http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/23/technology/google-privacy-inquiries-get-little-cooperation.html?pagewanted=1&hp&gwh=77883A123200D8E57071F073AF98EBEA
Privacy is treated very differently in the US vs Europe. I figured anyone that reads this already knew that. But it's still interesting to learn about. There's been some recent hubbub regarding Google and their cars and the information they have supposedly been gathering (well, it's not so supposed...).
So it got me to thinkin' about privacy, how much it has changed in the last 20 years, how willingly we give it up. It's definitely tied to the generations who have grown up with technology- I have 18-19 year old cousins who are much more willing to give up certain aspects of their privacy than me- look at what a difference even 10 years makes.
The thought has also crossed my mind about the Patriot Act. Would todays college aged students have been as up in arms as I was when that was passed? Could it be because they feel (whether rightly or not) that they are not threatened? Obviously when someone doesn't feel threatened they are more willing to give up privacy rights (Shout out to Facebook- holla!).
Could Europe's handling of privacy be tied to their history? Nazis, Communists, totalitarian regimes loved breaching privacy to get what they wanted. Ends justifies the means- right, Machiavelli? We have this innate ability of sweeping hard parts of our past under the rug here in the US. Could be because of how we teach or don't teach history...but that's a whole other can of worms.
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Alcoholism and Native Americans
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/05/16/how-to-address-alcoholism-on-indian-reservations
Another interesting "Room for Debate"...I'm telling you readers, it's worth checking out every week just to see what they've covered. Sometimes it's dumb (I'm allowed to say that because I read the NY Times every day), but I'd say on average once a week there's a good one.
So here's the back story: the town of Whiteclay, Nebraska is very close to the Pine Ridge reservation (also in Nebraska). Pine Ridge is one of the largest reservations in the country and coincidentally, bans alcohol. Whiteclay is considered a gateway town where over 4 millions units of alcohol (cans, bottles, etc) are sold yearly. What's its population? 10. The tribe can do nothing under the law with Whiteclay because it's out of their jurisdiction. Pine Ridge covers counties in Nebraks and South Dakota and sadly, one of the counties in South Dakota has the same life expectency as living in Afghanistan.
So, what to do? Do we blame the reservation for not doing enough? Do we blame companies that make/distribute alcohol? Do we blame the U.S. government (and in a sense, U.S. society as a whole) for where centuries of oppression have led these people?
There are no easy answers. Many Native American activists are calling for Anheuser-Busch to have to pay some sort of restitution, since a majority of the products sold in Whiteclay are made by them. The Oglala Sioux has also brought lawsuits against the company as well as other distributors and retailers. Some want the government to extend the tribe's boundaries to include Whiteclay, thus making the alcohol sales illegal. Oh, and Anheuser-Busch? They haven't said a damn thing.
On a tangent, what saddens me about this is that people get all up in arms about where the money at Komen goes or doesn't go. We complain about our tax dollars going to this or that. We worry about a lot of complex things. But I really doubt that a lot of people are worried about this. These are people we've put in the worst situation we could possibly think of. And then we take our sweet time in offering any help or solutions. I really hope something comes of this.
Another interesting "Room for Debate"...I'm telling you readers, it's worth checking out every week just to see what they've covered. Sometimes it's dumb (I'm allowed to say that because I read the NY Times every day), but I'd say on average once a week there's a good one.
So here's the back story: the town of Whiteclay, Nebraska is very close to the Pine Ridge reservation (also in Nebraska). Pine Ridge is one of the largest reservations in the country and coincidentally, bans alcohol. Whiteclay is considered a gateway town where over 4 millions units of alcohol (cans, bottles, etc) are sold yearly. What's its population? 10. The tribe can do nothing under the law with Whiteclay because it's out of their jurisdiction. Pine Ridge covers counties in Nebraks and South Dakota and sadly, one of the counties in South Dakota has the same life expectency as living in Afghanistan.
So, what to do? Do we blame the reservation for not doing enough? Do we blame companies that make/distribute alcohol? Do we blame the U.S. government (and in a sense, U.S. society as a whole) for where centuries of oppression have led these people?
