News and Current Events - 2013 to 2014

[doodler]

I think this is a wise observation. I quote it here because I believe it's something we all, myself included, need to keep in mind and be reminded of from time to time.

I'd be interested in knowing how a poster can protect himself from someone else's thought process (or lack thereof.)

[Jeff Wrangler]

I'd be interested in knowing how a poster can protect himself from someone else's thought process (or lack thereof.)

You can't really, I guess, but you can think carefully about what you've written, and how it might be interpreted by others, and try to put yourself in a reader's place, before you hit "Post."

[doodler]

The gorilla/elephant/whale shark in the room is the use of this technology by employers and insurance providers to control employees' and clients' private lives, and that's what's getting too little attention.

Last week, a 60 Minutes report was on facial recognition technology and how far it has come in the hands of non-government organizations (read that commercial enterprise) and how far it is lagging IN government use because of privacy laws. It was NOT used to identify the Boston bombers, for instance. I don't get it. Banks and stores and google can use all this stuff willy-nilly but the FBI, CIA and other law enforcement initials can't. People have their backs up about DNA collection,  voter id laws, traffic cameras, etc. Seems overly paranoid to me.

[Sara B]

You can't really, I guess, but you can think carefully about what you've written, and how it might be interpreted by others, and try to put yourself in a reader's place, before you hit "Post."

And conversely think carefully about what the writer has said and the ways in which it could be interpreted....

[Paul029]

I'm mystified that you took my, what to me was a completely innocuous, comment "on the chin". 

I was tempted, once upon a time, to change my online name to either "Someone" or “Another Poster.” 
Then I decided that I might be held accountable for any number of horrors, so refrained. 

Did you feel slighted because I couldn't remember who had posted about the train disaster?

No, Gil, I didn’t feel slighted, nor was I “angry, annoyed, resentful, irritated or even vexed.”
I accepted that you had no idea who’d posted something about what’d happened in Lac Mégantic, so it was water off a duck’s back—no worries, mate.

The thing about perceived subtle intonations is that they are often projections by the reader.   Like Linda mentioned a while back, we read the words without visual and aural cues so it’s easy to do...

The choice of words, and the way they’re put together to form a sentence (if they are, that is), is usually a good clue, irrespective of visual issues.
Emoticons, although ostensibly used to help convey and/or clarify meaning, can also be employed sarcastically.
I’ve wondered what purpose the Devil icon, for instance, is meant to fulfil; are we meant to interpret it as something whimsical and facetious, or as evil incarnate?

[Paul029]

And conversely think carefully about what the writer has said and the ways in which it could be interpreted....

Exactly, Sara.

[killersmom]

Iowa grants permits for blind residents to carry guns in public

Sheriffs and advocates are divided on whether that's a good idea.

Here’s some news that has law enforcement officials and lawmakers scratching their heads:

Iowa is granting permits to acquire or carry guns in public to people who are legally or completely blind.

No one questions the legality of the permits. State law does not allow sheriffs to deny an Iowan the right to carry a weapon based on physical ability.

The quandary centers squarely on public safety. Advocates for the disabled and Iowa law enforcement officers disagree over whether it’s a good idea for visually disabled Iowans to have weapons.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20130908/NEWS/309080061/Iowa-grants-permits-for-blind-residents-to-carry-guns-in-public?Frontpage&nclick_check=1

[Marge_Innavera]

"Wastewater from the controversial practice of fracking appears to be linked to all the earthquakes in a town in Ohio that had no known past quakes, research now reveals. . . . A furious debate has erupted over the safety of the practice. Advocates claim fracking is a safe, economical source of clean energy, while critics argue that it can taint drinking water supplies, among other problems.

"One of the most profitable areas for fracking lies over the geological formation known as the Marcellus Shale, which reaches deep underground from Ohio and West Virginia northeast into Pennsylvania and southern New York. The Marcellus Shale is rich in natural gas; geologists estimate it may contain up to 489 trillion cubic feet (13.8 trillion cubic meters) of natural gas, more than 440 times the amount New York State uses annually. Many of the rural communities living over the formation face economic challenges and want to attract money from the energy industry.

"Before January 2011, Youngstown, Ohio, which is located on the Marcellus Shale, had never experienced an earthquake, at least not since researchers began observations in 1776. "


http://www.nbcnews.com/science/fracking-practices-blame-ohio-earthquakes-8C11073601

[doodler]

The latest national poll shows
85% -- For
  9% -- Against
  6% -- Undecided
Should Congress be sent to Syria

[Paul029]

Iowa is granting permits to acquire or carry guns in public to people who are legally or completely blind....

Interesting article, Linda.

No one questions the legality of the permits. State law does not allow sheriffs to deny an Iowan the right to carry a weapon based on physical ability.

The quandary centers squarely on public safety. Advocates for the disabled and Iowa law enforcement officers disagree over whether it’s a good idea for visually disabled Iowans to have weapons.

The National Federation of the Blind does not track states that require vision tests as part of weapon permit processes and has not taken an official stand on the issue.

But its members are generally opposed to such laws, said Chris Danielsen, director of public relations for the group.

“There’s no reason solely on the (basis) of blindness that a blind person shouldn’t be allowed to carry a weapon,” Danielsen said. “Presumably they’re going to have enough sense not to use a weapon in a situation where they would endanger other people, just like we would expect other people to have that common sense.”

The presumption that blind people would have “enough sense” to use a weapon where it wouldn’t endanger people seems to miss the point, mainly,
 • why would blind people need to carry weapons in public at all; but also,
 • how would they even know whether there were people around when they were shooting at things in public? Would it be because they were moving? What if they're not moving?

Does Danielson mean that a "sensible" blind person would be entitled to shoot at something in public which wasn't a person?
And what if they missed such a "non-person thing" and hit a person?

Jane Hudson, executive director of Disability Rights Iowa, who says blocking visually impaired people from the right to obtain weapon permits would violate the Americans with Disabilities Act...believes [that] changing the state law to deny blind people or others with physical disabilities the right to carry arms would violate federal disability law.

I agree with Jane. It would be a terrible violation of their rights if Iowans with other physical disabilities (such as being without arms) were denied the right to carry arms.

[doodler]

Once again some do-gooder organization is crying foul before anybody has claimed to be discriminated against.
Has any blind Iowan applied for and been denied a permit?

As for how reasonable it is to let visually impaired people carry guns, in this state you must take and pass gun handling classes to get a permit. Accuracy at shooting targets is part of the test.

I wonder what kind of tests drone operators, blind or otherwise, have to pass.

[killersmom]

The latest national poll shows
85% -- For
  9% -- Against
  6% -- Undecided
Should Congress be sent to Syria

Not that I am disagreeing with the authors of this poll, but I guess I have been discussing the Syrian situation with the 9%.
I had not realized the numbers had fluctuated so much from a couple of weeks ago.

[killersmom]

Anyone have any thoughts about the latest George Zimmerman debacle?

Did he do all the things his soon to be ex wife claimed he did in the 911 call, that she is now recanting?
Can't they arrest her for filing a false police report?

I am not defending him. It seems he is either acting weirdly to attract the attention or he is being watched more closely since the acquittal.

[CellarDweller115]

Not that I am disagreeing with the authors of this poll, but I guess I have been discussing the Syrian situation with the 9%.  I had not realized the numbers had fluctuated so much from a couple of weeks ago.

Linda, I believe that's a "joke poll"...the last line says 'should Congress be sent to Syria'.

[killersmom]

Oh I just thought that was part of the poll.