bitbol

What parent doesn't have boxes full of pictures of their kids (or nowadays hard drives full). But the problem in the current state of affairs is that people are so wickedly paranoid about everything that they seek to destroy everyone else's sanity because they fear everything. A man photographing his own kids was called a "pervert" when parents started to think that he was taking pictures of other people's kids to post on the internet.

Half of what I don't understand is why people were freaking out in the way that they did. He was confronted simply for taking pictures, not that he was doing anything dodgy. The owners of the slide that his kids were on claim that "Our policy is to ask people taking photos whether they have children on the slide. If they do, then that is fine." However, what the operators don't seem to understand is that even if they don't, there isn't much of any legal action that could be taken.

People think that taking pictures of people that you don't know is a crime, especially when the subject is a child. I find this funny because in my high school photography class one of ours assignments was to take pictures of young and old people. Would you criminalize a class of photography students for taking pictures?

As with any article, the comments that follow it are often more important to read than the article itself. Depending on where you read the article, you get be surprised at people's common sense or appalled at the stupidity of mankind. Here are some from the original article:

I understand the parents concern. I see nothing wrong with the dad telling the other parents of his intent so they could keep their children out of the photo and then extending the same courtesy to the other parents. Normal parents did not create this multi billion dollar industry mess. We have to protect our children the best was we can.
- Lucy MacKay, Georgetown Ky

This poster is quite unrealistic, and leads me to ask many other questions. After her short post, I have to wonder if she herself announces to others that she is taking pictures of her own kids while the play in the park. When you do announce that you are taking pictures of your own kids, doesn't that make you seem just a touch overprotective?

I sympathise totally with Mr Crutchley [the father], I was recently in a country park with my wife and daughter. My wife had gone to buy the three of us some ice cream, and in the meantime my daughter fell over on some play equipment.

I of course picked her up in my arms to soothe her, and within moments a woman had come over to me and asked where the girl's mother was. I could see in her eyes and tone that she was suspicious of me holding a crying girl. The woman absolutely refused to leave our side until my wife returned.

Just like Mr Crutchley says, it spoiled my enjoyment of the day, and made me wary to go anywhere near my own daughter for the rest of the day - ironic in this age where fathers are so often accused of not paying attention to their children.

I cant help but wonder if anyone would have said anything at all if it had been my wife holding my daughter instead of me.
- John Thomas, England

There is an interesting dilemma where father's are being criticized for not being involved with their kids, but then when they are involved (especially in this case, for safety) the worrying parents of other kids condemn them for being near kids in public.

This is a direct result of the NSPCC's campaign over the last few years to spread the fear of abuse and paedophilia. Sadly this has had the side effect of people (i.e. men) being to scared to help if a child is in trouble and also accounts for the huge drop in male primary school teachers and role models.
- R Williams, Aylesbury, UK

It would take my a long time to find it, but there was an article about a father who volunteered his daughter to take part in a study. The girl's job was to sit on a bench in a mall a few feet from a "Missing Children" poster. Almost all people walked right by the girl. When people who walked by were questioned, many (particularly males) said that they were afraid to do anything for fear that other parents would attack for speaking to a child.

The study proved two things, that no one tried to abduct a child sitting by themself on a bench, and that had the child really been missing nothing would have been done.

On the BoingBoing mention of this article, there are general level-headed people who see what is worng in the situation, being that a father can't even take pictures of his own kids:

It is rather sad. My wife worked as a lunch supervisor at an elementary school. Being a "small town" person and having a flock of younger siblings in her youth she would give crying kids who'd bumped heads or dropped their deserts a hug or pat on the back. Her supervisor said that just wasn't done - there would be no touching whatsoever.

From this I assume that the proper thing to do if you find a child needing help is to review the situation and determine f there is a non-contact way of helping them. If not, just walk away or phone 911 to have properly trained and bonded staff initiate human to human contact - providing parental permission has been arranged.
- Woodwose

Especially in elementary aged kids, I don't see where it is beneficial to the children that the teacher is prohibited from making any contact with the child, even if the child is hurt. I would bet that most of those children feel better because of the comforting that they got from the teacher. It's not like a teacher would do anything intentionally wrong because it would ruin their career if they did inappropriately touch a child. A hand on the shoulder isn't going to kill a child.

