The adjacent cemetery would actually be a great selling point for me! Both for the Halloween atmosphere (in October and year-round), and because I just love cemeteries anyway (I blog about pretty headstones).
It's not just a matter of worrying about "compromising" photos of yourself being out there. To make a hyperbolic analogy: are you okay with police randomly strip-searching you on the street just because you aren't concealing any contraband about your person? Hey, you've got nothing to hide, right?
The point is, FB is ostensibly a tool for connecting to your friends (and/or classmates or workmates). There's all kinds of innocuous information you can fill in, from your religion to your favorite books. And yes, the understanding was that this was to tell other people about yourself, especially people you've just met in class, and let them find out things about you that might not otherwise come up in conversation for some time.
And maybe, just maybe, some people would like to put up lots of information about themselves and-- gasp!-- only have it appear to their chosen few (or many). Currently, anything you "like" (which applies to basically everything) will appear in your public profile with no option for limiting that. My boyfriend noticed that in a Google search for his name, posts that he had made to some of those pages came up as well. It shouldn't come down to "Facebook or no FB" just to have the option of some minor privacy (that FB used to afford its users but has been slowly stripping away, and good riddance).
The quality of those photos is amazing! I feel like I may as well be looking at a modern photo, almost. Too bad Kodachrome film didn't get used more frequently!
IANACopyright Lawyer, but I'm skeptical of how effective mirror-flipping the video would actually be in an infringement challenge. There have been cases of far more dissimilar items being ruled against for fair use or separate copyright than this. I expect this to be taken down as readily as non-flipped images (though I'm eager for any contrary evidence).
@astrodex- "Education does not have to come from a mold. We learn more quickly and easily when we have interest and motivation."
I think that in that case, we ought to put more focus on instilling interest and motivation, giving useful applications for various subjects and/or just try to instill an appreciation for learning for its own sake.
Some things do have to come from a mold. How many people have an "interest" in learning how to spell correctly or write in a fluent manner(consider the number of online posters who don't give a damn if they write actual sentences)?
I am skeptical of most young people's to teach or want to teach themselves anything of value (e.g. basic arithmetic and writing). There's just not that level of context for what skills you will need in life there. How many high schoolers would still opt to do homework if it were all completely optional and tests on that material didn't matter? I know I heard (and uttered) lots of grousing about many of our various assignments, a lot of which were, in the end, helpful.
3rd cousin -> 1st cousin -> 1st cousin is enough to have deleterious effects? I thought 3rd cousins, even more than 1st, were considered okay to breed, genetically. Two generations of 1st cousin breeding already having weird effects seems...specious.
Maybe they just had genes for infertility that were getting passed around. *shrug*
Ragtimegal, interesting. :) But still, backwards or not, the waltz would still be face-to-face(or, er, -back, not side-to-side. The way the article is phrased makes it sound as if that just was not done.
I know Apple likes its big press releases for new toys, but anytime something like this happens, I always if it's really just bad luck or a deliberate publicity move.
I wish I had gotten paid for my good grades. "Unfortunately," my usual report card from an early age was already straight As, so that was just the expected norm. [Really not bragging, honest.] I also felt a little envious of those kids whose parents paid them for every book they finished, but again, one way my parents punished was by taking away books, so...:)
@Splint Chesthair, you couldn't have just told them "no"? :)
@crowT - bottomline for me...if someone else spanked your kid, you'd call the cops. why is it ok for us to do it? ... and why stop at kids?
1. There's a ton of things parents can do with/to their children that strangers cannot. For instance, dressing them or bathing them.
2. Your argument is partially based on the flawed assumption that everyone would call the cops. There are, and have been, many parents who have been perfectly fine with a neighbor giving the kid a spank if he had been misbehaving on their watch. Of course, a total stranger off the street randomly grabbing a child and swatting it is very different, but I'm not sure if that's the distinction you're making.
3. I believe the idea is that kids don't have fully developed brains capable of various levels of complex reasoning. An employee can understand a myriad of possibilities for his screw-up, from pay cuts to getting fired, which could lead to losing his home and what about his family, etc. Children don't have that kind of reasoning-- their brains physically just aren't there yet. Ergo, more primitive, simple forms of discipline: pain = bad. Don't touch the lit stove again. Don't (heh) set the garage on fire again.
