![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Incredibly silly
Apr. 16th, 2007 02:50 pmAnimated music video of Don Ho covering Peter Gabriel's Shock the Monkey
It has cameos by certain well known Hawaiian TV stars. :-)
It has cameos by certain well known Hawaiian TV stars. :-)
Apr. 16th, 2007
What *were* they thinking?
Apr. 16th, 2007 04:01 pmA flyer for Shuck's Auto Parts arrived in the mail the other day. Examining it, I noted two car accessories that fit the title above.
The first is a license plate holder with a programmable scrilling LED display on it. $39.99
The second is a "wireless backup camera". The camera part mounts on the license plate holder, the display will mount on places such as the sun visor. $99.99
My first thought with regards to both was "And they won't last a week unless you never park in public..."
Heck, there are cars with *built in* backup cameras and the local news had an item months back about them getting stolen. Just the camera part. Apparently it's not that hard to hook them up to a TV or computer, and drug houses and crack labs were using them to set up survielance around their locations.
What's *your* favorite (or "most recent") example of products that might make sense on one level but are just gonna attract trouble?
The first is a license plate holder with a programmable scrilling LED display on it. $39.99
The second is a "wireless backup camera". The camera part mounts on the license plate holder, the display will mount on places such as the sun visor. $99.99
My first thought with regards to both was "And they won't last a week unless you never park in public..."
Heck, there are cars with *built in* backup cameras and the local news had an item months back about them getting stolen. Just the camera part. Apparently it's not that hard to hook them up to a TV or computer, and drug houses and crack labs were using them to set up survielance around their locations.
What's *your* favorite (or "most recent") example of products that might make sense on one level but are just gonna attract trouble?
Yay. Free speech wins.
Apr. 16th, 2007 04:08 pm(From EFFector Online 20.15)
* A Win for Kids' Free Speech Rights
A ruling in the Indiana Court of Appeals last week gave a
middle school student her free speech rights back.
The girl, who is called "A.B." in the court record, had
posted comments on a MySpace page criticizing her school's
policy on body piercings. The post was full of expletives,
which a judge ruled ""obscene" despite the lack of any
sexual content. The girl was found to be a "delinquent
child" and was put on probation for nine months.
However, the girl appealed the ruling, arguing that her
post was protected political speech. A three-judge panel
agreed: "While we have little regard for A.B.'s use of
vulgar epithets, we conclude that her overall message
constitutes political speech." The judges threw out the
"delinquent child" finding, holding that the lower court's
conclusion "contravened her right to speak."
A lot of media coverage focuses on the perceived dangers
for kids on the Internet. But, expletives or not, this case
shows how students use the web to discuss issues of
importance to them. It's heartening that judges like these
see the importance as well.
For this post and related links:
<http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/005198.php>
* A Win for Kids' Free Speech Rights
A ruling in the Indiana Court of Appeals last week gave a
middle school student her free speech rights back.
The girl, who is called "A.B." in the court record, had
posted comments on a MySpace page criticizing her school's
policy on body piercings. The post was full of expletives,
which a judge ruled ""obscene" despite the lack of any
sexual content. The girl was found to be a "delinquent
child" and was put on probation for nine months.
However, the girl appealed the ruling, arguing that her
post was protected political speech. A three-judge panel
agreed: "While we have little regard for A.B.'s use of
vulgar epithets, we conclude that her overall message
constitutes political speech." The judges threw out the
"delinquent child" finding, holding that the lower court's
conclusion "contravened her right to speak."
A lot of media coverage focuses on the perceived dangers
for kids on the Internet. But, expletives or not, this case
shows how students use the web to discuss issues of
importance to them. It's heartening that judges like these
see the importance as well.
For this post and related links:
<http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/005198.php>