sunday

Ingredients:
1 part mercy
5 parts self-sufficiency
3 parts joy

Method: Layer ingredients in a shot glass. Top it off with a sprinkle of sadness and enjoy!

Personality cocktail From Go-Quiz.com

Last Sunday my boyfriend and I decided to kill the afternoon by visiting the National Zoo. It was nice because it wasn’t too hot, and it sure as hell wasn’t as crowded (we saw all the family groups leaving as we were entering). I figure this would be my opportunity to go see what all the hype was about with the pandas and all. Turns out there’s a LINE to see the damn panda, and since I didn’t feel like standing in the heat, we moved on and said we would come back on our way out of the zoo.

First animals we saw was a giraffe and an elephant. And that was probably the most exciting thing in the entire zoo. All the other animals were asleep in their dens or just … sitting there … not doing anything. I’ve learned that if you want to see exotic animals, you have to see them in their natural habitat. And I think I can safely say that most of the animals in the zoo I’ve already seen elsewhere, with better entertainment value. For example, white tigers — Mirage, Las Vegas; seals — San Francisco Bay; fish — Atlantis, Bahamas. The monkeys weren’t even that exciting either (we only saw one to be exact).

We went to the “amazon” and saw a lot of…plants. I walked by a plant in particular and I said “cocoa!” to which my boyfriend replies, “cocaine!” He claims cocaine is made from cocoa…but I give him this weird look and tell him that CHOCOLATE is made from cocoa.

We finally decided we had enough of the boring animals and the heat and we want to see the pandas! Turns out the pandas weren’t being exhibited anymore for the day. How lame. I guess that’s what you get for a free zoo.

Interesting editorial in the Tallahassee Democrat calling on parents to pay more attention to sexualized pop culture, advertising, celebrities, and MySpace because they put children in danger from online sexual predators.

It’s a simplified, emotional description of a complex issue, but the writer had a word limit she had to cram it into. She manages not to say that porn creates predators, but instead, notes that predators look at porn and then look for targets. That wouldn’t surprise me — all kinds of normal, healthy people look at porn so it stands to reason that unhealthy people look at porn too.

What I would like more information on is the “dire consqeuences” of early sexualization. And in fact, how to define “early” sexualization. Making out and oral sex between 16-year-olds seems perfectly normal to me. An adult attempting any kind of sexual overture or action with a 13-year-old is twisted.

I also think that MySpace is a place where *anyone* can be the cool kid, and not every highly sexualized teen profile tells the full truth about that teen’s drinking, drugs or sex.

No one can harm you online unless you let them, so the emphasis needs to be on educating young people not to give out personal information, not to go meet people, etc. But parents cannot compete with the lure of the mysterious stranger who “understands” you and treats you like an adult and like someone precious … the message is going to have to come from other sources as well. Peers, sex educators, teachers, and — yes — those dreaded celebrities and their media. And you, and me, because parents alone cannot solve this one.

————————————————————————-

Friday, 21 July 2006 - 1:40 PM PDT
Name: “kay”

First of all, creepy people are everywhere, not just online sexual predators, so unless you lock your child up in your house, I don’t think keeping your child from going on MySpace and being part of their social network will make much of a difference. You can’t really escape it, and sheltering your child from growing up is just going to hurt them in the long run.

I think we learn pretty early on that we shouldn’t give out our personal information and meet up with strangers. There must be some issues going on at home which the parents should be looking into, rather than banning their children from contact with the outside world.

On another note, there are those online dating sites, so perhaps out of sheer desperation, meeting up with total strangers may be inevitable. I just read that moderati and rejection hotline are teaming up to create rejection ringtones. So for those situations where you really screwed up, you can fake a phone call and run from your problems. Hoorah! Problem solved.

