Biocurious is a weblog about biology through the eyes of physicists. More...
Academics
Andre's Research
Biocuriosities
Books
Graduate School
History of Science
Hot off the Press
Igor's Research
Interdisciplinarity
Molecule of the Month
Open Access
Philip's Research
Philosophy of Science
Physics
Physicsworld.com
Backreaction
Ceclia's Blog at PHD Comics
Cocktail Party Physics
Cosmic Variance
The Daily Transcript
Easternblot
Everyday Scientist
The Evilutionary Biologist
Evolgen
Freelancing Science
The Futile Cycle
Good Math, Bad Math
iMechanica
in singulo
Incoherently Scattered Ponderings
Juniorprof
Life of a Lab Rat
The Loom
Malletrivia
Metadatta
Mixed States
Not Even Wrong
Notes from the biomass
Notional Slurry
OpenScience Project
Pharyngula
PLoS Blog
Ponderings of a fool
Recombinants
The Sandwalk
SciAm Observations
ScienceBlogs
Shtetl-Optimized
Three-toed Sloth
Uncertain Principles
What's New by Bob Park



A few weeks ago Nature published a few articles from participants in a Microsoft Research conference on the future of computing. There are some interesting ideas that are definitely worth checking out and, for once, I don’t have to warn you about a subscription being required when linking to Nature because Microsoft has sponsored free online access to all for these articles.
The comedy of biophysics Tiktaalik roseae legitimizes creation science [Updated]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
History is emphatic on three points:
1) Mankind is wholly incapable of predicting its future. Science fiction (sf and sci-fi) exists to expose and prevent defective futures; big government exists to legislate them into existence.
2) Working futures are discovered by insubordinate bastards – a small group of criminal bourgeoisie called “the Founding Fathers” or a patent clerk in Berne, Switzerland embezzling employer resources.
3) Any future created by centralized managerial oversight will be a Grand Guignol of waste and death. The USSR comes to mind, as do FEMA and Homeland Severity.
How much and how far you trust a corporation whose defective products frustrate and cripple hundreds of millions of users each day?