Windows Registry Repair And Maintenance

In general, the occurrence of errors in a system's Registry increases over time and with the Registry's continued growth.

This is because the most common and abundant errors are orphaned Registry entries created during the installation or incomplete removal of registered applications and hardware drivers, making them largely responsible for the overall degradation of database stability as the Registry is forced to grow around them.

These errors usually have a minimal affect on overall system performance, but can become debilitating if they are left in the registry for a very long time or if the Registry grows very rapidly. In a sense, your system is doomed from the start.

If you add to these odds your Registry's chances of escaping all other sources and types of errors completely, it will probably become apparent that something needs to be done.

What's to be done?

It is almost universally decided that incorporating a regular Windows Registry Repair and Maintenance Program into your Registry's diet will not only prevent system crashes by repairing major registry issues, but will also maintain a more stable database structure by periodically removing the multitude of minor errors that are responsible for its gradual degradation over time as it grows around them.

Registry Repair Utilities

Although some versions of Windows provide built-in background system utilities designed to maintain Registry structure and stability, these utilities only address the most basic Registry problems in the most primitive ways, making them insufficient when a Registry becomes really huge and complicated.

Fortunately, there are currently an infinite number of third-party Windows Registry repair utilities available on the Internet, spanning the full spectrum in cost user control that are effective in removing a large number of common Registry errors.

Combination Repair and Cleaning utilities fix errors caused by invalid references, viruses, and spyware and tracking programs, as well as defragment hives and backup/restore registry data.

The most common errors addressed by these utilities are :

• Orphaned, missing, obsolete and damaged Registry keys, These are usually caused by applications that are incompletely or incorrectly uninstalled.

• Orphaned DLLs (Dynamic Link Libraries). These are invalid registry entries in the SharedDDLs section that are created when a DLL shared by multiple applications is deleted or moved.

• Missing or corrupt GUIDs (Globally-unique Identifiers), The registered components that are identified by the Registry by GUIDs rather than their paths and filenames can no longer function..

• File Not Found errors

• Old or corrupted hardware drivers

• Registry fragmentation, Fragmentation of registry hives occurs when applications repeatedly modify the same values in small increments.

• Virus and spyware that enter the registry by creating or modifying keys.

How often you should use these utilities depends on your Registry's size and your system's activity and can be best determined by starting off with a very frequent repair schedule, slowly increasing the time between successive repair. EWIL

Spyware In Coming' Without Knocking

No one welcomes spyware out of choice. Again spyware attack happens in your ignorance. The provision of becoming alert of the spyware attack is so minimal that when your personal computer system has already become infected you then come to know that it's spyware behind the whole fuss.

Increasing attack of spyware

The creator of the spyware program is actually using an illegal means to affect your working and computation system for his own benefit. Spyware is so dangerous that once it gets into your computer it can easily track an overall record of everything in it.

Spyware does not even leave the strokes you use to compute a programming. Such detailing comes under the spyware's capture.

The problem of spyware attack has become a great threat to everyone using a computer system in the online process. As there are varieties of spywares, also in the form of adware in thousands of types, it has become very tough to detect them instantly.

They are always under disguise and have been formatted in such a way that you will feel tempted and open the program to call upon you an unwanted problem quite unknowingly.

The current report placed by Symantec is definitely a warning to protect each one's computer system from the spyware. More that 85% of people working online has already received spyware infection in their PCs and have suffered with this technological menace.

Spyware removal tool

The immediate protection you can take against the spyware attack is through the installation of some spyware removal tool in your computer system. General anti-virus is ineffective on the spyware and spyware is very efficient to remain camouflaged till it gets the right opportunity to attack.

A slight indication of remaining unprotected if tracked by the spyware adware programming system, it won't delay to spot your system and immediately infect it to get hold of your data and documents with every kind of secret records.

Thus beware because you might never know that the spyware is actually keeping a constant watch on you.

The creator actually so efficiently does the spyware programming that it can steal your personal password at ease and regulate your banking and credit at his own discretion. Only when you are bankrupted you come to know that the roof has broken on your head.

So it's high time that you block all possible routes for the spyware to enter your personal computer and get protected from these unsafe situations any further.Everything What I Like

Use Firewall Protection ' For Combat Spyware

How will you react when you come to know you are being watched? Will there be a chill in your spine? Quite possible! But let's look at the same thing in a different way. If you have the premonition that someone is keeping an eye on you, there is a possibility that you can take steps to counter the attack. Am I right?

Now wear the same spectacles and watch the spyware through your angle of vision. What do you find out?

Spyware was really troublesome when you were not that aware of its harmful intentions but now when you can clearly recognize that there is software called spyware that can mess up with your documents and befool you with wrong motifs, why don't you take prior safety measures?

Firewall is one such protective measures against virus and spyware that can damage your computer and the records stored in it.

Understand the utility

Keeping your computer system in an unprotected state is indeed a foolish thing to do. Don't you know that the hackers are all around to disrupt your operating system with different types of viruses and other software threats? In such a situation how can you be so callous to keep your computer in an unprotected condition?

You are also aware of Trojan Horses similar to the spyware that can seal any type of information from your personal operating system.

The spyware can slow down your machine by making a niche in the computer's registry. Corrupting the files seems to be the birth right of every virus and spyware and Trojan horse don't stand behind in this using this opportunity.

Firewall provides every possible security to your computer system so that the hacker can't create nuisance in your system.

Firewall types

There are three security forms from the firewall. All the three types give service to specific users of the computer system and those dealing with the network. The reason for this difference is quite justifiable because a person operating from home in his own PC and a person connected through LAN has different avenues to fall into the spyware trouble.

If you have to stop the spyware you will have to block all the routes of its entry.

Thus the firewall is divided into software firewalls, wireless routers and the hardware routers. You can guess from the names that the software firewalls are used for individual computers whereas the wireless routers are required to protect the wireless connection.

Of course the hardware router has been devised in such a way that it gives safeguard to those networking system at home connected with the Internet.Everything What I Like

Mechanism affecting' Salmonella virulence' Drug susceptibility discovered

Scientists have uncovered the mechanism behind Salmonella’s virulence and its susceptibility to antibiotics. Although the mechanism had not been recognized before, the scientists were intrigued to find evidence of a similar mechanism in all five kingdoms of life - animals, plants, fungi, protista, and monera.

The findings have appeared in Molecular Cell. The senior author of the study is Dr. Ferric C. Fang, professor of microbiology, laboratory medicine, and medicine at the University of Washington (UW).

Fang also directs the Clinical Microbiology Laboratory at Harborview Medical Center in Seattle. The lead author is William Wiley Navarre, who began the study as a postdoctoral fellow in the Fang lab and is now an assistant professor at the University of Toronto.

Salmonella enters the gut when people eat contaminated food, and can sometimes spread to other parts of the body. Illness outbreaks and grocery recalls related to Salmonella are often in the news. Babies, young children, the elderly, and people with cancer or HIV are especially prone to severe illness from Salmonella.

Salmonella is adaptable and can withstand many of the body’s attempts to fight it. The bacteria live and multiply in a special compartment inside the cells of an infected person or animal. Salmonella can alter its physiology as it moves from a free-swimming life to its residence in a host cell. Salmonella’s metabolism also changes over time to make use of the nutrients available in the host cell, and to survive damage from the build-up of oxidants and nitric oxide in the infected cell.

While screening mutant Salmonella that were resistant to a form of nitric oxide that normally stops the bacteria from dividing, Navarre, Fang and their research collaborators found mutations in two little-known genes. These are the closely linked poxA and yjeK genes.

In a number of bacteria, these two genes are associated with a third gene that encodes the Bacterial Elongation Factor P, which is involved in protein production.

The researchers discovered that these three genes operate in a common pathway that is critical for the ability of the Salmonella bacteria to cause disease and resist several classes of antibiotics. Salmonella with mutations in either the poxA gene or the yjeK genes, the study noted, appear to be nearly identical and show similar changes in proteins involved in metabolism. Strains with mutations in both genes resemble the single mutant strains, an observation that suggests the two genes work in the same pathway.

The mutant strains exhibited many abnormalities under stressful conditions.“The wide spectrum of compounds that dramatically inhibited the growth of these mutant strains suggest that the defect lies in a general stress response,” the researchers noted.