Speaking of protocols for teachers, it is ridiculous what they have teachers doing. One of the teacher that I had wore latex gloves so that she could put on a band-aid. A gym teacher I had once told us about how a parent thanked him for not following the "correct" protocol for emergencues. An ice-skating boy slipped and cut his wrist. If the teacher had spent time to look for gloves, the boy would have likely bled to death. Instead, the teacher reacted quickly and saved the boy's life.

I am a woman, (hence the name, cranky old woman) and my grandson is on a junior soccer league. So, every Saturday morning, I go to take pictures of his game, and I am subject to a lot of evil looks as well. It's kinda difficult to take just pics of him, when there are nine other kids on the field. I took some pics of him once playing with the next door neighbors, and when I gave some copies to the parents, they were quite rude, and told me they did not want me to photograph their boys. I was hurt, stunned and insulted. But, I am trying to decide how I might have reacted were I in their shoes. Must I be constantly sizing everyone I meet with a camera as a child molester? I guess I can no longer assume others good intentions.
- Cranky old woman

Given the fact that the grandparent was the neighbor, and that it would (should?) be one of the people that you know the best, it is crazy that a parent would be so defenisive about it considering that it is perfectly acceptable to take pictures of your grandkids. When I was a kid, I would spend hours at a time at my neighbors house with her grandkids, and that was one of the few places that I felt totally comfortable. As a kid, I would think nothing of it if she was taking pictures of her grandkids and I playing together.

My friend was taking pictures of me at a park while i was wandering around looking at flowers under the influence of something or other. Some little (adoreable) demon kid ran up and started throwing grass at us. Whatever, He wasn't hurting us and we were laughing about it. So my friend starts taking pictures of the kids, and THEN the mom comes over.

Guess which aspect of the situation concerned her most? Her kid throwing shit at strangers? or photography.

As long as kids are fucking adoreable, shutterbugs will take pictures of them.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/captaintim/2644448055/
- Cpt. Tim

This is completely valid. Many kids, like my nephew, will run to the camera seeking to have their picture taken. And it's not like people don't take picture of random kids. If you see a group of kids at a park doing something completely silly, there is nothing wrong with taking a picture to remember that silliness. I have taken pictures of kids before when I was at airshows. Planes can only be interesting for so long, then the interest as a photographer is drawn to pictures of people enjoying the show, which includes kids.


As a teenager myself, I am fresh out of the age where even my own mother fit into the "unhealthy paranoia" category. I play soccer about twice a week with a drop-in group. My mom always worried about the whole child predator thing and was always warning me to be careful, and thankfully, I have never once listened to her about this. The group that I play with consists of primarily me and one of my best friends, and the rest are primarily adult males. Have I ever once felt uncomfortable around them? No.

After nearly a year with this group and nothing happening, my mom has finally calmed down. This might also have to do with the fact that she just randomly dropped in once to watch, which was rather annoying because the stare of my parents creeps me out more than anything else.

Labels: America, Kids, News, People, Rants, Stupidity

ABC News ran a variation to the previous story, one that varied slightly from the one that I posted two days ago. This article includes some of the details about the school and their response, including this little gem:

"The principal did not list any information other than students' names on her personal call list, and she certainly did not specify the sexual orientation of any student," said Van D. Turner, Jr., associate general counsel of the Memphis City Schools Board of Education, in a statement provided to ABCNEWS.com. "Additionally, the list was never posted publicly anywhere at the school."

Listing the couples together and then claiming that the school never specified sexual orientation is nonsense. Almost no one is stupid enough to not make the decision. Also, the school claims that the list was not publicly posted, however, the ACLU says that it was perfectly in view of anyone in the office.

The response that I have seen from places like Digg is also amusing. Some of the responses are either ignorant, or otherwise blind to the point of the story.

It isn't private when there is PDA in the hallways.

The thing is, there was an influx of response from the rest of the student body, which obviously means that not that many people were aware of it before. Also, the school was seeking out the names of couples, even if there was never an issue of PDA.

They want to be treated as equals, don't they? Then there shouldn't be anything wrong with outing them as well as the other heterosexual couples.

Many of the comments on Digg are about treating the two boys as any of the other students, but they fail to note the consequences that happen as a result of the fact that the school went as far as to contact parents, who were unaware that their child was gay. Ideally, it should matter, but the fact is that parents may freak out a little when they are dealt a considerable piece of news such as "your son is dating another boy." Which leads me to one of the only thoughtful comments that I saw:

Oh right, because gay couples have never been the victims of discrimination and harassment, sure, lets just just throw them to the hateful bigots and blame them for their own fate. Lets just ignore all the cases where homosexual teens have been bullied, killed and committed suicide just so we can sit on our high horses and mock them for wanting to be treated as human beings.

