Want to optimize your browsing experience? Check out this pretty comprehensive set of browser speed tests targeting all of the major browsers and some minor ones on Linux, Mac, and PC. If you’re not into reading the tech specs and methodology, scroll down to the bottom for the conclusions. It turns out that Opera is a pretty darned fast browser. Although the author concludes that Mozilla and Firefox are optimized for Linux, it seems to me that Opera wins almost across the board, especially on Windows. Of course, Firefox is free, easily extended, and simple out of the box, so it’s still my browser of choice.

Incidentally, Firefox netted 25 million downloads in 100 days. About 110 days ago, when we on the Spread Firefox crew were trying to project a reasonable download count for 100 days, we landed on 10 million. Similarly, the NY Times campaign wound up raising something like six times what some of us thought we could reasonably expect. It’s amazing how many extra miles the Firefox community keeps going.

Giraffes are sometimes called cameleopards because they sort of resemble what might be produced from a union between a camel and a leopard. In Greek mythology, there’s a creature called a chimera that has the body of a lion, a serpent for a tail, and the head of a goat. Apparently, scientists are coming closer and closer to producing species of animals that are a cross between human beings and other species.

This raises all sorts of interesting questions, such as what rights such a creature would or should be afforded. Does its human genetic material grant it the same rights as the rest of us or do its animal genes cause it to be lumped with pets and farm animals?

A couple of months ago, The Daily Show’s Jon Stewart lambasted nut-job pundit Tucker Carlson on Crossfire, using that forum to blast its own genre. Now, although they’re being very courteous about the whole thing, CNN has figured out what a panty waste Carlson is and has ditched him. Crossfire is probably going away as well. CNN CEO Jonathan Klein has expressed a desire to maintain relationships with other Crossfire pundits Bob Novak, Paul Begala, and James Carville.

Ok, we’re giving this a shot for two reasons. First, I’m curious about how this whole Google ad thing works. I’m interested in tracking what kind of ads it determines my content merits, and I’m curious about just how much money per click one can make off the ads. Second, I wonder if I can actually make any money at this. I don’t expect I’ll get rich, given my sparse traffic, and I don’t especially aim to. It’s just an experiment. If you happen to read regularly (I know of only two people who keep track of the site at all) and having the ads up there chaps your hide, let me know and maybe I’ll move them. For now, I want them up high so maybe they’ll draw clicks, which after all are important data points for my experiment.

The bit-heads behind Mozilla, Firefox, and related software sometimes feature off-topic blog posts at planet.mozilla.org, an aggregator of Mozilla-related blogs. Today, Gervase Markham replies to a post by Ian Hixie pertaining to evolution. Hixie maintains that evolution is a fact, while Gervase proposes that it’s a matter of faith (that macro-evolution is, at any rate).

Gervase’s tactic is common among those disinclined to believe in evolution, and it can be pretty easily swept aside. Talk Origins points out that evolution doesn’t require faith because it is based on observable phenomena (and further, I would add, phenomena that can be observed by anybody and everybody, unlike a personal relationship with the deity of your choice). In short, because we can review the fossil record and draw conclusions from relationships among creatures that emerge therefrom, we are using evidence rather than faith — and rather than a reliance upon old texts — to support hypotheses.

A general criterion for whether or not something can be classified as science is that it is falsifiable. And it is true enough that evolution as a whole can’t be falsified (because it can’t be reproduced — it’s one big long phenomenon that we have no way of duplicating on so large a scale). But conclusions within the theory can be falsified, and it seems pretty clear to me that there’s a scientific process based on observation rather than just an “I believe this” process going on. So nice try, Gerv, but it really doesn’t fly. There’s a big difference between “hey, look at the similarities and slight differences among these fossils sitting here in front of us and compare them to modern animals of type X” and “I believe Jesus will come back in three weeks because I had a dream about horsemen and beasts with horns and boy doesn’t it make me feel nice to think about heaven.”