The mutant bacteria measurably differed from the wild-type Salmonella under 300 different conditions. In addition, their aberrant production of virulence factors reduces their ability to survive in the host.

The researchers’ analysis also suggests that the way poxA and yjeK modify the bacterial protein elongation factor is essential in the production of proteins that allow the bacteria to use alternative energy sources when they are deprived of nutrients, as occurs after they enter host cells.

Unexpectedly the researchers found that the Salmonella with mutations in poxA and yjeK continued to respire inappropriately under nutrient-poor conditions in which wild-type Salmonella cease respiration.

Perhaps the mutant strains don’t know when to quit. Wild-type Salmonella might enter a state of suspended animation to weather harsh conditions, whereas the mutants fail to respond properly to environmental stress.

The fact that the mutants continue to respire when they are in dire straits might lead to the production of toxic oxygen-containing compounds.“This might explain,” the authors suggested, “why the mutants are broadly sensitive to a large number of unrelated compounds and cellular stresses.”

The researchers also noticed a resemblance between the astounding manner in which the poxA gene modifies the bacterial elongation factor to regulate stress resistance, and the way a similarly acting factor is regulated in plant and animal cells.

During the manufacture of a protein, transfer RNA, also called tRNA, normally places an amino acid at the end of a growing chain of protein building blocks. A certain type of enzyme normally hands the tRNA the amino acid for it to place. However, in this study, researchers have shown for the first time that the poxA enzyme steps in and directly attaches an amino acid to the Elongation Factor P protein, rather than to the tRNA.

Fang said, “Sometimes it seems as if the most basic discoveries in biology have already been made. It was fun and unexpected to learn something new about a process as fundamental as protein synthesis.”

“This is an interesting illustration of molecular evolution,” Fang continued. “This essential, but previously unrecognized mechanism, for regulating the production of proteins appears to have been conserved over evolutionary time and continues to take place in cells belonging to all five kingdoms of life.”

Future studies in his lab will address the specific reasons behind the defective stress response in poxA- and yjeK-deficient bacteria and the explanation for its different effects on the amounts of individual proteins.

The lab will also look further into the roles of the normal poxA and yjeK proteins, the intriguing way in which the bacterial elongation protein is modified, the apparent universality of this protein-modifying mechanism in living cells and its conservation throughout the course of evolution. (ANI)

The Simple Shattering of Water

It's because you and them were made of the same pieces. And afterwards, when you put yourself back together, some piece of them remained.

Ghost of Kuntilanak' Indonesian Real Ghost' (video)

Kuntilanak (Melayu language: puntianak, Pontianak) is a ghost who is believed derived from pregnant women who died or the woman who died of childbirth and the child has not had time of birth. The name "Kuntilanak" or "pontianak" most likely comes from the combination of the word "pregnancy" (pregnancy) and "child". This myth is similar to the mythical ghost langsuir known in Southeast Asia, especially in the Indonesian archipelago. Myth Kuntilanak ghosts from earlier times has also become a common myth in Malaysia after being taken by the immigrants from the archipelago.

The Cybernetics of Black Knights

Serendipity’s a funny thing. When I started planning out this post a couple of days ago, I knew that I was going to have to pull my battered copy of Gregory Bateson’s Mind and Nature off the bookshelf where I keep basic texts on systems philosophy, since it’s almost impossible to talk about information in any useful way without banking off Bateson’s ideas. I didn’t have any similar intention when I checked out science reporter Charles Seife’s Sun in a Bottle: The Strange History of Fusion and the Science of Wishful Thinking from the local library, much less when I took a break from writing the other evening to watch “Monty Python and the Holy Grail” for the first time since my teens.

Still, I’m not at all sure I could have chosen better, for both of these latter turned out to have plenty of relevance to the theme of this week’s post. Fifty years of failed research and a minor masterpiece of giddy British absurdity may not seem to have much to do with each other, much less with information, Gregory Bateson, or a “green wizardry” fitted to the hard limits and pressing needs of the end of the industrial age. Yet the connections are there, and the process of tracing them out will help more than a little to make sense of how information works – and also how it fails to work.

Let’s start with a few basics. Information is the third element of the triad of fundamental principles that flow through whole systems of every kind, and thus need to be understood to build viable appropriate tech systems. We have at least one huge advantage in understanding information that people a century ago didn’t have: a science of information flow in whole systems, variously called cybernetics and systems theory, that was one of the great intellectual adventures of the twentieth century and deserves much more attention than most people give it these days.

Unfortunately we also have at least one huge disadvantage in understanding information that people a century ago didn’t have, either. The practical achievements of cybernetics, especially but not only in the field of computer science, have given rise to attitudes toward information in popular culture that impose bizarre distortions on the way most people nowadays approach the subject. You can see these attitudes in an extreme form in the notion, common in some avant-garde circles, that since the amount of information available to industrial civilization is supposedly increasing at an exponential rate, and exponential curves approach infinity asymptotically in a finite time, then at some point not too far in the future, industrial humanity will know everything and achieve something like omnipotence.

I’ve pointed out several times in these essays that this faith in the so-called “singularity” is a rehash of Christian apocalyptic myth in the language of cheap science fiction, complete with a techno-Rapture into a heaven lightly redecorated to make it look like outer space. It might also make a good exhibit A in a discussion of the way that any exponential curve taken far enough results in absurdity. Still, there’s still another point here, which is that the entire notion of the singularity is rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding of what information is and what it does.

Bateson’s work is a good place to start clearing up the mess. He defines information as “a difference that makes a difference.” This is a subtle definition, and it implies much more than it states. Notice in particular that whether a difference “makes a difference” is not an objective quality ; it depends on an observer, to whom the difference makes a difference. To make the same point in the language of philosophy, information can’t be separated from intentionality.

What is intentionality? The easiest way to understand this concept is to turn toward the nearest window. Notice that you can look through the window and see what’s beyond it, or you can look at the window and see the window itself. If you want to know what’s happening in the street outside, you look through the window; if you want to know how dirty the window glass is, you look at the window. The window presents you with the same collection of photons in either case; what turns that collection into information of one kind or another, and makes the difference between seeing the street and seeing the glass, is your intentionality.

The torrent of raw difference that deluges every human being during every waking second, in other words, is not information. That torrent is data – a Latin word that means “that which is given.” Only when we approach data with intentionality, looking for differences that make a difference, does data become information – another Latin word that means “that which puts form into something.” Data that isn’t relevant to a given intentionality, such as the dirt on a window when you’re trying to see what’s outside, has a different name, one that doesn’t come from Latin: noise.

Thus the mass production of data in which believers in the singularity place their hope of salvation can very easily have the opposite of the effect they claim for it. Information only comes into being when data is approached from within a given intentionality, so it’s nonsense to speak of it as increasing exponentially in some objective sense. Data can increase exponentially, to be sure, but this simply increases the amount of noise that has to be filtered before information can be made from it. This is particularly true in that a very large fraction of the data that’s exponentially increasing these days consists of such important material as, say, gossip about Kate Hudson’s breast implants.

The need to keep data within bounds to make getting information from it easier explains why the sense organs of living things have been shaped by evolution to restrict, often very sharply, the data they accept. Every species of animal has different information needs, and thus limits its intake of data in a different way. You’re descended from mammals that spent a long time living in trees, for example, which is why your visual system is very good at depth perception and seeing the colors that differentiate ripe from unripe fruit, and very poor at a lot of other things.

A honeybee has different needs for information, and so its senses select different data. It sees colors well up into the ultraviolet, which you can’t, because many flowers use reflectivity in the ultraviolet to signal where the nectar is, and it also sees the polarization angle of light, which you don’t, since this helps it navigate to and from the hive. You don’t “see” heat with a special organ on your face, the way a rattlesnake does, or sense electrical currents the way many fish do; around you at every moment is a world of data that you will never perceive, because your ancestors over millions of generations survived better by excluding that data, so they could extract information from the remainder, than they would have done by including it.

Human social evolution parallels biological evolution, and so it’s not surprising that much of the data processing in human societies consists of excluding most data so that useful information can emerge from the little that’s left over. This is necessary but it’s also problematic, for a set of filters that limit data to what’s useful in one historical or ecological context can screen out exactly the data that might be most useful in a different context, and the filters don’t necessarily change as fast as the context.

