"Senator Barack Obama adapted one of his signature arguments — that his oratory amounts to more than inspiring words — from speeches given by Gov. Deval Patrick of Massachusetts during his 2006 campaign."
What do you think -- is this plagiarism by Obama, or not?
Continue reading "Critics Accuse Obama of Plagiarism - What Do You Think?" »
Just because it's interesting to see how far we've come: What the internet looked like in 1996.
Massimo Calabresi says that Bush's State of the Union address this evening is his "last stab at a legacy."
Nonesense.
Unlike Bill Clinton, who frittered away his years in the Oval Office and has yet to find a positive legacy, George W. Bush's positive legacy is already secure.
Bush has been a strong leader in the war waged against all Western democracies by Islamic terrorists. He has brought freedom to about 60 million people in Afghanistan and Iraq. He has kept America free of another horrific terror attack like September 11, 2001 for more than six years, something that seemed highly improbable if not impossible in 2001.
In the arena of domestic U.S. politics, Bush has again and again repaid viciousness with decency. His decency and kind words at the White House on the occasion of dedication of portraits of the Clintons is but one example.
Bush enacted the No Child Left Behind legislation, which has already applied pressure across America to improve objectively measurable educational results for every chlid in every school. The fact that the legislation has become unpopular of late is simply a function of the fact that the law is working as intended to drive out truly incompetent teachers and adminsitrators and give every child a good chance.
Bush has been a consistent advocate for the sanctity of human life. He has not caved to pressures to destroy embryos in the name of science. Nor has he stood in the way of progress. Huge advances in use of adult stem cells have already begun to save lives. In a stunning breakthrough, scientists have learned how to turn adult stem cells back into undifferentiated, pluripotent cells that have the ability to differentiate back into any other kind of cell. Even advocates of embryonic stem cell research now admit that use of embryos is probably unnecessary.
George W. Bush doesn't have a legacy problem. He has an immediate popularity problem, but that will take care of itself.
I blogged about the possible fakery in the recent Bin Laden video four days ago on September 9th ("Is the Bin Laden Video a Forgery?") and again two days ago on September 11th ("Both Recent Osama Bin Laden Videos Are Sock Puppet Fakery"), and now it's been confirmed:
On the Friday before the sixth anniversary of 9/11, Osama bin Laden appeared in a new video, his first since prior to the U.S. presidential elections in 2004. In analyzing the video, Neal Krawetz of Hactor Factor, an expert on digital image forensics, said in his latest blogs that the video contained many visual and audio splices, and that all of the modifications were of very low quality.
Most striking is bin Laden's beard, which has been gray in recent images. For this video it is black. "As far as my tools can detect, there has been no image manipulation of the bin Laden portion of the image beyond contrast adjustment. His beard really does appear to be that color." The Washington Post has the full video here.
Krawetz says the inner frame of bin Laden was resaved at least twice, and not at the same time. The images show fine horizontal stripes on bin Laden and a background indicating these came from interlaced video sources. In contrast, the text elements, such as the As-Sahab logo, appear to be from non-interlaced sources.
The September 7 video shows bin Laden dressed in a white hat, white shirt and yellow sweater. Krawetz notes "this is the same clothing he wore in the 2004-10-29 video. In 2004 he had it unzipped, but in 2007 he zipped up the bottom half. Besides the clothing, it appears to be the same background, same lighting, and same desk. Even the camera angle is almost identical." Krawetz also notes that "if you overlay the 2007 video with the 2004 video, his face has not changed in three years--only his beard is darker and the contrast on the picture has been adjusted."
More important though are the edits. At roughly a minute and a half into the video there is a splice; bin Laden shifts from looking at the camera to looking down in less than 1/25th of a second. At 13:13 there is a second, less obvious splice. In all, Krawetz says there are at least six splices in the video. Of these, there are only two live bin Laden segments, the rest of the video composed of still images. The first live section opens the video and ends at 1:56. The second section begins at 12:29 and continues until 14:01. The two live sections appear to be from different recordings "because the desk is closer to the camera in the second section."
Then there are the audio edits. Krawetz says "the new audio has no accompanying 'live' video and consists of multiple audio recordings." References to current events are made only during the still frame sections and after splices within the audio track." And there are so many splices that I cannot help but wonder if someone spliced words and phrases together. I also cannot rule out a vocal imitator during the frozen-frame audio. The only way to prove that the audio is really bin Laden is to see him talking in the video," Krawetz says.
