The article summary is incorrect. MR Spectroscopy (MRS) is used today to measure molecules inside the brain. Resolution is not great for 3D MRS in clinical applications (due to the tradeoff between SNR and resolution, acquisition times are slow), but it's more than high enough to distinguish between different regions of the brain. And it's very common to perform single-voxel imaging and only get the spectroscopy for a given piece of tissue - for example, where a tumor is located.

MRS easily detects metabolites and ratios, like choline, NAA, as well as things like lipids, and alcohols. It requires expensive scanners, but it works and is used routinely in brain imaging today. The article mentions something that does not work clinically, and is being demonstrated in a lab with a piece of meat. The technology in the article is not a "first step" to understanding molecules in the brain, because we already have that technology today with MRS.

I guess I'm glad they spun off Qt before going back and regressing past the paid-commercial-development trolltech days for Qt.

Admittedly Trolltech used to offer free GPL noncommercial Qt licenses, but that sort of licensing isn't even possible with Windows Phone. Still painful to see open source transition into the most closed model of all.

Microsoft Surface (RT) does apparently ship with Windows Defender.]

So yes, Virus Scanner included/required.

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQhhtvuZwVg)

One in five macs where people chose to install antivirus software have (inactive) Windows malware.

Which is a bit like saying "one in five cars brought to the mechanic get serviced for something." The survey is skewed due to the sample group - most Mac users never install any anti-virus software.

The only places I've seen it installed are on computers in corporate environments where there are already viruses being passed around commonly via email attachment, USB stick, and network drives. These places install antivirus on Macs so users don't forward a virus to Windows users - and it sounds like from this survey, that's with good reason.

Apple's Mail software (and Microsoft's Outlook for Mac) cache attachments locally on the user's disk, so it's very easy to "have" malware and viruses if you just receive email (even without opening it).

It's a bit ridiculous to claim they are "infected" however, and again, the sample group is not really representative. That said, I don't think Macs are in any way immune from viruses. Apple's iOS-like sandboxing and signed-app requirements would likely help OS X considerably in this regard, but of course every decision that increases security by removing control from the user also infuriates free/open software proponents and hackers. Think of jailbreaking iOS and how Apple patches security holes - this is maddening for people who want to jailbreak, but is ultimately an attempt to fix a potential infection vector.

Citrix already has a close relationship with Amazon. They have testing images available, white papers on how to integrate private and public EC2 cloud "farms" with your existing Citrix infrastructure, and not only promote Amazon AWS/EC2 for corporate usage, but make it easy for admins to draw on it as a test base for learning and playing with their new software offerings.

It wouldn't surprise me if they have plans to tie in per hour or other commoditized Citrix licensing with Amazon at some point in the future.

As they do all of this they will inevitably move closer towards Amazon and further away from Amazon's competitors. I don't see this as a surprising development.

I think is less about OpenStack and its relative merits and detriments, and more about Citrix and their corporate partnerships and strategic direction.

Additional Restrictions (we are working on these!)

*Videos with ads are not supported (they will play in the Flash player)

Ads will still play, and will in fact inflict flash on you. There's really no good way right now to force people to watch advertisements if the whole video is H.264 (since you could just scrub past the ads), so I can understand this, even if I don't like it.

What they'll probably eventually do is break the video up into a bunch of shorter videos, with ads in between. Then they can load each part in sequence, and enforce a timer on the ad portion so even if you scrub through the ad you still have to wait for the timer.