Google it!

I can’t imagine my life as a content writer without Google. I am regularly given sets of writing task that are not familiar to me.

So I heavily rely on Google to provide me with the juiciest information I can use in my tasks. Yet there are also times, especially the old times when I am new new to content writing, I found it difficult to google the information I need.

Glad I have digg this how-to article in HUBSPOT. The author enumerated the twelve of the best search techniques in Google.

Explicit Phrase: Lets say you are looking for content about internet marketing.  Instead of just typing internet marketing into the Google search box, you will likely be better off searching explicitly for the phrase.  To do this, simply enclose the search phrase within double quotes.

Example: “internet marketing”

Exclude Words: Lets say you want to search for content about internet marketing, but you want to exclude any results that contain the term advertising.  To do this, simply use the “-” sign in front of the word you want to exclude.

Example Search: internet marketing -advertising

Site Specific Search: Often, you want to search a specific website for content that matches a certain phrase.  Even if the site doesn’t support a built-in search feature, you can use Google to search the site for your term. Simply use the “” modifier.

Example: “internet marketing”

Similar Words and Synonyms: Let’s say you are want to include a word in your search, but want to include results that contain similar words or synonyms.  To do this, use the “~” in front of the word.

Example: “internet marketing” ~professional

Specific Document Types: If you’re looking to find results that are of a specific type, you can use the modifier “filetype:”.  For example, you might want to find only PowerPoint presentations related to internet marketing.

Example: “internet marketing” filetype:ppt

This OR That: By default, when you do a search, Google will include all the terms specified in the search.  If you are looking for any one of one or more terms to match, then you can use the OR operator.  (Note:  The OR has to be capitalized).

Example: internet marketing OR advertising

Phone Listing: Let’s say someone calls you on your mobile number and you don’t know how it is.  If all you have is a phone number, you can look it up on Google using the phonebook feature.

Area Code Lookup: If all you need to do is to look-up the area code for a phone number, just enter the 3-digit area code and Google will tell you where it’s from.

Example: 617

Numeric Ranges: This is a rarely used, but highly useful tip.  Let’s say you want to find results that contain any of a range of numbers.  You can do this by using the X..Y modifier (in case this is hard to read, what’s between the X and Y are two periods.  This type of search is useful for years (as shown below), prices or anywhere where you want to provide a series of numbers.

Example: president 1940..1950

Stock (Ticker Symbol): Just enter a valid ticker symbol as your search term and Google will give you the current financials and a quick thumb-nail chart for the stock.

Example: GOOG

Calculator: The next time you need to do a quick calculation, instead of bringing up the Calculator applet, you can just type your expression in to Google.

Example: 48512 * 1.02

Word Definitions: If you need to quickly look up the definition of a word or phrase, simply use the “define:” command.

Example: define:plethora

To Make You Feel My Love

Last night, I was watching American Idol Top 11 (Their Performance Night)and the moment Kris Allen sang Garth BrooksTo Make You Feel My Love,” the lyrics immediately knocks me off my feet. The whole song was like a poem to me I can recite all my life to the one I unconditionally love.

At last, I found the studio version in iTunes, also the lyrics!

This soulful record will surely be played in my wedding day ten years or century from now, LOL

When the rain is blowing in your face
And the whole world is on your case
I could offer you a warm embrace
To make you feel my love

When the evening shadows and the stars appear
There is no one there to dry your tears
I could hold you for a million years
To make you feel my love

I know you haven’t made your mind up yet
But I would never do you wrong
I’ve known it from the moment that we met
There’s no doubt in my mind where you belong

I’d go hungry, I’d go black and blue
I’d go crawling down the avenue
There ain’t nothing that I wouldn’t do
To make you feel my love

ooohh…To make you feel my love

The storms are raging on a rolling sea
Down on the highway of regret
The winds of change are blowing wild and free
But you ain’t seen nothing like me yet

I could make you happy, make your dreams come true
No, there’s nothing that I wouldn’t do
Go to the ends of the earth for you

To make you feel my love
To make you feel my love

Survivor Insights 21: Spencer was Out!

His tribe didn’t know he’s gay. He thought he did poorly in this week’s immunity challenge. He tried to persuade his alliance in the last minute, unfortunately, nothing happened Spencer Duhm was still voted out.

As the youngest castaway in Survivor History at 19, Spencer was perceived to be a big threat from the beginning. The only problem with his strategy was he didn’t came across the board. His strategy was nearly under the radar and that cost him the cut.

