by Ben Heine

What it is

“Digital Divide” refers to the gap between those who benefit from digital technology and those who do not. It took digital-divide researchers a whole decade to figure out that the real issue is not so much about access to digital technology but about the benefits derived from it. Examining the situation more closely, it turns out that upper-to-middle classes have high-quality access to digital technology because the profit motive pushes technologists to work hard at creating “solutions” designed specifically for them. In this equation, however, the poor are ignored because the assumption is that designing solutions for them will not be profitable. The result is that even where the poor are provided access to digital technology, it is low-quality. Furthermore, the digital technology they do have access to is often of a design that ends up being harmful rather than beneficial. This, in turn, widens the digital divide.

Consider, for the example, cyber cafés. Years ago, many pointed to their spread as an example demonstrating that the digital divide was shrinking. But when a local youth in a Cambodia village ignores his school work and instead spends his evenings playing violent video games at a local cyber café, he is not really benefiting from digital technology. Thus giving to the poor digital technology that has been designed for the rich may actually add to the causes of poverty and accelerate the exodus of the rural poor into cities already bursting at the seams.

The new view is that closing the digital divide will be most effectively achieved through a two-pronged approach, one direct and the other indirect: The direct approach will be for governments and businesses to work together to change the incentives that shape digital markets. The indirect approach will be for them to team up on e-government digital technology initiatives that extend rural health care and quality education to the poor. Through these two approaches, the poor will be able to reap many of the same benefits from digital technology now derived by the wealthy.

System requirements for Adobe Photoshop CS3 Extended, Windows version, include a system based on an Intel Pentium 4, Intel Centrino, Intel Xeon or Intel Core Duo or compatible processor running Microsoft Windows SP with Service Pack 2 or Windows Vista Home Premium, Business,Ultimate or Enterprise (certified for 32-bit editions). The system also needs to have at least 512 MB of RAM and 1 GB of available hard disk space (additional free space is required during instalation) and a DVD-ROM drive.

A Monitor with at least 1,024 x 768 resolution and a 16-bit or greater video card is required. Some 3D features in Photoshop CS3 Extended require a DirectX 9-capable graphics card with at least 64 MB of VRAM.

The Macintosh version of Adobe Photoshop CS3 Extended requires a PowerPC G4 or G5 or multicore Intel Processor Macintosh running Mac OS X v.10.4.8. You’ll need at least 512 MB of RAM and 2 GBof available hard disk space (still additional free space is required during product installation). You’ll also need a DVD-ROM drive for installation. As with Windows version of Photoshop CS3 you’ll need a display capable of at least 1024 x 768 resolution with a 16-bit or greater video card. Some 3D features in Photoshop Extended requires OpenGL 1.4-capable graphics card with at least 64 MB of VRAM.

It’s been awhile since I started using this one of a kind graphic editing software. It has been my primary tool for trade when everytime I’m editing photos, making graphics and wallpapers. Since the day I learned how to use this application I got also hooked to art and became an addict user of it. But what is Adobe Photoshop a.k.a PS anyway? What makes this software a must to use when you are in graphic or photo editing?

If you haven’t know yet what is this application I’m talking about well, here’s a brief information about this amazing software.

Adobe Photoshop, or simply Photoshop a.k.a PS, is a graphics editor developed and published by Adobe Systems. It is the current market leader for commercial bitmap and image manipulation, and is the flagship product of Adobe Systems. It has been described as “an industry standard for graphics professionals” and was one of the early “killer application” on Macintosh

The current (10th) iteration of the program, Photoshop CS3, was released on 16 April 2007. “CS” reflects its integration with other Creative Suite products, and the number “3″ represents it as the third version released since Adobe re-branded its products under the CS umbrella. Photoshop CS3 features additions such as the ability to apply non-destructive filters, as well as new selection tools named Quick Selection and Refine Edge that make selection more streamlined. Adobe released Photoshop CS3 Extended (version that I’m currently using), which includes all the same features of Adobe Photoshop CS3 with the addition of capabilities for scientific imaging, 3D, and high end film and video users.

Myth: Global warming is caused mainly by carbon dioxide.

