Results buy viagra online cheap suggest that emergency LAR surgery may limit a surgeon's ability buy generic glyburide to remove the cancer and preserve tissue. Following a stroke, (metacam) tablets a person may need physical, occupational, or speech therapy to purchase discount mirapex sale regain functioning. SHOP NOW AT RO These prenatal multivitamins are buy cafergot without prescription suitable while trying to conceive and during pregnancy. According to diflucan sale the American Cancer Society (ACS), typical carcinoid (TC) tumors are discount spiriva no rx rare and less aggressive than SCLC and LCNEC. Some people buy t-ject 60 develop skin rashes due to an immune system reaction, or viagra low price they react to the UC medication. If people have any allopurinol without prescription other symptoms of endometriosis, they will need to contact a buy viagra doctor to receive a diagnosis and treatment. If people want compazine for order to try delayed voiding or timed urination, it may be generic augmentin best to talk with a healthcare professional to determine a cheap tetracycline no rx suitable schedule. If you have insurance, your insurance company may require.

The New York Times had several good bits stories over the weekend. The Education Week article about de-tagging Facebook photos, for example. Cheap, ubiquitous sensors–digital cameras in the hands of teenagers and college students–combined with the vast Facebook social network have resulted in lots of embarrassing party photos appearing online every Sunday morning. When their peers tag the photos with the names of the people appearing in them, the photos turn up in searches for the names of the revelers. So every Sunday afternoon the hung-over youth “de-tag” the photos, which remain visible but unsearchable. (And if you’re the only one not tagged in the photo, well, that creates an interesting social tension–you’re saying you’re the only one who believes that your reputation is going to be damaged by being seen with the others at that party!)

But my favorite is the story about the perhaps under-age Chinese gymnasts. They have passports showing their age as 16, the minimum allowed in Olympic competition. But the enterprising reporters think some may be as early as 14. Why?

The Times found two online records of official registration lists of Chinese gymnasts that list He’s birthday as Jan. 1, 1994, which would make her 14. A 2007 national registry of Chinese gymnasts — now blocked in China but viewable through Google cache — shows He’s age as “1994.1.1.”

Another registration list that is unblocked, dated Jan. 27, 2006, and regarding an “intercity” competition in Chengdu, China, also lists He’s birthday as Jan. 1, 1994. That date differs by two years from the birth date of Jan. 1, 1992, listed on He’s passport, which was issued Feb. 14, 2008.

Nice detective work. Some earlier public list of athletes had the correct date, goes the theory; Google indexed it and kept a copy, as Google generally does; the Chinese later decided to make the athlete a couple of years older, and took the web page down; but Google’s cached copy is still visible from the U.S. site where it is stored. Just like the example on page 125 of Blown to Bits. Except in this case, the cached copy itself is blocked inside China, even though it’s a copy of a Chinese web page. Bits are awfully hard to eradicate–it will be interesting to see if this incident becomes a problem for the Chinese team.

This entry was posted on Monday, July 28th, 2008 at 10:07 am and is filed under Search. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.