A few weeks ago, Eric Meyer responded to the ballot measures in several states (including his own) banning gay marriages and in some cases even civil unions. In response both to the election and to his post, I wrote a draft of a polemic that I haven’t ever published because I couldn’t say what I wanted to say quite right. Well Eric’s back, and he’s posted what I would have written had it been in me to do so. I couldn’t agree more with what he wrote, and I have real trouble understanding how anybody couldn’t see that he’s right.

The American Humanist Association has sent out an action alert asking those interested in human rights to urge CBS and NBC to reverse their censorship of a United Church of Christ advertisement. The ad, which can be viewed at the UCC Web site, depicts a gay couple being turned away from the church as other, heterosexual, couples are allowed to enter. The networks have censored the ads on the basis that they’re “too controversial.” The AHA gives the following background:

Rev. Robert Chase, director of the UCC’s communication ministry stated in response to NBC and CBS’s refusal to air the advertisement, “We find it disturbing that the networks in question seem to have no problem exploiting gay persons through mindless comedies or titillating dramas, but when it comes to a church’s loving welcome of committed gay couples, that’s where they draw the line.”

In a written explanation from CBS, the advertisement was considered inappropriate because “the Executive Branch has recently proposed a Constitutional Amendment to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.” NBC deemed the advertisement “too controversial” and declined to air it.

As the Federal Marriage Amendment failed to pass in both the Senate and House of Representatives, CBS shows partisanship toward the Bush administration and those who support the Federal Marriage Amendment. Furthermore, the FMA prioritizes certain religious beliefs over others and over those without religion.

This follows on the heels of the pre-election move by Sinclair Broadcasting Group, which owns the largest group of television stations in the nation, to air an anti-Kerry film. Sinclair owns stations affiliated with all of the major networks, including 20 with FOX, 19 with the WB, eight with ABC, six with UPN, four with NBC, and three with CBS (source).

As long as this homo-loving, baby-aborting, Jesus-trashing, old-lady-bullying liberal media’s in charge of the world, there’s simply no hope for anybody in possession of a modicum of common sense and compassionate conservatism who wishes only to keep our sex missionary, our babies plentiful and impoverished, our religion fundamental, and our old ladies safe.

Via Jason Kottke, I ran across today a column by William Safire entitled “Kiduage” in which he goes over some recent slang neologisms. Some of them, such as “fo shizzle” and “hella,” I was already familiar with (so they must not be so neo, as I’m definitely not up on the trends of youth speech). Other, such as “crunk” (crazy drunk) and “marinating” (replacing “chill out”) I hadn’t run across. I believe I had heard but had forgotten (inexplicably) about “dropping the kids off at the pool,” a phrase for defacation, the vivid and often crude naming of which is one of my guilty pleasures (I’ll spare you examples of my own virtuosic neologisms).

As a bonus, Safire mentions one of my former professors (Connie Eble) as a source he tapped to find some of these phrases. Just a few years ago, I suppose I was one of the students helping to provide examples of such phrases; I believe I recall that Eble had us do a survey or at any rate to provide her with some slang terms we were familiar with.

In A Frolic of His Own, William Gaddis presents a court ruling, with all its suits and counter suits and legal mumbo jumbo, surrounding the problems a piece of sculpture causes a community. If I remember correctly, it’s initially perceived as an eyesore and then traps a dog, so it’s considered a public menace. There’s much todo over ownership of the art and responsibility for the dog’s whereabouts, etc., and it’s really absurdly funny. The details aren’t all the same in this real life situation, but I find the circumstances similarly amusing.

If you haven’t tried out Firefox yet, now’s the time to do it. The latest version of the software — two years in the making — has been released today. Get your copy now. In the next couple of weeks, the Spread Firefox effort to get a Firefox ad published in the NY Times will be finished, making history in rough tandem with the release of a piece of software that, even in beta, beats the pants off any other browser I’ve tried. Much credit to Blake Ross, Ben Goodger, and the rest of the Firefox crew for a job well done.