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.

Anyone remember the James Bond Jr. cartoon? Ah… Saturday Morning Cartoons how I miss thee!!!

Ahhh… memories. I’m going to see “Quantum of Solace” in about… 15-17 minutes at the exclusive “Westminster Town Mall Regal Cinema” (which is *not* available for on-line ticketing I might add – to give you an idea of just how exclusive it truly is). I expect the following:

• A theme/intro song which involves some sort of techno/sultry beat to which silhouettes of naked women will dance
• A 2-5 minute intro scene that we won’t realize it part of the plot until half-way through the movie
• Another scene where the new James Bond shows us how “fit” he is, by jumping around on some buildings or doing step-aerobics.
• A quick introduction of a sexy, scantily clad women (perhaps with some sort of scratch on her face from a recent fight, complete with small drop of blood) that James Bond will be forced to sleep with.
• Some sort of deception or lie from someone close to James Bond
• A scene where “M” expresses her disappointment with his action (“I’m not mad… I’m just dissapointed”, anyone?)
• Some sort of vengeful killing on the part of James Bond (Just like Luke Skywalker and every other user of the “Light” side of the force… he’s a weakling until he gets mad)
• A high-speed chase involving a car and/or boat and/or helicopter
• Lots of weaponry, all of which James Bond is proficient in using
• Some sort of misplaced Computer Science theory or reference (including an operating system that doesn’t exist on some sort of Corporate Sponsor computer like Dell or Apple)
• A remarkable escape
• A sweet and sour ending

Tune in next post to see if my predictions were accurate

“My perfect date? I take the girl out for a nice dinner. She looks stunning. but then, some guy tries to hit on her… so I grab him and throw him into a jukebox. But the other ninja has a knife… so I take her home… As I kiss her goodnight, I hear something in the leaves, and I flip her around. She gets a poison arrow right in the back…” — Dwight K. Schrute (The Office)

More »

You: “Hey, thanks for picking me up at the airport.”

Me: “No problem. It’s the least I could do.”

Let’s assume that you’re “You” and I’m “Me” (a stretch… I know) – don’t you just want to slug “Me” at this point? Heck yes, you do. Why is that an acceptable response for “Me”? Why would you ever want to tell someone that whatever favor you’re doing is really just the least that you could do for them? That in essence you had to do them the favor, because it was the absolute minimum for maintaining whatever sort of relationship you have. Like “You” are supposed to somehow feel good about that? Is it a humility thing? Is it that really the “favor” is a big inconvenience for “Me”, but “I” am unable to articulate it?

Why isn’t it socially unacceptable for the conversation to go like this:

You: “Hey, thanks for picking me up at the airport.”

Me: “You’re welcome. It was a big deal, but you’re worth it to me.”

??

Note: this rant has no implications to any persons real or imagined.

I press onward in the name of progress – I have countered my whopping .2 pound gain from last week and am now down an additional .2 pounds. So… put that in your back pocket! I’m the man! Yesssss!

/cry

I was hoping it would take me less than 10 weeks to lose 1 pound… unfortunately that seems to be the track I’m on. Let me ask you – would you buy a book from an author that “claims” to have a diet guaranteed to help you take off “1 pound in less than 2 months!”?? I think not. =(

oh well… progress is progress. Look out Gwen – I’m coming for ya’!