<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>OhGizmo! - Latest Comments in The Ant And The Microchip</title><link>http://ohgizmo.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://ohgizmo.disqus.com/ohgizmo_raquo_archive_raquo_the_ant_and_the_microchip/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Jan 2007 14:24:54 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: The Ant And The Microchip</title><link>http://www.ohgizmo.com/2007/01/23/the-ant-and-the-microchip/#comment-1760926</link><description>&lt;p&gt;That should read "a DEAD ant holding a microchip". They can't take electro-scanning  pictures of insects that move around. It's more likely they killed the ant, then glued a chip in it's mouth, then did the picture. So, who cares about an ant? Well, it's the principle of the thing. I mean, would it be a cool picture if it was a dead puppy with a micro-chip in it's mouth? Or a butterfly? Should one kill a creature just to get a cool picture?&lt;br&gt;Discuss (2000 words).&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">jon</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 23 Jan 2007 14:24:54 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>