Unfortunately, there are fewer smart people, such as this one, and more intolerant like the two further above. I think the problem lies in the fact that people don't know how to put themselves in the position of someone else. Unfortunately, this is the world we live in.

Labels: America, Gay, Kids, News, People, School, Stupidity

In Memphis, Tennessee, a principal has created a stir after she asked staff to compile a list of couples. The object was to cut back on the public displays of affection in the school. However, in the process, the principal outed two boys who had just started dating. From the article:

She's accused of publicly posting the names of those students, including two boys, Andrew and Nicholas, who had just started dating. The ACLU says that in doing so, Beasley revealed their relationship to other students, teachers and even their parents.

This story has ruffled the feathers of many, regardless of whether or not they support equal rights for gays. On one side is the argument that exposing these two boys has wrecked a significant portion of their high school career, but also the idea that regardless of sexual orientation, the principal sought to compile a list of all of the people who were dating, something many saw as a perverse abuse of authority.

Nicholas says his teachers and other students treat him differently as a result of Principal Beasley's decision and that he and Andrew have both had to deal with verbal assaults. Nicholas was also not allowed to go on a trip to New Orleans to help rebuild homes because, as one of his teacher's explained, he would "embarrass" the school by engaging in gay affection.

First off, I think that the school must be incredibly intolerant if the sheer presence of a gay couple offends anyone. I can understand the intention behind wanting to cut back on displays of affection in the way that students should not be making out in the middle of the hall, but simple hand-holding or likewise is no bid deal and should be ignored.

This principal had very poor foresight to think that publishing a list would accomplishing in the way of stopping displays of affection. For one, those on the list would likely be the ones who are already very public in their relationship. The only surprise may come in the form of who is if they are bring caught having a public display of affection, there obviously isn't a problem, but this principal sought to make it a problem.

Another significant issue to ponder is how the staff came to know about the two boys' relationship in the first place. To me, it almost sounds as though they had sought out a teacher for help given the circumstances, but that teacher turned them over and betrayed their trust (only an educated guess). How many false positives are on that list? In some friendships, their is a very fine line between what would be considered a friendship and what is dating.

These kids are bring taught that having any physical contact with someone, even someone that they care for is a bad thing. These kids are being taught that the only accepted form is one that they dictate. The principal is endorsing intolerance. Teachers are often tolerant of the intolerance in schools. Even when a student makes a racial slur or some other direct attack, teachers often sit back and doing nothing to correct the situation. If nothing else, their involvement is often limited to "don't say that again."

My school is just beginning to try to address the issue of racism in a school were the students are very tolerant of race. My school is primarily white, but there are some minorities, which according to our school newspaper, feel as though they are bring alienated. However, the school is addressing the wrong problem. They think that we (as whites) are being intolerant of the minorities when it is the minorities who are backing away from social interaction by choice. Aside from racial minorities, there is nothing being done to create an atmosphere of tolerance. The students are doing a better job than the school; it is the school that gets in the way of everything.

Labels: America, Gay, Kids, News, People, School, Stupidity

Airport security in this country is the biggest joke. A mother was detained over a cup of water for her infant son. Meanwhile, there are consistent stories where agencies will bring in potentially dangerous material, and get through.

In the US, airport security isn't about actually making things safe, but pretending to be doing so. What are the odds that someone will blow-up a plane with a sippy-cup? Toothpaste tube? Nail-clippers? Book? What happened to a little common sense?

I heard somewhere that the reason security is so bad is because it is reactive. Security only checks things that have been used before. Shoe bomb: take off your shoes. Liquids: surrender your water bottle. They don't actively prevent anything, only react to the existing concerns.

Labels: America, News, Stupidity

Roy Pearson, a judge, sued a Korean couple running a dry-clean business in DC for losing his pants. Not only is suing over pants ridiculous, he wanted $65M. Now, the worst has happened: he cried over his pants in court. A disgusting example of a man abusing the legal system. From the article:

As Pearson explained that those weren't the pants for the suit, he choked up and left the courtroom crying after asking [Judge] Bartnoff for a break.

