Evolving Perceptions

Despite some beta issues, Google’s streamlined and speedy browser offers strong integrated search and an intriguing alternative to Firefox and Internet Explorer.

Google takes aim squarely at Microsoft with the release of its new Web browser, Chrome. And Microsoft should be very afraid: Chrome lives up to its hype by rethinking the Web browser in clever and convenient ways that make using the Web a more organic experience than you’d get with either Microsoft’s Internet Explorer 8 or Mozilla’s Firefox 3.

Best color switch cheats

Initially available for download for Windows Vista and XP, Google plans to expand its Chrome offerings to the Mac and Linux platforms as well. The company doesn’t offer any timeline for these versions, though. (For additional PCWorld.com coverage of Google’s new browser, see “Chrome vs. the World” and “Google’s Chrome: 7 Reasons for It and 7 Reasons Against It.”)

Chrome automatically detects the Web browser you’re using and prompts you through the process of installation (right down to telling you how to access downloaded files within Firefox, for example). When you first run the application, Chrome imports your bookmarks, passwords, and settings from Firefox or Internet Explorer. It even can grab username and password data, and it automatically populates those fields for you when you use Chrome for the first time to visit a particular site.

After running through a quick import checklist, Chrome opens on your desktop–and right away you begin to experience the Web in a new way. Chrome’s layout is very simple: You’ll see a row of tabs running along the top, a Web address bar, and a bookmarks bar that runs beneath the address bar. A separate recent bookmarks box appears at the right of the screen, as does a history search field.

Like its Google stablemates, Chrome has a remarkably minimalist interface. There is no full-scale menu bar and no title bar–and few distractions. All controls are buried beneath two icons to the right of the Omnibar (as Google refers to its address bar): a page icon for managing tabs and using Google Gears to create application-like shortcuts from your desktop to a Web site; and a wrench for history, downloads, and other browser options.

You can set your own home page, or you can use the ‘most visited’ sites page as your starting point. This page provides thumbnail images of your most frequently visited sites, shows recent bookmarks, and supplies a search field for searching your page history. You can change your default search engine, too: This option is located beneath the wrench icon, under Options .

Chrome’s design bridges the gap between desktop and so-called “cloud computing.” At the touch of a button, Chrome lets you make a desktop, Start menu, or QuickLaunch shortcut to any Web page or Web application, blurring the line between what’s online and what’s inside your PC. For example, I created a desktop shortcut for Google Maps. When you create a shortcut for a Web application, Chrome strips away all of the toolbars and tabs from the window, leaving you with something that feels much more like a desktop application than like a Web application or page. The lack of forward and back buttons means that if you browse between pages in a saved Web application you may find yourself a little confused if you want to go back a page. Chrome does let you right-click to navigate backward, however.

This being Google, search is an integral part of Chrome; and Google has added some clever features to make searching easier. Chrome goes beyond its Microsoft and Mozilla competition by searching your browser history’s page titles as well page content. The history results show the title of the page, as well as a thumbnail representation of the page (for some sites but not all; it was unclear why some sites were visually represented while others were not), but it doesn’t show the actual Web page address. The lack of URL information can make it difficult to identify the specific Web page you’re going to, especially if the site’s title bar description is not specific (because, say, different sections of the same site have identical title bar descriptors).

For example, earlier today I read an article on Macworld about an upcoming Apple launch event. To find the article in my browser history, I simply typed ‘apple event’ in the Omnibar. The resulting list showed every page I had visited that contained the phrase ‘apple event’. Conveniently, the Omnibar lets you search not just your history, but Google and other sites as well.

The default search engine is Google, as you might expect. However, you can choose from a list of nine other search engines, or you can manually add your own search engine. Type ‘google fish sticks’ to search for fish sticks on Google. The same syntax works for Yahoo, Amazon, Live Search, and other sites that are already recognized by Google or that you add. This feature, though nifty and promising, proved inconsistent in the early going: It worked for me most of the time on a Windows Vista PC, but two of my colleagues who were testing Chrome on Windows XP machines had trouble getting the feature to work. Google provides keywords to activate this search feature, but some of us had to edit the search engine keywords manually before the feature would function properly.

