A researcher at the University of Oregon recently conducted a study on the brain effects of donating money to a cause. In the study, the researchers gave subjects $100 and watched their brain activity via FMRI as the subjects were shown their money being transferred from their account directly to a foodbank's account. Then they did the actress brunette ame thing but allowed the subjects to choose how to spend their money. In the automatic transfer of funds to the foodbank, pleasure areas of the brain (that are traditionally stimulated by food, sex, sweets, shelter and social connection) were significantly activated. In the second part of the study when the subject chose to donate the money, the effect was even greater. To read the full Reuters story: Click here

While I think that Forbes typically does a better job covering the biopharm industry, Fortune also comes through with flying colors once in a while. The October 5th issue is a good example of that with an article called "The (Second) Worst Deal Ever." Reminding me of many exciting encounters with books of the "who done it?" genre, the article by Shawn Tully recounts the fight for Guidant between J&J and Boston Scientific and the important role played by Abbott. Since I don't want to give away any of this juicy story, I will only quote one part of it. If anything, it will only entice you to read the whole thing. "What emerges is a roller-coaster tale of bet-the-franchise corporate brinkmanship, miscalculation and overreaching. It is a stark lesson on how the single-minded small business web hosting services ursuit of victory can blind even brilliant execs to the true costs of a deal. It's also a study in wildly contrasting personalities locked in gladiatorial combat: the colorful, swashbuckling crowd from Boston vs. the cautious, by-the-book executives at Johnson & Johnson, who, despite their stiff bearing, proved as tough as they are proud." Now, not giving away the story does not mean that I don't have some opinions about this deal. If I could choose only one of those opinions, it would be my dismay about greed trumping ethical behavior. It must be remembered that deals are made by human beings and the element of trust can't be underestimated.

Click Here

A researcher at the University of Oregon recently conducted a study on the brain effects of donating money to a cause. In the study, the researchers gave subjects $100 and watched their brain activity via FMRI as the subjects were shown their money being transferred customer service sample surveys rom their account directly to a foodbank's account. Then they did the same thing but allowed the subjects to choose how to spend their money. In the automatic transfer of funds to the foodbank, pleasure areas of the brain (that are traditionally stimulated by food, sex, sweets, shelter and social connection) were significantly activated. In the second part of the study when the subject chose to donate the money, the effect was even greater. To read the full Reuters story: Click here

I will be traveling today and will not post until late, when I am a little tanked up and safely installed in a hotel room in 1958. Don't worry; I'll post pictures. space guard air filter

A researcher at the University of Oregon recently conducted a study on the brain effects of donating money to a cause. In the study, the researchers gave subjects $100 and watched their brain activity via FMRI as the subjects were shown their money being transferred from their account directly to a foodbank's account. Then they did the same thing but allowed the subjects to choose how to spend their money. In the automatic transfer of funds to the foodbank, pleasure areas of the brain (that are traditionally stimulated by food, sex, sweets, shelter and social connection) were significantly activated. In the second part of the study when the subject fun fundraisers hose to donate the money, the effect was even greater. To read the full Reuters story: Click here

Let's take a leap of faith that presence is broken off from being bundled into instant messaging, IP telephony or other systems. Given what IBM is building postit notes n terms of its gateway that supports other presence methods (e.g., XMPP) and the capability of the gateway to support various plug-ins, then perhaps this forms the basis of a multi-protocol presence server that could integrate with a variety of signaling interfaces. Nahhhh....

Let's take a leap of faith that presence is broken off from being bundled into instant messaging, IP telephony or other systems. Given what IBM is building in terms of its gateway that supports other presence methods (e.g., XMPP) and the capability of the job offer negotiation ateway to support various plug-ins, then perhaps this forms the basis of a multi-protocol presence server that could integrate with a variety of signaling interfaces. Nahhhh....

Let's take a leap of faith that presence is broken off from being bundled into instant messaging, IP telephony or other systems. Given what IBM is building in terms of its gateway that supports other presence methods (e.g., XMPP) and the capability of the gateway to support various plug-ins, then perhaps this forms the basis of a multi-protocol presence server that publication ould integrate with a variety of signaling interfaces. Nahhhh....

Let's take a leap of faith that presence is broken off from being bundled into instant messaging, IP telephony or other systems. Given what IBM is building in terms of its gateway that supports other presence methods (e.g., XMPP) free ramp plans nd the capability of the gateway to support various plug-ins, then perhaps this forms the basis of a multi-protocol presence server that could integrate with a variety of signaling interfaces. Nahhhh....