This is the most commonly perpetuated myth, and the most easily debunked. Global warming cannot solely be attributed to CO2 – CO2 is a greenhouse gas, part of the same family as methane, ozone and even water vapour (Each of which is just as common a cause). In fact, double the amount of water vapour is released than carbon dioxide and it usually amounts to roughly 35-70% of the total greenhouse gas emission. Although much of this stems from natural creation that the Earth needs to survive, a good deal of it is produced in excess of the recommended amount.

Mirth: Only burning fossil fuels releases greenhouse gases.

This is highly amusing to many, because most people believe it and campaign to have fossil fuel power stations shut down and replaced with cleaner, renewable forms of energy. Although this is a very good idea (Renewables are cleaner, generally cheaper and fossil fuels are running out), fossil fuel stations are not the only source of greenhouse gases. Aerosols such as deodorant release CFCs into the air, which damage the ozone layer and increase global warming, cows are a substantial producer of methane (as are we) driving releases noxious fumes which are major pollutants and growing rice on paddy fields can release tonnes of methane and other gases. But, as people are unwilling to give up their conveniences such as cars, these major contributors are still everywhere to be found.

Mirth & Myth: Global warming does not pose a serious threat.

This is a very common view in many skeptics, and is also one of the views most opposed by people. If global warming is no threat, why then have several scientific hypotheses concluded that if we continue at the rate we do now the planet will be uninhabitable in 100 years? Why would such thing as the Kyoto Protocol exist (for those not in the know, the regulatory law which states the alloted resource and energy quota of every country in the world)? And if people continue to disregard these warnings, bad things will happen, such as the growth of deserts, drought, alteration of ecosystems, famines, and lots more – bad things!

Fact: You can do something to help.

How, you ask? By doing anything that isn’t wasteful, because the average consumer wastes about seven times their weight in rubbish every year! Everyone can do something! Be a little less wasteful with your aerosols – roll-on deodorant is a good idea. Walk to places every now and then. Turn your thermostat down a degree, and turn your washing machine to 30. Eat different foods – grow more of your own so less is mass-farmed. Whatever you do, if you at least try to help, you can be happy and proud of yourself knowing you helped to ensure a peaceful, happy future for later generations. And who doesn’t want that?

Thanks to cutting edge research in genetics, artificial DNA can now be created in labs on demand. What’s more, this DNA has the benefit of being dominant when introduced to a cell; meaning if a scientist sequences a strand of DNA and injects it into a healthy cell, the new DNA will take over and the original DNA is erased.

Alright so, what’s the big deal? First, we have to examine the reason why we age in the first place. According to modern science research, aging is caused by the corruption of one’s DNA. This occurs due to things like UV radiation damaging your skin and releasing anti-DNA free radicals. As time goes on, we slowly begin to lose our ability to regenerate because of this weakened DNA, until the point where our bodies lose integrity and we eventually die.

Now, why is this artificial DNA important? The most major benefit to these new pioneering discoveries is that fact that the artificial DNA is dominant. Therefore, conceivably, if a scientist were to take DNA from the peak of a person’s life (aka. Maturity when physical growth is complete), generate fresh copies in a lab, and then implant them into the aged person’s body, through normal cell activity, this fresh DNA could be spread throughout the whole body. The outcome? Complete cellular restoration within three years (the time it takes for all the cells in the body to be replaced, on average).

What vehicles can be used such that the fresh DNA has full penetration within the body? The most popular answer would probably be a retrovirus. Viruses are unique in the fact that they replicate extremely fast and are very adept at spreading their contents throughout a host’s body. If someone were to take a particularly invasive virus, like HIV, and replace the viral DNA with human DNA, this infusion of fresh genetic material could be achieved in a very short amount of time. Just for illustration’s sake, on average, once exposed to HIV, it only takes about 30 minutes for the virus to replicate enough to be contagious.

Another idea is a nano-machine. Scientists, sci-fi writers, and imaginative people have been toying with the idea of machines too small to see with the naked eye that could serve the purpose of healing the body and performing surgery for several years. As technology becomes ever smaller, the possibility of such creations arising becomes only a question of “how long?” instead of “if ever”.

What does this mean? It means that we may finally have an answer to aging. However, science is imperfect, and such measures may not work in the long-run. Although one may be able to halt aging eventually through pursuits like these, it doesn’t stop the many thousands of causes of death we face during the courses of our lives. In my mind at least, I take some comfort in the fact that we may be closer to averting at least one.