The history of fusion power research provides a superb example. For more than half a century now, leading scientists in the world’s industrial nations have insisted repeatedly, and inaccurately, that they were on the brink of opening the door to commercially viable fusion power. Trillions of dollars have gone down what might best be described as a collection of high-tech ratholes as the same handful of devices get rebuilt in bigger and fancier models, and result in bigger and costlier flops. They’re still at it; the money the US government alone is paying to fund the two fusion megaprojects du jour, the National Ignition Facility and the ITER, would very likely buy a solar hot water system for every residence in the United States and thus cut the country’s household energy use by around 10% at a single stroke. Instead, it’s being spent on projects that even their most enthusiastic proponents admit will only be one more inconclusive step toward fusion power.

The information that is being missed here is that fusion power isn’t a viable option. Even if sustained fusion can be done at all outside the heart of a star, and the odds of that don’t look good just now, it’s been shown beyond a doubt that the cost of building enough fusion power plants to make a difference will be so high that no nation on Earth can afford them. There are plenty of reasons why that information is being missed, but an important one is that industrial society learned a long time ago to filter out data that suggested that any given technology wasn’t going to be viable. During the last three centuries, as fossil fuel extraction sent energy per capita soaring to unparalleled heights, that was an adaptive choice; the inevitable failures – and there have been wowsers – were more than outweighed by the long shots that came off, and the steady expansion of economic wealth powered by fossil fuels made covering the costs of failures and long shots alike a minor matter.

We don’t live in that kind of world any longer. With the peak of world conventional petroleum production receding in the rear view mirror, energy per capita is contracting, not expanding. At the same time, most of the low hanging fruit in science and engineering has long since been harvested, and most of what’s left – fusion power here again is a good example – demands investment on a gargantuan scale with no certainty of payback. The assumption that innovation always pays off, and that data contradicting that belief is to be excluded, has become hopelessly maladaptive, but it remains welded in place; consider the number of people who insist that the proper response to peak oil is some massive program that would gamble the future on some technology that hasn’t yet left the drawing boards.

It’s at this point that the sound of clattering coconut hulls can be heard in the distance, for the attempt to create information out of data that won’t fit it is the essence of the absurd, and absurdity was the stock in trade of the crew of British comics who performed under the banner of Monty Python. What makes “Monty Python and the Holy Grail” so funny is the head-on collisions between intentionalities and data deliberately chosen to conflict with them; any given collision may involve the intentionality the audience has been lured into accepting, or the intentionality one of the characters is pursuing, or both at once, but in every scene, cybernetically speaking, that’s what’s happening.

Consider King Arthur’s encounter with the Black Knight. The audience and Arthur both approach the scene with an intentionality borrowed from chivalric romance, in which knightly combat extracts the information of who wins and who loses out of the background data of combat. The Black Knight, by contrast, approaches the fight with an intentionality that excludes any data that would signal his defeat. No matter how many of the Black Knight’s limbs get chopped off – and by the end of the scene, he’s got four bloody stumps – he insists on his invincibility and accuses Arthur of cowardice for refusing to continue the fight. There’s some resemblance here to the community of fusion researchers, whose unchanging response to half a century of utter failure is to keep repeating that fusion power is just twenty (more) years in the future.

Doubtless believers in the singularity will be saying much the same thing fifty years from now, if there are still any believers in the singularity around then. The simple logical mistake they’re making is the same one that fusion researchers have been making for half a century; they’ve forgotten that the words “this can’t be done” also convey information, and a very important kind of information at that. Just as it’s very likely at this point that fusion research will end up discovering that fusion power won’t work on any scale smaller than a star, it’s entirely plausible that even if we did achieve infinite knowledge about the nature of the universe, what we would learn from it is that the science fiction fantasies retailed by believers in the singularity are permanently out of reach, and we simply have to grit our teeth and accept the realities of human existence after all.

All these points, even those involving Black Knights, have to be kept in mind in making sense of the flow of information through whole systems. Every system has its own intentionality, and every functional system filters the data given to it so that it can create the information it needs. Even so simple a system as a thermostat connected to a furnace has an intentionality – it “looks” at the air temperature around the thermostat, and “sees” if that temperature is low enough to justify turning the furnace on, or high enough to justify turning it off. The better the thermostat, the more completely it ignores any data that has no bearing on its intentionality; conversely, most of the faults thermostats can suffer can be understood as ways that other bits of data (for example, the insulating value of the layer of dust on the thermostat) insert themselves where they’re not wanted.

The function of the thermostat-furnace system in the larger system to which it belongs – the system of the house that it’s supposed to keep at a more or less stable temperature – is another matter, and requires a subtly different intentionality. The homeowner, whose job it is to make information out of the available data, monitors the behavior of the thermostat-furnace system and, if something goes wrong, has to figure out where the trouble is and fix it. The thermostat-furnace system’s intentionality is to turn certain ranges of air temperature, as perceived by the thermostat, into certain actions performed by the furnace; the homeowner’s intentionality is to make sure that this intentionality produces the effect that it’s supposed to produce.

One way or another, this same two-level system plays a role in every part of the green wizard’s work. It’s possible to put additional levels between the system on the spot (in the example, the thermostat-furnace system) and the human being who manages the system, but in appropriate tech it’s rarely a good option; the Jetsons fantasy of the house that runs itself is one of the things most worth jettisoning as the age of cheap energy comes to a close. Your goal in crafting systems is to come up with stable, reliable systems that will pursue their own intentionalities without your interference most of the time, while you monitor the overall output of the system and keep tabs on the very small range of data that will let you know if something has gone haywire.

That same two-level system also applies, interestingly enough, to the process of learning to become a green wizard. The material on appropriate technology I’ve asked readers to collect embodies a wealth of data; what prospective green wizards have to do, in turn, is to decide on their own intentionality toward the data they have, and begin turning it into information. This is the exercise for this week.

Here’s how it works. Go through the Master Conserver files you downloaded, and any appropriate tech books you’ve been able to collect. On a sheet of paper, or perhaps in a notebook, note down each project you encounter – for example, weatherstripping your windows, or building a solar greenhouse. Mark any of the projects you’ve already done with a check mark. Then mark each of the projects you haven’t done with one of four numbers and one of four letters:

1 – this is a project that you could do easily with the resources available to you.
2 – this is a project that you could do, though it would take some effort to get the resources.
3 – this is a project that you could do if you really had to, but it would be a serious challenge.
4 – this is a project that, for one reason or another, is out of reach for you.

A – this is a project that is immediately and obviously useful in your life and situation right now.
B – this is a project that could be useful to you given certain changes in your life and situation.
C – this is a project that might be useful if your life and situation were to change drastically.
D – this is a project that, for one reason for another, is useless or irrelevant to you.

This exercise will produce a very rough and general intentionality, to be sure, but you’ll find it tolerably easy to refine from there. Once you decide, let’s say, that weatherstripping the leaky windows of your apartment before winter arrives is a 1-A project – easy as well as immediately useful – you’ve set up an intentionality that allows you to winnow through a great deal of data and find the information you need: for example, what kinds of weatherstripping are available at the local hardware store, and which of those can you use without spending a lot of money or annoying your landlord. Once you decide that building a brand new ecovillage in the middle of nowhere is a 4-D project, equally, you can set aside data relevant to that project and pay attention to things that matter.

Of course you’re going to find 1-D and 4-A projects as well – things that are possible but irrelevant, and things that would be splendidly useful but are out of your reach. Recognizing these limits is part of the goal of the exercise; learning to focus your efforts where they will accomplish the most soonest is another part; recognizing that you’ll be going back over these lists later on, as you learn more, and potentially changing your mind about some of the rankings, is yet another. Give it a try, and see where it takes you.

The Air Never Saw It Coming

If the air ever pushes its luck, if it dares to get between me and you, I will cut it, kill it and let it bleed blue.

The World Is Better Backwards

I never saw you again. You slammed the door as you came in. We yelled at each other about something that just shouldn't fucking matter but for some reason, it does. It happened. We spoke softly. We were in bed. I told you

"I love you."

You said the same. We went to movies and parties and friends and ate and drank and made love.

It all ended with my eyes meeting yours for the first time and the sudden, extreme feeling of expectation.

And now, how can I miss what has never existed.

Should You' Really Be Using Web Templates for Your Site?

Whether you are a new or veteran web master, using a web page template as the basis for your website may, at first, seem very attractive. After all, here's an opportunity to cut your development time and have an attractive page designed by a professional.

