A 33 year old Indian man married a dog in a Hindu temple.
He claims that the marriage was his way to atone for stoning two other dogs to death, an incident that he believes left him cursed.
He said something like he used to be physically fit until he murdered two dogs and then he couldn't move his arms and legs freely. He had some weird disability right afterwords so so he went to an astrologer and he told him that he had to marry a dog to get rid of the curse.
"On the advice of an astrologer and others, he decided to marry a bitch to get cured."
So..I don't really know whether his curse was cured or not because it doesn't say. I think that this is newsworthy because of oddity.
article
Monday, January 11, 2010
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Tipsy? Call the scooter guy
tipsy? call the scooter guy
I think that this article (or video) is a good thing to be put out there for people because it lets them know safer ways to get home. The drunk driving accidents that have been recorded in the past years have been through the roof. Basically, they are trying to make the roads safer for others and just happend to make a business out of it. I think that this article also could be a way to show other big cities or places where people party, that they could take up this idea and make their roadways safer also. Together, we could eliminate drunk driving for just a small price of having some dude on a street-leagal mini scooter hop in your car and drive you to your house for a small amount of money.
My article covers the aspect of oddity. The name is pretty catchy and it is to inform people on how to be safer on the roads. The gist of it is that there is a guy who runs a service in South Carolina that people call when they have had too much to drink. The scooter service sends a guy who comes to where you are at... maybe a bar or a party... then he folds his little scooter up and puts it in the back of your car and drives you in you car home. Then when he drops you off, you are safe and you have your car where you need it when you wake up. He then drives away to the next call on his scooter.
They are trying to reach the audience of college kids and people of legal drinking age who like to go out and have fun and party but don't want to risk their lives and others' on the attempt to get home.
Monday, December 14, 2009
talking about scholarly article that was almost IMPOSSIBLE to post. keep in mind the library wouldnt let me print either
"Scott Page claims that groups of diverse persons are better at solving problems and making predictions than individuals who are smarter or groups with uniform perspectives and methods of looking at problems."
This article is a review on a book that was written about diversity by Scott Page. It is all about how a group of diverse people are more likely to solve a big problem than a group of alike people. A diverse group has a set of different cultural backgrounds and probably grew up with a set of completely different beliefs and childhoods. When a problem arises, like how to advertise a product for something... a group of diverse people are more likely to come up with the idea of a great way to apply to all viewers and not just one group of people. The company definitely wants to look appealing to as many people as possible and the diverse advertising team will come up with the idea that will apply to all people, with different backgrounds, income, and beliefs.
scholarly diversity article
Full Text:COPYRIGHT 2009 University of North Carolina Press
The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups,
Firms, Schools and Societies
By Scott E. Page
Princeton University Press. 2007. 424 pages. $27.95 cloth.
Where do you store your ketchup, in the refrigerator or in the cupboard? Ketchup storage illustrates a problem of coordination when people do things differently. People don't much care how the condiment is stored; they just want to find it. However, sometimes we can improve our situation when we are exposed to other ideas and techniques. In the engaging book, The Difference, Scott Page claims that groups of diverse persons are better at solving problems and making predictions than individuals who are smarter or groups with uniform perspectives and methods of looking at problems. In terms of diversity, Page is talking about diverse ways of looking at, engaging with, interpreting and predicting solutions for problems. Rather than conforming to each other's perspectives, Page exhorts us to appreciate and work with our differences, like where we store ketchup, in order to be better problem solvers.
Page does not claim that diverse perspectives and toolkits will be better for solving problems in every case. In part, it depends on how one defines the "problem" to be solved. If the problem is finding the optimum new product to sell or public policy to employ, then a diverse set of perspectives is likely best. If the problem is how to mobilize a group into social action, then more uniformity might be better. Indeed, Page acknowledges that common perspectives allow for quick and error-free communication. The downside is that when we have identical perspectives, we are likely get stuck rather than find our way to the best solution. Our desire to conform, which is a function of our social being, leads to common perspectives. If everyone adopts an unproductive perspective, this can lead the group to make bad decisions. While he notes that "groupthink" can foster disastrous policy decisions, common perspectives can also foster trust, which can also lead to improved outcomes. So which is best when? The question remains unanswered.
Another difficulty is the source of diversity. Page notes that diverse perspectives do not come from the ether but are constructed from other perspectives. In this process, there is superadditivity: One plus one equals twelve. "Thus, if we hope to continue to innovate and reach new understandings, we must encourage the creation of new and diverse perspectives." (50) But how does this work? How do we create these diverse toolkits? Page doesn't really explain this although he does explain that affirmative action might fit within his framework. But this may be an important question that relates back to his model. One can envision different models for achieving diversity in cognitive toolkits. For example, there might be institutionalized diversity (like affirmative action), spatial diversity, and collective or "ground-up" diversity (through the use of so-called "weak ties" in a network). But, how people with diverse tools are assembled may affect the ability of the collective to perform the desired task.
