If you haven’t seen Wolfram Alpha, you’re missing out. It’s not just a search engine — is answers simple questions with an amazing array of analytics and diagrams and graphs and history and statistics and more. You can see trends, explore patterns, drilling into many layers of detail. Pick a subject, if there’s information to be had, Wolfram Alpha can help you dive in:

Want some eclipse info?
previous eclipse
solar eclipse
lunar eclipse

How about some weather:
evansville weather in 1976
(differentiates rain and snow for short term, bunches them together as ‘precipitation’ for longer term)
precipitation in evanston il in january 1968
climate in boston

Health info:
male, 5′9″, 155lbs, body mass index
2 eggs with apple juice

Some investment info:
apple microsoft google

Was the name “Wanda” ever more popular than “Edna”?:
wanda, edna, beulah
karen, faith, madison

If you had 20/50 vision…
20/50 vision

Got music?
D major 7th chord <= click ‘play chord’!

Crossword fanatic?
pu__l_
anagram roster

Sheesh, this is amazing!

Consider one of the greatest speeches of all time, Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address. It’s short, and it packs a whallop. Abe had something to say, and he found a concise way to say it.

So when I find an article that’s concise and meaningful, and — better yet — focuses on communicating, well, I’ve got to encourage them in their efforts.

To ensure we’re becoming better communicators, not just older communicators, consider following these 10 tips.

1. Know our intent, including what outcomes we want.
2. Put ourselves in others’ shoes to help us shape our message.
3. Rehearse what we’ll say and edit what we write.
4. Listen better.
5. Acknowledge what people tell us.
6. Question ourselves and others; be curious.
7. Tell more stories.
8. Work with a coach.
9. Match our words and actions.
10. Practice humility.

The original post is from ConnectITnews.com entitled “Ten tips to becoming a better communicator” and it’s concise. It should take less than three minutes to read.

First note — “all” in the above title is just a colloquialism, as in “all this nonsense”.

So it turns out that the scientists, you know, the folks who published all the alarming hoo-hah about global warming? Well, they selected which data to include in (and exclude from) their study, which makes the scientificity very suspect.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/12/01/EDV01ASHN5.DTL

Note that the SFGATE article only shows that, like the rest of us, even high-caliber scientists can have their own agenda and can fall prey to picking-and-choosing the data that support their pet causes. This is called confirmation bias, when we try to figure that we’re already right, instead of trying to find out what the actual data is telling us.

Second Note — This article does not mean that global warming is a fraud. Likely? Possible? Probable? Maybe, but not conclusive. Don’t fall into the trap of swinging the blindness pendulum to the other side of the argument.

Just because the little boy cried wolf… it doesn’t mean there isn’t a wolf.

Third note — where’s the hue and cry about defrauding the public? It’s not there! Could big-lobbying-dollars have anything to do with it? (Just because I’m paranoid, doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get me…)

For a much more reasonable take on Global Warming, whether it’s true or not, check out Greg Cravens’s “How It All Ends” video at Youtube.com (Greg Cravens talks about “Confirmation Bias” in chapter 3 of his book).

The chances of someone like you, who can read and comprehend English sentence structure, NOT having heard of Napoleon Hill’s “Think and Grow Rich“, is slim.

The book was originally published in 1938, at the end of America’s Great Depression. Andrew Carnegie had commissioned Hill to interview hundreds of movers-and-shakers, from Ford and Edison to Wrigley and Eastman to Bell and Darrow. From these interviews he spent 20 years distilling the common patterns among these folks and determined that they all exhibited similar behaviors. Moreover, he determined that anybody else who exhibited those behaviors couls also succeed, regardless of circumstance.

The book is packed with wisdom and insight. Here are some examples:

No more effort is required to aim high in life, to demand abundance and prosperity, than is required to accept misery and poverty.

Why shoot for mediocre when you can shoot for exemplary?

I bargained my Life for a penny,
And Life would pay no more,
However I begged at evening
When I counted my scanty score.

For Life is a just employer,
He gives you what you ask,
But once you have set the wages,
Why, you must bear the task.

I worked for a menial’s hire,
Only to learn, dismayed,
That any wage I had asked of Life,
Life would have willingly paid.

In other words, if you settle for misery, you’ll get it. Or, if you believe you can succeed, or not, you’re right.

Another:

If you think you are beaten, you are,
If you think you dare not, you don’t.
If you like to win, but think you can’t,
It is almost certain you won’t.

If you think you’ll lose, you’re lost,
For out of the world we find,
Success begins with a fellow’s will–
It’s all in the state of mind.

If you think you’re outclassed, you are,
You’ve got to think high to rise,
You’ve got to be sure of your self before
You can ever win a prize.

Life’s battles don’t always go
To the stronger or faster man,
But soon or late the man who wins
Is the man who thinks he can!

It’s not speed or force that does the trick — it’s persistence and relentless determination that wins the day.