For those of us that are "graphically challenged" using a web page template offers a great looking alternative to what we might otherwise produce ourselves.

However, there are some serious pitfalls that you must beware of if you choose to use a web page template. By making yourself aware of these important points you can avoid a disastrous experience for both you and your visitors.

One of the biggest mistakes I see when using a web template is made mostly by new web masters. Many web designers pick the first good looking template that catches their eye with little consideration to what it takes to actually use the template.

Many first-time template purchasers assume that all templates are easy to edit and require little work or special tools on their part. Take the designer that purchases a template with a flash introduction and navigation controls.

Without the proper software these controls may be impossible to edit, leaving the webmaster with a near worthless template. Some templates may be more than simple HTML and therefore difficult for the first-time webmaster to edit.

Be certain to choose a template that suits the tools you use to edit your web site. As in the flash example above, a web site designed heavily with Cascading Style Sheets may prove confusing and a real challenge to someone without CSS experience or a web editor that does not properly support these features.

Many templates are designed with a specific web editor in mind. The original creator may have used Dreamweaver or Front Page and may have used technology specific to that editor. Front Page extensions are a perfect example. Not only must you have Front Page to properly work with the template, but your web host must also support them.

Most web template designers use Photoshop to create their graphics. Therefore, if you want to edit the template's graphics you will need a basic understanding and own a copy of Photoshop. In addition to the technical aspects of using web templates, there are other issues that you will want to consider before laying down your hard-earned cash for one. Templates usually cost under $100 each.

In order to sell them for such a low price each template is sold to as many customers as will purchase it. If you look at any good template reseller you will notice a price for "exclusive" rights to a template. Exclusive rights means that the template will not be sold to anyone else.

What does this mean for you? It means that if you purchase a template and use it "as is" your site will not have a unique look to it. Is this a real issue? That depends on your site, your goals, and your pocketbook.

In many cases templates can serve as the basis for an entirely different looking site. By simply changing the color scheme and graphics you can give your template a look that is unique enough to suit your needs.

Using a web page template can be a tremendous shortcut in developing a new site. It can also serve as a way to present yourself professionally without spending a fortune on graphic development.

However, you should take care to choose your template carefully based on your own skill level and the software you may need to alter it to your needs.Source

Bagian Dari Tubuh Wanita Yang Sangat Menggoda Pria

Indonesia 'Jakarta, : Penilaian pertama pria tentang wanita pastinya tentang fisik. Apa saja yang dilirik pria dan apa saja yang bisa membuat pria tergoda. Simak artikel ini!

Cinta pada pandangan pertama memang bukan basa-basi. Menurut survey, seseorang membuat penilaian fisik tentang orang lain pada 10 detik pertama. Empat menit selanjutnya, orang akan membuat penilaian tentang hal-hal lainnya.

Hasilnya, bisa dipelajari para wanita untuk memikat para pria. Ini dia bagian tubuh wanita yang akan membuat wanita tergoda, berdasarkan urutannya.

1. Tubuh Yang Atletis

Pria menyukai wanita yang bertubuh atletis karena dalam pandangan mereka pasti wanita tersebut mampu menjadi ibu yang baik. Dengan tubuh yang fit, si wanita tentu akan mampu menjalani hari-harinya sebagai ibu dan mengerjakan berbagai tugas rumah tangga. Wanita bertubuh atletis juga diyakini mampu melindungi dirinya dari bahaya.

2. Payudara Padat Berisi

Bagi para pria, payudara wanita paling indah ada pada rentang usia awal 20 tahunan. Favorit mereka adalah payudara padat berisi persis yang ada di majalah-majalah pria atau iklan-iklan pakaian dalam.

Jika Anda tidak memiliki payudara padat berisi jangan sedih dulu. Menurut hasil penelitian, pria menyukai payudara tanpa mempedulikan bentuknya. Tidak masalah apakah payudara tersebut berukuran kecil ataupun besar, pria pasti tertarik pada payudara wanita.

Satu lagi fakta tambahan mengapa pria menyukai payudara wanita adalah karena di sekitar puting wanita ada bagian bernama aerola. Pada saat berhubungan seks, aerola akan mengeluarkan bau yang menggoda pria. Itu lah sebabnya, pria senang bermain-main dengan payudara ketika berhubungan seks.

3. Kaki Jenjang

Ketika seorang wanita beranjak remaja, kaki mereka akan bertambah jenjang. Nah, di mata pria, kaki yang panjang menandakan kedewasaan wanita.

Banyak wanita berkaki panjang menyadari kelebihan tersebut. Biasanya mereka menggunakan sepatu hak tinggi atau rok mini untuk semakin menonjolkan keseksian kakinya.

Pria juga senang ketika wanita menggunakan hak tinggi. Sepatu yang mudah bikin kaki pegal tersebut menurut pria membuat kaki wanita tambah seksi, membuat bokong dan bagian belakang wanita semakin menarik.

Lucunya, ketika masa subur atau menstruasi, wanita secara instingtif merasa ingin menggunakan rok mini atau pakaian-pakaian yang menggoda pria.

4. Pinggang yang ramping

Bentuk tubuh jam pasir sejak dulu menjadi idola wanita. Sejak lima abad silam, wanita berusaha keras mewujudkan bentuk tersebut lewat bentukan korset, diet ketat, sampai operasi plastik. Semakin segaris pinggul dengan pinggang membuat pria semakin tertarik. Terkesan wanita tersebut banyak menimbun lemak sehingga secara reproduktif kurang subur.

5. Bokong yang bulat

Bokong bulat yang penuh dipastikan membuat mata pria tak bisa berpaling. Bokong wanita memiliki banyak fungsi, seperti menyimpan lemak untuk menyusui dan tempat menumpuk energi untuk saat-saat tertentu. Inilah mengapa banyak orang menganggap semakin besar bokong semakin menarik wanita tersebut.

Zaman dahulu wanita berusaha keras membuat bokongnya terlihat semakin besar. Tapi tidak demikian kini, bokong besar malah seperti menandakan tubuh yang kurang sehat.

6. Perut Ramping

Pastinya ini bukan kejutan lagi, perut ramping akan membuat pria jatuh cinta. Mengapa? Pertama, karena jelas perut ramping menandakan wanita tersebut tidak hamil. Lalu apalagi? Menurut para pria perut ramping menandakan wanita tersebut pandai merawat diri dan peduli akan kesehatannya.

Perhiasan di perut, seperti tindik di perut atau rantai di sekitar perut menurut pria membuat perut semakin seksi. Rantai tersebut membuat pinggul wanita tampak lebih besar sekaligus merampingkan pinggang.

Itu saja? Tentu tidak, masih ada tujuh hal lagi yang pasti membuat pria langsung jatuh hati.

7. Leher Jenjang

Leher pria umumnya pendek, lebar, dan kokoh. Secara historis, leher semacam itu berguna untuk membawa benda-benda berat, seperti binatang hasil buruan.

Nah, karena itu leher jenjang wanita membuat pria terpesona. Leher jenjang dianggap sebagai tanda kewanitaan yang sangat menggoda, membuat pria senang mencium dan menghiasinya dengan perhiasan.

8. Wajah Ramah

Diam-diam pria mengidolakan wanita yang berwajah sedikit kekanak-kanakan dan penuh senyum. Wajah mungil, dagu kecil, rahang yang elegan, tulang pipi tinggi, bibir penuh, dan mata besar merupakan ciri-ciri wajah favorit pria.

Wajah seperti ini membuat pria secara instingtif ingin melindungi dan memberi kasih sayang. Wajah yang lebih muda memang akan membuat pria tergoda. Karena itu tak heran jika jasa facelift dan operasi plastik cukup sering digunakan oleh wanita-wanita yang mulai keriput.

9. Mulut yang Sensual

Manusia adalah satu-satunya mahluk hidup yang bibirnya berada di bagian luar. Ketebalan bibir wanita sama dengan vaginanya. Kedua bagian tubuh ini akan bereaksi dan dipenuhi oleh aliran darah ketika dalam keadaan terangsang.

Pria menyukai wanita yang berbibir penuh dan sensual. Untuk wanita yang tidak memiliki bentuk bibir demikian jangan khawatir. Dengan bantuan lipstick merah menyala, para pria juga bisa tergoda. Tapi penggunaan make-up yang berlebihan juga berbahaya karena bisa membuat pria-pria berebutan menggoda dan memicu permusuhan dengan wanita lainnya.

