources through waste reduction and the use of recycled and sustainable materials and components.
• To endeavour to meet or exceed all applicable environmental and safety regulatory requirements.
• To promote waste minimization activities, giving preference to recycled or renewable sources wherever practicable.
• To promote continuous improvement and methods for improving manufacturing processes that minimize environmental impacts.
• To encourage environmental awareness to all employees so that environmental factors are considered in all decision-making processes.