As I wrote on September 11th:
There is no plausible explanation for Bin Laden's video image to be frozen in two separate videos while he is speaking of recent events-- except for video fakery.
I'm more convinced than ever that Bin Laden is dead or that he has dramatically altered his appearance and seeks to avoid detection. Either way, the video images we are seeing are years out of date.
Given the strange references to liberal hot-button issues like global warming in the latest Bin Laden video and other oddities, I think it more likely that Bin Laden is dead and that the "Bin Laden" videos are being entirely ghost-written.
As a practical matter, the West should proceed on the working assumption that Bin Laden is dead unless and until Al Qaeda produces credible video of Bin Laden in which his lips are moving when he speaks of current events.
When we fall for sock puppetry, we are being played for chumps by jihadists. In addition to lending aid and comfort to America's enemies by our naivete, we waste precious, irreplaceable time foolishly debating the wrong questions such as "Why haven't we yet caught Bin Laden?" and whether we should withdraw from Iraq in order to look for Bin Laden in Afghanistan.
If Bin Laden is alive, let Al Qaeda prove it. Their video sock puppetry suggests otherwise. Either they are engaged in an elaborate double hoax to lead the world to believe that Bin Laden is dead when he really is not (a hoax which the world has yet to even recognize), or, more likely, Bin Laden is indeed worm food and the jihadists are working with their dwindling supply of old videotape and one of Bin Laden's many male relatives to record the audio track.
I am surprised that more in the blogosphere, especially on the right, have not yet sounded the alarm about the apparent Bin Laden video fakery. In their defense, it has been a busy news week with General Petraeus's testimony to Congress and the 9/11 anniversary. Further, the conclusion that the videos are fakes is a matter of opinion, although one supported by the evidence in hand.
As we have learned through one media mistake and distortion after another in the war on terror discovered only by the blogosphere, we cannot rely on the Associated Press or Reuters to recognize a fake when it is presented to them. That is our job. I'm calling foul.
Remember, you read it here before you heard it from the AP, Reuters, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, or the New York Times.
Let's see how long it takes them to catch up.
Update: Consider all the foolish stories being uncritically printed and broadcast by the media this week that make no sense in light of this evidence. Journalists are reporting that Osama Bin Laden is "taunting" the U.S. in his latest video.
No, some dweeb with video editing equipment in a back room is "taunting" the U.S., while Bin Laden is mouldering in the grave (or -- remote possibility -- while he is cowering somewhere afraid to make a video that shows his current appearance). That Bin Laden is long dead is far more likely. It's a better fit with the facts and with what we know about human nature and the nature of terrorists.
But why does it matter?
Let me ask this in return: Should America be sending more troops to hunt for Bin Laden in Afghanistan? Or would that be a colossal waste of time, money, soldiers' lives, energy, and resources -- because Bin Laden is already dead?
Are we better off staying to fight Al Qaeda right where we are in Iraq?
It's rather an important question, wouldn't you say? It's more important than any other lead story you'll find in the print or broadcast media today, isn't it?
And yet we have total silence from the print and broadcast media on this story so far. What's their excuse? They have yet to even recognize that the issue of video fakery exists, let alone report the evidence that confirms these videos are fakes.
Update: A little example of Bin Laden video fakery for your amusement.
__________________________
Here's what passes for the conventional wisdom on Iraq: The war was badly planned and therefore is failing miserably. As a result, America's only option is to fold up the entire operation and slink away, leaving the Iraqis to whatever bloodbath awaits them. We've reached the point of no return; the war is irretrievably lost; and no amount of rethinking or redoubling of effort will make any difference.
Meanwhile, Al Qaeda's early losses in the war on terror, including the deaths of major leaders such as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and possibly Osama Bin Ladin himself, are completely irrelevant, since Al Qaeda is "evolving" constantly and is planning mass casualty attacks on the U.S.:
Al Qaeda terrorists are rebuilding their capabilities and continuing to plan mass-casualty attacks inside the United States, according to an intelligence assessment made public yesterday.
"We assess [al Qaeda] has protected or regenerated key elements of its homeland attack capability, including a safe haven in ... Pakistan [tribal areas], operational lieutenants and its top leadership," according to the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), a consensus analysis of 16 U.S. intelligence agencies.
"Although we have discovered only a handful of individuals in the United States with ties to al Qaeda senior leadership since 9/11, we judge that al Qaeda will intensify its efforts to put operatives here," the report stated.
Retired Vice Adm. Michael McConnell, the director of national intelligence whose office produced the NIE, said the United States will face a "persistent and evolving terrorist threat" in the next three years.
