“A single can of soda a day can add up to 15 pounds a year, report says”

Sugary drinks are piling on pounds – Diet & Nutrition – MSNBC.com:

Americans have sipped their way to fatness by drinking far more soda and other sugary drinks over the last four decades, a new scientific review concludes.

An extra can of soda a day can pile on 15 pounds (7 kilograms) in a single year, and the evidence strongly suggests that this sort of increased consumption is a key reason that more people have gained weight, the researchers say.

“We tried to look at the big picture rather than individual studies,” and it clearly justifies public health efforts to limit sugar-sweetened beverages, said Dr. Frank Hu, who led the report published Tuesday in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

…Unlike other carbohydrates, the main sweetener in beverages — high-fructose corn syrup — does not spur production of insulin to make the body “process” calories. It also does not spur leptin, a substance that helps moderate appetite. For these reasons, beverages are not as satisfying as foods containing similar amounts of calories and fly under the radar of the body’s normal weight-regulating mechanisms, many nutrition experts say.

Wow.

Chris Bowers: “Viral Marketing Versus a Mega-Conglomerate”

A cross post from Philly Future yesterday….

Chris touched on something big in his post on today’s primary in Connecticut – today will be a test of how well the web works to shorten the distance between someone who is selling something, in this case a politician, and consumers/participants, in this case voters. The Ned Lamont campaign’s use of viral marketing (Internet campaigning), while suffering some faults and trip-ups as any political campaign does, should be looked at as a case study in how to connect people to causes they care about and generating buzz.

Last year I had no idea who Ned Lamont was. And if it wasn’t for the web – I doubt few in Philadelphia would be so concerned, let alone the entire country. But here we are. Think about it.

So let the talk of partisanship and division wash over you for a second. Partisanship and division in politics and within political parties isn’t all that new is it?

What *is* new (well at least was long missing) and is very, very heartening, is the infectious enthusiasm and growth of a politically aware and involved public.

That has to be celebrated. No matter the outcome.

In a similar vein, go read Richard Cranium at The All Spin Zone: “In Connecticut – America Wins”.

And um… go Ned Lamont!

… and Lamont wins!

A note from Shelley:

Lieberman stood for something once upon a time. Whatever it was he stood for, though, was lost in the 9/11 attacks. He lost his perspective, and now he�s lost the race. Running as an independent, as he has threatened, just shows that he�s about to lose the one thing left: his dignity.

On the other hand, the �people� weren�t entirely the winners, as has been proclaimed. The Lieberman challenger, Lamont, may have made effective use of the grassroots to run his compaign, but he also made a great deal of use of his personal wealth. He wasn�t exactly one of the little people.

Still, hopefully this will shake up the Dems enough to force the party into something other than Republican Light.

Jeff Jarvis: “It�s not about them v. us, as Nick Lemann would have it. It�s about them and us.”

Jeff Jarvis makes a point I agree with, but I’m afraid not many look at it this way, at least not yet:

The Times has two good stories today that were both helped by the work of bloggers. I don’t say that at blog triumphalism or as a war cry of bloggers replacing journalists. Quite the contrary, I say that because these are the sorts of examples of networked journalism at work that I hope we’ll be seeing more and more.

…It’s not about them v. us, as Nick Lemann would have it. It’s about them and us. The more we work together, the more informed society will be. It is a good thing for journalism that there are now more people than ever doing journalism and these are just two small illustrations of that.

I replied (paraphrased) in his comments:

Wish the rhetoric from the community that spread word of the doctored photos shared your way of looking at things.

Because they don’t you know. And maybe it’s from their rallying cries that the Lemanns of the world derive their fear and concern from.

Mathew Ingram: “Is AOL to blame, or is privacy dead?”

I’d say it’s dead Mathew. And that most folks just don’t realize it unless it personally impacts them.

Case in point, this article in CNet has it all wrong on how to protect yourself. It’s not your IP address that gives you away. No amount of cloaking can help you when it’s what you type that identifies you. As this NYTimes article proves.

Oh, and want to unlock your kid’s profile on MySpace, there’s a way now.

As Mr. Edelson, of Stealth Ideas says, It’s not like you�re stealing a key out of their drawer and reading their diary,� says Mr. Edelson. �This is public information.”

That’s the way a whole lot of people and organizations seem to feel about the information we unknowingly devulge everyday.

Become a beta tester for Comcast’s new Webmail

If you’re a Comcast.net user, you can click here to sign up to participate in a beta program for our new Webmail. It’s far easier to use, with a cleaner interface, and new functionality.

And speaking of something interesting, check out this search interface. Try typing in a long query for fun.

Oh, and if you’re into widgets, we have one for the fan.

It’s true I normally avoid talking about what I do at work, but Webmail is a special case since the beta program is limited to a small number of participants and the other efforts are up on labs. Get-a-clicking and leave feedback for us.