Talking about Spencer’s strategy, Taj immediately came into power by finding the hidden immunity necklace but looks like not the 100% power, the reason behind: she’s not keeping it inside her pocket. Instead she handled the necklace to Stephen, her closest ally in the secret-four-way-alliance. Taj’s decision implied she completely expects Stephen on her side. However, the “trust” decision sounds worn-out to me. When the necklace was at his grab, Brendan didn’t share it to Sierra.

Trust is a fragile element in SURVIVOR. One needs only to give a little trust to earn little trust, not to a point putting the hidden immunity necklace into someone’s pockets. This event put Stephen in the power position too, probably the most powerful member in Jalapao.

When Stephen said to Taj, “I’ve never brought such pleasure to a woman before,” Jeff Probst in his EW blog thought that “Stephen is going for broke and playing this game full on.”

Considering also the event Brendan took Stephen in Exile Island, the story can change in an instant. These two gentlemen are rolling the ball in their palms and anything can happen in the next weeks to come.

But wait, there’s still Tyson. He brilliantly pieced the puzzles in their right corner that might put Brendan’s four-way-alliance in great jeopardy. Tyson was really the BIG thinker of this season. In the past episodes, he became the assistant coach of Benjamin. Now he instantly claimed himself as the mind reader putting too much pressure not only Brendan but also to his tribe.

Wow, this man can oust anyone he likes. Tyson was like the storm that bursts in Timbira camp while Coach was reading wind directions. It can be very possible for Tyson to snake into Brendan’s secret alliance and oust Coach? 🙂

That seems nonsense but it can work, right?

It was a different Tyson in challenges. He was in no doubt the savior of Timbira during the launch-the-ball-in-air immunity challenge. JT immediately marked a 2-0 lead for his tribe but Brendan rallied over to put the game in 2-2.

Even with Joe broke his knee and with JT saying goodbye to his tooth, Jalapao moved ahead as JT’s impressive catch continue in play.

The score was 4-2 and Jalapao was only a point away from winning. Big thanks to Tyson! He secured three straight points for another Timbira’s victory. Truth is; the last point was in big sighs. JT was nearly in possession of the ball but misses it, throwing his net into the water (reminds me of Marat Safin’s aggression in tennis courts).

Jalapao and Timbira were definitely two of the best tribes in Survivor History. These two tribes were always neck-in-neck to avoid a date with Jeff Probst in TC . Timbira broke down in reward challenges but whoa, their spirits came back in big explosions just to win immunity.

It’s nearly merge or but still, no shocking twists yet and wow, four of my earlier picks are still on board. Before I wrap up, this week’s spinning-around reward challenge was all a blast. How those people do it? Spinning in a platform then crossing the a beam balance? Do you think it would be more interesting if the beam balance was at least a meter higher on the ground?

But all praise to Jalapao, especially to beautiful Sydney for winning the final point for Jalapao to enjoy the muffins, cakes and letters from home.

(Spencer’s RNO interview)

Why Some Politicians are against Abortion and for Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Source: Catholic News Agency

Just think of something being constructed, such as a house, or a scholarly article – or take a car on an assembly line. When is a car first there? At what point in the assembly line would we first say, “There’s a car”? Some of us would no doubt go with appearance, saying that there is a car as soon as the body is fairly complete (in analogy to the fetus at 10 weeks or so). I suppose that most of us would look for something functional. We would say that there is a car only after a motor is in place (in analogy to quickening). Others might wait for the wheels (in analogy to viability) or even the windshield wipers (so that it’s viable even in the rain). And a few might say, “It’s not a car until it rolls out onto the street” (in analogy to birth). There would be many differing opinions.

However, one thing upon which we’ll probably all agree is this: Nobody is going to say that the car is there at the very beginning of the assembly line, when the first screw or rivet is put in or when two pieces of metal are first welded together. (You can see how little I know about car manufacturing.) Two pieces of metal fastened together don’t match up to anybody’s idea of a car.

I think that this is exactly the way that many people see the embryo, like the car-to-be at the very beginning of the construction process. In the first stages of construction you don’t have a house, you don’t have a car, you don’t have a human individual yet. You don’t ever have what you’re making when you’ve just started making it. This does not mean that our “constructionist” friends are anti-life. They may believe that a baby should have absolute protection once it has been fully fabricated. But until that point, for them, abortion just isn’t murder.

What happens when a constructionist hears a pro-lifer argue that a human embryo has the same right to life as any other human being? Journalist Michael Kinsley, writing in the Washington Post, expressed his utter bewilderment:

“I cannot share, or even fathom, [the pro-life] conviction that a microscopic dot – as oblivious as a rock, more primitive than a worm – has the same rights as anyone reading this article.”