The seven-page public summary of the classified report said the United States is in a "heightened threat environment."
"They're working as hard as they can in positioning trained operatives here in the United States," Mr. McConnell said. "They have recruitment programs to bring recruits into [the tribal] region of Pakistan [who] could come to the United States, fit into the population and then use some of the training that they receive in the Pakistani area for explosives and so on."
Is the contrast between the defeatism of the media in viewing America's chances in the Iraq war and the endless optimism for Al Qaeda's chances stark enough for you?
Al Qaeda remains a threat because it is "continuing to plan" further attacks and "will intensify its efforts" and its members are "working as hard as they can."
But when it comes to the Iraq war, working harder, intensifying efforts, rethinking, and continuing to plan are off the table for the United States. The only option we have is to rip our leaders from limb to limb, metaphorically speaking, for having started the war. Since things look bleak now, they're going to stay that way no matter what America does, and its only option is to turn tail and run.
Don't tell me we've tried long enough and hard enough in Iraq and there's no point in continuing any longer. Nonsense. Al Qaeda's attacks on the U.S. predate the Iraq war, but nobody seems to be pulling out a stopwatch and insisting that Al Qaeda's chances of striking a mortal blow at the U.S. or the West are forever lost.
What a fitting metaphor is Harry Reid's surrender slumberthon in the Senate tonight. Harry Reid knows how to lose a war he has already declared lost. The solution is quite simple: Lie down, accept defeat, and make no effort to prevail.
In the real world, the margin between victory and defeat is rarely great, but the outcome matters a great deal. The margin of victory usually turns on one thing: motivation. If we are motivated to win; if we are determined; if we are constantly "rebuilding our capabilities" and "continuing to plan" and "intensifying our efforts and "working as hard as we can," then there are very few forces on earth that can stand in our way.
By the same token, if we are frequently announcing that we've already lost and that our cause is hopeless, and holding slumberthons to protest our own nation's continued effort to prevail, then we certainly can bring about our own defeat.
Update: Today brings a stunningly important speech from Senator John McCain (via Captain's Quarters):
Mr. President, we have nearly finished this little exhibition, which was staged, I assume, for the benefit of a briefly amused press corps and in deference to political activists opposed to the war who have come to expect from Congress such gestures, empty though they may be, as proof that the majority in the Senate has heard their demands for action to end the war in Iraq. The outcome of this debate, the vote we are about to take, has never been in doubt to a single member of this body. And to state the obvious, nothing we have done for the last twenty-four hours will have changed any facts on the ground in Iraq or made the outcome of the war any more or less important to the security of our country. The stakes in this war remain as high today as they were yesterday; the consequences of an American defeat are just as grave; the costs of success just as dear. No battle will have been won or lost, no enemy will have been captured or killed, no ground will have been taken or surrendered, no soldier will have survived or been wounded, died or come home because we spent an entire night delivering our poll-tested message points, spinning our soundbites, arguing with each other, and substituting our amateur theatrics for statesmanship. All we have achieved are remarkably similar newspaper accounts of our inflated sense of the drama of this display and our own temporary physical fatigue. Tomorrow the press will move on to other things and we will be better rested. But nothing else will have changed.
In Iraq, American soldiers, Marines, sailors and airmen are still fighting bravely and tenaciously in battles that are as dangerous, difficult and consequential as the great battles of our armed forces’ storied past. Our enemies will still be intent on defeating us, and using our defeat to encourage their followers in the jihad they wage against us, a war which will become a greater threat to us should we quit the central battlefield in defeat. The Middle East will still be a tinderbox, which our defeat could ignite in a regional war that will imperil our vital interests at risk there and draw us into a longer and far more costly war. The prospect of genocide in Iraq, in which we will be morally complicit, is still as real a consequence of our withdrawal today as it was yesterday.
During our extended debate over the last few days, I have heard senators repeat certain arguments over and over again. My friends on the other side of this argument accuse those of us who oppose this amendment with advocating “staying the course,” which is intended to suggest that we are intent on continuing the mistakes that have put the outcome of the war in doubt. Yet we all know that with the arrival of General Petraeus we have changed course. We are now fighting a counterinsurgency strategy, which some of us have argued we should have been following from the beginning, and which makes the most effective use of our strength and does not strengthen the tactics of our enemy. This new battle plan is succeeding where our previous tactics have failed, although the outcome remains far from certain. The tactics proposed in the amendment offered by my friends, Senators Levin and Reed – a smaller force, confined to bases distant from the battlefield, from where they will launch occasional search and destroy missions and train the Iraqi military – are precisely the tactics employed for most of this war and which have, by anyone’s account, failed miserably. Now, that, Mr. President, is staying the course, and it is a course that inevitably leads to our defeat and the catastrophic consequences for Iraq, the region and the security of the United States our defeat would entail.
