Thursday, April 14, 2005

Unattractive children get less attention. [Edu_RSS] I guess I don't know what bothers me the most about this.  The question of whether 10 minute observations count as research or how the definition of less attractive children was arrived at?  A kid at three will be considered attractive and you will keep them closer to you because of their age. BUT, a kid of five to seven with buck teeth and that uneven body that comes with growth would be allowed to wonder farther.  Can you eliminate all the variables with less than 500 observations to confirm that we care less for the ugly?  What if it is just bad parenting?  What if the parent was uglier than the kid? I don't think Dick would buy this one. Dot neither for that matter. 8:00:47 PM    comment [] Smashing Heads Does not Open Minds [Edu_RSS] 7:56:23 PM    comment [] I found a lovely radio program on the BBC, Sounds of the 70s, poifect for a guy about to turn 50. It's done by a grizzled old British guy, opinionated, no commercials, great songs you never hear. Wowo. The Internet is still cool. [Scripting News] 5:51:01 PM    comment [] Data Thieves Strike Polo Ralph Lauren. Data apparently stolen from the popular clothing retailer Polo Ralph Lauren Corp. is forcing banks and credit card issuers to notify thousands of consumers that their credit-card information may have been exposed. By AP. [washingtonpost.com - Technology] This feels like a new form of spamming and seems to have as little protection as we had in the early days of spamming.  Or, maybe just not as good as being able to hide what is happening?? 5:01:47 PM    comment []

© Copyright 2005 Judy Smith. Last update: 5/3/2005; 12:34:39 PM.