Some times the eye for an eye idea is just to good to be ignored. I think this is one of those cases for those who attacked this kid. Please do not try the argument it just perpetuates the violence, I am not fully convinced that a kinder gentler society has served us so well.
@Curves: Ginger, eh? You know, I would not have guessed on my own, but you know what? Yes...yes this totally fits. Also from now on, you get totally non-offensive red-head jokes. Thusly *ahem*:
Careful, guys! Don't screw with Curves! Clearly she has a hot temper, you see, because the color of the hair that she has on her head is a shade of red, which is also kind of like fire!
@OCEntertainment: Actually, I have a pretty long fuse; it takes a lot to get me mad*, BUT, once I get there, pull up a chair and get comfortable and enjoy the fireworks.
*Cruelty to any innocent person (children, old people, et al) negates this statement, and I will go from Nice to Medieval Mean on your ass in .01 seconds.
I watched South Park at their age and I turned out fine. Anyone who takes South Park seriously at any age is retarded. Do we blame Jodi Foster for John Hinckley trying to kill Regan?
@Yerzriknot: Yeah! Saying to any woman just once "Get back in the kitchen and make me some pie!" will definitely teach you not imitate the behavior on that show.
You say that Facebook and Southpark are two favorite punching bags for people unwilling to blame the attackers.
I agree to an extent.
But should we, as a society, not give even an ounce of thought towards what kinds of messages are being displayed in the media?
Should we not analyse and think about the books, movies, music, cartoons and news that we consume on a daily basis and how it affects us and those around us?
I am not saying we should all become scholars, but it would benefit us greatly, to step back from time to time and think about not only the packaging and instant gratification, but also the content, messages and values we are surrounded by.
We should always make an effort to be active, thinking human beings and not mere passive consumers who don't have an opinion or anything to say.
@Coolmodo: I just wrote a paper on this general subject. The problem is not knowing when to stop. That is, once we decide that some types of messages are to be censored, why not others?
"Censorship leads to more censorship, or as Floyd Abrams, a prominent First Amendment lawyer, said, 'once you're in the business of suppressing speech, the quest for more speech to suppress is endless" (NYT article).'
Unless we as a society are willing to allow much more censorship than we intend, blocking things is bad.
On the other hand, I give you that these things can be problematic. The solution is either to not allow kids to access facebook and other sites, not allow them to watch South Park, or not be stupid enough to take either seriously.
Perhaps "having opinions" is needed - but one should express those opinions only by boundaries set for their kids.
Give the kid minced tiger whiskers to put in the bullies' food. The intense excruciating pain they feel afterward will be sweet sweet revenge. Oh, who couldn't love the Chinese?
There is also the carrying of aromatics out of the beverage through the carbonation, as per the recent articles on champagne bubbles. (e.g. [www.guardian.co.uk]). This only refers to bubbly, but I would be rather surprised if the same principle was not at work in other carbonated beverages. After all, beer and cola are full of aromatics as well. #gizmodoremainders
Wait so nobody felt the need to post about the baby nearly dying because it wasn't 'gadget-related' enough for Gizmodo, but you jumped in with a BREAKING article about a balloon flying away? And then posted 5 more articles about the most retarded hoax ever, even though it didn't have any "cellphone-related mayem?" #gizmodoremainders
@G-Ram: the balloon is actually a really cool gadget (er...was). Apparently once it was filled with helium there was a small electrical current applied to parts of the outer skin to help it navigate. I have no idea of the physics of it all (or even if it would work, since this guy is a bit weird as it is) but that's the story.
Whether or not giz knew that at the time is another thing. I think they just wanted to get a bit more site traffic :) #gizmodoremainders
Wait so this baby stroller video doesn't end with, "Just kidding, the baby was not actually in the stroller and was hiding in an attic" ? #gizmodoremainders
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
#tips
11/24/09
11/24/09
Hell, better yet, I'm starting a "Give Dry-Roasted-Peanuts $5 Day".
11/24/09
11/24/09
cool?
11/24/09
Careful, guys! Don't screw with Curves! Clearly she has a hot temper, you see, because the color of the hair that she has on her head is a shade of red, which is also kind of like fire!
(......Err...I'll practice.)
11/24/09
*Cruelty to any innocent person (children, old people, et al) negates this statement, and I will go from Nice to Medieval Mean on your ass in .01 seconds.
11/24/09
11/24/09
Scotland or Ireland - which one has the most gingers?
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
I agree to an extent.
But should we, as a society, not give even an ounce of thought towards what kinds of messages are being displayed in the media?
Should we not analyse and think about the books, movies, music, cartoons and news that we consume on a daily basis and how it affects us and those around us?
I am not saying we should all become scholars, but it would benefit us greatly, to step back from time to time and think about not only the packaging and instant gratification, but also the content, messages and values we are surrounded by.
We should always make an effort to be active, thinking human beings and not mere passive consumers who don't have an opinion or anything to say.
11/24/09
"Censorship leads to more censorship, or as Floyd Abrams, a prominent First Amendment lawyer, said, 'once you're in the business of suppressing speech, the quest for more speech to suppress is endless" (NYT article).'
Unless we as a society are willing to allow much more censorship than we intend, blocking things is bad.
On the other hand, I give you that these things can be problematic. The solution is either to not allow kids to access facebook and other sites, not allow them to watch South Park, or not be stupid enough to take either seriously.
Perhaps "having opinions" is needed - but one should express those opinions only by boundaries set for their kids.
11/24/09
You're right.
Fox "News" should be taken off the air immediately.
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
10/17/09
10/17/09
10/17/09
and babies #gizmodoremainders
10/17/09
10/17/09
10/17/09
Whether or not giz knew that at the time is another thing. I think they just wanted to get a bit more site traffic :) #gizmodoremainders
10/16/09