Chrome includes a number of features that appear in other browsers, such as a private browsing mode dubbed Incognito, tools for Web developers to use in viewing and troubleshooting source code, and the ability to restore all tabs from a previous session. Chrome also features tab isolation: If a Web page causes a problem with Chrome and leads to a crash, the crash will affect only the tab displaying the page and not the whole program. Internet Explorer 8 will offer a similar feature, but Chrome takes the idea a step further by adding a task manager that gives the user an idea of how much memory and CPU use a page is eating up, and by allowing you to kill anything that is causing a problem. Unfortunately, you have to configure this tool manually.

In my early testing, I ran into some problems. Chrome can be a little unstable, which is not surprising considering that it is a beta. Also, I have found that Flash does not work with Chrome on my Vista-based system, though my two colleagues running XP had no issues with Flash compatibility. They did, however, experience software crashes when searching in the history section. And when Chrome crashes, it takes everything with it unless you manually configure the browser to act otherwise (the configuration options are buried under the wrench icon, in the Options/Basics menu). In contrast, Mozilla Firefox and Microsoft Internet Explorer 8 automatically restore your previous session in the event of a crash.

The sites I visited that rely on JavaScript and Ajax seemed to work fine, but Microsoft’s Silverlight wouldn’t work with Chrome. Google’s browser uses WebKit, the same engine that powers Apple’s Safari Web browser–and Silverlight works with Safari for Mac only.

Google has produced an excellent browser that is friendly enough to handle average browsing activities without complicating the tasks, but at the same time is powerful enough to meet the needs of more-advanced users. The search functionality of the Omnibar is one of many innovations that caught my attention. PC World has chosen to rate this beta version of Chrome because of Google’s history of leaving products and services in long-term beta and in an ongoing state of evolution. In the past there has been some speculation that Google would develop its own operating system, but I think that Chrome’s launch makes one thing is clear: The Web browser is Google’s operating system.

We can either work with nature, or work against it. On this spectrum, these architects have decided to find a middle ground: instead of chopping down trees and building their houses, the trees are incorporated as a part of the new structures.

Deforestation has a significant environmental impact. Many studies suggest that is a contributor to global warming; it impacts the water cycle by reducing the amount of water in the soil and air; it contributes to soil loss; and it results in a decline in biodiversity.

Urbanization makes up only a small part of global deforestation, but it is important for its psychological impact. Will we cut down the forests to build our homes, or will be try and incorporate our buildings into the surrounding environment? How can we change our living habits to be more mindful of nature?

These designs showcase tree-human cohabitation. Do you have any pictures of nature an architecture combined? Post them or vote on your favorite below!

Casa Vogue

Kindergarten around the tree

I was here first!

The tea house

Niavaran residential complex

Peeping Tom

Kook osteria & pizzeria

Lakeview residence

Tree hugger

Cylindrical glas house built around a tree

Tree apartments

A landmark legal ruling that saw a woman overturn her mother's will could undermine the right of people to leave their assets to who they wish, lawyers have warned.

Melita Jackson decided not to leave a single penny for her daughter and even wrote a letter explaining why Heather Ilott 'should not expect any inheritance when I die'.

But the 54-year-old has now been awarded more than £160,000 following an eight-year-legal battle, despite being written out of the document after she eloped 37 years ago.

Judges said their decision was influenced by the fact Mrs Jackson had little association with the charities who would benefit from her legacy and that Mrs Ilott had 'real financial need'.

Lawyers now fear the ruling could have widespread ramifications for how wills are drawn up, with people needing to outline in detail why they had left money to certain parties and disinherited others.

Charities have also warned that other benefactors could be deterred from leaving legacies to charities if they fear their wishes would be overruled by the courts.

James Lister, senior associate at law firm Charles Russell Speechlys, told MailOnline the ruling was 'concerning'. But he said the case was 'very fact specific' due to the fact that Ms Ilott had 'financial need'.

He said: 'Charitable beneficiaries in particular will be very concerned about the consequences that this could have in inviting claims against them.

'That the Court of Appeal is apparently willing to make such an award in the face of very clear expressions of wishes by a testator will remain of concern to will draftsmen and beneficiaries alike.'

He added: 'While this judgment will be interpreted as a blow to testamentary freedom, it should be remembered that this is a very fact specific case.

'The Court were clear that the position of the charitable beneficiaries did count against them here, as they had no direct financial need whereas Mrs Ilott plainly did.