This issue also relates back to the problem definition. Problems can involve information aggregation (each person in a group holds a different piece of the puzzle), coordinated searching (we spread out in search of the best solution), and sharing different perspectives (the classic brainstorming session). These are all present in The Difference, but it would seem the processes are very different. Social influences would seem to play a large role, but he does not discuss a specific mechanism.
Page creatively illustrates his model in interesting thought experiments, but the book's empirics are a little thin. This is understandable in that Page is explaining a model that generates hypotheses, but this reader yearned for more concrete examples. Of course, the book should motivate empirical researchers across (yes) diverse disciplines, from social psychologists to social network analysts to business school researchers. And the book does raise interesting questions that could link disciplines. Are diffusions of fads facilitated by lack of diversity in perspectives? Is innovation and entrepreneurship really the interaction of diverse perspectives that are socially linked?
The book is intelligently written and fun to read. Given that Page's underlying academic work is in computational modeling, this book is aimed at a larger audience, and it succeeds in making the ideas accessible and appealing. In the end, Page presents a clear roadmap or model that connects certain kinds of diversity with certain kinds of problem-solving and predicting.
I store my ketchup in the fridge, but from now on I will consider the perspectives of those who put the Heinz bottle in the cupboard (or even use the spelling "catsup").
Reviewer: John C. Scott, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Gale Document Number:A211714811
The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups,
Firms, Schools and Societies
By Scott E. Page
Princeton University Press. 2007. 424 pages. $27.95 cloth.
Where do you store your ketchup, in the refrigerator or in the cupboard? Ketchup storage illustrates a problem of coordination when people do things differently. People don't much care how the condiment is stored; they just want to find it. However, sometimes we can improve our situation when we are exposed to other ideas and techniques. In the engaging book, The Difference, Scott Page claims that groups of diverse persons are better at solving problems and making predictions than individuals who are smarter or groups with uniform perspectives and methods of looking at problems. In terms of diversity, Page is talking about diverse ways of looking at, engaging with, interpreting and predicting solutions for problems. Rather than conforming to each other's perspectives, Page exhorts us to appreciate and work with our differences, like where we store ketchup, in order to be better problem solvers.
Page does not claim that diverse perspectives and toolkits will be better for solving problems in every case. In part, it depends on how one defines the "problem" to be solved. If the problem is finding the optimum new product to sell or public policy to employ, then a diverse set of perspectives is likely best. If the problem is how to mobilize a group into social action, then more uniformity might be better. Indeed, Page acknowledges that common perspectives allow for quick and error-free communication. The downside is that when we have identical perspectives, we are likely get stuck rather than find our way to the best solution. Our desire to conform, which is a function of our social being, leads to common perspectives. If everyone adopts an unproductive perspective, this can lead the group to make bad decisions. While he notes that "groupthink" can foster disastrous policy decisions, common perspectives can also foster trust, which can also lead to improved outcomes. So which is best when? The question remains unanswered.
Another difficulty is the source of diversity. Page notes that diverse perspectives do not come from the ether but are constructed from other perspectives. In this process, there is superadditivity: One plus one equals twelve. "Thus, if we hope to continue to innovate and reach new understandings, we must encourage the creation of new and diverse perspectives." (50) But how does this work? How do we create these diverse toolkits? Page doesn't really explain this although he does explain that affirmative action might fit within his framework. But this may be an important question that relates back to his model. One can envision different models for achieving diversity in cognitive toolkits. For example, there might be institutionalized diversity (like affirmative action), spatial diversity, and collective or "ground-up" diversity (through the use of so-called "weak ties" in a network). But, how people with diverse tools are assembled may affect the ability of the collective to perform the desired task.
This issue also relates back to the problem definition. Problems can involve information aggregation (each person in a group holds a different piece of the puzzle), coordinated searching (we spread out in search of the best solution), and sharing different perspectives (the classic brainstorming session). These are all present in The Difference, but it would seem the processes are very different. Social influences would seem to play a large role, but he does not discuss a specific mechanism.
Page creatively illustrates his model in interesting thought experiments, but the book's empirics are a little thin. This is understandable in that Page is explaining a model that generates hypotheses, but this reader yearned for more concrete examples. Of course, the book should motivate empirical researchers across (yes) diverse disciplines, from social psychologists to social network analysts to business school researchers. And the book does raise interesting questions that could link disciplines. Are diffusions of fads facilitated by lack of diversity in perspectives? Is innovation and entrepreneurship really the interaction of diverse perspectives that are socially linked?
