Enter Marcel Duchamp's snow shovel, comb, and urinal, and other "readymade" or "found" art.

Or at least, if we want to affect racial attitudes, should we be focusing on treating "fear" as well as correcting for the effects of racism? I suppose psychology is very familiar with fear and has some treatment for it.

It would, at least, change the format of diversity/sensitivity training.

See, modern White Privilege theory defines racism as gaining unearned benefit from belonging to the privileged race. Because whites cannot divorce themselves from this privilege, all whites are racist. Conversely, because Blacks cannot claim white privilege - upon which racism is predicated - Blacks cannot be racist.

Whether these children exhibit racist tendencies is irrelevant. The real question is, "What color is the child's skin?" If it's white, they are racist. ...

Wow. Did I just type all that without laughing? Yes, it was tongue-in-cheek, but if you read Kendall's book, that is her model of racism and white privilege.

Short Answer: For the kids that are not a pain in the butt.

Long Answer (sans explanation): Out of a moral and religious obligation (not that I would expect most slashdotters to comprehend)

Additional Note: Recently started working with this group of kids, and parents are being notified of the behavior and that it will not be tolerated; I hardly think I am part of the problem.

--
So who is hotter? Ali or Ali's Sister?

I totally agree with this sentiment. I work with a youth group at my church, mainly the teenage boys, and some are forced to attend by their parents, and they are impossible to control. Growing up I attended the same group and participated as I wished but did not actively cause problems at risk of punishment that may be doled out even though my parents could not really do anything (I just didn't really realize it). The kids today know that their parents and leaders can't do anything. A very dangerous line has been crossed in the American Society. Just my thoughts

--
Who is hotter? Ali or Ali's Sister?

The interesting part is that I posted my comment from my black MacBook - a computer that I chose for the reasons you stated (plus its openness - runs Windows and Linux just fine *in addition to* the "just works" Mac OS X). But I've never been interested in iPod or iPhone because the fine engineering is useless when it locks me out of it.

But you and I are in the vast minority of Mac users. Microsoft couldn't survive on the techies, neither could Apple. They make their money on the less-savvy masses. In the MP3 and smartphone market, Apple has embraced that lack of knowledge and extended it into a locked-in content/applications model.

The iPad extends that further, which is why it would be a bad thing even if (*especially if*) everyone bought one.

I appreciate Apple somewhat because - for example - the iPod did increase the competition in the DAP market. I don't think my iRiver Clix would exist sans Apple.

But we shouldn't overlook the fact that Apple has been successful because they market locked-in solutions to largely technology-ignorant consumers. Very intelligent (but less computer-savvy) people buy iPods and iPhones because they don't know anything else exists. (How many people do you know who a) owned an MP3 player before buying an iPod? or b) owned a smart phone before buying an iPhone?) Now those people don't know that there are other iPod-compatible music outlets besides the iTunes store, and there *isn't* anywhere else to buy apps for the iPhone besides the app store.

So forgive us for hoping the iPad fails. If it succeeds, it will only further ingrain the vendor-lock-in model in the psyche of American consumers. That would be a loss for all of us.

Great point.

The obvious parallel here is hearing impairment. The deaf community does not consider themselves to be disabled (though that confuses me when a deaf individual sues for accommodation under ADA). When cochlear implants became possible in the 80's, deaf protests were held outside Senate hearings on whether to cover them with Medicare.

If it costs $10^12 to *attempt* to prevent it and $10^8 to adapt, plus we can bring about a bunch of good with the rest of the funds, it's a no-brainer to me. Admittedly, I pulled those numbers out of mid-air, but it's just an illustration of the options we should consider.

I'd mod you up, but I already commented.

The original poster fully supports Lomborg''s position. Oddly, none of the mainstream environmentalists (that I've seem - please correct me if I'm wrong) are pushing adaptation.

On another note, Lomborg also compares the cost of fighting global warming to the cost of other efforts. He claims that we could get almost everyone clean drinking water and eradicate malaria for less than cap-and-trade would cost.

Not a skeptic; just want to know.

Was that the IPCC sea-level claim that was based on a paper that was retracted this week?

I agree with you. Putting a trackpad on the back - if done properly - could be one of those I-can't-believe-we-didn't-think-of-this-before ideas. I hope to see it on more devices, if it works. Even if it does work, it might not catch on. The old Garmin 12 had thumb controls *above* the screen. Despite its efficiency for one-hand use, that format never caught on.

Back in the 19th Century (in the US anyway), mail *recipients* paid postage to get their mail from the local general store. Political figures and others who might have a negative following would receive scores of blank letters and have to pay for them. The objective was to either crowd out the legitimate communications or bankrupt the recipient. Traditionally, one could place an ad in the local paper explaining that he or she would no longer receive letters at the store, which would free them from their obligation.

Also, his "they were in charge" cry is tiresome since congress has been in democratic control since 2006. I saw one poll just after the 2008 election asking people which party controlled congress. Around 80% of those who voted democratic responded "the republicans."

Of course, if the tables were turned, I'm not sure those who vote republican would have any clearer idea of how the government operates. It just demonstrates how people craft reality to meet their own beliefs.