————————————————————————-

Friday, 21 July 2006 - 6:21 PM PDT
Name: Cody
Home Page: http://tkblog.com

Did anyone say keep your child from going onto MySpace? Or didn’t both folks, Regina and the Tallahasseeeeeee both say be aware of this activity and talk to your kid about it?Banning kids from virtually anything will either make them more vulnerable later on, or more prone to mischief now, depending on their temperament and its effect on their rebellion.I don’t think the issues are necessarily at home at all, although they may be. The issues may simply be from the social environment the kid is in. As Regina points out, parents can’t do this alone, even at our best. We must use an entire system, a society if you will, that can re-enforce our notions about what is and what is not appropriate when it comes to children and sexuality. Consensual realities are fun but also hard to manage.

————————————————————————-

Saturday, 22 July 2006 - 5:28 AM PDT
Name: “Audrey”
Home Page: http://www.ameribritbaby.blogspot.com

Pardon? Oral sex between 16 year olds seems perfectly normal to you? Then perhaps I must have the most abnormal 16 year old twins on the planet (fraternal boy/girl) because both consider that something to be shared between a committed couple who are old enough to understand the emotional/physical consequences of such an act. And it’s got zilch to do with religion!

And yes, parents can indeed compete with the lure of the mysterious stranger who understands them. It’s called watching your kids whilst they’re online and knowing who is on their “friends list” and COMMUNICATING with your children.

The message comes from myself and their father first, then we’ll determine if we want anyone, be it educators, clergy or anyone else adding to it!

Give parents a little credit….I realize there are several out there who are ready to foist the upbringing of their kids onto the backs of the nations public school systems, but come on already! There are still a few of us who exist out there who deem our children “precious” and who take the intiative to be involved.

And no, I don’t have “stepford” kids…I have normal, healthy well-adjusted kids who can think for themselves and value themselves enough to know better!

————————————————————————-

Saturday, 22 July 2006 - 4:17 PM PDT
Name: Chris

Lady you have no idea.Oral sex between sixteen year olds is a normal thing. I know, because i am sixteen, and i know many people (no self incriminating statments made here) my age and younger who have enjoyed oral sex.

————————————————————————-

Saturday, 22 July 2006 - 8:30 PM PDT
Name: Natasha

Please, do you honestly think your children would tell you if they’re participating in Oral sex? I agree that 16 does seem a little young (I’m 21 and didn’t do anything like that until 17 or 18…), but I know my little sister has had experiences like that, and says it’s the norm. I’m glad though that you realize that it should be the parents responsibilty to moniter their children, and be open, yet enforcing with them. For that I applaud you.

I just registered for classes this fall, and it reminded me of when I would register for classes at Rose (yeah, they use Banner too, and it looks exactly the same). I’m excited, nostalgic, and of course, nervous. This won’t be the undergrad experience all over again, I’m not living on campus, and I only have classes twice a week for three hours. But I will be able to haul my Northface with all my EE books and my Nalgene bottle, and trudge through the snow (hopefully it won’t be as bad), and hopefully my ADD doesn’t get the better of me, and I’ll stay awake for the entire class (THREE HOURS!!).

Ugh, and I lost my train of thought. Stupid kittens.

What’s inside the cell-phone maker’s answer to Research In Motion’s BlackBerry, and how much does it cost to make it?

The smartphone wars have a new entrant: Motorola (MOT ). And as they battle to get consumers pecking away at a handheld with their thumbs, Research In Motion and Palm can’t help but take notice.

Released earlier this year to fanfare, Motorola’s Q is aimed squarely at helping the cell-phone maker win business from RIM (RIMM ) and Palm (PALM ) among a highly coveted constituency: hardcore wireless messaging users (see BusinessWeek.com, 7/7/06, “Motorola’s Quirky New Smartphone”)

If it’s anywhere near as successful as the RAZR and SLVR phones that preceded it, the Q will probably help Motorola put price pressure on RIM and Palm and could force RIM to add features it has previously eschewed.

WHAT’S INSIDE. According to market research firm iSuppli, which has done a tear-down analysis of the Q, it costs Motorola about $158 to build the phone. That includes components and assembly but excludes other expenses such as marketing, distribution, and licensing fees to Microsoft (MSFT ), which makes the phone’s Windows Mobile operating system.