While I think that Forbes typically does a better job covering the biopharm industry, Fortune also comes through with flying colors once in a while. The October 5th issue is a good example of that with an article called "The (Second) Worst Deal Ever." Reminding me of many exciting encounters with books of the "who done it?" genre, the article by Shawn Tully recounts the fight for Guidant between J&J and Boston Scientific and the important role played by Abbott. Since I don't want to give away any of this juicy story, I will only quote one part of it. If anything, it will only entice you to read the whole thing. "What emerges is a roller-coaster tale of bet-the-franchise corporate brinkmanship, miscalculation and overreaching. It is a stark lesson on how the single-minded pursuit of victory can blind even brilliant execs to the true costs of a deal. It's also a study in wildly contrasting personalities locked in rx ladiatorial combat: the colorful, swashbuckling crowd from Boston vs. the cautious, by-the-book executives at Johnson & Johnson, who, despite their stiff bearing, proved as tough as they are proud." Now, not giving away the story does not mean that I don't have some opinions about this deal. If I could choose only one of those opinions, it would be my dismay about greed trumping ethical behavior. It must be remembered that deals are made by human beings and the element of trust can't be underestimated.

Engagement can be basic - how much time and how many interactions will a user have with an experience. This simple baseline allows advertisers to try and gauge (can't say measure) how "engaging" an ad is. That doesn't begin to describe the real promsie of engagement. In the online video world, there have been some terrific engaging experiences. From ZeFrank's The Show, now archived on Blip.tv to havemoneywillvlog , creators are trying new ways to make involving experiences. Now, the filmmakers behind a 71 minute film, Four-eyed t mobile pcs onsters , are trying to get known, get reimbursed, and prove out a new sponsorship/promotion idea. The film which is available on YouTube and Spout.com begins with the filmmakers displaying the fan of credit cards that funded their film. They tell the viewer that for every sign-up at Spout.com (if you want to sign up, use the link below so the filmmakers get their dough), they will recieve a dollar (up to $100K) to offset their movie debt. I am pre-loading the movie as we speak and only know that it begins on an unassuming suburban ranch house. I can say it looks nicely shot and made. We will know more later, perhaps much later. I cannot help but want to know the fine print. Are the filmmakers who they say they are? Are they truly at risk financially? How did they hook up with Spout.com? Arin Crumley and Susan Buice seem to be as real as you and me.

I will be traveling today share point nd will not post until late, when I am a little tanked up and safely installed in a hotel room in 1958. Don't worry; I'll post pictures.

Engagement can be basic - how much time and how many interactions will a user have with an experience. This simple baseline allows advertisers to try and gauge (can't say measure) how "engaging" an ad is. That doesn't begin to describe the real promsie of engagement. In the online video world, there have been some terrific engaging experiences. From ZeFrank's The Show, now archived on Blip.tv to havemoneywillvlog , creators are trying new ways to make involving experiences. Now, the filmmakers behind a 71 minute film, Four-eyed Monsters shop at home tv network are trying to get known, get reimbursed, and prove out a new sponsorship/promotion idea. The film which is available on YouTube and Spout.com begins with the filmmakers displaying the fan of credit cards that funded their film. They tell the viewer that for every sign-up at Spout.com (if you want to sign up, use the link below so the filmmakers get their dough), they will recieve a dollar (up to $100K) to offset their movie debt. I am pre-loading the movie as we speak and only know that it begins on an unassuming suburban ranch house. I can say it looks nicely shot and made. We will know more later, perhaps much later. I cannot help but want to know the fine print. Are the filmmakers who they say they are? Are they truly at risk financially? How did they hook up with Spout.com? Arin Crumley and Susan Buice seem to be as real as you and me.

Oh, bother. This one has been on my mind for some time now. I live in one of those cities free anti spyware software here many of the women like to wear what seems to be the entire contents of their jewelry collection to the gym. Rings on every finger, a diamond-crusted gold watch nested between a few diamond tennis bracelets on the left wrist, the right wrist dripping with gold chains, the neck and decollete heavily-laden with chains and charms, large hoop earrings, etc. It's the walking definition of female hysteria . Now, mind you, these ladies also wear about 1/4" of slap and liquid eyeliner, too, to the gym. And hose themselves down in Thierry Mugler Angel perfume, which smells like a combination of cotton candy and chlorine gas. Because one needs that for a proper workout. I wonder what Kim and i am pretty nyc would have to say about that? That cannot be good for the skin. It just can't. And I know the metals and the sweat can't be a healthy combination either. Let's not even mention what it's doing to the jewelry. Dirty, dirty. Filthy. Methinks it's a cultural thing, this being Texas and all. I used to live in Newport Beach, and it was a similar scenario. Less drippy gold bracelets and hoop earrings, though. More large diamonds. A nice pair of E-color, VVS 1, two-carat studs and a TechnoMarine with diamond bezel for an hour of Pilates Reformer and thirty minutes of Tai Chi. Not me, but I've seen it.