Newspost#061108

With hardship, but also quite inevitably we have to mention, this weeks news only typically show the old division for categories Good-, Bad- and the Ugly. Also, on the topics discussed we may notice opposites attract, but also got possibly only ourselves to blame: this time, as usual, we have a selection of highlights from digitalization and computing front-line(say; the good), but also on the contrary from the Climate Change and its environmental co-effects (the bad). Also, just for the reason that there has to be a place for the ugly too, we'll leave that role for ourselves, and here's these discussions on blogging (...not that we'd find ourselves less attractive. As an further justification for the role-part selected: it's my favourite character in the original western by Leone, perhaps sometimes disgusting, but also most human of them...)

For starters we just mention that now Microsoft is also on the cloud-computing front-line with it's Azure (curiously named, not their style at all...), also there's now 1st previews from Windows 7 and on quick glance we kind of noticed: it almost reminded us from the early days (in 1990's) when Win98 was pushed to market as some sort of face-lift for 95 OS (as comparison, of course this time plenty more new features introduced and plenty more cash to be made, expectable but not surprising we might say). As an examples from the capabilities improved one finds at least these: up-to-date inclusion of codecs (AAC and H.264, not to mention Divx and Xvid also supported in WMP 12), native device support (for such as blu-ray), streaming possibilities, the improved file-systems managements and security improvements like bitlocker...etc., also, they promise it to fit on notebooks as well (or vice versa the notebooks are supposed to evaluate in properties necessary to support on-coming Windows). In general something new under the sun; on the other hand, we see no reason why they couldn't, if wish so, also make (many) of these modifications available for Vista simultaneously (as an SP, perhaps they even will). Also Google's Picasa 3 hits the surface with such-and-such properties improved(most apparently the included Photo viewer, that with style and glamour takes its place, we notice at first glance). Also, there's now on-the-cloud version from OpenOffice 3 too(that Open Source competitor for MS Office) with project name Ulteo. In addition to that, the most futuristic news concern the printer markets (selected from Treehugger's briefings): With modest estimate, once some 10 years pass they say, you are likely to get the 3D-modelling/printing device with price of these days regular one, currently these ”3D Kinko's” costing less than what Apples first laser-printers when presented on markets in 1985 (6995$). So they say: ”While we are not at the state where we can print out our chairs or cutlery yet, it is coming.” Whoever finds that efficient solutions necessary and indispendable at the time...I suppose...

…Google finally scores the hand wrestling with...Authors Guild and Association of American Publishers (or AAP and some individual writers, as it reads on Google's pages concerning agreement) and readers are blessed with all these numbers of books out-of-print, now to be searchable and readable via G's Book Search. Whole book previewing now applies to all books out-of-print (not selling in remarkable amounts anymore). Are we excited? Sure. Like they say, 'to guarantee that this material is available for previewing, reading and buying [in U.S., so far (as we are of current knowledge) it only benefits american readers], and also to preserve the cultural history of human kind', one of the main aims for this co-operative books scanning and data-base project. We can but clap ours hands. Writers receive their equal share of side-by income via Book Rights Registry (which can possibly be quite an complicated effort to maintain, we suppose...), and also, the (US) readers can buy full on-line credit for million book-shelve catalogue: "Because the agreement is the result of a U.S. lawsuit, all of these services will be available to readers who access Google Book Search in the United States. " Only question, we didn't find answer for yet, is whether that undoubtedly nominal sum a user should pay for his (hers) online library is to be tied in certain minimum income amount, sort of, just to guarantee that the whole thing would be equally benefiting for each one.. In time they hope to make service similarly available for all users outside States as well... and they should, cause actually that's similarly a matter of equality politics. Waiting for that...the new forms of literature - with hypertext and multimedia scalability - namely blogging, is found gaining grounds but not necessary with as much organized manner. This has downsides as well: As there's not generally any definitive rules or agreements for the possible futuristic directions (of blogs), so the whole phenomenom could even possibly nourish in time when falling out of style. Most likely not, but nothing in net most likely stays the same in longer periods... Ourselves, as sometimes in favour of less technoid and more conventional methods, like to recommend the literally 'primitive' world of blogging the high values of classical literature history (which have stubbornly preserved this far even through the digitalization and internet revolutionions.) That's always a bit on the background in our efforts and doings what comes to form of these texts, if not the content, mostly. As noted elsewhere, we now even have printed version from 1st quarter year of this blog, too (not publicly available, cause these pages already serve all the imaginable demand). Mainly, with the printed version, we are just kind of documenting this effort in traditional manner, too.