This guy does not at all sound like a stable enough person to effectively preside as a judge. Because of this case, he is making a very mockery of the system he is supposed to be upholding. Based on this, I would suggest that someone from that region push for his disbarment. You can't have a loony like this and expect anything to be fair.

Labels: America, Legal, News, Stupidity

"Dubya" Bush is threatening to veto a bill^[1] that would extend the definition of hate crimes to include crimes based on sexual orientation and gender. From the article:

Just two days after the second veto of George W. Bush's presidency, the White House has threatened a third.

This time it involves a bill that expands hate crime laws to include violent attacks against people because of their sexual orientation or gender, passed by the House Thursday on a 237-180 vote. Current law applies to acts of violence on the basis of race, religion, color or national origin.

The Whitehouse defends themselves saying that such laws already exist at the local level, but that is hardly an excuse. As if denying marriage to gays wasn't enough, the Bush administration doesn't even want to protect them from violence. Who cares if it exists at the local level, make it national; it's not like it will damage the legal system.

Footnote: [1] The page is a composite of multiple stories. Headline is: "House passes hate crimes bill that includes sexual orientation, gender."

Labels: America, Gay, Legal, News, Stupidity

Bush doesn't give up. He has vetoed the Iraq spending bill that would mandate a pull-out date. Now, officially, any lack of funding can be blamed on Bush's mishandling of the war. From the article:

WASHINGTON - President Bush vetoed legislation to pull U.S. troops out of Iraq Tuesday night in a historic showdown with Congress over whether the unpopular and costly war should end or escalate.

I desperately want to see Congress override Bush's veto, but it will be hard to sway the Bushies. I have a strong feeling that because of their backing of the Iraq war, many republican candidates will fail. It is near impossible to imagine any kind of justification for the war. Democrats will likely succeed because they are fighting to stop the war.

ThinkProgress has published some statistics of before and after "Mission Accomplished". What exactly was the "mission" that we accomplished? And why are we still there if it is accomplished? Why are so many more dead afterward?

Labels: America, News, Politics, Stupidity

Anyone who has ever flown knows that the security at airports is a hassle. Neil Godfrey was trying to fly to Phoenix to meet his parents. Little did he know, the book that he was reading would land him on the no-fly list. It took ten to twelve people to "inspect" the book.

They told him he could fly, only to be denied by the airline later, for three reasons:

The first reason, she said, was that Godfrey was reading a book with an illustration of a bomb on the cover. Secondly, she said, he purchased his ticket on Sept. 11. (Godfrey bought the ticket on Priceline.com shortly after midnight, at least eight hours before the World Trade Center was attacked).

The last was reference to his drivers license, which the employee consistently referred to as expired, as she pointed at the issue data. He left, got another flight, and then tried again, but was pulled aside to be interrogated. Needless to say, he didn't fly.

Now the thing that I find disgusting about all of this is that a book stopped him from flying. Also the fact that they pulled "ten to twelve" people from their jobs to "inspect" said book. When the airlines finally step away from their "list of know terrorists", they come after books. What harm can you do to a flight with a book? They are more shady characters than the ones carrying books.

Labels: America, Books, News, People, Stupidity

Two secret service officers were injured as another officer shot them both, accidentally. It one thing if someone else shot them, but the agency is shooting itself. From the article:

Two Secret Service officers were injured on Tuesday after a gun held by another Secret Service officer accidentally fired inside the White House gate, according to a spokesman, Darrin Blackford.

Just who we want to be holding the guns in those dire situations, a guy who misfires and shoots his own teammates. I really makes you trust the officers to be able to protect, or end up accidentally killing you. It's like trusting the gun safety officer who shot himself.

Labels: America, News, People, Stupidity

President Bush wants everything his way, and when he couldn't get one of his people approved, he took advantage of the Senate being on leave and used his power to appoint an ambassador without Senate approval. This is democracy at its best.

To me, it is apparently obvious that Bush has his own agenda and he doesn't care what the public thinks as long as he gets what he wants. He pushes for a troop surge that makes no sense, and insists that "he knows best," but he doesn't. I can't wait until 2008 when he is gone. Just about anyone (other than Cheney) could handle things better than Bush has over the last seven years. [via digg]

Labels: America, News, Stupidity

As part of a questionable legislation in Michigan, students may be given iPods as "educational materials". The program will cost $38 million to the already financially struggling state. None of this makes any sense at all.