@felixthecat - "Spanking is abuse. Just like when many of you spankers grow old, and your children hit and punch you."
"Hit and punch" is not not not not the same as spanking. I'd love to see just ONE discussion of spanking that did not resort to conflating a pretty minor swat on the softest, squishiest, most padded part of the body with actual, severe abuse.
Call spanking abuse if you like, but at least try to be honest enough to recognize it's just not on the same level as...everything else, in the same way that getting punched when Daddy's drunk isn't the same as Uncle Diddle playing with you every night of your so-called childhood.
Just wanted to point out that many professors (particularly those with tenure) are also paid to do research and publish papers. Teaching may be a distant second or third in their job duties.
This still sounds like a bad, idea. Also, I can't imagine how this is a better deal (financially and ethically) than getting TAs to do it. It's not like grad students are all that expensive, either.
The point is, FB is ostensibly a tool for connecting to your friends (and/or classmates or workmates). There's all kinds of innocuous information you can fill in, from your religion to your favorite books.
And yes, the understanding was that this was to tell other people about yourself, especially people you've just met in class, and let them find out things about you that might not otherwise come up in conversation for some time.
And maybe, just maybe, some people would like to put up lots of information about themselves and-- gasp!-- only have it appear to their chosen few (or many). Currently, anything you "like" (which applies to basically everything) will appear in your public profile with no option for limiting that. My boyfriend noticed that in a Google search for his name, posts that he had made to some of those pages came up as well. It shouldn't come down to "Facebook or no FB" just to have the option of some minor privacy (that FB used to afford its users but has been slowly stripping away, and good riddance).
I think that in that case, we ought to put more focus on instilling interest and motivation, giving useful applications for various subjects and/or just try to instill an appreciation for learning for its own sake.
Some things do have to come from a mold. How many people have an "interest" in learning how to spell correctly or write in a fluent manner(consider the number of online posters who don't give a damn if they write actual sentences)?
I am skeptical of most young people's to teach or want to teach themselves anything of value (e.g. basic arithmetic and writing). There's just not that level of context for what skills you will need in life there. How many high schoolers would still opt to do homework if it were all completely optional and tests on that material didn't matter? I know I heard (and uttered) lots of grousing about many of our various assignments, a lot of which were, in the end, helpful.
Maybe they just had genes for infertility that were getting passed around. *shrug*
followed by
"3) Via Online Dating Site 17%
4) Through Bars/Clubs/Other Social Events 11%"
17 > (11*2)? Am I missing something?
I know Apple likes its big press releases for new toys, but anytime something like this happens, I always if it's really just bad luck or a deliberate publicity move.
@Splint Chesthair, you couldn't have just told them "no"? :)
1. There's a ton of things parents can do with/to their children that strangers cannot. For instance, dressing them or bathing them.
2. Your argument is partially based on the flawed assumption that everyone would call the cops. There are, and have been, many parents who have been perfectly fine with a neighbor giving the kid a spank if he had been misbehaving on their watch. Of course, a total stranger off the street randomly grabbing a child and swatting it is very different, but I'm not sure if that's the distinction you're making.
3. I believe the idea is that kids don't have fully developed brains capable of various levels of complex reasoning. An employee can understand a myriad of possibilities for his screw-up, from pay cuts to getting fired, which could lead to losing his home and what about his family, etc. Children don't have that kind of reasoning-- their brains physically just aren't there yet. Ergo, more primitive, simple forms of discipline: pain = bad. Don't touch the lit stove again. Don't (heh) set the garage on fire again.
@felixthecat - "Spanking is abuse. Just like when many of you spankers grow old, and your children hit and punch you."
"Hit and punch" is not not not not the same as spanking. I'd love to see just ONE discussion of spanking that did not resort to conflating a pretty minor swat on the softest, squishiest, most padded part of the body with actual, severe abuse.
Call spanking abuse if you like, but at least try to be honest enough to recognize it's just not on the same level as...everything else, in the same way that getting punched when Daddy's drunk isn't the same as Uncle Diddle playing with you every night of your so-called childhood.
This still sounds like a bad, idea. Also, I can't imagine how this is a better deal (financially and ethically) than getting TAs to do it. It's not like grad students are all that expensive, either.