This is the second time Life Hacker has hit this Life Hackery post and it reads like a really questionable source. A lot of head scratchers along with some common ideas. The unpersuasive ones detract from the maybes--but I'm weirded out that Life Hacker would go there. What's the deal?
To answer my own question, I got droid@screen to work for me. It's a piece of java programming and it requires you to have the android ADK installed to work. It's a little hairy for dummies like myself, but it seems mostly safe (despite the "turn back!" warnings). It doesn't require you to root my phone. One trouble is that you have to have the ADK installed and running on the machine ahead of time since it can take a while. The best tutorial to get it to run on my mac--not because it was particularly well-written, but because it troubleshot issues that came up for me--was oddly from PC world: [www.pcworld.com]
Oh and thanks for nothing! :D #howto
Oh and thanks for nothing! :D #howto
Android question here. I there a way to stream my android screen to a mac _without_ rooting my phone? I need to share something on my android to a projector that's hooked up to a mac. I'm too happy with how my phone works right now (it's a Samsung Galaxy II) to mess with it. Something like Bluestacks might be the solution but it only supports Windows--any suggestions? I'm attempting emulators now, but there's no guarantee that it will work with the app I have in mind (and I'm reluctant to add an emulator on a mac that's not mine). Help! #howto
So good. That's all.
Gosh, that's nifty. Where'd you learn that?
Crap, you are right, I got my homophobic groups mixed up. My quote is attributed to Paul Cameron of the Family Research Institute which is designated as a hate group by the South Poverty Law Center, where as Focus on the Family apparently has stayed on the other side of that line. My apologies, sincerely.
[www.splcenter.org]
[www.splcenter.org]
That is surprising. Couldn't there be the male equivalent in the bi men category?
I'm always a little ambivalent when overpopulation is directed as the problem to scarcity of resources, since consumption doesn't break down neatly per capita across countries. I.e. some nations do a much poorer job in curtailing consumptions, regardless of standard of living. More than that there's lifestyle choices and cultural conventions that seem so maladaptive to ecologically stressed times, like watering your lawn and not using public transport which appear to me more pressing than population. Sure, many cities may suffer from water deficiencies due to over-consumption by population, but in many cities I lived in, the potability of water seems be as much an issue of poorly considered large public works, little oversight to pollution and waste management, and increasingly unreliable monsoons. The last of which the result of changing weather pattern due to consumption patterns, which as I hold to be unevenly distributed on the planet. Though I suppose that consumption will follow suit in the route that China and India are charting their economic development. Yeah, we're fucked.
The Arabian Gulf states heavily rely on desalination without seeming to officially acknowledge the impact on its over-salinated sea waters. I visited an aquarium in the gulf and some exhibit was pointing to "adaptation" to salination of gulf waters (without pointing to the cause) and subtext looked pretty grim. They do keep strict tabs on fishing quotas though, I think. But naive to not to consider the consequences on marine ecology.
Agree with what's on your should-have-been-in list. I practically choked when I read the duel between Mrs. Weasley and Bellatrix in the book, and was left a little cold with it here.
Tree-mendous, even.
It seems to me that the circumstances are slightly different than how you characterize it in one crucial way. Focus on the Family isn't just a conservative group, it is a hate group, whose founder called for the "extermination of homosexuals." Maybe Jezebel should have made that more clear.
And here I was going to suggest that it might be time for Io9 to do a doppelganger list post. I nomiate Evil Hasselhoff from Knight Rider, if it happens.
If anyone gets a chance, they shouldn't pass on Sam Green's (of the doc 'Weather Underground' fame) live-doc 'Utopia in Four Movements'. I caught it at the Ann Arbor Film Festival this year, and it's one of the best cinematic experiences I've had. Green basically lectures and narrates Utopian impulses and projects including a couple of the one's mentioned above, before a screen of images, with a live band accompanying. And it's studded with irony, erudition and romanticism. There's the gem of trivia about the 'inventor' of the modern mall Victor Gruen being a committed socialist who bemoaned the inability for cities and suburbs to realize his visions for malls. All sorts of good stuff. Check it. [utopiainfourmovements.com]
"For every person who's been flipped out on for revealing non-monogamous urges, there's somebody who's been shamed by a partner for not being okay with non-monogamy. And for everybody who calls non-monogamists cheaters (even though, as Coke Talk so sagely suggests, they often aren't), there's somebody else who dismisses monogamists as uncool, deluded, or insecure"
I'm a little uncomfortable with this too facile equivalence, as if one set of notions are not attached to what really is a hegemonic order, or that both sets are equally held or expressed. That's hardly the case, no? Just listening to all the reactionary talk news so unopposed, unnuanced and unproblematized on any news channel about what constitutes cheating or the supposed contents of people's relationships, marriage or barometers of trust or fidelity are, really seems to point to that. And that seems to affords the hunky-dory sounding conclusion which comes later that we should all (just?) respect each other. That people "should negotiate fidelity on their own terms" is exactly that minority position that needs to be screamed to be heard, and fact that people assume what those terms are in relationships outside their own all the time points to its minority status.
I'm a little uncomfortable with this too facile equivalence, as if one set of notions are not attached to what really is a hegemonic order, or that both sets are equally held or expressed. That's hardly the case, no? Just listening to all the reactionary talk news so unopposed, unnuanced and unproblematized on any news channel about what constitutes cheating or the supposed contents of people's relationships, marriage or barometers of trust or fidelity are, really seems to point to that. And that seems to affords the hunky-dory sounding conclusion which comes later that we should all (just?) respect each other. That people "should negotiate fidelity on their own terms" is exactly that minority position that needs to be screamed to be heard, and fact that people assume what those terms are in relationships outside their own all the time points to its minority status.
It's more a shudder than a shiver, no?
To be fair, we aren't hearing from the contestants themselves at all. Still, sad, and telling, that this institution persists.
I dunno, I'm kinda fond of the word "manscaping."
Thanks to the both of you!
I'm taking off on an extended trip and thinking of leaving my pc laptop behind. Is it alright if my laptop stays off for over three months? It's kinda on its last legs anyway.
