Green is the color between blue and yellow on the visible spectrum. It is evoked by light which has a dominant wavelength of 495–570 nm. In subtractive color systems, used in painting and color printing, it is created by a combination of yellow and blue, or yellow and cyan. By far the largest contributor to green in nature is chlorophyll, the chemical by which plants photosynthesize and convert sunlight into chemical energy. Many creatures have adapted to their green environments by taking on a green hue themselves as camouflage. Several minerals have a green color, including the emerald, colored green by its chromium content. During post-classical and early modern Europe, green was the color associated with wealth, merchants and the gentry, while red was reserved for the nobility. For this reason, the costume of the Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci and the benches in the British House of Commons are green while those in the House of Lords are red, it has a long historical tradition as the color of Ireland and of Gaelic culture.

It is the historic color of Islam, representing the lush vegetation of Paradise. It was the color of the banner of Muhammad, is found in the flags of nearly all Islamic countries. In surveys made in American and Islamic countries, green is the color most associated with nature, health, spring and envy. In the European Union and the United States, green is sometimes associated with toxicity and poor health, but in China and most of Asia, its associations are positive, as the symbol of fertility and happiness; because of its association with nature, it is the color of the environmental movement. Political groups advocating environmental protection and social justice describe themselves as part of the Green movement, some naming themselves Green parties; this has led to similar campaigns in advertising, as companies have sold green, or environmentally friendly, products. Green is the traditional color of safety and permission; the word green comes from the Middle English and Old English word grene, like the German word grün, has the same root as the words grass and grow.

It is from a Common Germanic *gronja-, reflected in Old Norse grænn, Old High German gruoni from a PIE root *ghre- "to grow", root-cognate with grass and to grow. The first recorded use of the word as a color term in Old English dates to ca. AD 700. Latin with viridis has a genuine and used term for "green". Related to virere "to grow" and ver "spring", it gave rise to words in several Romance languages, French vert, Italian verde; the Slavic languages with zelenъ. Ancient Greek had a term for yellowish, pale green – χλωρός, cognate with χλοερός "verdant" and χλόη "chloe, the green of new growth". Thus, the languages mentioned above have old terms for "green" which are derived from words for fresh, sprouting vegetation. However, comparative linguistics makes clear that these terms were coined independently, over the past few millennia, there is no identifiable single Proto-Indo-European or word for "green". For example, the Slavic zelenъ is cognate with Sanskrit hari "yellow, golden"; the Turkic languages have jašɨl "green" or "yellowish green", compared to a Mongolian word for "meadow".

In some languages, including old Chinese, old Japanese, Vietnamese, the same word can mean either blue or green. The Chinese character 青 has a meaning that covers both green. In more contemporary terms, they are 綠 respectively. Japanese has two terms that refer to the color green, 緑 and グリーン. However, in Japan, although the traffic lights have the same colors as other countries have, the green light is described using the same word as for blue, because green is considered a shade of aoi. Vietnamese uses a single word for both blue and green, with variants such as xanh da trời, lục. "Green" in modern European languages corresponds to about 520–570 nm, but many historical and non-European languages make other choices, e.g. using a term for the range of ca. 450–530 nm and another for ca. 530–590 nm. In the comparative study of color terms in the world's languages, green is only found as a separate category in languages with the developed range of six colors, or more in systems with five colors; these languages have introduced supplementary vocabulary to denote "green", but these terms are recognizable as recent adoptions that are not in origin color terms.

Thus, the Thai word เขียว kheīyw, besides mea

Homoeosoma anaspila

Homoeosoma anaspila is a species of snout moth in the genus Homoeosoma. It is endemic to New Zealand, it found in the South Islands as well as the Kermadec Islands. This species was first described by Edward Meyrick in 1901 using specimens from Waipukurau collected by Meryrick himself in March and two other specimens collected in Christchurch including one collected by R. W. Fereday; that latter specimen is held at the Natural History Museum, London. Meyrick described the species as follows: ♀ 16-21 mm. Head and thorax fuscous, irrorated with white. Forewings narrow, posteriorly somewhat dilated. Hindwings whitish-fuscous, termen slenderly dark fuscous; the species is endemic to New Zealand. It has been collected in the wider Mackenzie basin, the Canterbury region, as well as on the Kermadec Islands; the adults of this moth are on the wing during the months of October to December and in March. The larvae feed on Vittandinia species including Vittadinia gracilis and Vittadinia australis as well as Helichrysum luteoalbum, Hieracium lepidulum, Jacobaea vulgaris and Ozothamnus leptophyllus

Googled: The End of the World as We Know It

Googled: The End of the World as We Know It is a book published in 2009 by American writer and media critic Ken Auletta. It examines the evolution of Google as a company, its philosophy, business ethics, future plans and impact on society, the world of business and the Internet. For his book, Auletta interviewed one hundred and fifty people related to Google and an equal number of persons unrelated to the company, including top media company executives. Auletta uses Edgar Allan Poe's short story The Purloined Letter to describe the attitude of the executives of the traditional media companies toward Google, illustrate the belated recognition of Google's power by mainstream media, he suggests that in a similar fashion to the prefect in Poe's story who could not locate the letter although it was in plain sight, it took the media company executives until 2004, when Google issued its initial public offering, to first realise the magnitude of Google's digital power. Auletta uses the term "frenemies" to describe the attitude of the traditional media companies as well as Microsoft toward Google, as they try to cooperate with the company despite their adversarial and mistrustful relationship.

Nicholson Baker in his book review for the New York Times writes that he obtained a lot of information from Auletta's book regarding Google's adversarial relationship with various companies such as Facebook and Viacom. Google's involvement in the Yahoo-Microsoft case is explored as well as the deteriorating relationship between Google and Apple. Baker finds that one of the strengths of Auletta's book are his interviews with a large number of media company executives, during which they express their criticism of Google; the review mentions Auletta's use of military terminology when he refers to privacy concerns about Google which he compares to a predator drone which could destroy the company. The Globe and Mail's book review mentions that although Auletta was granted access to Google's executives, his book does not reveal many unexpected details; the review mentions that Auletta explains adequately how Google's black box algorithms work and that the author describes the impact Google's innovations have had on the media industry in the advertising sector.

The Christian Science Monitor writes that Auletta throughout his book breaks from the historical narrative documenting Google's success story to contextualise it and juxtapose it to a business environment where traditional media companies face a crisis due to their difficulty in adopting innovation. Despite that, Auletta is not negative about the future of the traditional media and allows that there is still demand for journalism and information; the Los Angeles Times reviewer remarks that whereas "Google" has become a common word in the English language synonymous to online searching, the term "Googled", as used in Auletta's book title, is more synonymous to "outsmarted", "slamdunked", "left for dead", when applied to traditional media companies. The review in The Observer calls the book "superbly balanced" but it remarks that despite its balance, Auletta's work does not show Google has a real understanding of the media whose operations it is disrupting; the review cites the example of a conversation between Sergei Brin.

After Brinn suggested that "people don't buy books" and "you might as well put it online", Auletta asked Brinn how does he propose book authors get funding for expenses incurred while writing their books without getting an advance from a publisher. According to the review, Brinn did not reply to the question; the book critique on Business Insider comments on the contrast which exists between Google's advocacy of free access to information and intellectual property and their own policies related to disclosure of their business practices and data processing algorithms