Sunday, July 26, 2015

Social Media: Twitter Censoring Plagiarism

In the good old days, you could earn Twitter karma from reposting someone else's tweet under your own handle. If you've ever practiced this once socially acceptable charade, the jig is up.

According to TheVerge, Twitter is now intellectual-property-friendly, giving clever quipsters their due credit. If you spot your pun, joke, or one liner under someone else's handle, it's well within your rights to report it. Not that it wasn't within you rights before, as copyright kicks in the moment you write something, but Twitter is responding to the complaints with deletions.

Sunday, July 5, 2015

Opinion: Why I Disagree With The Removal of The Confederate Flag From A Federal Building


While I disagree with the message that having a Confederate flag hanging in from of a state or federal building implies, I don't believe that Ms Newsome's actions were right or justified.

It's the Charlie Hebdo thing all over again, though with fewer hospitalizations. People think that violence is an acceptable justification for offensive speech.


Defacing a building, be it a government building or one owned by a corporation or private individual, by adding, altering, or removing a piece of the property is a form of violence. It may not directly cause harm to come to another person, but the argument could be easily made that indirectly it can and does cause harm.

It's possible that her actions were necessary to open the eyes of other people and start them talking to get the "problem" of offensive speech revised. I'm okay with the talking, but not with the mild violence that occurred to get it to happen.

This post is mirrored on DreamClassier.com

Thursday, July 2, 2015

Health/Art: Recently Re-Viral Is Not The Same As New

"Dangerous new summer trend could increase chances of cancer by 50 percent" says a daunting headline from Fox News 8.

They're talking our sunburn art, which goes re-viral (an internet viral revival) every year as summer hits the northern hemisphere for the past several. Sunburn art is exactly what it sounds like: drawing artistic patterns on your body in sunscreen and then getting the rest sunburned to show off the design. It's partway in the permanence scale between henna and tattooing/branding, depending on your particular skins tolerance and healing rate.

Simple by being published by Fox, the article imparts all manner of dubiousness into the concept. Could increase is not will increase, and everybody's chances are mostly minimal anyway. Don't be taking me for a doctor now, but in years past, I remember hearing the same numbers about just getting a mild tan.

Is getting sunburn art dangerous? Sure, could be, but it's less painful than a tattoo (unless you have sensitive skin), less permanent about a tattoo (so you have fewer regrets later in life, unless you come up a winner in the cancer lottery), but also less healthy than a tattoo (as one down by a professional, not some guy you know working out of his basement).

Fox also went on to say that their "Doctors" claim that "sun block creams work much better than spray." The truth of the matter is that it's a lot easier to under-apply spray than it is to under-apply cream. Mayo Clinic and WebMD agree: the difference between spray and cream is the delivery method, that's all. They also go on to say that the SPF value isn't everything; you need a sunscreen that protects you from both UVA and UVB wavelengths, and though Fox's doctors may try to assure you that any SPF 30 is good enough, once again (and to no particular surprise) they're wrong.