There are no limitations to the mind except those we acknowledge. Both poverty and riches are the offspring of thought!

When you were a kid you often talked about your hopes and aspirations, and at some point someone started making you feel stupid for having them, and you quietly surrendered. Carpe diem! Sieze your destiny again and pursue it with wild abandon — unless you expect to “drift” into success…

We rise to high positions or remain at the bottom because of conditions that we can control if we desire to control them.

Learn to distinguish what you can control vs. what you can complain about. Focus on what you truly do have the opportunity to do something about — and then take action! Position yourself to where “opportunity can find you!”

Above all, DO NOT STOP.

Hear hear! Persistence and determination are omnipotent.

Steam ships and railroads do not spring up from the earth and function automatically. They come in response to the call of civilization, through the labor and ingenuity and organizing ability of men who have imagination, faith, enthusiasm, decision, persistence! These men are known as capitalists.

He also talks a bit about how “radicals and self-seeking politicians” who “offered to deliver voters in return for legislation designed to permit men to take riches away from industry by organized force of numbers, instead of the better method of giving a fair day’s work for a fair day’s pay.” Ouch!

Millions of men and women throughout the nation are still engaged in this popular pastime of trying to GET without GIVING. Some of them are lined up with labor unions, where they demand shorter hours and more pay! Others do not take the trouble to work at all. They demand government relief and are getting it.

Further, Napoleon Hill recognizes:

There is but one dependable method of accumulating, and legally holding, riches, and that is by rendering useful service.

Wonder how many votes Napoleon Hill would get in today’s America…

Wonderful perspective on how English will survive the ages:

The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that the English language is as pure as a crib-house whore. It not only borrows words from other languages; it has on occasion chased other languages down dark alley-ways, clubbed them unconscious and rifled their pockets for new vocabulary.

James Nicoll (b. 1961), “The King’s English”, rec.arts.sf-lovers, 15 May 1990

French authorities scurry about looking to keep their language pure by forbidding alien terms such as “le hotdog” and “le weekend” and “le sweater”. In English, we use whatever new term or turn of phrase conveys the thought best. Consider “Pretty” (Saxon), “Bouquet” (French), “Quota” (Latin), “Algebra” (Arabic). It’s part of why we English-speakers have a ridiculously rich vocabulary, and also why English will survive.

English purists who have icebergs up their butt will rail at the progress English makes organically and make themselves obsolete… you ain’t gonna keep folks from using the terms they want to, in the way they want to — it ain’t gonna happen, no siree.

Still, there are some constructs that just aren’t right, no matter how organic you want to get.

• “It’s” vs “Its” — With an apostrophe, it’s a contraction for two words. Without the apostrophe, it represents ownership, just like his or hers. So try using “him” or “her” instead and you’ll get it right:
  • That’s its main flaw <= That’s her main flaw
  • It’s been grand <= She’s been grand
  • It’s its own worst enemy <= He’s his own worst enemy
• “You’re” vs “Your” — Here the apostrophe version is most definitely a contraction for the two words “you are”. If you can replace the contraction with those two words and the sentence still makes sense, you’ve got it right; if not, use “your” which means ir belongs to you.
  • Your house is on fire.
  • You’re almost too late. (You are almost too late)
• “They’re” vs “Their” vs “There” — the first is a contraction for “they are”, period. The second means it belongs to them. The third means it’s somewhere besides here.
  • They’re screwing it up again. (They are screwing it up again)
  • Their car is in the shop. (The car belongs to them and it’s being repaired.)
  • There is the one we were looking for. (It’s not here, it’s there.)
    For this last one, just remember you’re starting with the word “HERE” and adding another letter “T” to get somewhere else that’s not HERE — it’s THERE.

I stole a french fry right from the hands of my eight-year-old niece, and she said “You’re so cool.”

Is that the reaction you’d expect? Let me complete the picture:

So there I was, minding my own business, digesting some fast food we’d bought on the way to Chicago; I had already polished off my whole supper. My eight-year-old niece was sitting in the vehicle right across from me, still working on hers. She takes out a french fry, waves it around at me taunting me with “I’ve got a french fry, you don’t have any, I have a french fry…” Singing, of course. You get the picture.

She’s waving it at me, don’t forget. So I snatch it out of her hand, chew it up and swallow it, enjoying every morsel along the way. Gloating, even. I then ask her “Did you learn anything?”

She thinks for a moment — a bit of a pause, here — and takes out another french fry, and starts to wave it again, with the same song: “I’ve got a french fry, you don’t have any, I have a french fry…” but this time it’s well out of my reach. I say “Very good,” with a large grin.

She says “You’re so cool!”

I say “For stealing a french fry from you?”

She says “For teaching me stuff.”

Apparently she understands that I’m not going to steal all of her food. (Darn, I thought I had her snowed.)

