The eclipse of white bread
"As much as our hands shape bread, bread shapes us, too," says Psychology Today. "According to Aaron Bobrow-Strain, professor of politics at Whitman College in Washington and author of White Bread: A Social History of the Store-Bought Loaf, mid-19th century American industry embarked on what turned out to be a 150-year experiment to bring to the table the purest of refined commodities. … But over time, white bread has descended from a status symbol of upper-crust refinement to a stand-in for white trash and the empty, sugary promises of industrial food. The year 2009 was a pivotal one for bread; for the first time in the history of American commercial bread production, sales of whole-wheat loaves surpassed those of white, part of a wider reconsideration of what we eat."
Ow? Easy for you to say
"The semi-involuntary sound we make when we stub a toe or burn a finger is surprisingly constant across languages and cultures," writes Luis Villazon in BBC Science Focus magazine. "The Spanish say ' Ay!', the Germans ' Ach!', the Chinese ' Aiya!', the Norwegians ' Au!' In each case it's a wide-open mouth with a short breath. This is the fastest and simplest way to make a loud noise and it probably evolved as an alarm call to the tribe that danger was nearby. In case that danger is a wild animal, saying Ow also has the effect of baring your teeth threateningly."
The technology script
"When it is introduced, a new technology typically sets in motion a now-familiar script," writes Tom Vanderbilt in The Wilson Quarterly. "At first, the technology is deemed to have little import or to fulfill only very specific, limited uses. Consider, for example, this casual dismissal by The New York Times in 1939: 'The problem with television is that people must sit and keep their eyes glued on a screen; the average American family hasn't time for it.' Next, as the technology's true uses come into view, but before it is widely adopted, come the grandiose pronouncements, both pro and con, on how it will shape society. … [T]levision inventor Philo T. Farnsworth thought television would engender world peace: 'If we were able to see people in other countries and learn about our differences, why would there be any misunderstandings? War would be a thing of the past.' And then, as prices come down … people simply buy the thing."
When the red chips are down
"The colour red has been associated with blood, romance, communism and Republicans," writes Kevin Lewis in The Boston Globe. "New research finds that it's also a winning bet. In computer-simulated poker games, players were more intimidated by opponents using red chips (compared to white or blue chips) and, as a result, folded more and called less. More red chips led to more intimidation, more folding, and less calling. In turn, players using red chips felt more dominant and bet more."
Will we spy on each other?
"Anyone who's stepped out in the city has a good idea of how much officially sanctioned surveillance we're exposed to daily," says The Futurist. "Increasingly, individuals are also surveilling themselves (a.k.a. 'lifelogging', 'terabyting', 'sousveilling') by using cameras and other devices to record all the data of their lives. 'Coveillance' is a term made popular in a 2003 paper for Surveillance & Society by sociologist Barry Wellman and co-authors to describe the phenomenon of networked individuals observing and recording each others' lives. The idea is that we are transparent and accountable to one another. Would we behave better knowing someone nearby may post our foibles on YouTube and then tweet it to the world? Coveillance could also reduce the need for government surveillance and offer us more protection as we move between communities, the authors suggest."
He'll have what you're having
"Does your puppy turn up his nose at his own chow – because he wants some of whatever it is you're having?" asks Scientific American. "A new study finds that, when it comes to food, dogs recognize human social signals about what's good. The work is in the journal Public Library of Science ONE. … Researchers let dogs choose between two plates, one with a single piece of food and the other with six pieces. Unsurprisingly, the animals generally went for the larger portion. But when a human being showed a clear liking for the smaller plate, the canines likewise went for the skimpier choice. The dogs apparently recognized and responded to the humans' social cues."
Thought du jour
"Unless they share our opinions, we seldom find people sensible."
François, duc de la Rochefoucauld (1613-80)