There’s a deep truth at the base of Kinsley’s puzzlement. Nothing can be a certain kind of thing until it possesses the form of that kind of thing, and the form of a thing under construction just plain isn’t there at the beginning of the construction process. It isn’t there because that form is being gradually imposed from the outside and the persons or forces doing the construction have not yet been able to shape the raw material into what it will eventually be.

There is a special relevance of the construction idea to the embryonic stem cell debate. Conley admits there can be a peculiar, lesser sort of dignity even in a work-in-progress. For example, if we thought God were engaged in fabricating a new Eve, out of a bone and a breath, we wouldn’t want to destroy His work-in-progress, simply out of respect for Him. Again, many of us would think a Corvette-To-Be pretty special even on the assembly line, something not lightly to be destroyed, because it’s on the way to becoming something that we really care about. But if the auto factory shuts down early on, those two pieces of joined metal on the assembly line are not “to be” anything; they’re just recyclable waste. Likewise, an embryo conceived outside the womb – with no plans to implant it so that it could be born – is not on its way “to be” anything. Thus it has little or no work-in-progress dignity, and work-in-progress type dignity is all that it can ever have for Conley and those who agree with his construction model of gestation.

So there is a reason that people like John McCain, and some others who are strongly opposed to abortion, even in early pregnancy, could feel free to vote for embryonic stem cell research funding. They could think that an intrauterine fetus or embryo is a great divine or human work in progress, and thus shouldn’t be aborted, even when just recently conceived, but only because it is under construction. Since the thousands of frozen, test-tube-generated embryos that scientists want to use for experiments are not under construction, are just scrap left over from IVF treatments, they can be recycled without a qualm.

Development as an alternative to construction

Despite the great explanatory power of Conley’s construction metaphor for an understanding of contemporary life-issue debates, it is radically misleading concerning the nature of gestation. It is in fact not true that the bodies of living creatures are constructed, by God or by anyone else. There is no outside builder or maker. Life is not made. Life develops.

In construction, the form defining the entity being built arrives only slowly, as it is added from the outside. In development, the form defining the growing life (that which a major Christian tradition calls its “soul”) is within it from the beginning. If Corvette production is cancelled, the initial two pieces of metal stuck together can become the starting point for something else, perhaps another kind of car, or maybe a washing machine. But even if you take a human embryo out of the womb, you can never get it to develop into a puppy or a guppy.

Living organisms are not formed or defined from the outside. They define and form themselves. The form or nature of a living being is already there from the beginning, in its activated genes, and that form begins to manifest itself from the very first moment of its existence, in self-directed epigenetic interaction with its environment. Embryos don’t need to be molded into a type of being. They already are a definite kind of being.

This idea of development – as the continual presence but gradual appearance of a being – lies deep within us. Here is a non-biological example of development. Suppose that we are back in the pre-digital photo days and you have a Polaroid camera and you have taken a picture that you think is unique and valuable – let’s say a picture of a jaguar darting out from a Mexican jungle. The jaguar has now disappeared, and so you are never going to get that picture again in your life, and you really care about it. (I am trying to make this example parallel to a human being, for we say that every human being is uniquely valuable.) You pull the tab out and as you are waiting for it to develop, I grab it away from you and rip it open, thus destroying it. When you get really angry at me, I just say blithely, “You’re crazy. That was just a brown smudge. I cannot fathom why anyone would care about brown smudges.” Wouldn’t you think that I was the insane one? Your photo was already there. We just couldn’t see it yet.

Why do we sometimes find the constructionist view plausible, while at other times the more accurate developmental view seems to make more sense? The constructionist view is intuitively appealing, I think, whenever the future is shut out of our minds, even if we are using the scientifically correct term “development.” Whenever the embryo or fetus is described in terms simply of its current appearance, it is easy to fall into constructionism. For example, if a snapshot is taken in which an embryo looks like just a ball of cells, its dynamic self-direction is obscured. It seems inert. Since an entity that had merely embryonic characteristics as its natural end state would indeed not qualify as a human being, it is easy to imagine that the entity in the snapshot is not human. Scientific knowledge of its inner activity may not be enough to overcome this impression, for it is hard to recognize a form still hidden from view.

However, when we look backwards in time or otherwise have in mind a living entity’s final concrete form, development becomes intuitively compelling. Knowing that the developing Polaroid picture would have been of a jaguar helped us to see that calling it a “brown smudge” was inadequate. If we somehow had an old photo taken of our friend Jim just after he had been conceived, and was thus just a little ball, we’d have no trouble saying, “Look, Jim. That’s you!” Thus the most arresting way to put the developmental case against embryo-destructive research would be something like this: “Each of your friends was once an embryo. Each embryo destroyed could one day have been your friend.”