Yes, we have heard quite a lot about the folly of “staying the course,” though the real outcome should this amendment prevail and be signed into law, would be to deny our generals and the Americans they have the honor to command the ability to try, in this late hour, to address the calamity these tried and failed tactics produced, and salvage from the wreckage of our previous failures a measure of stability for Iraq and the Middle East, and a more secure future for the American people.
I have also listened to my colleagues on the other side repeatedly remind us that the American people have spoken in the last election. They have demanded we withdraw from Iraq, and it is our responsibility to do, as quickly as possible, what they have bid us to do. But is that our primary responsibility? Really, Mr. President, is that how we construe our role: to follow without question popular opinion even if we believe it to be in error, and likely to endanger the security of the country we have sworn to defend? Surely, we must be responsive to the people who have elected us to office, and who, if it is their wish, will remove us when they become unsatisfied with our failure to heed their demands. I understand that, of course. And I understand why so many Americans have become sick and tired of this war, given the many, many mistakes made by civilian and military leaders in its prosecution. I, too, have been made sick at heart by these mistakes and the terrible price we have paid for them. But I cannot react to these mistakes by embracing a course of action that I know will be an even greater mistake, a mistake of colossal historical proportions, which will -- and I am as sure of this as I am of anything – seriously endanger the people I represent and the country I have served all my adult life. I have many responsibilities to the people of Arizona, and to all Americans. I take them all seriously, Mr. President, or try to. But I have one responsibility that outweighs all the others – and that is to do everything in my power, to use whatever meager talents I posses, and every resource God has granted me to protect the security of this great and good nation from all enemies foreign and domestic. And that I intend to do, Mr. President, even if I must stand athwart popular opinion. I will explain my reasons to the American people. I will attempt to convince as many of my countrymen as I can that we must show even greater patience, though our patience is nearly exhausted, and that as long as there is a prospect for not losing this war, then we must not choose to lose it. That is how I construe my responsibility to my constituency and my country. That is how I construed it yesterday. It is how I construe it today. And it is how I will construe it tomorrow. I do not know how I could choose any other course.
I cannot be certain that I possess the skills to be persuasive. I cannot be certain that even if I could convince Americans to give General Petraeus the time he needs to determine whether we can prevail, that we will prevail in Iraq. All I am certain of is that our defeat there would be catastrophic, not just for Iraq, but for us, and that I cannot be complicit in it, but must do whatever I can, whether I am effective or not, to help us try to avert it. That, Mr. President, is all I can possibly offer my country at this time. It is not much compared to the sacrifices made by Americans who have volunteered to shoulder a rifle and fight this war for us. I know that, and am humbled by it, as we all are. But though my duty is neither dangerous nor onerous, it compels me nonetheless to say to my colleagues and to all Americans who disagree with me: that as long as we have a chance to succeed we must try to succeed.
I am privileged, as we all are, to be subject to the judgment of the American people and history. But, my friends, they are not always the same judgment. The verdict of the people will arrive long before history’s. I am unlikely to ever know how history has judged us in this hour. The public’s judgment of me I will know soon enough. I will accept it, as I must. But whether it is favorable or unforgiving, I will stand where I stand, and take comfort from my confidence that I took my responsibilities to my country seriously, and despite the mistakes I have made as a public servant and the flaws I have as an advocate, I tried as best I could to help the country we all love remain as safe as she could be in an hour of serious peril.
Can you think of a worse idea than bringing terrorist enemies to America?
That's exactly what House Democrats propose to do:
Key House Democrats plan to insist the Pentagon shut down the detention camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and are contemplating the relocation of many of the 385 or so remaining terrorist suspects to military brigs along the East Coast -- including Quantico, Va., and Charleston, S.C.
"It sets us back in the war on terrorism to be maintaining Guantanamo," said Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), who's heading an investigation of the facility for the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.
"It will enhance our reputation to close it down and to apply our system of justice to all of these detainees," he added.
After two trips to Guantanamo, Moran told The Politico that he's recommending Congress cut funding to the detention center at the end of summer 2008. The men held there should then be released, tried or moved to the United States, he said.