“Don’t believe BusinessWeek’s Bubble Math”

37Signals: Don’t believe BusinessWeek’s bubble-math:

This week’s BusinessWeek cover story features a beaming Kevin Rose from Digg. Across his chest it says “How this kid made $60 million in 18 months.” Wow, now that sounds like a great success story.

Too bad it’s a blatent lie. BusinessWeek knows it….

…So why are you writing about an 18-month old company that took $2.5 million to be “finally be flush with enough cash to pay salaries, rent an office, and keep employees in standard startup snacks like Twizzlers and Vitamin Water.” If BusinessWeek wants to say it only takes $50 and an internet connection to be the next mogul they may want to cite a valid example. It’s certainly possible, but Digg isn’t that example.

via the Bb Gun

Blogging, networked journalism, business models, contrasts

Craig Newmark: What I’m doing regarding journalism and why:

Democracy requires an active press, asking tough questions, and speaking truth to power. When that fails, we get ineffective government. I figure people of goodwill gotta stand up and support the press.

In my case, I have no background in journalism, so I’m listening hard, and relying on people who really know their stuff, some of whom are taking big risks.

PressThink: Introducing NewAssignment.Net:

In simplest terms, a way to fund high-quality, original reporting, in any medium, through donations to a non-profit called NewAssignment.Net.

The site uses open source methods to develop good assignments and help bring them to completion; it employs professional journalists to carry the project home and set high standards so the work holds up. There are accountability and reputation systems built in that should make the system reliable. The betting is that (some) people will donate to works they can see are going to be great because the open source methods allow for that glimpse ahead.

In this sense it’s not like donating to your local NPR station, because your local NPR station says, “thank you very much, our professionals will take it from here.” And they do that very well. New Assignment says: here’s the story so far. We’ve collected a lot of good information. Add your knowledge and make it better. Add money and make it happen. Work with us if you know things we don’t.

But I should add: NewAssignment.Net doesn’t exist yet. I’m starting with the idea.

Salon on Amazon.com’s Mechanical Turk: “I make $1.45 a week and I love it”:

The 21st century twist on the Turk, conceived by Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, doesn’t try to hide the people inside the machine. On the contrary, it celebrates the fact that we have become part of the machine. For fees ranging from dollars to single pennies per task, workers, who cheekily call themselves “turkers,” do tasks that may be rote, like matching a color to a photograph, but they can confound a computer. Conceived to help Amazon improve its own sites, Mturk.com is now a marketplace where many companies have solicited workers to do everything from transcribing podcasts for 19 cents a minute to writing blog posts for 50 cents. Amazon takes a cut from every task performed.

Amazon claims its virtual workplace provides “artificial artificial intelligence” — a catchy way of saying human thought. “From a philosophical perspective, it’s really turning the traditional computing paradigm on its head,” says Adam Selipsky, vice president of product management and developer relations for Amazon Web Services. “Usually people get help from computers to do tasks. In this case, it is computers getting help from people to do tasks.” As Tim O’Reilly, a computer book publisher and tech industry figure, puts it on his blog, old dreams of artificial intelligence are “being replaced by this new model, in which we are creating more intelligent systems by using humans as components of the application.”

So who wants to be the human component of a computer application? A lot of people, it turns out. Since last November, thousands of workers from the U.S. and more than 100 other countries have performed tasks on Mturk.com. The most dedicated turkers have even formed their own online communities, such as Turker Nation.

Calacanis: The first 10 Navigators: We’ve hired three of the top 12 DIGG users, the #1 user from Newsvine, the #1 user from Reddit, and a bunch of Weblogs, Inc. folks.:

It is important to note that this is all an experiment. No one knows for sure if this model of “paying people for work” us gonna work. I mean, it’s crazy to think that people could be paid to do a job and do it with integrity–that’s just crazy talk. 🙂

Seriously, the fact is that the top 10 users on DIGG are responsible for 30% of the front page stories on DIGG. That’s 3% of total front page stories each!!! Think about that for a second… the top 10 users of DIGG do 3% of the work each–that is stunning. They get paid nothing but they are responsible for 3% of the total content on the home page. Wow. Like WOW, WOW, WOW!

BusinessWeek: Digg.com’s Kevin Rose leads a new brat pack of young entrepreneurs :

Those in the know believe that Digg could become a new kind of clearinghouse for news and that its interactive community concept could snowball. That could be a jackpot for Rose, who owns 30% to 40% of the company (he won’t specify) — a massive stake for a founder in a world in which investors routinely demand up to 20% with every outlay. But it’s still only paper wealth, which he and many others have learned can evaporate. “I was here in 2000,” he recalls in an instant message.

My favorite MP3 player

musikCube has become my favorite desktop mp3 player on Windows lately. It’s lightweight, and incorporates a souped up version of my favorite iTunes functionality – helping keep my library organized on my file system while simultaneously tagging. It’s free, open source, and for the developers out there, written with .NET, which means I can dive into the code if I wish.