Deconstruction and the disabled

The construction vs. development clash may also help us to clarify our mutual misunderstandings regarding euthanasia. If a Corvette is gradually deconstructed (dismantled), it eventually ceases to merit the appellation “car”. If you were given a disassembled Corvette body, without the motor or wheels, would you feel that you had been given a “car”? What if you got only a chunk of the frame? True, Corvette-lovers might still have a certain reverence for that body, or even for a piece of the frame, because of what it used to be part of, so that wantonly trashing it (for no good purpose) could still seem to them wrong. But it wouldn’t seem nearly as bad as destroying a whole car. (Remember, there’s nothing wrong with this thinking with regard to artificial creations like cars. Once the pieces necessary to form a car are gone, that form itself is gone and so the car is truly gone.)

Life, however, is different. The form (nature, design) of a living creature both precedes and perdures independently of its appearance and function. That activated form is imbedded within a living being’s every part and every cell (in its active DNA). As long as a disabled creature remains anything – that is, as long as it holds itself together in some way, rather than just becoming a collection of non-integrated objects – that is, as long as it remains alive – it remains what it always was from the beginning of its development.

Indeed, our photo analogy fails fully to capture the nature of life. A photo does not hold itself together. If you scratch it after it has been developed, it won’t even try to repair itself. Like a constructed entity, it is merely an assemblage of parts, without a continuing inner force maintaining its form. Since a living creature is not only an assemblage of parts, it actually cannot be merely constructed. Both ancient and modern constructionists switch (and have to switch) to the developmental understanding at some point during gestation, or soon thereafter, in order to account for the fact that living human beings do have this active inner unifying form, until the day they die.

A deconstructionist might forget this truth and claim misleadingly that someone in a so-called “persistent vegetative state” is no longer a human being, having lost forever what we think special about our species. But in point of fact such a person never loses the unifying force that strives to express her humanity, until the moment she dies. Every part of her wasted body, even her very genes, actively, though in vain, strives to repair her injuries and to express her natural reason, will, and connection to those whom she has loved. She never becomes something else, such as a vegetable. That’s why her condition is tragic, because she has a human nature that is utterly frustrated. We don’t find real vegetables tragic (“Poor little heads of lettuce. Look how they’re just vegetating!”) because they are able to exhibit their inner design or nature.

As a result of accident or of age, many of us will become no longer capable (in this world) of expressing well, or expressing at all, the speech, reason, choice, and love for which we remain formed. Our humanity will have once more become partially hidden, as it was when we had just been conceived, but it will still be there.

Survivor Insights 20: S For Sydney

Belonging to Jalapao since the premiere, Sydney Wheeler was like under- the-radar and attractive blond who couldn’t be in the center stage. This week was entirely different for I saw her vulnerable side and what’s probably the nicest thing in her strategy was using her charms to survive the cut.

This sex-appeal game was already an old testament in SURVIVOR. Good for Sydney and it still works by flirting with the boys and geez, by even wearing the boxers of JT.

This is the reason why I picked Sydney as one of my earlier favorites. Just by reading her profile in CBS, I smell something so sweet in her and wow, it’s true, she successfully rolled her cards on board just like what Parvati Shallow, Jenna Morasca, Heidi Strobel and Amber Brkich did in previous seasons.

In Timbira, Tyson got in touch with his nudity madness once again, wearing only a loincloth with a buff in the private area. Was this his strategy to make his tribe laugh at him and let them forget the conniving side of Tyson? If this is one of his strategies, it looks like he’s in a good or bad shape leading to complete frustration or potentially have the numbers on his side when twist occurs.

I wonder what happen to Erinn. She was in no energy to socialize with the group as Tyson did his nude comedy. Is she feeling bad? Or was she just uncomfortable? Nevermind. Erinn was still a stand-out to me even she’s not with people. There was even a scene that she looks like Parvati!

During the reward challenge which requires stamina to lift weights and conquering mental soreness, I expected Coach might volunteered to stand on the box and carry the load as he’s more in great mass than Tyson is. Yet, what was new with Coach… the skinny Tyson did his part and even without proper amount of food for days, he did awesome carrying 140 pounds in his back before giving out. That’s not it, this challenge was for another great record, two woman were in showdown. Taj in Jalapao and Debb in Timbira.

Standing on that box with 100 pounds, Taj was like Serena Williams. She’s already too exhausted but still giving a solid stand to win the game.

Rolling to immunity challenge, it was a rewind of season’s twelve: Panama Exile Island. Again, Jalapao and Timbira were neck-in-neck, squeezing their brains to solve the mystery message in rolling blocks.

Jalapao couldn’t outplay Timbira this time and decided to send their tribe’s mother, SandyBurgin, home. Watch this never before seen video as how Sandy acted like a mom to injured Spencer.