10. Daun Telinga

Telinga wanita juga memiliki peran penting dalam menggaet pria. Bagian telinga tempat wanita memasang anting-anting adalah bagian favorit pria. Panjangnya bagian tersebut menurut beberapa pria membuat wanita makin seksi.

Beberapa wanita primitif bahkan dengan sengaja memperpanjang bagian tersebut untuk menarik hati pria. Sekarang wanita sudah lebih pandai untuk mengakali bagian tersebut. Anting-anting model panjang dan menarik perhatian jadi pilihan wanita untuk membantu membuat bagian tersebut terlihat lebih menarik. Tapi hati-hati anting-anting yang terlalu besar malah akan merusak telinga.

11. Mata Besar

Pria umumnya mengagumi mata besar. Karena itu tak heran jika penata rias selalu menonjolkan bagian mata pada tata rias seseorang.

Pria bukannya menyukai mata besar wanita tanpa alasan yang jelas. Menurut mereka mata semacam itu membuat para pria merasa terlindungi.

12. Hidung mungil

Secara umum, pria menyukai wajah wanita yang imut seperti anak-anak. Wajah tersebut membuat pria merasa ingin melindungi. Begitu juga dengan hidung, pria sangat menyukai wanita yang berhidung mungil.

13. Rambut Panjang

Sehelai rambut bisa hidup hingga enam tahun, setiap harinya seseorang bisa kehilangan 80-100 helai rambut. Untuk pria bule, rambut pirang dianggap menarik karena wanita terkesan feminim dan subur.

Namun apapun warnanya, pria menyukai rambut yang bersih dan berkilat. Rambut tersebut menandakan wanita tersebut bersih dan rajin merawat diri. Selain bersih, menurut sebuah survey, 75% pria lebih tertarik pada wanita yang berambut panjang.

The Fragile Arc

It may have just been a moment to you, but it changed every single one that followed for me.

The Business Of Breaking Things

You have a pen? Take a memo and write this down:

Once, I was loved, supremely with every fiber of someone's being. They just never knew how to tell me.

The Burning Compass

My atoms and chemicals could've been made anywhere in the universe, but they were made here, near you. Near yours.

Tiga Hal Yang Unique Dari Rambut Manusia

Indonesia: Rambut yang indah dan terawat bisa menjadi daya tarik seseorang, terlebih lagi wanita. Tapi di balik keindahannya, rambut ternyata menyimpan beberapa rahasia unik. Apa saja? Rambut manusia merupakan struktur sederhana yang terbuat dari keratin dan sel-sel kulit mati. Rambut berfungsi untuk mencegah hilangnya panas dari kepala seseorang.

Namun di balik kesederhanaannya, rambut menyimpan sesuatu yang kompleks. Dilansir dari AskMen, berikut 3 fakta unik seputar rambut yang belum banyak diketahui orang:

1. Rambut bisa membersihkan tumpahan minyak di air

Ketika tumpahan minyak Cosco Busan terjadi pada tahun 2007 di Teluk San Francisco, kelompok relawan ramah lingkungan menggunakan tikar yang terbuat dari rambut manusia untuk membersihkan pantai. Hal ini tidak mengherankan, karena rambut bisa menyerap minyak dan air, serta dapat bekerja sebagai spons alami.

2. Asam amino rambut manusia bisa digunakan dalam industri kecap

Menemukan helaian rambut dalam makanan tentunya dapat merusak selera makan. Tapi bagaimana jika bumbu atau makanan Anda terbuat dari rambut?

Internet Journal of Toxicology melaporkan bahwa Hongshuai Soy Sauce, perusahaan kecap di China, memasarkan produk yang menggunakan bioteknologi terbaru dengan harga lebih murah. Hal itu tentu saja membuat produknya menjadi populer.

Tapi sebuah investigasi media menemukan bahwa perusahaan tersebut tidak menggunakan asam amino yang berasal dari kedelai ataupun gandum, melainkan asam amino yang berasal dari rambut manusia, yang dikumpulkan dari salon dan tempat cukur rambut.

3. Orang berambut merah dianggap alien

Ada sebuah teori konspirasi yang menyatakan bahwa orang berambut merah adalah alien-manusia hibrida. Hal ini memang terdengar gila, tapi orang berambut merah memang memiliki perbedaan struktur secara biologi.

Dokter harus membuat persiapan khusus untuk menjalani proses persalinan wanita berambut merah. Hal ini karena darah dari wanita berambut merah lebih sulit membeku, sehingga mengalami pendarahan lebih lama.

Selain itu, orang berambut merah memiliki jumlah rambut paling sedikit, yaitu sekitar 90.000 helai, dibandingkan dengan rambut pirang atau cokelat yang mencapai 140.000 helai.

Closing the Circle

A couple of weeks ago, Energy Bulletin revisited some predictions made in 2000 by Amory Lovins, then as now one of the most vocal proponents of technological solutions to the crisis of industrial society. Under prodding by energy analyst Steve Andrews, Lovins insisted among other things that by the year 2010, hybrid and fuel cell cars would account for between half and two thirds of the cars on the road in the United States.

Lovins was completely wrong, as we now know – hybrid cars account for maybe 5% of the current US automobile fleet, and you can look through every automobile showroom in North America for a car powered by fuel cells and not find one – and it’s to Andrews’ credit that he pointed this out to Lovins at the time. What makes Lovins’ failed prediction all the more fascinating is that there was never any significant chance that it would pan out, for reasons as predictable as they were pragmatic. Hybrid cars may cost less to operate but they’re much more expensive to build than ordinary cars; fuel cell cars, while they could probably have been made for a more competitive price, could only compete in any other way if somebody had invested the trillions of dollars in infrastructure to provide them with their hydrogen fuel. In both cases economics made it impossible for either kind of car to account for more than a token fraction of the US car fleet by this year, and it makes their chances of being much more popular by 2020, or 2030, or any subsequent year not much better.

Those specific reasons can be usefully subordinated to a more general point, which is that airy optimism about technologies that haven’t yet gotten off the drawing board is not a useful response to an imminent crisis in the real world. This is a point worth keeping in mind, because airy optimism about technologies that haven’t yet gotten off the drawing board is flying thick and fast just now, especially but not only in the peak oil scene. Mention that industrial society is in deep trouble as a result of its total dependence on rapidly depleting fossil fuels, in particular, and you can count on a flurry of claims that Bussard reactors, or algal biodiesel, or fourth generation fission plants, or whatever the currently popular deus ex machina happens to be, will inevitably show up in time and save the day.

One of the things that has to be grasped to make sense of our predicament is that this isn’t going to happen. Some of the reasons that it’s not going to happen differ from case to case, though all of the examples I’ve just given happen to share the common difficulty of crippling problems with net energy. Any attempt at a large-scale solution at this point in the curve of decline faces another predictable problem, though, which was discussed back in 1973 in The Limits to Growth: once industrial civilization runs up against hard planetary limits, as it now has, the surplus of resources that might have permitted a large-scale solution are already fully committed to meeting existing urgent needs, and can’t be diverted to new projects on any scale without imposing crippling dislocations on an economy and a society that are already under severe strain.

The green wizardry being developed in these posts thus seeks to craft responses to the crisis of our time that don’t ignore the predictable impacts of that crisis. For this reason, we aren’t going to be exploring the sort of imaginative vaporware that fills so many discussions about our energy future these days. Instead, the curriculum I have in mind starts with a sufficiently solid grasp of ecology to understand the context of the wizardry that follows, and then moves to practical techniques that have been proven in the real world and can be put to use without lots of money or complicated technology. That may seem dowdy and uninteresting, but that’s a risk this archdruid is willing to run; if your ship has already hit a rock and is taking on water, to shift to a familiar metaphor, passing out life jackets and launching lifeboats is far less innovative and exciting than sitting around talking about some brilliantly creative new way to rescue people from a sinking boat, but it’s a good deal more likely to save lives.

All this makes a useful prologue to the subject of this week’s post. Last week we talked about energy, and explored the way that the laws of thermodynamics shape what you can and can’t do with the energy that surges through every natural system. It’s easy to make energy interesting, since there’s always the passionate hope we all retain from childhood that something might suddenly blow itself to smithereens. Even when it doesn’t, watching energy make its way down the levels of concentration toward waste heat is exciting, for most of the same reasons that watching the silver ball bouncing off the bumpers of a pinball machine is exciting.