Another part of the context here is that most adults treat kids like they’re fragile, or should be fragile. Me stealing her french fry was a refreshing, bracing stimulus bringing her in direct contact with the “real world”. Most adults talk to kids, they don’t interact with kids. (I expect I’ll never understand how an adult can forget what it was like being a kid, and the types of interaction a kid hungers for. Zut alors!)

This probably would have induced emotional trauma if she was age three. But an eight-year-old is at the Age of Reason where she can start to make lots of conceptual connections. Valuable lesson, and it only cost a french fry.

So here are the rules:

1. Establish a relationship of trust with the kid
2. Let them experience a real loss (you should pick and choose, here — if you start with small losses early on, you might be able to avoid really big losses later)
3. Get them to examine the situation and encourage them to consider what they would do differently next time
4. Lather, rinse, repeat

It’s the sense of loss (or pain) that sets the stage for real learning. Skin your knee in a bicycle accident? You’ll work hard to not do it that way again. Lose your favorite watch? Once you find it or replace it you’ll pay much closer attention to where you set it down from now on. Say something really stupid and tick off a best friend? You’ll learn to either pay more attention to how you say things, or how to get along without your ex-best friend.

But having them reflect on step 2 — this reflection is actually step 3 — is where the educating really happens. Get them to look at cause and effect, to reflect on their choices, and consider alternatives.

It’s that second step that most adults either want to be efficient, or the hero, rather than let their children learn. “My precious widdiw snookums needs his glasses, I’ll go get them for you, you silly forgettery-goose!” “Ickle duddykins must wear knee pads and only use the trampoline with the net around it, we don’t want any accidents!” “I’ll bail you out of jail, son, I’m on my way with cash right now!”

Plus, you might wind up being late to the occasional baseball practice or the play or the party, if you let them panic about not being able to find something while you wait. Sure, it’s more efficient on time if you find it for them… but only in the short term is more efficient on time — just this afternoon, but not long term! You’ll be finding their stuff for them from now through when they return home from college!

When you separate consequence from action — effect from cause — and you wind up with a totally irresponsible adult.

Similar to the U.S. Congress.

For me, here in the American midwest, it’s July 21 at 8pm. This means it’s already tomorrow everywhere from Greenwich UK to Japan. In fact, the big solar eclipse of 2009 has already begun!

The animated image you see here is a great representation of where the moon’s shadow is (and was, and will be) during this eclipse.

For more specifics, check out the original web page at http://www.eclipse.org.uk/eclipse/0412009/.

Having more than one conversational language at your disposal makes a ton of sense. You can think from a different paradigm, you can see the world from a different point of view, you can connect with a whole new people, learn from a completely different culture…

In case the advantages aren’t obvious — why be bi-lingual? — here’s a quick video clip to explain it to even the thickest among us.

Holy cow — the new iPhone 3.0 OS is so advanced I can now delete multiple pictures! But wait, there’s more: I can delete multiple pictures mounted from my desktop, too! Back in the old 2.x days it would RESET THE IPHONE when trying to delete two or more pictures at once.

On top of that, the photos show up in chronological order! How snazzy can you get?

There’s a Pulitzer, or Emmy, or Nobel, in there somewhere.

All kidding aside, it’s a nice new feature set.

• You can also search all your content (drag left from the home-home screen, or hit your home button just one more time, to open the Search interface).
• There’s a voice-memo application now, too.
• And with iPhone OS 3.0 you can now see how long your phone conversations have been. Plus, you know more than just who called, but which phone number they called from (instead of just ‘Diode’ it says ‘Diode / mobile’). Sweet!
• Double-tap just about any text and you get a little select-o-rama interface. Drag the ends where you want them, then tab ‘copy’ and now you can paste it anywhere text is allowed. Nice!

We elect representatives to lead us through trying times, right? To make policy decisions based on mountains more information than we ordinary folks have, yes? Why not have them run everything? Wouldn’t they be better at it than us uninformed simpletons?

Wouldn’t the world be a better place if we had only one organization responsible for all important decisions? Let’s have the feds determine how to educate our kids — oh that’s right, they already do. We could have the feds tell us how to handle our elder care and set up restrictions on who can access the estate and how — oh, wait, they already do. Well the feds should certainly step up and tell us how to manage our own health care and diet and exercise… um, they do.

But that’s only part-way, isn’t it?

Why leave any field open for insights and input and collaboration and production from all quarters, when instead we can restrict the decisions and activitiy to just one exclusive team? Let’s have the feds do it all. We’ll all sit back in our lawn chairs, caching stimulus checks while prices go through the roof, which our kids and grandkids will have to deal with later. Nobody will produce anything, but everyone will feel good while it lasts. It’s a great plan, and is NOT a short term fix at all; this is a well-considered approach with an eye on the future, having nothing to do with buying votes. Nothing at all.

Land of the convenient, home of the comfortable.