Thursday, May 10, 2007


I got it as an attachment in word.
I see it as a banch of philosophical illusions/brain twisters with a deep meaning seosoning.

Read out loud the text inside the triangle below.

More than likely you said, "A bird in the bush," and........
if this IS what YOU said, then you failed to see
that the word THE is repeated twice!
Sorry, look again.

Next, let's play with some words.

What do you see?

In black you can read the word GOOD, in white the word EVIL (inside each black letter is a white letter). It's all very physiological too, because it visualize the concept that good can't exist without evil (or the absence of good is evil

Now, what do you see?

You may not see it at first, but the white spaces read the word optical, the blue landscape reads the word illusion. Look again! Can you see why this painting is called an optical illusion?

What do you see here?

This one is quite tricky!
The word TEACH reflects as LEARN.

What do you see?

You probably read the word ME in brown, but.......
when you look through ME
you will see YOU! Do you need to look again?

Test Your Brain
This is really cool. The second one is amazing so please read all the way though.

Count every " F " in the following text:




WRONG, THERE ARE 6 -- no joke.
Really, go Back and Try to find the 6 F's before you scroll down.

The reasoning behind is further down.

The brain cannot process "OF".

Incredible or what? Go back and look again!!

Anyone who counts all 6 "F's" on the first go is a genius.

Three is normal, four is quite rare.

Send this to your friends.
It will drive them crazy.!
And keep them occupied
For several minutes..

More Brain Stuff . . . From Cambridge University.

O lny srmat poelpe can raed tihs.

I cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt! if you can raed tihs psas it on !!

Psas Ti ON !

Thursday, April 26, 2007

Why I hate Digg? is a platform for UGC, therefor it must be democratic right? wrong.
1. Digg contain few hundreds of users (even less) that promote only their interests or their friends interests. this is not democracy - these people were not even elected. Just try to promote a very interesting site or content yourself and see how it sunks to oblivion.
2. Digg have a snitch line(email) for stories that are not relevant to user or contain spam. this sounds more like the KGB to me. Only this few hundreds use this email - believe me.
3. Digg does not allow members to communicate with each other on its platform. not so web 2.0, and there goes your freedom of speech.
4. If your site is banned from Digg than you can not do anything about it. No pardonת, nothing - this government has no mercy. your site is sentenced to life in prison.
well, i can add more reasons but i welcome you to post yours.


Sunday, April 22, 2007


"Spammer", "he is spammer" - we all love to hate those spammers.
Of course, They send junk to our mail (actually, I can hardly see spam using Gmail), they contaminating websites and they make a lot of money.
How do I know they make a lot of money? The spammers work according to the long tail theory - they are shooting anywhere, someone will get hurt eventually, the people that they target eventually will spend some money (that part of it goes to their pocket).

Well, these are the bad guys, the spammers, they make a lot of money in an annoying way that interferes with our browsing life.
We hate them - "Be careful, he is a spammer!!!" is a very common sentence one can see in a lot of UGC sites (digg, flickr, youtube etc').

I think that the legitimate advertising is worse than spam(or is it the same thing without the legitimacy). It interferes with my browsing in a much larger scale of cross points than the spammers. I search for something and i see it, I browse to my favorite sites (that lots of other browsers like) and see them - a lot of banners, roadblocks, Addwords, addsence, you name it, some of them are so annoying that i almost swear to my self never to visit these sites again. therefore, I think, the real spammers are the legitimate ones.

I'm not implying that spammer are good hearted fellas, after all, most of the mails sent today are spam, but I think that if google would have got payment for every spam it delivers, than, the spam industry would have become legitimate.

Think of it