Michigan has already cut millions of dollars from schools in an effort to try to balance the budget. Now, they are making the most ass-backward decision they could possibly make. As much as I like iPods, there is no educational value to it. What stops kids from just putting music on it?

The only option that makes any sense is to provide lectures and such on them, but even then, that could simply be done through the school website. If that were the goal, the lectures should simply be downloadable so that students can access them at home.

Another option for saving money would be to get rid of most of the teachers presently there. Many of the teachers at my school are just waiting until they can retire. Until then, they offer no value to the school, and many are simply a waste of time.

Labels: America, iPod, School, Stupidity

It's a funny thing that the military is always begging for recruits, but they reject, or in this case, redicule potential recruits. What kind of barbaric country do we live in? It's not legal to discriminate by gender or racial background, how is being gay any different?

People are willing to fight to defend their country, voluntarily (not me), but the government denies them. Meanwhile, recruiters are tricking people by telling them they won't see combat so that there are enough people. It doesn't make any sense. How can beg for people to defend the country, but then reject people who are willing and capable?

Labels: America, Gay, News, People, Stupidity

Another unfortunate business blunder. A couple was refused from a hotel because they were gay. Just more inconsiderate people. From the article:

"We were inquiring about the price, deposits, extra person fee, and she asked who the room was going to be for, and I said for my partner and I," Pickel said. “She said, 'Oh we don't rent to multiple people of the same sex.' I said, so you don't rent to gay couples? She said, 'No, we don't rent to gay people at all.'"

It is ridiculous that people think that it is alright to do such a thing. They are not allowed to discriminate based on sex, race, or many other criteria, but how is being gay any different? A little tolerance would be nice.

Labels: America, Gay, News, People, Stupidity

If you have Linux on your HP computer, they might just refuse to honor your warranty. A woman contacted HP because her keyboard acted up. She was told they wouldn't help because she was using Linux. From the article:

When she called Compaq -- the unit comes with a one-year warranty on the hardware -- they asked what operating system she was running. When she told them Linux, they said, "Sorry, we do not honor our hardware warranty when you run Linux." In order to get warranty service, she was told, she would have to remove Linux and reinstall the original OS.

This doesn't bode well for HP's thought preloading Linux (link: mentioned at bottom). They can't sell something they outright reject. Overall though, that is terrible customer service. The way I see it, they do that because the documentation they sift through only work in Windows.

Labels: Computer, Linux, Microsoft, Stupidity

Every once and a while, something hilarious comes from stupid people. In this case, it is a person pretending that they know about computers. Excerpt:

If [Linux's ability to run without windows] were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling computers without a windows. This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations. I hope you realise that windows is more than just Office ? Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive. A lot of people dont realise this.

This person seems to believe that because it is not mass distributed through vendors, that it is not an operating system. He also seems to think that there is possible way that Linux can run without windows because a there's no way Linux "could just snap into existence overnight."

There are also comical responses to this posting:

Wow this is the funniest thing I've read in literally days.... I mean.. you were able to form complete sentences and avoid most spelling errors so I'd imagine you're not mentally handicapped, but GOD DAMN you missed the mark on that one....

Even my dad laughed at the article, and he has limited knowledge of computers. It's incredible that people can use computers, but not even be aware of the existence of alternatives.

Labels: Computer, Linux, Microsoft, People, Stupidity

The Record Industry Association of America (RIAA) has made another landmark case for why they should cease to exist. The RIAA is now suing a family who has no internet access, and doesn't even own a computer. The strange case is be blamed on the fact that the "illegal" act may have been from the previous owner of the house.

I find it baffling that a such corporate giant could be so careless in the way they handle their business. It seems like the RIAA is so hit or miss (more often miss) that the government should make them more accountable for themselves. Then again, the FBI doesn't even live up to that.

Labels: America, News, Stupidity

The United Stupidity Patent Office (USPO) has decided that file sharing programs are a risk to national security. The USPO seems to miss the point; the threat is not the program, it's the person using it. From the document:

For the Federal Government, this threat became manifest during 2005, when the Department of Homeland Security warned all Federal Agencies that government employees or contractors who had installed filesharing programs on their home or work computers had repeatedly compromised national and military security by "sharing" files containing sensitive or classified data.

Right here, on page ii, they practically admit that it is the people working in the government that is the problem. They are installing programs notorious for spyware and other bundled crap, and to top that, on government computers. Nice to see that they are passing the blame instead of fixing the problem. [via slashdot]

Labels: America, News, Stupidity