The Q is sold by Verizon Wireless, the joint venture of Verizon (VZ ) and Vodafone (VOD ), at a heavily subsidized $199 with a two-year service contract, and $349 with a one-year contract. Typically, the mobile-phone service provider absorbs some of the cost of subsidizing a handset or other wireless equipment.

The Q’s single most expensive component, says iSuppli analyst Andrew Rassweiler, is the LCD display. He says the cost is $25, although it’s unclear what company makes the display. “Whoever made it didn’t want to be identified,” Rassweiler says.

Sources of other parts of the Q are clear. Intel (INTC) has two parts in the phone, a $19 XScale microprocessor and a flash memory chip. The XScale chip is produced by the unit of Intel that is being acquired by Marvell Technology (MRVL ).

Qualcomm (QCOM ) supplied a chip called a digital baseband processor (about $14) that helps the device connect to digital wireless networks. Rassweiler says the Q phone marks the first time he’s seen that particular Qualcomm chip. Qualcomm supplied four other parts, including a power management chip. Other suppliers included Texas Instruments (TXN ); Broadcom (BRCM ), which supplied a Bluetooth chip; Freescale Semiconductor (FSL ), which supplied a USB chip; and M-Systems (FLSH ), which supplied flash memory chips. Micron Technology (MU ) supplied the CMOS imaging chip, and Skyworks (SWKS ) contributed two power chips.

HOW THEY STACK UP. The materials and manufacturing cost of the Q is higher than that of RIM’s current flagship handheld device, the Blackberry 8700. The 8700 cost about $123 to make, and it sells for $299 from Cingular Wireless, owned by AT&T (T ) and BellSouth (BLS ), and from Deutsche Telekom’s T-Mobile (DK ).

But the 8700 differs from the Motorola device in several ways. For one, it doesn’t play video or music, and unlike the Q, it doesn’t have a camera. Palm’s Treo 700p has both a camera and plays music and video. The difference between them is starting to show. RIM co-CEO Jim Balsillie has recently hinted Blackberry devices with cameras and music and video capability might start showing up soon. ISuppli hasn’t yet torn down the Treo and so couldn’t speculate on what it costs Palm to build. But Sprint Nextel (S ) and Verizon Wireless sell the Treo 700p for $399.

Motorola has said that it expects to sell some five million Q phones, which would make it a formidable competitor to the BlackBerry. That device, dubbed the CrackBerry because fans are addicted to it, is used by some 5.5 million people, RIM said when it reported the results for its most recent quarter.

I saw this CoverGirl ad in the latest InStyle issue, and you know what my first thought was? “Ooh, what camera is that?”

So I’m 99% sure my boyfriend’s buddy is coming to Negril with us, which means, there’s one spot left for YOU! That’s right, you could be the lucky winner of a fabulous trip to Negril, Jamaica!

Zooomr 2.0 is handing out FREE pro accounts to all bloggers (including MySpace, LiveJournal, and Xanga).

All you gotta do is post a picture hosted on Zooomr on your blog, and then … actually just follow the instructions here.

Hosted on Zooomr

After much fixing and resolving some hacking-issues, Zooomr 2.0 has finally debuted! Some new features include navigation bar, SETS, login, but!…they still haven’t changed the upload quantity. I’m assuming they’re limiting to 10-at-a-time so it doesn’t kill the bandwidth, which is understandable, but inconvenient.

But, I like it, and I hope you do too.

Alright kiddies, here’s the deal:

I know this is probably a little out of budget for most of you, but I promise it’d be sweet (see picture below). I am currently soliciting volunteers willing to put up with my boyfriend and me for a weeklong vacation in Negril, Jamaica. The trip will include tons of fun, sun, beachcombing, waterfall hiking, eating, relaxing, shopping, and anything else we wanna do. I’m determined to stay in a villa at the RockHouse Hotel (which sleeps up to 4 persons), and if I don’t find two other people, I’m not going at all. So help me make my dreams (and yours) come true!

Guestlist is first come, first serve.

RockHouse home