Jenifer Gillman, partner at Willans, said: 'The case seems to suggest we are moving towards a position where the courts, regardless of the original intent of the law under which the claim was brought, can simply impose their ideas of what is fair, regardless of the deceased’s clearly expressed wishes.

'What more can be done when a client makes it clear that he or she wishes to exclude or materially limit an adult child’s interest in the estate?'

Meanwhile, Gary Rycroft, a member of the Law Society's wills and equity committee told the Daily Telegraph: 'This ruling is saying that while you can still disinherit your children, you are going to have to explain why and show connections with those you are leaving the money to.

'It is also very important because it seems to be making it easier for adult children to claim for reasonable financial provision in wills and has made the gap wider for them to do that.'

The pair had fallen out when Ms Ilott married her boyfriend at the age of 17 and never reconciled before Ms Jackson's death in 2004.

Expecting a fallout from the estate, Mrs Jackson also instructed the executors of her will to fight any claim Mrs Ilott might make after her death, adding: 'I can see no reason why my daughter should benefit in any way from my estate. I have made it clear to my daughter'.

But, despite the 70-year-old leaving her entire £489,000 fortune to three animal charities, the Court of Appeal ruled that her daughter - who was last year granted £50,000 after asking for half of the inheritance - is entitled to a chunk of the money.

In a rare case of its kind, Lady Justice Arden today more than tripled the payout saying that Mrs Jackson had failed to make 'reasonable provision' for her daughter.

Although it is hard for claimants to contest an estate, claimants can overturn wills if they can prove they are not valid or if they can show they have not been given 'reasonable financial provision' - which is often difficult for a self-sufficient adult.

During the case, the court had been told how Mrs Ilott - a mother of five who is still married to her teenage sweetheart Nicholas - was struggling for money and wanted to buy her housing association property in Great Munden, Hertfordshire.

Judges ruled the money, which had been left to the RSPCA, Blue Cross and RSPB, should be awarded to Mrs Ilott due to her 'basic human need' and that it was 'unreasonable' to leave her daughter with nothing.

Mrs Ilott had also argued it was a derivative fortune from assets belonging to her father Thomas Jackson, who died in an industrial accident two months before she was born.

Barrister Brie Stevens-Hoare QC said the family had been kept off the housing ladder and had 'never had a holiday'.

'She had difficulty affording clothes for her family, was limited in the food she could buy and much of what she had was old or second hand,' she said.

She also told the court that Mrs Jackson was 'unreasonable, capricious and harsh' and had left her money to charity to spite her - not because she supported the charities' work - in a 'picture of irrationality'.

She said: 'Mrs Jackson took offence at Heather's choices although they were choices she was entitled to make and it was reasonable to expect her mother to accept.

'Instead her mother consistently undermined reconciliation attempts. Although Heather was at some fault, her mother was the dominant cause.'

Yesterday, following a lengthy series of legal appeals and challenges, the panel of three judges ordered she should be given £143,000 to buy her housing association home, plus a further £20,000 to cover her expenses. The rest of the inheritance will still go to charity.

Following the judgement, James Aspden, solicitor for the three charities said they were 'surprised and disappointed' by the court's decision.

He added: 'Charities rely upon income from legacies and the outcome of this case could have serious ramifications for the future of the charity sector as a whole.

'Nearly £2billion a year is donated to charitable causes through legacies and, without it, much of their work would not be possible.

'This case also raises serious questions about whether people generally have the freedom to choose who they want to leave money to in their will'.

Mr Aspden said the charities would now give 'very careful consideration' to the case before deciding whether or not to appeal to the Supreme Court.

The solicitor added: 'This is a worrying decision for anyone who values having the freedom to choose who will receive their property when they die'.

Sally de la Bedoyere, chief executive of the Blue Cross charity, said: 'Blue Cross depends on the generosity of our supporters and, as such, we will always endeavour to fulfil their wishes.

'Over the past eight years we have defended the wishes of Mrs Jackson to the very best of our abilities. We are deeply saddened that the courts have decided not to honour them'.

Mike Clarke, the RSPB's chief executive, said: 'It is regrettable that, occasionally, courts need to become involved in interpreting the terms of a person's will.

