Ever thought your PC could do with that guru touch? Well Microsoft’s new website "Windows and Me" aims to give your PC just that. According to the site it is "a Microsoft India initiative to help consumers make the most of the Windows in their PC every day".

It includes tips and tricks for using Windows and the opportunity to ask their "gurus" a question.

Sadly the site has very obviously not been designed by a native English speaker, but hopefully the language quality will change as the site is still at the beta stage.

I got an invite to the AT&T Pogo beta today so off I rushed to try it out. My initial impressions was sluggish. Think Compiz Fusion on an Eee PC. The next thing that came to mind was novelty. I’ll wait and see how many of these things actually prove useful before commenting on that.

The install experience was fairly normal for a web browser. Ended by importing bookmarks etc. from the other browser on my system (interestingly it only detected Opera 9.5 and Internet Explorer 7 – missing Firefox 3.0). I didn’t have the option to choose install location, which was a bit annoying as I try and install all my programmes onto my larger D: drive rather than the default C: drive.

Pogo’s main feature is of course a non-orthodox approach to the browser UI. This is also reflected in the naming of many of their features. For instance there is a speeddialesque feature called "Springboard" which describes itself has "Why have one homepage when you can have more?"

One thing to watch out for here is that you have to click once on the page to bring it into focus and a second time to actually visit it. Tabs have been named cells and are placed in a "dock" at the bottom of the screen. Another new feature, one that other browsers may like to look at implementing is the ability to auto-hide this, freeing up valuable real estate for your webpage.

The heavily trumped 3D features include 3D web history (not nearly as convenient as the awesome bar though) and 3D bookmarking. To be honest I can't imagine trawling through large amounts of 3D history, at least unless the performance is improved.

Find is baby of the month in tech circles at the moment and on a quick count I found at least 3 find/search boxes in Pogo, including one nifty box that searched bookmarks, "collections" (which I had thought were just 3D bookmarks) and history. Definitely something else I'd like to see in mainstream browsers.

My final words? If you're looking for a usable 3D browsing experience - choose the PicLens add-on from CoolIris and your current browser. If your looking to be right at the cutting edge of cool and pointless eye candy (Compiz Fusion users do you hear me? ;)) get hold of a Pogo invite from somewhere.

EDIT: It appears that the performance problems I was having may be due to a bug in the programme causing CPU usage to spike. Will keep you posted.

If only people would hold mutual respect for each other...

(when talking about countries such as Russia or China I find it helpful to remember that "Western Europe" has had many centuries, even millennia, to refine it's governing structure gradualy, while the above countries have often had a rapid change as the result of revolution etc.)

By Dr. Qiu Zhenhai [邱震海], commentator for Hong Kong's Phoenix TV

Translated By Mark Klingman

March 22. 2008

China - Wen Wei Po - Original Article (Chinese)

Tibet's largest riot in 20 years has aroused international concern. Although over the past few days Chinese officials have released some news, they have yet to allow foreign reporters to interview the locals and the rumors are flying. Particularly European countries are of the belief that information from the Chinese government is wholly unreliable. This statement sounds harsh, but the Western world's inherent thinking and feeling on the issue of Tibet is a reflection of this.

Then please explain the statement by a Chinese torch bearer that she had never heard of a Tibetan independence movement. Whether you agree with their ideals or not you cannot say that the government should hide them from the general population.

If we carefully study the mentality behind this thinking and improve China's international public-relations skills,

Otherwise known as propaganda.

we can try to overcome the limitations of the West's political culture.

Which would be? So there are shortcomings, but less than in the Chinese system.

The Olympic Games in Beijing are still four and a half months away. Although this is a moment of crisis, the crisis may also offer opportunities.

Tibet is a complicated issue. There does need to be a deeper, more respectful, civilized dialogue and an improvement in relations between Han Chinese and Tibetans.

That's all any reasonable person could ask for.

But long-term delays and the way the Tibetan running-dogs have acted in their own political interests have resulted in the growing complication of Tibetan affairs.

Wouldn't you have done the same if you were being discriminated against? Which they wouldn't have done had they been held equal to Chinese citizens.

But looked at in isolation, it's clear that the disturbances, rioting, vandalism and heinous disorder are being dealt with according to the law.

Legal does not mean right.