But not everyone has taken leave of their senses:
"While we want to bring these guys to trial as quickly as possible, where do Democrats believe we should keep Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the 9/11 plot?" the official asked. "Which American city will they choose to place America's most wanted terrorists?"
I guess Democrats have decided we've had too many years of relative peace on American soil since September 11th and it's time to give the terrorists some good reasons to bomb American cities.
Here are some of the biggest stories and best commentary out there so far today. Leave a comment or suggest a story if you wish, and check back for updates!
NEWS
MUST SEE Little Green Footballs, Massive Beirut Crowd: "Death to America" (video) What the mainstream media won't tell you -- that you really, really need to know
NEW! Fox News, One of Three Missing Mt. Hood Climbers Has Been Found Dead Search continues for two more climbers
NEW! Yahoo! News, France to Pull Troops from Afghanistan France doing what it does best
Fight Night: Ten Players Ejected Following Knicks-Nuggets Brawl Knicks embarrassed by losing badly on their home floor decided to get physical
They Killed Osama Bin Laden Sort of. So why am I not happy?
COMMENTARY
NEW! Mark Steyn, And Merry Xmas to You All In the week when Iran hosts a well-attended Holocaust Denial Convention (which simultaneously denies the last Holocaust while gleefully anticipating the next one), this rabbi thinks it's in the interests of the Jewish people to take legal action against "holiday" decorations at Seattle Airport? Sorry, it's not the airport but the plaintiff who's out of his tree. An ability to prioritize is an indispensable quality of adulthood, and a sense of proportion is a crucial ingredient of a mature society
New! Jules Crittenden, Boston Herald, Kerry Rewrites U.S. Foreign Policy to Fix Iraq Wisecrack Some people seem to have an unerring instinct for the wrong side of history. You can rely on them, at critical moments, to abandon friends and accommodate evil, in the name of good
Time, Person of the Year: You They like us! They really like us!
QUOTE OF THE DAY
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable -- if anything is excellent or praiseworthy -- think about such things." (Phillipians 4:8)
Here are some of today's biggest stories and best commentary. Check back for updates!
NEWS
Reuters, Senator Kerry Urges Dialogue with Iran, Syria And Kerry will be meeting with Syrian President Bashar al-Assadas. Has Kerry ever met an enemy of America he doesn't like?
Newsday, White House Says Senate Visits to Syria Could Hinder Progress Even more leading Democratic Senators (and Republican-in-name-only Arlen Specter) rush to get chummy with Syria
Washington Post, Democratic Sen. Johnson in Stable Condition After Brain Surgery "Stable" sounds like an improvement over "critical"
NEW! Yahoo! News, Johnson Shows Signs of Surgery Recovery Looking good, but one independent doctor cautions Sen. Johnson still may need more surgery at some point
Associated Press, World's Tallest Man Saves China Dolphins Long arms come in handy when you need to pull plastic from a dolphin's stomach
New York Times, Reversing Trend, Big Drop Is Seen in Breast Cancer Most likely explanation is that women have abandoned hormone replacement therapy that was believed to slightly increase breast cancer risk
NEW! Space Station Glitch Possibly Caused by Solar Flare Solar winds appear to be affecting astronauts' flight
NEW! Washington Post, Castro Near Death, U.S. Intelligence Chief Says Last seen in an October 28th video
COMMENTARY
Jawa Report, No Killing "Innocents"-- Innocents = Muslims, Everyone Else Is Fair Game Anjem Choudary, head of The Society of Muslim Lawyers in U.K., explains that it's O.K. to murder you if you're not Muslim
Powerline, Mr. President, If I May Be So Bold . . . What to do about Iraq and Iran . . . besides giving up, that is
NEW! Michelle Malkin, What's So Funny About Going to Iraq? Plus: More Questions for AP Whatever was left of the AP's reputation for accuracy in Iraq war coverage is slip-sliding away fast
FUN
NEW! Point Five, Windows Middle East Troubleshooter: At Last, A Solution A little off-color language, but it's amusing
TODAY IS THE LAST DAY TO VOTE IN 2006 WEBLOG AWARDS
Please take two clicks and cast one more vote for this website. Voting ends today! Do know what that means? It means you'll actually be able to visit this website again without finding endless pleas for your vote! A big thank you to all who have voted.
Oh, and while you're at it, please cast another vote for Dr. Melissa Clouthier, who always has something interesting up at her website. Vote for her here.
