I am led to believe that many Tracker readers will be watching election returns tonight instead of roaming through the Tracker's archives, looking for the crankiest, funniest, or most astute posts of yesteryear. (For some reason, Nate Silver did not find it within his means to predict what Tracker readers would...
Category: Google
I am led to believe that many Tracker readers will be watching election returns tonight instead of roaming through the Tracker's archives, looking for the crankiest, funniest, or most astute posts of yesteryear. (For some reason, Nate Silver did not find it within his means to predict what Tracker readers would be doing tonight, so I can't back this up with data.)
So I'm conceding the evening, even before the polls close. You win. But while you're publishing your own cranky, funny, or astute election comments on Twitter or FB, I thought you might like a little diversion. Here are a few things to scan while waiting for Ohio to come in:
--Adam Mann at Wired likes the new Google Mars, which has "more coverage, more detail, and...
I've had an item on a slow burn since the middle of the summer, and now I think I know what I want to say about it.
In July, The Washington Post ran an...
I've had an item on a slow burn since the middle of the summer, and now I think I know what I want to say about it.
In July, The Washington Post ran an interesting piece about whether it was appropriate for U.S. Supreme Court justices to use Google while forming their opinions. "The justices routinely supplement their arguments with facts, studies, media reports, law review articles and other materials that none of the parties in the case before them ever put forward or countered," wrote Robert Barnes. This practice "has become a new focus of legal academic research."
Barnes begins be recalling the angry dissent from Justice Antonin Scalia in June when the court struck down some provisions of Arizona's immigration law. Scalia cited a...
On Wednesday, I wrote that reporters were insufficiently skeptical when evaluating the claims of Planetary Resources, Inc., which announced it was going to make money mining minerals...
On Wednesday, I wrote that reporters were insufficiently skeptical when evaluating the claims of Planetary Resources, Inc., which announced it was going to make money mining minerals and precious metals from asteroids.
In a smart follow-up to his original story, Alex Knapp at Forbes looks at how the company will try to do that. And the surprise is: The company is already making money!
It seems that this company will do fine, at least for a while, even if it doesn't get close to digging gold (or fool's gold) out of any rock in space.
Read Knapp's tale here.
- Paul Raeburn
Beware posts done in haste: I initially wrote that USA...
Beware posts done in haste: I initially wrote that USA Today illustrated its story with a picture of an iPhone, but as a reader points out, it did not; the photo was of an Android phone. Apologies to Williamson, who will probably not let me forget this.-PR
Jeff Williamson of USA Today reports a survey sure to spark conversation (and texts and tweets) among geeks and Google and Apple fans:
"Nielsen: Android edges Apple in mobile survey."
How the mighty iPhone has fallen, we're ready to exclaim!
But wait. According to Williamson, a Nielsen survey...
©2010 Knight Science Journalism at MIT. All Rights Reserved.