Tech that Matters – You (or your kids) could be arrested for texting in a text-free zone!!!? (snark)

Mind your manners, people – a 14-year-old girl was reportedly charged with disorderly conduct for refusing to cease texting in class and then hiding the phone down her pants.

The real question here: will they forcibly collect her DNA for this misdemeanor?

Today, 641 (mostly) small-market TV stations will no longer broadcast analog signals, while many others delay until the new deadline (June 12) set by President Obama.

For those of you who still view “over-the-air” Television and do not have an HDTV, now would be a good time to get your hands on a set-top box to act as a digital tuner.

P.S. My apologies for any “regular” readers out there who missed my regular Monday blog. “Things” have been crazy while Gwen and I ramp up our efforts to buy a home.

Lee Bains over at Switched first turned me on to this story, Washington State lawmakers are pushing to have a controversial proposal approved by Legislature
Suspects arrested in cases as minor as shoplifting would have to give a DNA sample before they are even charged with a crime if a controversial proposal is approved by the Legislature.
There are a number of issues that I have with this: practical, ethical and legal.

1. Doesn’t the justice system cost tax-payers enough already without taking DNA samples from every shoplifter? As Lee says, “Can’t we just put aside our creepy ‘Brave New World’ ideas until after the economic crisis?”
2. DNA says A LOT about someone. It can indicate certain traits and conditions, flaws, propensities towards certain behaviors. What if Jimmy and Bobby Jimmerson are arrested on suspicion of illegal drug usage and Jimmy’s DNA reveals that he might have a propensity towards using addictive substances while Bobby’s does not. Furthermore, let’s say there’s no other evidence that either has committed any crime. What now? Should what makes up a person cause Jimmy to be charged, but his brother let free? What are the risks associated with maintaining a DNA database of so many people? What are the risks of this data being stolen or misused? Do these risks outweigh the benefits?
3. What happened to “Innocent until proven guilty”? I’m sure that this policy would make solving crimes much easier. Torturing those we arrest would also expedite the process, as would eliminating the need for a warrant before performing a search-and-seizure. I think you get my point – that DNA collection provides convenience for law enforcement efforts should not be reason enough for infringing on our 4th amendment rights.
   

   “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” (emphasis mine, courtesy of FindLaw.com

   I can’t help but feel that taking DNA samples from those arrested, before they are even charged with a crime is an unreasonable search, is not justified under the “special needs exception” and is therefore unconstitutional.

Read more after the jump!

More »

“Tech that Matters” – if you can make a Mii on the Nintendo Wii, you can get job as a sketch artist for the police department in Kanagawa, Japan.

Mii Police Sketch

Sure, sketch artists might be able to create a more accurate likeness, but a Mii should be close enough for an arrest, right?

Apparently the Police have denied responsibilty for this poster, but… well… meh.

I blogged earlier about our tendency, as humans, to reveal more than we ought in on-line communication through portals like Facebook, Twitter, etc. Yet, these are but a few of the ways in which we often fail to safeguard the rights to privacy that we defend and claim to cherish. A NY Times article says that researchers refer to this as the “privacy paradox”.

normally sane people have inconsistent and contradictory impulses and opinions when it comes to their safeguarding their own private information.

Today, Google announced a new service called Google Latitude – a new service for mobile devices and “iGoogle” that allows users to views the location of their friends and loved ones (who have opted to share the information). It’s a pretty cool idea – basically you (the user) can opt to other specified users to see your geographic location and vice-versa. Purportedly, this information can be adjusted per “friend” to show the best approximation of your location, a city-level view, hide your location entirely or even to provide intentional false information. “No honey, I’m not out boozing it up with the guys… I’m… at work… <typetypetype> … check Latitude.”

<keep reading after the jump!>

More »

Too much Facebook makes all teenage girls depressed.

Chris Matyszczyk wrote a CNET article, disagreeing with a study done by Stony Brook University, which claims that:

excessive co-rumination–perhaps you would refer to it as “chatting with your friends about your problems”–by text, e-mail and on social-networking sites leaves impressionable teenage girls more prone to anxiety and depression.