If any incident of this kind took place in a Western country, regardless of the "complexity" of the surrounding issues, the local government would carry out effective programs to clamp down and maintain peace. The 1992 riots in Los Angeles as well as the 2005 riots in Paris are perfect examples.

No. The causes of the riots were fundamentally different. In the Paris riots the rioters went bad before the authorities, in Tibet it was the other way around.

Also - if this argument circles around independence (which, in my opinion it should not, I believe that it should circle around dialogue) then a government in Paris has a much greater argument for extending its authority to its own city, then a government the other side of a country does. (An China is larger than most European countries too).

There is certainly some hypocrisy in the West's views, however no one's perfect and the Western states have had much more experience at managing a developed or semi-developed country than China has.

Only on the Tibet issue do Western media and intelligentsia diverge from their usual thinking.

That is not true. I could list many examples where the western media have condemned the actions of their own part of the world (both internally and externally).

• Guantanamo bay
• Extraordinary rendition
• The Iraq war
• Detention without trial (UK terror laws)
• And more

In the past, Western intellectuals have almost unanimously condemned the Chinese government over Tibet. In regard to the current turmoil, they have condemned the use of force and demanded official Chinese restraint,

disproportionate force would be a better phrase to use.

regardless of the facts surrounding the riots.

Could we have an unbiased source of the facts please? (I will concede that the western media often swings the bias the other way)

But the West's criticism is in stark contrast to its long history of intellectual and empirical rigor,

Trying flattery?

because it is fully aware that the question of Tibet is a deep and complex one. Therefore we must take the first step: We must study the Western position on the question of Tibet, along with the international public relations measures utilized by Western intellectuals.

TIBET: A WESTERN BLIND SPOT AND MENTAL COMPLEX

On the question of Tibet, Western intellectuals have multiple overlaid and intertwined complexes. So when they speak with the appearance of "rationality" on the issue of Tibet, they merely give vent to their own confusion and demonstrate the vicious circle that they've gotten themselves into.

COMPLEX NUMBER ONE: The long-standing, traditional liberalism and idealism of the West, which is concerned primarily with civil liberties, human rights, self-determination, and confidence in basic government, arose out of the Renaissance and the bourgeois [industrial] revolution. These ideas are the precious spiritual wealth of the West. The trouble is that for a variety of reasons, when this spiritual wealth encounters the Tibet issue, it gets twisted and perverted.

No. Some basic rights are inalienable. You can't say that they are only so in the west, or that they do not apply to certain people because of where they come from.

Everyone has the right to be respected, and the responsibility to respect.

Everyone has the right to free and fair trial if they are accused of breaking the law of the land.

Everyone has the right to believe what they wish.

Everyone has the right to air their beliefs provided they do not contradict the right to respect.

This first one is a universal, deontological principle. Almost all other things that people consider to be universal rights are considered so because they fall under this principle.

Because this principle is deonotolgical it is not changed to take into account circumstances. It is ALWAYS held to be true, regardless of the consequences.

COMPLEX NUMBER TWO: Over the past few centuries because of the success of modernization, there has been a "tilting" process toward the West. The West has become a model for the world in human rights, democracy, freedom, civil law, and the self-determination of peoples. These have become so-called natural, mainstream values, and therefore in the exchanges between the West and China, the West has had a commanding position.

No reasonable person would claim that the west has a moral high ground over China. However many of these values are not just modern western in their origin. Many of these values are summed up in Christian, Jewish and Buddhist theology as well much older civilisations such as the Ancient Greeks and the Roman Republic. Values that have survived this long must be incredibly close to universal truth to have survived.

Yes we may get them, their interpretation, or their implementation wrong at times but we can all learn from each other to improve life for all.

China is not and should not reject these ideals due to their Western origins. Rather, China should take part in these universal values of freedom, democracy, and human rights, and should remain "inclined" toward dialogue with the West.

If people would only talk to each other... things would be so much easier.

COMPLEX NUMBER THREE: Along with the rapid development of the West and shift of the East-West balance toward the West (especially the major European countries), there has also come an odd spread of primitive "hippie" culture - those in search of novelty and interested in "finding themselves" - as well as religious fanaticism, the leading representatives of this being Africa and Tibet.

If people wish to be part of an odd spread of primitive hippy culture  then that is up to them. Attacking other peoples cultures does not help to further your argument. Instead it just makes you look like a stuck up git.

