Pumice seems most plausible.

We obtained worldwide elevation data from NOAA, for our BattleCell land conquest game. (a super-evolved version of Risk) Game coordinates for Sandy Island are: -1911,15956

Sure enough, the NOAA data shows an elevation of 1 meter, for the entire Sandy Point island.

Possibly, the island was a dynamically generated object, based on the original NOAA elevation data. What else, besides pumice could generate such readings?

In a move to present itself as being even less evil that Google, Microsoft has announced its intention to decrease its lobbying budget to $0 over the next 36 months.

"Basically, it teaches machines to learn without human intervention." ...no. It provides a clearing-house for downloading new routines for accomplishing a task that someone else has previously programmed on another system elsewhere.

Please do not sensationalize what the lowly PC has been doing for well over a decade... that is, downloading information via the Internet to "learn" how not to crash, or prevent a security compromise.

Substituting a solenoid or motor output for a memory write command to claim that a "robot learned something" does not make this a novel concept.

From Borker to Borkee...

We've all been there. It works on every browser, except for IE. The trick is to respond intelligently, and not fall victim to emotional despair when Internet Explorer refuses to act like the mature browser it should be by now.

Flinging mud at something, even when deserved, will get you dirty as well.

Why not solve 2 problems at the same time? Do this instead:

http://code.google.com/p/chromeframeiebar

That's nice, but are the interference issues between WiFi and Bluetooth fixed yet?

It would be nice to have the laptop connect to the stereo via Bluetooth while I'm lounging in the living room without cutting out while I'm watching YouTube.

(more info here: Wi-Fi and Bluetooth Coexistence)

We developed a web based game BattleCell that uses Ajax/CSS instead of Flash for all the heavy lifting. We discover at least one new bug in the IE rendering engine every month. Our pile of IE bugs in the back room that we have to track every time we develop a new feature is testament to the dread with which we view this new hardware-based rendering engine. We know what we're doing.

Just last week, we learned that once you have a stack of enough semi-transparent layers (combination of PNGs with alpha channels coupled with DIVs with various opacity CSS settings), IE fails to render the top-most layers. This doesn't happen after 20-30 layers. This happens after 5-7 layers. At first we thought our code was faulty, until we realized that scrolling down such a page with multiple layers will cause text that was previously "invisible" to suddenly be rendered in its specified color... as we kept scrolling, the text would then disappear again. You get the idea.

Obviously, this all works flawlessly in Safari, Chrome, Opera. For IE, we get to re-architect all sorts of work-arounds --a house built on sand.

If they're smart, they'll build it out on IPV6.

(Those who consider this to be obvious should remember that the government is involved.)

Merchants, immersed in the bustling commerce of Rome, who suddenly found themselves shipwrecked along with a handful of other sailors on some island in the Mediterranean would likely have, "showed signs of withdrawal, craving and anxiety along with an inability to function well without their " ...familiar environment around which their lives had come to revolve.

...when they do.

Is anybody else bothered by the false advertising that well funded corporate marketing and headline-seeking news is shoving down the public's collective throat?

Claiming that a stereoscopic picture is the equivalent of a 3 dimensional projection is the equivalent of presenting a stereo entertainment center and claiming that it is surround sound.

...or not.

I sincerely hope that this wasn't someone's doctorate thesis.

There are too many such "learned" individuals out there who are incapable original thought. I wonder if this has always been the case...

You mean like BattleCell? Offensive/defensive military strength of each cell depends on troop counts as well as altitude differences between cells. (Yes, we used STRM data to acquire our altitudes.)

Mark makes some excellent points. We are rapidly evolving the BattleCell game (BattleCell.com) to fit the gaping-wide hole that has become today's Social Gaming world: If it's a Social Game, how come I can't interact with my friends and other players? Zynga has brilliantly demonstrated that you can build a successful business model by effectively marrying good viral marketing (aka, News Feed) with the addictive behaviors identified in your article. Today's Social Gaming offering is comprised of hyped up Tamagotchi digital pet reproductions that allow players to look over their friends' shoulders. One can't really argue with success, of course. But, Mark's final statement nails it --players are left wishing that the game was more fun, that it had more depth after all their investment, that it offered something more meaningful than just another way to spend one's time.