Yes, it's true, according to this story. Once again I found it on /. The parasite "Toxoplasma gondii," which lives in the guts of cats, has been shown to affect behavior in rats.
Specifically, the parasite alter's the rat's instincts to avoid cat urine, and makes the rat actually *seek out* cat urine. As the parasite's eggs are often passed through the urine, the rat picks up the parasite eggs, the cat eats the rat, and the parasite makes it back into the cat's gut.
According to the article, there's a link between this parasite in humans and schizophrenia; antipsychotic drugs stop the growth of this bacteria.
Of course, humans are not as instinct-driven as rats... but I am feeling the urge to welcome our new overlords... welcome...
Sunday, February 12, 2006
Friday, February 10, 2006
Copyrighted logo or international symbol? Red Cross v. Video Games
According to this interview (another story I found on slashdot), that little red cross on virtual med-kits you pick up in your average first-person shooter game is an illegal misuse of a protected trademark.
To quote the Canadian Red Cross spokesman David Pratt: "The fact that the Red Cross is also used in [videogames] which contain strong language and violence is also of concern to us in that they directly conflict with the basic humanitarian principles espoused by the Red Cross movement."
Right. So, at what point does a trademark become an international symbol? I can't think of a more ready symbol for medical aid than the good old even-barred cross. It's become an association between symbol and meaning that has imprinted our global society. It's beyond the nonprof's reach now.
It's certainly not libel or slander for Red Cross to be associated with healin' up some critical hit points while your avatar is out shooting Nazzis or aliens. If the Red Cross was stamped on the AK-47 you're blasting away with, sure. That could be interpretted as the Red Cross organization standing behind violence. But... Med kits?
And let me get this straight. Since when does placement of an object in an art piece equate to that trademark supporting said art? If I want to accurately portray my surroundings, why can't I have a Red Cross med kit in my virtual surroundings?
Art reflects life and the daily objects around us. Video games are an interactive art form. Censoring that art form would be a crime against freedom of expression.
To quote the Canadian Red Cross spokesman David Pratt: "The fact that the Red Cross is also used in [videogames] which contain strong language and violence is also of concern to us in that they directly conflict with the basic humanitarian principles espoused by the Red Cross movement."
Right. So, at what point does a trademark become an international symbol? I can't think of a more ready symbol for medical aid than the good old even-barred cross. It's become an association between symbol and meaning that has imprinted our global society. It's beyond the nonprof's reach now.
It's certainly not libel or slander for Red Cross to be associated with healin' up some critical hit points while your avatar is out shooting Nazzis or aliens. If the Red Cross was stamped on the AK-47 you're blasting away with, sure. That could be interpretted as the Red Cross organization standing behind violence. But... Med kits?
And let me get this straight. Since when does placement of an object in an art piece equate to that trademark supporting said art? If I want to accurately portray my surroundings, why can't I have a Red Cross med kit in my virtual surroundings?
Art reflects life and the daily objects around us. Video games are an interactive art form. Censoring that art form would be a crime against freedom of expression.
Monday, February 06, 2006
Achilles handshake
To quote Eddie Izzard, "He suffers from hand-squeezy death!"
And can I just say... I can't get over this Bush quote. It HURTS MY BRAIN.
"I'm honored to, uh, shake the hand--of a brave Iraqi citizen who had his hand cut off by Saddam Hussein." --May 25, 2004 at the White House.
It just makes me cringe... it's ten times worse than throwing up on the Japanese prime minister's lap ("Bushusuru"). So... I'm sorry, world. *I* didn't vote for him.
And can I just say... I can't get over this Bush quote. It HURTS MY BRAIN.
"I'm honored to, uh, shake the hand--of a brave Iraqi citizen who had his hand cut off by Saddam Hussein." --May 25, 2004 at the White House.
It just makes me cringe... it's ten times worse than throwing up on the Japanese prime minister's lap ("Bushusuru"). So... I'm sorry, world. *I* didn't vote for him.
Wednesday, February 01, 2006
My first blog - Why Journalists are like Jedis
My very first blog, courtesy of a homework assignment. I never figured I'd ever have a teacher who knew what a blog is!
I'm a great Star Wars fan. I have always wanted to be a Jedi Knight. Jedi are the Guardians of Peace and Justice throughout the Galaxy. How cool is that? They are like Journalists, the Guardians of Truth throughout the Galaxy. I could be, like, a combination, and get the best of both worlds.
...And as any Jourdi Knight knows, "Truth" is really just one person's point of view. What I want to share is someone else's Truth... you guessed it... their blog!
PZ Myers, who claims to be a professor at the University of Minnesota, wrote this blog on President Bush's State of the Union address --specifically, the section asking Congress to outlaw human cloning and creating human-animal hybrids.
To quote: [Bush is] trusting that everyone will think he is banning monstrous crimes against nature, but what he's really doing is targeting the weak and the ill, blocking useful avenues of research that are specifically designed to help us understand human afflictions. His message isn't "We aren't going to let the mad scientists make monsters!", it's "We aren't going to let the doctors help those 'retards.'"
There is a link to this blog from Slashdot, which also has some lively and interesting comments on the issue... Everything from obligatory Bush animalism comments to more intellectual moral debates.
"Why is this issue a newsworthy one?" I can hear Professor Fox asking. Here's what I think. State of the Union address=timely. Technology being censored=important issue to my generation. A blog=good news delivery. Polls show that people my age (22) prefer their news delivered with a twist of opinion.
In general, I say humanity can't be trusted with human genes. But on the other hand, research could lead to farming human organs so that no one has to go on a waiting list any more. I'm all for that. GATICA doesn't sound like such a great future, but in a way it has a lot of appeal...
I'd love to see how J130 students feel about cloning and chimeras. What do you think?
I'm a great Star Wars fan. I have always wanted to be a Jedi Knight. Jedi are the Guardians of Peace and Justice throughout the Galaxy. How cool is that? They are like Journalists, the Guardians of Truth throughout the Galaxy. I could be, like, a combination, and get the best of both worlds.
...And as any Jourdi Knight knows, "Truth" is really just one person's point of view. What I want to share is someone else's Truth... you guessed it... their blog!
PZ Myers, who claims to be a professor at the University of Minnesota, wrote this blog on President Bush's State of the Union address --specifically, the section asking Congress to outlaw human cloning and creating human-animal hybrids.
To quote: [Bush is] trusting that everyone will think he is banning monstrous crimes against nature, but what he's really doing is targeting the weak and the ill, blocking useful avenues of research that are specifically designed to help us understand human afflictions. His message isn't "We aren't going to let the mad scientists make monsters!", it's "We aren't going to let the doctors help those 'retards.'"
There is a link to this blog from Slashdot, which also has some lively and interesting comments on the issue... Everything from obligatory Bush animalism comments to more intellectual moral debates.
"Why is this issue a newsworthy one?" I can hear Professor Fox asking. Here's what I think. State of the Union address=timely. Technology being censored=important issue to my generation. A blog=good news delivery. Polls show that people my age (22) prefer their news delivered with a twist of opinion.
In general, I say humanity can't be trusted with human genes. But on the other hand, research could lead to farming human organs so that no one has to go on a waiting list any more. I'm all for that. GATICA doesn't sound like such a great future, but in a way it has a lot of appeal...
I'd love to see how J130 students feel about cloning and chimeras. What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)