In itself, this cultural phenomenon is beyond reproach. The complication arises with the inevitable "non-cultural factors." For example, in regard to Tibet, its "primitive" culture elicits pious feelings of enthusiasm, "reverence" and other heartwarming feelings from Western intellectuals. The inevitable result is that it is impossible for them to hold an objective attitude on the Tibet issue.

Birds of a feather flock together. Brain of Britain. However many of the intellectuals that you speak of are not members of the hippy culture so that argument is defunct.

COMPLEX NUMBER FOUR: There is still a huge difference between the ideologies of the West and China. Especially after the Cold War, the Western values have become mainstream for China and the majority of countries around the world, more so since its position has become so commanding and apparently "reasonable." So for example, police forces in the U.S. and France are permitted to handle rioters according to the law (regardless of how complicated the underlying issues may be), but for the same acts China is immediately condemned.

I explained this above. It is the side that makes the first move that is what sets those examples apart. Also be aware that we do frown upon western police using disproportionate force. It is also likely that the western law is much less severe than the Chinese one, making it much less likely that the western law violates the right to respect. 

These four intertwined complexes have led to confusion and internal divisions among Western intellectuals, which can be summed up this way:

The West's critical, liberal, empirical tradition

Flattery.

and the simultaneous ignorance of facts and logic due to simplistic thinking create a paradox.

Insulting the reader... always a good way to go. As I said earlier it makes you seem like a stuck up git. If anyone can provide examples as to how western thinking on this issue is simplistic I'd love to hear from you.

In Western Europe in particular, intellectuals are confused about the issue of Tibet,

How?

and to a certain extent, this affects Western public opinion and thinking.

ie. they don't agree with you?

But on the whole, people should not think that such thinking is antithetical to the Chinese people or against China.

I agree. It is not. It is just a disagreement about government policies.

On the contrary, within this staggering confusion and misunderstanding, there a huge opportunity for China to launch its own huge public relations campaign.

Propaganda

NEED TO GRASP SEVERAL KEYS

In terms of international public relations, this author has recommended responding rapidly, frankly, and following the principle of transparency. Because of its long-term nature and complexity, China can't ignore the Tibet issue. If it isn't handled properly, from now until the Olympics in August it could create even greater turbulence in the international community.

Define handled properly.

At the same time, we must realize that China's sovereignty over Tibet has long been recognized by the international community.

I don't think that this is the primary debate here, just an aside. Just because you have sovereignty over a region does not mean that you can treat its people as you will.

This is one structural barrier between China and the West that has been settled. We should also be aware that even after the turmoil in Tibet, the vast majority of Western countries still hope that Beijing will practice restraint and try to keep open official channels of communication,

Sitting down and talking is often the best way to solve things.

especially in regard to the issue of boycotting the Beijing Olympics. So far, no countries or international organizations have decided to officially boycott. As long as the governments of most Western countries don't intervene, an Olympic boycott won't gather steam.

Regrettably.

In regard to the Tibet issue, if Beijing acts quickly to put down any disturbances

That sounds bad. If they want to make friends in the west that is precisely the wrong way to go about it.

and truthfully releases the facts,

That would be a good step to make.

it can reduce the impact of any incidents on the Games.

Which are being used as a political tool.

In this regard, there are obvious short-term and long-term public relations considerations. In the long term, this will effect China's relations with the West, and of course it will affect Tibet as China gradually improves and adjusts its policies there.

improves and adjusts - that sounds ominous.

In the short term when journalists are permitted into Tibet to conduct interviews, the international community will gain a better understanding of the facts.

Well let it happen then.

[Editor's Note: After this article was published, Western reporters were indeed permitted to take a supervised tour of Tibet. But things did not go well .]

Freely.

Whether in the long term or the short term, there are several keys issues involved with public relations:

First, a frank attitude toward the international community, even in the face of misunderstanding;

Yes. But keep it honest.

Second, keeping in mind the international community's blind spots due to their numerous complexes (described above),

ie. try and dupe them.

we much begin to form a common language that could eventually lead to constructive dialogue;

Talking does solve many problems.

Third, we much open lines of communication with prominent Western columnists and intellectuals and those proficient in the West and persuade them write articles in the Western press.

persuade them to right...  you realise how much that would destroy a newspapers credibility? Aside most columnists would be mortified to let anyone else's opinion into their columns.

