Here's random information on the life and times, work and play of Eric M. Larson. Some technology, some philosophy, some note-keeping, a little religion, and some "current events," all coming together with the goal to support learning.
A lot of what I do here relates to Google AdSense -- working to make sure that you, the dedicated read, see ads that relate to what you're interested in. Here are some posts that focus on that topic:
Some of you might remember a few months back I blogged about a painting that turned up in a photo of my uncle's living room from the 1960s:
My loving parents were nice enough to buy me a MAIO print -- one that I'd remembered seeing years and years ago at an antique store, and I couldn't believe it was still there. It looks even better than my uncle's, because the green and yellow tones go with the den (it's hanging over my desk as I type this!) but it's a different one than Larry's. I always wondered if the one that my uncle had was a MAIO or just one of a similar style.
On a whim I looked on eBay, and found this one:
That's definitely a MAIO -- they have a photo of the signature in the eBay listing. And the buildings are absolutely identical to the painting my uncle had... if you start counting them from the right. But this painting on eBay right now is wider than my uncle's! The buildings in his just stop as you move from right to left, and the …
Okay, I needed a catchy title. There you go. Here's the issue, quoted in the story Bush administration objects to .xxx domains | CNET News.com: "The Family Research Council, for instance, warned that 'pornographers will be given even more opportunities to flood our homes, libraries and society with pornography through the .xxx domain.' "
How dumb can you get?
If pornographers want to "flood libraries and society" with porn, they can do it plenty-fine now. Don't need any more "opportunities". What a .XXX domain does is allow portions of society (libraries, schools, parents, whatever) to LIMIT the flood, by restricting access to the domain.
Porn is on the internet. It's not going to go away as long as we have a bare minimum of freedoms in this country. So why not attach a modicum of regulation to it, so that we have a better chance of avoiding it?
Yes, the article explains that this is the Bush Administration objecting to the domai…
How would you feel about being charged a fee so you have the option of legally doing something you have no interest in doing in the first place? It would be enough to keep me away from Hampton University, just on principle. According to the article Campuses blocking illegal downloads: "The school signed a contract with Ruckus, a company that will provide students with unlimited music and movie downloads. HU will charge every student who lives on campus a fee of $80 for the service, whether they use it or not."