He claims that if it wasn’t Facebook it would be “bathroom gossip”, text messages, phone calls, slumber parties… you get the picture. Having never been a teenage girl myself, I can’t really attest to this (hopefully Chris cannot either?), but it seems to me that the persistent and “open” nature of Facebook goes beyond text messaging and slumber parties and is asking for trouble. Not just for teenage girls or even the female gender – I think it can be a problem for anyone.

<keep reading after the jump!>

More »

So… time to genereate some readership in my friendly little blog. Unfortunately this blog is not topical at all and thus, doomed to failure. However, Seth Godin has a pretty good little (big) list of things to do to increase traffic.

Perhaps just posting more frequently than once every 3 months? hmm…

Edit: I forgot to include a link to the list in my original post, so here it is: How to Get Traffic For Your Blog

Candi posted a pretty hilarious (and tragic) story about trying to shop for a bathing suit (why do we still call them “bathing suits”? I mean, seriously… ) with her 2 year old. I shed a few tears while reading… had to post.

So… yeah… Gwen and I were eating dinner at Texas Roadhouse tonight for our annual “We don’t care about the Super Bowl so let’s go out and eat while the restaurants are deserted” experience. We were talking about the usual (for us) – Babies. It was during this conversation that it came to light that I have never – ever – changed a diaper. Gwen thought that was pretty funny – I told her that I could probably figure it out. How hard could it be… right? RIGHT?!

Hmm… well, I’m not so sure now. So… I decided to Google it. The results seemed information, but not very interesting. I then proceeded to search for “change diaper” on YouTube and within say… 30 seconds? … I was rapidly closing my browser window. I then went back to “the Google” and found my way to an informative article.

Here are some of the most important steps, quoted for your convenience:

1. Make sure you have everything you need nearby to change a diaper.
2. Lay your baby on his back on the changing surface. If you are using a changing table, it’s recommended to use the safety straps.

Wait, wait, wait… safety straps? This is getting out of hand. Perhaps I will just try my luck.

Meh.

I purchased Call of Duty: World at War (COD:WAW) last week from STEAM and have spent quite a few hours playing both the single and multi-player modes of the game. World at War is a return to World War II (WWII) for the Call of Duty series – a change that I welcome after having spent a few years away from first person shooters (FPS) set in that time.

The single-player mode was not earth-shattering – the genre has not been radically enhanced as a result of this game… but I don’t feel it has been degraded either. The game play is solid enough, though the scripted “Infinite troops rushing until you reach the next checkpoint” nature does feel a bit forced on occasion.

The sniper levels were a bit too short for my liking and without any real “use” at the end of the day. No grandiose assassinations or organizations that only “I” can tumble. Still… enjoyable.

Playing “gunner” on an amphibious plane, rescuing sailors in-between gunning down Japanese “PT boats”. I can only imagine having to make the decision between continuing to fire on enemy boats or reaching down to grab the sailor in the water screaming for help… wow.

The multiplayer… meh… the leveling is almost too fast – compared to Call of Duty 4, at least. I’m already on my third “prestige level”. One thing I have enjoyed is the surprised expressions I imagine on enemy’s faces when a “Private” lead the opposing team.

The weapons are all familiar to anyone who’s playing a WWII FPS before, the BAR, the M1 Garand, the Thompson and the MP40… even the Springfield sniper rifle complete with scope. What’s new to the scene are the “perks” (introduced with COD4 I believe?) that add a new dimension to the “same old” gameplay. That… and the freakin’ dogs! Get 6 kills in a row and you’re entitled to a pack of dogs that fights for you… running around the battlefield mauling enemies who aren’t fast enough to “pump them full of lead”. The dogs are much more effective at killing that “you” are… if they get within reach they automatically kill you sending you to a quick “kill cam” shot of your death repeated for your viewing pleasure.

Summary: worth some play time, especially if you’re new to the Call of Duty series, but don’t expect it to change the first-person shooter genre.