'Not only is it damaging to the work of charities, but it may also cause concern to people who intend to leave a gift to a charity they feel passionately about'.

David Bowles, assistant director the RSPCA, said: 'Legacy income pays for one out of every two animals we save and without it, much of our work would not be possible.

'This court decision goes against a person's desire to give their money to whomever they wish.

'We are immensely grateful for the kindness of people like Mrs Jackson who choose to remember the needs of animals in her will.

'And we hope that this does not stop others continuing to give money to help suffering animals'.

Read more

Kissing has overtaken smoking and drinking as the leading risk factor for developing head and neck cancers.

The humble French kiss can pass on human papilloma virus (HPV), Head of Maxillofacial and Head and neck Surgery at the Royal Darwin Hospital, Dr Mahiban Thomas, said the virus was responsible for 70% of head and neck cancer cases.

Dr Thomas told said if you became infected by HPV in the oropharynx, your risk of developing head and neck cancer was 250 times higher than that of someone without the virus.

While most commonly associated with cervical cancers, HPV can affect both men and women.

There are more than 100 types of the virus, but only about eight ‘high risk’ strains of HPV that can cause cancers in the oropharynx.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said studies suggest Oral HPV could be passed on during oral sex or open-mouthed or ‘French’ kissing, and about 7% of people have oral HPV, but only 1% of people have the type of oral HPV that is found in oropharyngeal cancers.

Dr Thomas said recent studies suggested even engaging in ‘petting’ without sexual interaction could transfer HPV.

‘If you look at the figures coming out of the US, 70 per cent of head and neck cancers are due to HPV,’ Dr Thomas said.

‘There has been a change in high-risk behaviour as far as smoking and drinking goes.

‘If you have an (HPV) infection, you have 250 times the chance of developing cancer of somebody who does not have HPV.’

Dr Thomas told NT News HPV was responsible for a 'tsunami' of head and neck cancer cases.

He said your risk of contracting the HPV virus increased with the number of French kissing partners you had, and people underrated the risks associated with oral sex.

Yesterday marked World Head and Neck Cancer Day.

In 2011, 3121 head and neck cancers were diagnosed in Australia, caused by smoking, frequent alcohol use, sun exposure, radiation, asbestos and HPV.

The Australian Government funds HPV vaccination for 12 to 13-year-old girls and boys which helps protect against cervical cancer, some vaginal, vulva and anal cancers and genital warts.

Read more: DailyMail

man survives lightning strike wins lottery

People often claim you have more chance of being struck by lightning than of winning the lottery. But what are the odds of being struck by both?

The odds of getting struck by lightning in Canada are less than one in a million.
The odds of winning the Atlantic Lotto 6/49 are even worse --> 1 in 13,983,816.

And the odds that both of these extraordinary events should happen to the same person in Nova Scotia are nearly impossible.

But lightning strike survivor Peter McCathie beat all those odds when he and his co-worker, Diana Miller, collected their million-dollar prize at the Atlantic Lottery offices in Moncton.

McCathie’s brush with death occurred during a boat trip when he was 14. The lottery winner said he was wading through shallow waters near the shore of a lake when he was struck by lightning.

"I was trying to lock the boat up, it was a very sunny day, there was one big, white cloud in the sky and the lightning bolt came through the trees and hit me," He said.

Incredibly, McCathie's daughter was also struck by lightning a few years ago in an eerily similar scenario while working as wilderness guide in Manitoba.

"They had pulled off the lake due to storms, so she was locking all the canoes, making sure they weren't going to get blown away, and she got hit by lightning," said McCathie.

McCathie and Miller have been buying tickets together for about a year, but they never expected to beat the odds.

"I honestly expected to get hit by lightning again first," said McCathie.

So how unusual is his story?

A mathematics professor at the University of Moncton believes the odds may be in the trillions.

"By assuming that these events happened independently … so probability of lotto … times another probability of lightning – since there are two people that got hit by lightning – we get approximately 1 in 2.6 trillion," said Sophie Leger.

Diana Miller is planning a trip to Cancun, Mexico with her share of the winnings, while McCathie says that after 30 years of marriage, it's time for him and his wife to take a second honeymoon.

McCathie also owns the store where he bought the ticket so gets an addition $10,000 from the Atlantic Lottery Corporation.

credit: ctvnews