[Editor's Note: The author is a commentator for Phoenix Television, which is a Hong Kong-based Mandarin Chinese television broadcaster. Being on good terms with the Beijing government, it is one of the few non-government TV broadcasters permitted to operate in mainland China . Read 'Behind the Scenes of China's Official Media Machine' by Reporters Without Borders ]

Via here and Reuters.

There have been a lot of misleading articles floating around in the press stating that if a woman eats a lot while pregnant she is more likely to have male children (example here). They refer to research conducted at Oxford and Exeter Universities.

So, can the food you eat really influence the gender of your baby. No. This wrong. The research itself isn't wrong, but it is being  mis-portrayed by the press.

It's basic school science that the gender of a baby is determined by the chromosome (Xor Y) carried by the mans sperm, and that alone. It is impossible for a female to provide a Y chromosome. For that to happen she'd have to be XY - male. (this is why Henry VIII was wrong)

So what is happening? The researchers actually said that the diet actually affects the survival of the different genders of embryo, not their conception. This means that you are still as likely to produce male or female offspring whatever your diet, but the chance of them surviving to birth are different.

Effectively by changing your diet you are trying to select out children of the gender that you do not want, not the chances that you will conceive a male or female. So if your man doesn't produce the right sperm this won't work.

I've taken some time to look at the Olympic Charter. I've found some quite interesting stuff. Next time someone says "the Olympic charter says we should keep politics out of this" I can say the Olympic charter says that the Olympics are not to be used as a political event, however there are certain criteria that have to be met:

Fundamental Principles of Olympics:
Throughout the document it repeatedly states that all individuals and organisations have to uphold these principals, and that any Olympic event or branding should uphold them. A host city that does not uphold them is "failing an obligation" to the Olympics. ("each applicant city has the obligation to comply with the Olympic Charter")

5. Any form of discrimination with regard to a country or a person on grounds of race, religion,
politics, gender or otherwise is incompatible with belonging to the Olympic Movement.

Mission and Role of the IOC*
In this section it clearly states that one of the key aims of the IOC is to "promote peace." The IOC is bound to adhere to this responsibility, and organising games in any city that does not promote peace is, in my opinion at least, failing to adhere to this responsibility

4. to cooperate with the competent public or private organisations and authorities in the
endeavour to place sport at the service of humanity and thereby to promote peace;

Advertising, Demonstrations, Propaganda*
This point begs the question as to what happens when the propaganda is not in or around the games but is - in fact - the games themselves. Does the exact semantics used in the charter make this acceptable? Is it acceptable to uphold the word, not the meaning, of the Olympic charter? This year will not be the first instance nor, I anticipate, the last but we have to ask ourselves why we give the Olympics and almost holy respect when, in fact, they often do not deserve it.

3. No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any
Olympic sites, venues or other areas.

And regardless of what the athletes, head of state and member of the IOC think the issue is not going away.

Can I also recommend this article that is very similar in viewpoint to my above post.

The Olympic Charter can be found here.

The third testing build (or beta) of Mozilla's acclaimed browser is out. The first thing to notice is that a lot of UI polishing has taken place since the last release, including a shiny new theme.

I also noticed that page loading times seemed to be substantially quicker, both than in 2.0.0.12 and than in 3.0b2.

The new address bar still features, as does the little star that allows you to add a site to your bookmarks.

Full screen mode doesn't seem to have had the new icons yet though:

Finally, it's good to see that ACID 2 compatibility is still here and that performance on ACID 3 is improved over FF2.

I found out about this new feature on Google maps today (available in some US cities only) - street view. Basically Google vans drive around photographing stuff and uploading it to maps.

So next time you're out and about keep an eye out for the Google vans.

There really is no escape from the almighty Google. As a geek I now feel happy that I prefer the inside to the out.

I finally got around to downloading beta 2 today. For reasons known only to me I didn't have much of a look at beta 1, so this is my first real impression of Firefox 3.

The first thing I noticed was the rather cool "What's new?" screen. A bit of a deviation from the usual!

I liked the snazzy new plugin manager - until now you've had to manage each plugin independently and manually.

I don't like the new favourites centre as much as the old one and I'm not sure about the new dropdown menu from the address bar, however I think that the latter may be an acquired taste that I'll get used to. Also I have heard that the download manager has been upgraded so that may be good. I haven't tested it yet.