Seriously, this is one of them. I love the idea of sharing and all, but we can wait to see your vacation or ...other... pics more than 15 minutes after you take it. A camera does not need to be directly connected to the internet, and all it does is open up potential security flaws. Find a good way to remotely exploit this and next thing you know, you can just take a vacation vicariously, through someone's (unsuspecting) lens. With the way tablets, smartphones etc are going, they can be great and (more) secure gateways to posting things, plus it gives you the chance to *filter* your photos...

Guess what the #2 result is from that link... I'll give you a hint, you don't need to go through google to find it.

"Don't bother. The anti-minimum-wage crowd left their intelligence at the door. It's an emotional issue, they don't want poor people to make any more money." Don't bother. The pro-minimum-wage crowd left their intelligence at the door. It's an emotional issue, they believe that corporations are evil and the ultimiate solution is the redistribution of wealth. Think that sounds ridiculous? Me too, just as ridiculous as your quoted assumption about the anti-minimum-wage group. Let's try it this way: "Since the economists can't give us a clear yes or no on the impacts of raising the minimum wage, people are divided on the issue, sometimes preferring to read pundit's comments instead of researching and thinking for themselves. It's annoying as hell and it comes from both sides of the aisle." Or you could stick to your assertation and continue the vitriolic rhetoric of your particular political tribe.

It's this exact attitude that has caused the USoA to become the political cesspool we are right now. Political debates are nothing but ad hominem attacks disguised as political talking points.

Take the Fordham case for example. If they host Ann Coulter it opens them up to ad hominem attacks from people who would rather dismiss them by saying "they're the same as that racist, sexist *-ist" than actually take the time to come up with a rational response to debate her points. The result: the institution capitulates to the threat and she is, in effect, censored from campus.

Murdoch may be a shady character whose only ambition in life is to see how big of a bank account he can rack up, but that doesn't discount the issue his company (WSJ) is presenting. We need to learn to separate the person (Murdoch, Coulter, etc.) from the issue.

No wonder we have bullying issues in school....

Just remember: everyone's a little bit racist.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbud8rLejLM