Coming up next; Once you got over the idea, that climate change actually can change (for worse)the lives of millions of people in the close future, possibly yours too, you are forced digest this one as well: in 50 years, as a co-effect 25 per cent of current animal species are supposed to be extinct(50 per cent of animals and plants 'til 2100...yes, this is the Bad ones...). But, before you read further you might like to know that information in our briefings is collected(in addition to this weeks newsfeed) from couple sources: there's a brief conclusive article on Conservation Biology studies (published last year, I guess) as well as the (relatively) new info on Climate Changes progresses (both from WWF's pages), but also (in fact most here, as well as some of our 'headings' printed in bold are loaned from it:) Julia Whitty's 2007 article on Independent; 'Animal extinction – the greatest threat to human kind'. See them, and for a complete picture, also, why not think of things on the economic level and check this article from 12 degrees of freedom blog as well and (just to stress the point...) you may find this collection of links and reports on Newscientist useful. (or to save time, just read from them the Tim Jackson's text to familiarize from the Ehrlich equation [human Impact]=PAT, and the arguments that follow...) And also, one may (not) like to, but can see the World Conservation Union's Red List (for up-to-date list on endangered species).

Yes, quite a list of external links...but the question (in question)? The frightening part is that current on-coming extinction is in scale only comparable to the previous pre-human mass-scale wipe-outs of life forms in Earths history. The previous ones have been described (ao) with the original definition (for extinction) by the 18^th century naturalist Georges Cuivier when examining the bones fossils and similar remains of the past: ”the existence of a world previous to ours, destroyed by some sort of catastrophe”. So...if it happened before, does it matter? ...All in nature kind of recycles and new species appear in time... Does (matter), cause the most recent one that killed the dinosaurs, also wiped out some between 50 to 95 per cent of other habitants as well and according to the prehistory experts (and this time, quite surprisingly, we don´t have any controversial arguments...) ”...it takes 10 million years before biological diversity even begins to approach what existed before a die-off”. You propably had no idea. Few do. (Neither did I.) Also, current development propably already started at human prehistory (on this, we're not quite convinced from theories of human ancestors actually having extinct the sabre-tooths and mammoths, but...), but the speed of current one in the industrial/post industrial age carries the alarming sign: estimates differ but ”by the most conservative measure – based on last century recorded extinctions – the current rate of extinctions is 100 times the background rate.” Could possibly wipe out the humans as well as a co-effect. However, that was not the original question (just to play with words: completely irrelevant question from sociological point-of-view). Instead, one the most alarming developments is the rapid decline, "not just species but of higher taxa, such as the class Amphibia." (And one finds the information from studies that tell from Yellowstone frogs die-outs as indications from environmental degradation, but also in 20 years some 70 species of South-American frogs already extinct as result of climate change, they say).

So, conclusively it seems to be not solely the change in weathers (as that's a most actual and renown side-effect from human actions), not even solely the amphibians or insects in general, not solely the orangutan or polar bears or penguins just to mention few other examples. Studies from biodiversity ”hot spots” (25 of 34 in world) containing many of the most unique plant and animal species show that Climate Change, along with the human caused deforestation, which remains even more direct cause, has become evermore apparent threat because: [these areas] ”...are particularly vulnerable because species in these regions have restricted migration options due to geographical limitations.” Practically, not surprisingly we notice, that means most alarmingly the rainforests, cause these particularly vulnerable areas include (ao) tropical Andes, the Cape Floristic region of South Africa, Southwest Australia and the Atlantic forests of Brazil, Paraguay and Argentina. And also its the question of incresing number in co-extinctions, [whose rate]; ”...climb alarmingly as the host extinctions rise in the close future.” ...Things being so, as one (sole) possibility to halt (or say, slow down) the current development they (many conversation biologist) believe 'rewilding' as the ”best hope for arresting the sixth great extinction”. Ending our remarks here, simply cause our limited knowledge can't take anymore, we suggest readers to check these articles mentioned in these paragraphs from current 'countdown to extinction' just in case if our brief summaries didn't quite make the most complete or even quite satisfactory picture from the topics in question(the extinction was the question). Of course, this unpleasant scenario presented shouldn't appear any manner unavoidable future, but just in case that all this wasn't properly clear in some other discussions of the topic (of course currently there's lot of discussions on it) ...and just because at the time (of question) you most propably are to hear them saying: 'Possibly, we can bio-genetically re-create all this diversity', sort of Jurassic dreaming I might say...