Blog: The absolute latest random thoughts
Kari Byron news
09.2002 10.2002 11.2002 12.2002 01.2003 02.2003 03.2003 04.2003 05.2003 06.2003 07.2003 08.2003 09.2003 10.2003 11.2003 12.2003 01.2004 02.2004 03.2004 04.2004 05.2004 06.2004 07.2004 08.2004 09.2004 10.2004 11.2004 12.2004 01.2005 02.2005 03.2005 04.2005 05.2005 06.2005 07.2005 08.2005 09.2005 10.2005 11.2005 12.2005 01.2006 02.2006 03.2006 04.2006 05.2006 06.2006 07.2006 08.2006 09.2006 10.2006 11.2006 12.2006 04.2007 05.2007 06.2007 07.2007 08.2007 12.2007 01.2008 02.2008 05.2008 06.2008 07.2008 08.2008 12.2008 01.2009 02.2009 03.2009 04.2009 05.2009 06.2009 07.2009 09.2009 10.2009 11.2009 12.2009 01.2010 02.2010 03.2010 04.2010 05.2010 06.2010 07.2010 08.2010 09.2010 10.2010 11.2010 12.2010 01.2011 02.2011 03.2011 04.2011 05.2011 06.2011 07.2011 09.2011 10.2011 11.2011 12.2011 01.2012 02.2012 04.2012 07.2012 10.2012 11.2012 01.2013 02.2013 03.2013 05.2013 05.2014 06.2014 07.2014 12.2014 01.2015 02.2015 03.2015 06.2015 11.2015 02.2016 03.2016 04.2016 05.2016 06.2016 11.2016
2.22.2006the evangelical outpost: Embracing Naomi:
Dobson and Reciprocal Beneficiary Contracts, I think I just might!
It looks like he's supporting an initiative in Colorado to have "binding legal contracts" between people, which is something I've suggested for years and years. As the blogger describes it:"The critics of Dobson and this legislation are, in my humble opinion, dead wrong. The bill is not about homosexuality, but about relationships. These relationships could cover a broad range of domestic situations, such as two elderly sisters who share a home or a widowed parent of an adult child who has Down’s syndrome or other potentially disabling condition. Such legal protections should be completely 'desexualized' and open to any two adults who desire to form a contractually dependent relationship."
There's also some really interesting discussion on that blog about the post...
2.15.2006Cheney Could Face Charges in Shooting - Yahoo! News: "Dallas defense attorney David Finn, who has been a state and a federal prosecutor, said Wednesday that a Texas grand jury could bring a charge of criminally negligent homicide..."
Just one problem at this point: Cheney didn't kill anyone!
2.09.2006Science and News - astronomy, Asteroid Alh2804-c, meteor, impact, global killers: "Newest computations show however that the course changed in the letzen months easily and the Asteroiden still more near to the earth will bring. According to estimations of the astronomers of the kit peak Observatory a 98%ige probability exists that the Asteroid collides in August 2006 with the earth."
Okay, not terribly clear, sure... but, basically, there's a rumor that we're all going to be killed by a meteor in August.
Time to brush up on that Bible reading and church attendance, right?
Wrong... that's not what it's about. But, anyway... hey, if it happens, it happens, right? Stay tuned for more information!
(P.S... my money is on the story being way, way bogus.)
2.07.2006Sony Reader details and pics - Engadget... and the comments are the interesting thing. Who knows where this'll go? We'll know in a couple years, right?
Just wanted you to know i was thinking about u and am missing you already, cant wait till the weekend when we'll have our own private screeening of FLAVOR OF LOVE.........loll .........
Considering "Sadiq" wrote from an e-mail account with the name "Abubakar Raji", which has an e-mail address of "seanjohn4life", I really do think this is SPAM.
So, is this an example of "viral marketing" for "Flavor of Love"? Or what?
Michelle Malkin: SO, WILL OUR SUPREME COURT BE NEXT? raises an interesting problem. In a nutshell, there's a depiction of Mohammed carved into the Supreme Court building. Islamic law prohibits depictions of Mohammed (hence one of the concerns with the recent Danish cartoons). So, now what? Politics and religion (or lack thereof) make strange bedfellows!
http://www.MacInTouch.com:As I say, I wouldn't have thought of that... but, unlike Apple, it's not my job to think about that kind of thing, either! Wow!
A MacInTouch reader pointed out a critical issue for some Apple customers who cannot buy a computer with a built-in video camera, thus ruling out both the iMac and the MacBook:
[MacInTouch Reader] It is frustrating to me (and probably a lot of others) that the next-generation Apple notebook has a built-in iSight without the option to not include it.
I work in an environment where cameras are a no-no. It's so bad that I cannot even have a camera in my car in the parking lot of the facility. Now, because of the built-in iSight, I cannot even think about upgrading from my personal PowerBook and there is, of course, no way of getting an Apple laptop as a business machine either.
Camera-restricted places are becoming more and more common these days, especially in work locations, so devices that include a built-in camera are starting to become less attractive to professionals that the MacBook Pro is targeted for.
Hopefully the next design revision will introduce the option of not having a built-in iSight camera.
2.01.2006seeker.TV) it'll never become as popular as Rocketboom.
And I suppose I can't blame the planet for that. :)
UPDATE (June 2006): I've moved all my Kari Byron commentary over to a different site; you're welcome to browse around here... but for anything new, check out the Kari Byron category on att.ention.net.
emlarson.com: Home | Blog| Work | Tech | Life | Lord | Play | Mail
Entire site contents Copyright © 2000-2005 Eric M. Larson
All rights reserved, please don't steal my stuff, etc. etc. etc.