This week is different. This week we’re going to talk about matter, the second of the three factors that move through every natural system, and matter appeals to a different childhood passion, one that most of us somehow manage to outgrow: the passion for mud. Matter is muddy. It does not behave itself. It does not do what it’s told. As you found out around the age of two, to your ineffable delight and your mother’s weary annoyance, it gets all over everything, especially when stomped. Most people discover this in childhood and then spend the rest of their lives trying to forget it, and one of the ways they forget it in modern industrial cultures is by pretending that matter acts like energy.

Get a piece of paper and a pen and I’ll show you how that works. At the top of the paper, draw a picture of Santa Claus in his sleigh, surrounded by an enormous pile of gifts, and label it "infinite material resources." In the middle, draw a picture of yourself sitting on heaps of consumer goodies; put in some twinkle dust, too, because we’ll pretend (as modern industrial societies do) that the goodies somehow got there without anybody having to work sixteen-hour days in a Third World sweatshop to produce them. Down at the bottom of the paper, draw some really exotic architecture, with a sign out in front, put up by the local Chamber of Commerce, saying "Welcome to Away." You know, Away – the mysterious place where no one’s ever been, but where stuff goes when you don’t want it around any more. Now draw one arrow going from Santa to you, and another from you to Away.

Does this picture look familiar? It should. It has the same pattern as a very simple energy flow diagram, of the sort you sketched out last week, with Santa as the energy source and Away as the diffuse background heat where all energy ends up. That sort of diagram works perfectly well with energy. It doesn’t work worth beans with any material substance, but it’s how people in modern industrial societies are taught to think about matter.

As an antidote to that habit of thinking, after you’ve drawn this diagram, I’d like to encourage you to crumple it up with extreme prejudice and throw it across the room. It would be particularly helpful if Fido is in the room with you, decides that you’ve thrown a ball for him to chase, and comes trotting eagerly back to you with the diagram in his mouth, having gnawed it playfully first and reduced it to a drool-soaked mess. At that moment, as you meet Fido’s trusting gaze and try to decide whether it’s more bother to go get a real ball for him to play with or to take the oozing object that was once your drawing and then wipe a couple of tablespoons of dog slobber off your hand, you will have learned one of the great secrets of green wizardry: matter moves in circles, especially when you don’t want it to.

That secret is crucial to keep in mind. Back in my schooldays, corporate flacks trying to head off the rising tide of popular unhappiness with what was being done to the American environment had a neat little slogan: "The solution to pollution is dilution." They were dead wrong, and because this slogan got put into practice far too often, some people and a much greater number of other living things ended up just plain dead. Dilute an environmental toxin all you want, and it’s a safe bet that a food chain somewhere will concentrate it right back up for you and serve it on your plate for breakfast. It’s hard to think of anything more dilute than the strontium-90 dust that was blasted into the upper atmosphere by nuclear testing and scattered around the globe by high-level winds; that didn’t keep it from building up to dangerous levels in cow’s milk, and shortly thereafter, in children’s bones.

A similar difficulty afflicts the delusion that we can put something completely outside the biosphere and make it stay there. Proponents of nuclear power who don’t simply dodge the issue of radioactive waste altogether treat this as a minor issue. It’s not a minor issue; it’s the most critical of half a dozen disastrous flaws in the shopworn 1950s-era fantasy of limitless nuclear power still being retailed by a minority among us. A nuclear fission reactor, any nuclear fission reactor, produces wastes so lethal they have to be isolated from the rest of existence for a quarter of a million years – that’s fifty times as long as all of recorded history, in case you were wondering. In theory, containing high-level nuclear waste is possible; in theory, it’s equally possible to drill for oil in deep waters without blowing your drilling platform and eleven men to kingdom come and flooding the Gulf of Mexico with tens of millions of gallons of crude oil.

In the real world, by contrast, it’s as certain as anything can be that sooner or later, things go wrong. Despite the best intentions and the most optimistic handwaving, in a hundred years, or a thousand, or ten thousand, by accident or malice or the sheer cussedness of nature, that waste is going to leak out into the biosphere, and once that happens, anyone and anything that comes into contact with even a few milligrams of it will suffer a painful and lingering death. The more nuclear power we generate, the more of this ghastly gift we’ll be stockpiling up for the people of the future. If one of the basic concepts of morality is that each of us ought to leave the world a better place for those that come after us, there must be some sort of gold medal for selfish malignity in store for the notion that, to power our current civilization a little longer, we’re justified in making life shorter and more miserable for people whose distant ancestors haven’t even been born yet.

This extreme case illustrates a basic rule of green wizardry: there is no such place as Away. You can throw matter out the front door all you want, but it will inevitably circle around while you’re not looking and come trotting up the back stairs. There’s a great deal of Mysticism Lite these days that talks about how wonderful it is that the universe moves in circles; it’s true enough that matter moves in circles, though energy and information generally don’t, but it’s not always wonderful. If you recognize matter’s habits and work with them, you can get it to do some impressive things as it follows its rounds, but if you aren’t watching it closely, it can just as easily sneak up behind you and clobber you.

The trick of making matter circle in a way that’s helpful to you is twofold. The first half is figuring out every possible way it might circle; the second is to make sure that as it follows each of those pathways, it goes through transformations significant enough to make it harmless. I hope I won’t offend anyone’s delicate sensibilities here by using human feces as an example. The way we handle our feces in most American communities is frankly bizarre; we defecate in fresh drinking water, for heaven’s sake, and then flush it down a pipe without the least thought of where it’s going. Where it’s going, most of the time, is into a river, a lake, or the ocean, and even after sewage treatment, you can be sure that most of what’s in your bowel movements is going to land in the biosphere as is, because mushing feces up in water and then dumping some chlorine into the resulting mess doesn’t change them enough to matter.

Consider the alternative of a composting toilet and a backyard garden. Instead of dumping feces into drinking water, you feed them to hungry thermophilic bacteria. When the bacteria get through with the result, you put the compost into the middle of your main compost pile, where it feeds a more diverse ecosystem of microbes, worms, insects, fungi, and the like. When they’re done with it, you dig the completely transformed compost into your garden, and soil organisms and the roots of your garden plants have at it. When you pick an ear of corn from your garden, some of the nutrients in the corn got there by way of your toilet, but you don’t have to worry about that. The pathogenic bacteria that make feces dangerous to human beings, having grown up in the sheltered setting of your bowels, don’t survive long in the Darwinian environment of a composting toilet, and any last stragglers get mopped up in the even more ruthless ecosystem of the compost pile.

In the same way, the inedible parts of garden vegetables can be put into the compost pile or, better still, fed to chickens or rabbits, whose feces can be added to the compost pile, so that plant parasites and diseases have less opportunity to ride the cycle back to the plants in the garden. You can cycle other parts of your household waste stream into the same cycle; alternatively, if you need to isolate some part of the waste stream from the rest of it – for example, if somebody in the house is ill and you don’t want to cycle their wastes into your garden soil, or if you want to collect and concentrate urine as a rich source of fertilizer – you can construct a separate cycle that takes the separate waste stream in a different direction, and subject it to different transformations, so that whatever cycles back around to you is a resource rather than a problem.

This logic can be applied to every part of the Green Wizard’s work. Not everything can be transformed in this way; one of the essential boundaries of appropriate tech, in fact, is the boundary between the kinds of matter you can change with the tools you have on hand, and the kinds you can’t, and if you can’t change it into something safe, it’s a bad idea to produce it in the first place. It really is that simple. So, my apprentice wizards, you have three mystic maxims to contemplate:

Matter moves in circles, especially when you don’t want it to;

There is no such place as Away;

If you can’t transform it, don’t produce it.

Aside from that, for this week’s homework, I’d like to ask those of my readers who are pursuing the green wizardry project to replace the pulpy mass Fido’s been chewing for the last fifteen minutes with something less soggy and more accurate. Take one material item or substance you currently get rid of, and figure out, as exactly as you can, where it actually goes once it leaves your possession. Don’t cheat yourself by choosing something you already know about, and don’t settle for abstractions; with the internet at your fingertips, it takes only a modest amount of work to find out which landfill gets your garbage, which river has to cope with your sewage, and so on. Your ultimate goal is to trace your chosen item or substance all the way back around to your own front door – for example, by tracing your plastic bottles to a particular landfill, the polymerizers in the bottles to the groundwater in a particular valley, the groundwater to a particular river, and the river to the particular coastal waters where the local fishing fleet caught the fresh cod you’re about to have for dinner.