There are no easy answers. Many Native American activists are calling for Anheuser-Busch to have to pay some sort of restitution, since a majority of the products sold in Whiteclay are made by them. The Oglala Sioux has also brought lawsuits against the company as well as other distributors and retailers. Some want the government to extend the tribe's boundaries to include Whiteclay, thus making the alcohol sales illegal. Oh, and Anheuser-Busch? They haven't said a damn thing.
On a tangent, what saddens me about this is that people get all up in arms about where the money at Komen goes or doesn't go. We complain about our tax dollars going to this or that. We worry about a lot of complex things. But I really doubt that a lot of people are worried about this. These are people we've put in the worst situation we could possibly think of. And then we take our sweet time in offering any help or solutions. I really hope something comes of this.
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Mladic's Trial
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/17/world/europe/mladic-bosnian-serb-leader-faces-war-crimes-charges.html?ref=world&gwh=A638265057AECC27FFBFE48CFD1D7127
So Ratko Mladic's war crimes trial is finally starting. If you don't know who he is, here's the crash course: big player in the massacre at Srebenica and all around ethnic cleansing in Sarajevo. So all in all, not the greatest guy.
In college I took a class on global human rights and one question we discussed I would like to pose: is it better that we have these war crimes trials, or should the justice be swifter, considering that most times a trial is at The Hague, the evidence is stacked against them. Also, for trials such as this, should the death penalty apply?
So Ratko Mladic's war crimes trial is finally starting. If you don't know who he is, here's the crash course: big player in the massacre at Srebenica and all around ethnic cleansing in Sarajevo. So all in all, not the greatest guy.
In college I took a class on global human rights and one question we discussed I would like to pose: is it better that we have these war crimes trials, or should the justice be swifter, considering that most times a trial is at The Hague, the evidence is stacked against them. Also, for trials such as this, should the death penalty apply?
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Partisan Psychology
Interesting article/audio from NPR about how it is actually painful for partisans to hear facts that challenge their pre-existing views.
In other news- stop saying that Obama can do anything about gas prices and that he's politicizing killing Bin Laden. It's hurting me.
It's hard to analyze this article- because anything I say could be skewed as my reaction as a supposed partisan.
But thinking about how our minds deal with challenging facts is quite interesting. Do you think one side or the other is more adept at hearing facts that challenge their beliefs? Or is it both sides, so partisan and polarized these past few years that despite facts staring them in the face that are contrary to their beliefs they stick to their guns? And, why are we electing people like that? We want politicians who have strong beliefs but are able to ebb and flow with the times and their constituencies- I mean, as a die hard Dem, I still would rather have politicians who can reach across the aisle and make things work.
In other news- stop saying that Obama can do anything about gas prices and that he's politicizing killing Bin Laden. It's hurting me.
It's hard to analyze this article- because anything I say could be skewed as my reaction as a supposed partisan.
But thinking about how our minds deal with challenging facts is quite interesting. Do you think one side or the other is more adept at hearing facts that challenge their beliefs? Or is it both sides, so partisan and polarized these past few years that despite facts staring them in the face that are contrary to their beliefs they stick to their guns? And, why are we electing people like that? We want politicians who have strong beliefs but are able to ebb and flow with the times and their constituencies- I mean, as a die hard Dem, I still would rather have politicians who can reach across the aisle and make things work.
Monday, May 7, 2012
The Bear is Back!
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/08/world/europe/vladimir-putin-returns-to-presidency-in-russia.html?_r=1&ref=world
I figured since it's been a while since I've blogged (Grad School Finals= no fun), what better to come back than to talk about Putin getting the presidency back! Sometimes...I don't understand Russia. I understand it's very corrupt. I understand people have been rioting for a few days now over Putin regaining the role of President. So what will having Putin back as president bring? Increased animosity towards the U.S.? A plethora of photos of an unsmiling Putin, sure to give any child a nightmare? Better economy? Guess only time will tell...
I figured since it's been a while since I've blogged (Grad School Finals= no fun), what better to come back than to talk about Putin getting the presidency back! Sometimes...I don't understand Russia. I understand it's very corrupt. I understand people have been rioting for a few days now over Putin regaining the role of President. So what will having Putin back as president bring? Increased animosity towards the U.S.? A plethora of photos of an unsmiling Putin, sure to give any child a nightmare? Better economy? Guess only time will tell...
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)