Big thank yous also for sending kind words and votes my way to The Anchoress, Point Five Blog, and Sister Toldjah. They all have terrific websites; you can vote for them here: Anchoress (Lileks is also outstanding but has more than enough votes already) and Sister Toldjah or Point Five (both in the same category along with some other terrific blogs, so you'll have to take your pick).
This is too funny: Larry King admits that he has never used the internet.
"Do you punch little buttons and things?”
Last night CNN’s Larry King confessed to Roseanne Barr that he’s never used the Internet. King expressed doubt that the Internet was a viable political medium because “there’s 80 billion things on it.” When Barr said she liked the Internet, King acknowledged that “I’ve never done it, never gone searching.”
Barr said King would love the internet if he tried it. King replied, “I wouldn’t love it. What do you punch little buttons and things?” Barr even offered to show King how to use the Internet. King declined.
Hoo boy! This may explain some of the stuff that comes out of Larry King's show.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go punch some little buttons and things.
Even though this is not exactly a computer technology website, I seem to be getting a steady stream of visits from people looking for computer wallpaper. Why? Apparently it's because I published this cartoon a while ago:
Although I'm sure you enjoy the cartoon, perhaps you'd be even happier if I helped you find some wallpaper for your computer desktop. Here are some links you may find helpful:
Hitarak: Download free wallpaper: Animals, beaches, movies, 3D, you name it.
Inspirational Desktops: Download free inspirational and motivational wallpaper.
Crosswalk.com: Free religious wallpaper, with a selection that changes each month. Most of these wallpapers include the current month's or current season's calendar.
Cloudeight: More free desktop wallpaper
And Wallpaperreview.com provides links to even more wallpaper websites!
Or try this simple method of coming up with unique wallpaper that suits your mood. Do a Google image search for any word that interests you today, like "motivational" (or "inspirational" or "cats" or "football" -- you name it.) Find a reasonably crisp image you like, click on it until you get the full-size image, right click it, and click "Set as Background." Voila! -- your favorite image is now your wallpaper! (If the image comes out too small or too fuzzy as wallpaper, repeat until you find an image that works.) To avoid copyright problems, use this "home-made" wallpaper on your own personal computer.
_____________________________________
If you found this information helpful and want to return the favor, start your next visit to Amazon.com at this website (click below or click the Amazon ad in the right column). No matter what you buy, if you enter Amazon.com from this website, some small reward will come this way. And remember, Amazon isn't just a bookseller -- it's become an online superstore. You likely find several things you need to buy anyway. Thank you!
"It's official. I'm a Google addict. I admit it. I can't help it. They seem to come out with some new and practical function each month that makes my online time that much more enjoyable. Gradually, I've found myself using Gmail more than the email account provided by my ISP, mainly because of the large storage capacity, the excellent spam filters, and a few useful Firefox extensions that I've come to rely upon. I've organized all of my RSS feeds on the Google Reader, which now gives previews in a popup balloon so that you don't have to open a new tab or window to see posts made by your favorite bloggers. And my personalized Google home page contains customized news and weather, plus Gmail and Google Reader previews, as well as a list of my most frequently used bookmarks, making them accessable from any computer. I also have Google Calendar set up to send me daily reminders and a full agenda of my day's activities via email (yeah, hard to believe I actually have activities, huh?). Like I said, I'm addicted."
I haven't tried half these Google tools. I use Google mainly as a search engine and as a source of referrals and ads for this web page. I've set up a gmail account but haven't used it yet.
Obviously I am way, way behind the curve here. I will have to get busy and try more tools.
By the way, I should add that I'm a little bit irritated, as is much of the blogosphere, about Google's failure to give even a passing salute (so to speak) to Memorial Day. Hopefully Google will get it right next year or on Veteran's Day this year.
But I have to admit -- Google makes some very nice software.
Since I happen to run Google ads, below is a link to get the free "Google pack." It includes some nice tools. Currently it only works if you have Windows XP.
Here's a list of software included in the free Google pack. You can download it all or just the parts you want.
TigerHawk has an excellent review of Glenn Reynolds' new book, An Army Of Davids.
Yahoo! News has an interesting article about blog spam.
For people who have no moral compass, the internet is a goldmine of opportunities to steal and defraud.
Spammers today are diverse. They work with adware; they control botnets of computers; they are virus writers. Today's spammers don't just want to sell you Viagra; they want to trick you into handing over your credit card number, or infect your system and turn it into a zombie.
Don't be their next victim. The article is educational for bloggers and for anyone who uses the internet.
Recent Comments