This may be an unsettling experience. I apologize for that, but it can’t be helped. One of the few effective immunizations against the sort of airy optimism critiqued toward the beginning of this post, and in another way a little later on, is to spend time wrestling with the muddy, material details of our collective predicament. If your wizardry is going to amount to more than incantations that make people feel better about themselves while their society consumes its own future, it needs to get into the nitty gritty of the work – first with the mind, then with the hands. We’ll pursue one more piece of basic theory next week before proceeding to the first hands-on projects.

The Wall Of Days

You will never meet anyone who has done something great who waited for permission to do something great.

The Things That Are Left

The world made me cold. You made me water. One day we'll be clouds.

The Distance From Here To Autumn

I wondered if every road was connected to every other road. I wondered if I touched it, if maybe somewhere, you would know.

Seven Reason Why Making Money Online Is Easy

Without doubt, the Internet has transformed all features of contemporary income. Nowadays, making money online is easy. In fact, it is gradually reshaping the income-generating setting.

Just as you can now easily purchase anything or pay your bills online, so can you generate workable income to give you the extra cash you need. The virtual world of marketing and commerce has definitely created a world of its own and motivated many people to hook up to the Internet and earn a living.

The electronic means of earning extra income online is easy. There is truth to it depending on the way you understand and interpret the word easy. For some people thought that the easy ways to make money online would eventually lead them to the now popular get-rich-quick phenomenon. What they do not know is that even if experts say that easy means convenience, the ease of earning some extra cash without having to leave the comforts of your home.

An Evaluated Difference

Making money online is easy but it does not necessarily mean that you will get rich now. These two concepts are entirely different, in ideas and in principles.

When experts say that it is easy to make money online, they mean that with so many options to choose from, any idiot can actually earn himself a living.

Hence, it does not take many requirements and qualifications just to make money online. You just have to know your options and get the best program that will work for you. To know more about the reasons why many people claim that making money online is easy, here are 10 reasons that will give you the explanation you need:

1. It is free

Programs that offer you some ways to easily earn money online are usually free of charge. Hence, you can instantly join their pool of home-based workers and start earning the extra cash that you need.

2. It is for everybody

One of the best reasons why making money online is easy is because most programs are suitable for almost everybody. Unlike the usual jobs, online businesses do not usually limit their job qualifications.

For instance, in web content writing, people from all walks of life can instantly earn money without having to finish a degree in Journalism or gain experience in any writing job.

As long as you can write effective feature articles, you can easily find lucrative means of earning money online.

3. You can manipulate your course

The good thing about earning extra money online is that you can manipulate or control the way you want to earn money.

Hence, if you want to earn faster, you just have to invest more time rummaging through websites and create affiliate programs. You can even write or read as many surveys as you want.

Everything is dependent on how you want to create your money and earn the gratification that you want.
4. You let others earn as well

One of the most common reasons why making money online is the so-called residual income.

Many people thought that residual income are for network marketers only. They do not know that it is also applicable to anyone who is into Internet business or home-based projects.

The real concept of residual income is that you let others earn money as well as you do. Hence, what you can see is a good interrelationship between and among people in the Internet.

For instance, in traffic-generating schemes, you can post banner ads of other people in your website. In this way, you create back linking strategies that ear you some profits just as the other website is earning as well.

5. It is enjoyable

For most people who are already earning extra money online, they claim that one of the best reasons why making money is easy online is that they are enjoying what they are doing.

If you are enjoy, you will definitely love your work and earning money becomes a breeze.

6. You do not have to do hard selling

Generating money online is easy because you really do not have to sell at all. Unlike the usual selling strategies online, selling online is not a hard job.

The main premise here is that since people are all seeking information that is why they are online, providing them your products will never be too hard.

In fact, they will personally find the product on their own. You do not have to push it or explain to them why they need it because every fact is demonstrated online.

Hence, all you have to do is to sit and relax and wait for your profits.

7. You build good relationships

When people trust you, they will keep on coming back and buy from you again. If you think you cannot wait to hear from them, you can add them to you mailing list and inform them about your latest product. Everything comes close to making money online easily if you know your way around, and building good relationships just happens to be one of the best things that you can do.

Indeed, making money online is easy if you know what you want and you really know your way around on the Internet. You Can Visit For This Site Get free Money Online' $ 27 in Ten Minute

The Tiny Iceberg

The little things you forget, kill me.

The Mirror Hurts

I never heard what you said, just what you meant. I hate you. I love you. I don't love you anymore.

The Ways of the Force

By now those of my readers who have joined me on the current Archdruid Report project – the creation of a “green wizardry” using the heritage of the appropriate technology movement of the Seventies – should have downloaded at least one of their textbooks and either have, or be waiting for the imminent arrival of, the rest. Now it’s time to get into the core principles of green wizardry, and the best way to do it involves shifting archetypes a bit. Give me a moment to slip on a brown robe, tuck something less clumsy or random than a blaster into my belt, and practice my best Alec Guinness imitation: yes, Padawans, you’re about to start learning the ways of the Force.

Well, almost. The concept that George Lucas borrowed from Asian mysticism for his Star Wars movies is an extraordinarily widespread and ancient one; very nearly the only languages on earth that don’t have a commonly used word for an intangible life force connected to the breath are those spoken nowadays in the industrial nations of the modern West. I’ll leave it to my readers to make up their own minds about what the remarkable durability of this idea might imply, and to historians of ideas to debate whether it was one of the sources that helped shape the modern scientific concept of energy; the point that needs making is that it’s this latter concept that will be central to this week’s post.

That’s understating things by more than a little. Everything we’ll be exploring over the weeks and months to come has to do with energy: where it comes from, what it can and can’t do, how it moves through whole systems, and where it goes. In the most pragmatic of senses, understand energy and you understand the whole art of green wizardry; in the broadest of senses, understand energy and you understand the predicament that is looming up like a wave in front of the world’s industrial societies, and what we can and can’t expect to get done in the relatively short time we have left before that predicament crests, breaks, and washes most of the modern world’s certainties away.

Let’s start with some basic definitions. Energy is the capacity to do work. It cannot be created or destroyed, but the amount and kind of work it can do can change. The more concentrated it is, the more work it can do; the more diffuse it is, the less work it can do. Left to itself, it moves from more concentrated to more diffuse forms over time, and everything you do with energy has a price tag measured in a loss of concentration. These are the groundrules of thermodynamics, and everything a green wizard does comes back to them in one way or another.

Let’s look at some examples. A garden bed, to begin with, is a device for collecting energy from the sun by way of the elegant biochemical dance of photosynthesis. Follow a ray of sunlight from the thermonuclear cauldron of the sun, across 93 million miles of hard vacuum and a few dozen miles of atmosphere, until it falls on the garden bed. Around half the sunlight reflects off the plants, which is why the leaves look bright green to you instead of flat black; most of the rest is used by the plants to draw water up from the ground into their stems and leaves, and expel it into the air; a few per cent is caught by chloroplasts – tiny green disks inside the cells of every green plant, descended from blue-green algae that were engulfed but not destroyed by some ancestral single-celled plant maybe two billion years ago – and used to turn water and carbon dioxide into sugars, which are rich in chemical energy and power the complex cascade of processes we call life.

Most of those sugars are used up keeping the plant alive. The rest are stored up until some animal eats the plant. Most of the energy in the plants the animal eats gets used up keeping the animal alive; the rest get stored up, until another animal eats the first animal, and the process repeats. Sooner or later an animal manages to die without ending up in somebody else’s stomach, and its body becomes a lunch counter for all the creatures – and there are a lot of them – that make their livings by cleaning up dead things. By the time they’re finished with their work, the last of the energy from the original beam of sunlight that fell on the garden bed is gone.

Where does it go? Diffuse background heat. That’s the elephant’s graveyard of thermodynamics, the place energy goes to die. Most often, when you do anything with energy – concentrate it, move it, change its form – the price for that gets paid in low-grade heat. All along the chain from the sunlight first hitting the leaf to the last bacterium munching on the last scrap of dead coyote, what isn’t passed onward in the form of stored chemical energy is turned directly or indirectly into heat so diffuse that it can’t be made to do any work other than jiggling molecules a little. The metabolism of the plant generates a trickle of heat; the friction of the beetle’s legs on the leaf generates a tiny pulse of heat; the mouse, the snake, and the coyote all turn most of the energy they take in into heat, and all that heat radiates out into the great outdoors, warming the atmosphere by a tiny fraction of a degree, and slowly spreading up and out into the ultimate heat sink of deep space.

That’s the first example. For the second, let’s take a solar water heater, the simple kind that’s basically a tank in a glassed-in enclosure set on top of somebody’s roof. Once again we start with a ray of sunlight crossing deep space and Earth’s murky atmosphere to get to its unintended target. The sun passes through the glass and slams into the black metal of the water tank, giving up much of its energy to the metal in the form of heat. Inside the metal is water, maybe fifty gallons of it; it takes a fair amount of heat to bring fifty gallons of water to the temperature of a good hot bath, but the steady pounding of photons from the sun against the black metal tank will do the trick in a few hours.

Most of what makes building a solar water heater complex is a matter of keeping that heat in the water where it belongs, instead of letting it leak out as – you guessed it – diffuse background heat. The glass in front of the tank is there to keep moving air from carrying heat away, and it also helps hold heat in by way of a clever bit of physics: most of the energy that matter absorbs from visible light downshifts to infrared light as it tries to escape, and glass lets visible light pass through it but reflects infrared back the way it came. (This is known as the greenhouse effect, by the way, and we’ll be using it over and over again, not least in greenhouses.) All surfaces of the tank that aren’t facing the sun are surrounded by insulation, which also helps keep heat from sneaking away. If the system’s a good one, the pipes that carry hot water down from the heater to the bathtub and other uses are wrapped with insulation. Even so, some of the energy slips out from the tank, some of it makes a break for it through the insulation around the pipes, and the rest of it starts becoming background heat the moment it leaves the faucet for the bathtub or any other use.

Here’s a third example: a house on a cold winter day. The furnace keeping it warm, let’s say, is fueled by natural gas; that means the ray of sunlight that ultimately powers the process came to Earth millions of years ago and was absorbed by a prehistoric plant. The plant died without being munched by a passing dinosaur, and got buried under sediment with some of its stored energy intact. Millions of years of heat and pressure underground turned that stored energy into very simple hydrocarbons such as methane and ethane. Fast forward to 2010, when the hydrocarbons found their way through pores in the rock to a natural gas well and got shipped by pipeline, possibly over thousands of miles, to the house where it gets burnt.

The furnace turns the energy of that ancient sunlight to relatively concentrated heat, which flows out through the house, keeping it warm. Now the fun begins, because that concentrated energy – to put things in anthropomorphic terms – wants nothing in the world half as much as to fling itself ecstatically into dissolution as diffuse background heat. The more quickly it can do that, though, the more natural gas has to be burnt to keep the house at a comfortable temperature. If you’re the green wizard in charge, your goal is to slow down the dionysiac rush of seeking its bliss, and make it hang around long enough to warm the house.

How do you do that? First, you have to know the ways that heat moves from a warm body to a cold one. There are three of them: conduction, which is the movement of heat through solid matter; convection, which is the movement of heat carried on currents of air (or any other fluid); and radiation, which is the movement of heat in the form of infrared light (mostly) through any medium transparent to those wavelengths. You slow down conduction to a crawl by putting insulation in the way; you slow down convection by sealing up cracks through which air can move, and doing a variety of things to stop convective currents from forming; you slow down radiation by putting reflective barriers in the way of its escape. If you don’t do any of these things, your house leaks heat, and your checking account leaks money ; if you do all of these things – and they can be done fairly easily and cheaply – the prehistoric sunlight in the natural gas you burn has to take its time wandering out of your house, keeps you comfortable on the way, and you don’t have to spend anything like so much on more natural gas to replace it.

There are four points I’d like you to take home from these examples. The first is that they’re all talking about the same process – the movement of energy from the sun to the background radiation of outer space that passes through systems here on earth en route, and accomplishes certain kinds of work on the way. At this point, in fact, the most useful thing you can take away from this entire discussion is the habit of looking everything that goes on around you as an energy flow that starts from a concentrated source – almost always the sun – and ends in diffuse heat radiating out into space. If you pick up the habit of doing this, you’ll find that a great deal of the material that will be covered in posts to come will suddenly seem like common sense, and a great many of the habits that have are treated as normal behavior in our society will suddenly reveal themselves as stark staring lunacy.

An exercise, which I’d like to ask those readers studying this material to do several times over the next week, will help get this habit in place. Draw a rough flow chart for one or more versions of this process. Take a piece of paper, draw a picture of the sun at the top, and draw a trash can at the bottom; label the trash can “Background Heat.” Now draw the important components in any system you want to understand, and draw arrows connecting them to show how the energy moves from one component to another. If you’re sketching a natural system, draw in the plants, the herbivores, the carnivores, and the decomposers, and sketch in how energy passes from one to another, and from each of them to the trash can; if you’re sketching a human system, the energy source, the machine that turns the energy into a useful form, and the places where the energy goes all need to be marked in and connected. Do this with a variety of different systems. It doesn’t matter at this stage if you get all the details right; the important thing is to start thinking in terms of energy flow.

The second point to take home is that natural systems, having had much more time to work the bugs out, are much better at containing and using energy than most human systems are. The solar water heater and the house with its natural gas furnace take concentrated energy, put it to one use, and then lose it to diffuse heat. A natural ecosystem, by contrast, can play hot potato with its own input of concentrated energy for a much more extended period, tossing it from hand to hand (or, rather, leaf to paw to bacterial pseudopod) for quite a while before all of the energy finally follows its bliss. The lesson here is simple: by paying attention to the ways that natural systems do this, green wizards can get hints that can be incorporated into human systems to make them less wasteful and more resilient.

The third point is that energy does not move in circles. Next week we’ll be talking about material substances, which do follow circular paths – in fact, they do this whether we want them to do so or not, which is why the toxic waste we dump into the environment, for example, ends up circling back around into our food and water supply. Energy, though, moves along a trajectory with a beginning and an end. The beginning is always a concentrated source, which again is almost always the sun; the end is diffuse heat. Conceptually, you can think of energy as moving in straight lines, cutting across the circles of matter and the far more complex patterns of information gain and loss. Once a given amount of energy has followed its trajectory to the endpoint, for all practical purposes, it’s gone; it still exists, but the only work it’s capable of doing is making molecules vibrate at whatever the ambient temperature happens to be.

The fourth and final point, which follows from the third, is that for all practical purposes, energy is finite. It’s become tolerably common for believers in perpetual technological progress and economic growth to insist that energy is infinite, with the implication that human beings can up and walk off with as much of it as they wish. It’s an appealing fantasy, flattering to our collective ego, and it makes use of a particular kind of mental trap that Garrett Hardin anatomized quite a while ago. In his useful book Filters Against Folly, Hardin pointed out that the word “infinite” – along with such synonyms as “limitless” and “boundless” – are thoughtstoppers rather than meaningful concepts, because the human mind can’t actually think about infinity in any meaningful sense. When somebody says “X is infinite,” in other words, what he is actually saying is “I refuse to think about X.”

Still, there’s a more specific sense in which talk about infinite energy is nonsense by definition. At any given place and time, the amount of energy that is available in a concentration and a form capable of doing any particular kind of work is finite, often distressingly so. Every ecosystem on earth has evolved to make the most of whatever energy is available to do the work of keeping living things alive, whether that energy takes the form of equatorial sunlight shining down on the Amazon rain forest, chemical energy in sulfur-laden water surging up from hot springs at the bottom of the sea, or fat stored up during the brief Arctic warm season in the bodies of the caribou that attract the attention of a hungry wolf pack.

Thus it’s crucial to recognize that available energy is always limited, and usually needs to be carefully coaxed into doing as much work as you want to get done before the energy turns into diffuse background heat. This is as true of any whole system, a garden as much as a solar hot water system, a well-insulated house, or any other project belonging to the field of appropriate tech. Learn to think in these terms and you’re well on your way to becoming a green wizard.