The book is intelligently written and fun to read. Given that Page's underlying academic work is in computational modeling, this book is aimed at a larger audience, and it succeeds in making the ideas accessible and appealing. In the end, Page presents a clear roadmap or model that connects certain kinds of diversity with certain kinds of problem-solving and predicting.
I store my ketchup in the fridge, but from now on I will consider the perspectives of those who put the Heinz bottle in the cupboard (or even use the spelling "catsup").
Reviewer: John C. Scott, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Gale Document Number:A211714811
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Diversity article
abercrombie & fitch lawsuit article
Abercrombie & Fitch recently settled a lawsuit for 40 to 50 million dollars to employees who said there was discriminatory labor practice.
Abercrombie & Fitch recently settled a lawsuit for 40 to 50 million dollars to employees who said there was discriminatory labor practice.
My song is Died a Jew, by Say Anything.
Died A Jew - Say Anything
You say you're a shade in my face from my father's share crops
My people were slaves before yours invented hip-hop
Apologize but I'm in on the joke
Another brother to scoff at the dancing patterns of white folk
I think I'm fine the way I am
(and yes I chase my milk with ham)
I think I'm fine the way I am
Jesus Died A Jew
pupils painted blue
yeah haters know its true
Jesus died a jew
you saw you're the breath on my nose of my daddy's ear locks
shunned before you pieced it and sold it and called it punk rock
apologize for the murder of god
like Judas the traitor we are both favored and deeply flawed
I think I'm fine the way I am
(although we broke our promised land)
I think I'm fine the way I am
Jesus died a jew
pupils painted blue
yeah haters know its true
Jesus died a jew
so I'll let it burn away
let it burn away
let it burn away
let it burn away
[ Died A Jew lyrics from
http://www.lyricsyoulove.com/s/say_anything/died_a_jew/ ]
***SONG ANALYSIS
Song- Died a Jew
Artist- Say Anything
Genre- Rock
Released- 2007
The issue that is being addressed is race relations. This song says that Jesus was a Jew and it is basically addressing the controversial issues that a lot of people believe that Jesus was white. I think that this belief mainly stems from the many white people that came over to America from England in the 1700's. The huge Anglican Church was in charge of everything, and they were all white, so of course, everyone claimed that Jesus was white. Also, it was even said in the Bible that Jesus was from Jerusalem, there's no way he could just be white. This song just says that what everything claims just because white was the supreme race for a long time, that Jesus was white.
Monday, November 9, 2009
fort hood
1. What are your thoughts, feelings, etc, as you read these articles?
I think that this article was very shocking because it was "friendly fire." But then, as I read into it, I learned that he was a Muslim and his fellow soldiers had been making fun of him and calling him things like "Camel Jockey" and other politically incorrect things. I understand that they were just joking around but apparently it really got to him.
2. What role do you think terrorism played in this massacre, if any? Why? Do you think that there was an terrorist organization behind the shooting?
I think that how our society acts about terrorism is pretty bad. Meaning that we always say things that could hurt people who are the race of the people that we are at war with, even though we obviously know that they are not terrorists. I think that this could have been a planned event from an organization but I don't think its likely. Regardless if it is an inside job or not, I bet that some people would consider it racist if we were to claim that it was a terrorist attack just because of what race he is.
3. What role did racism or religious persecution play in this incident? Why?
above.
4. Do you think a lot of Muslim Americans have the same feelings as this man? Why or why not?
I bet that there are a lot of Muslims that feel that way but I don't think that they are in the army or on a military base. I think that if there are Muslims that feel that way, then they should not be any leader of any sort in the military. This is unacceptable.
5. What do you think the military could have done to prevent this from happening? Why do you believe this? Were there signs that this man had the potential to do something like this? What were they?
I think that the military should definitely done something about it because he had already expressed his opinion on America and how he doesn't want to be in the military. I think that its a little bit ridiculous because if someone was saying stuff like that, they should not be able to be a leader of any sort. Those were signs that he could have done something like this.
6. Talk about the leadership of Kimberly Munley (the woman who stopped the shooter). What did she do? How would you have reacted in the same situation?
I think that Kimberly Munley had a huge amount of leadership. She risked her life to save other people. She was trained for something like this that you go right after the shooter right away, risking yourself, and there will be less fatalities. Even though she was being shot at, she still went on to take the shooter down. I would like to say that I would try to take them out but I probably would have ran or hid. I've had dreams about this sort of thing where I attacked the shooter from when they weren't looking. That's probably the only thing I would be brave enough to do.
7. What does this incident say about race relations in America? Specifically with Arab-Americans and Muslims? Is there a reason that Muslims and people from the Arab world feel a certain way about
America?
I think that people in America, often see all Muslims as the enemy just because of what happened in 2001 and who we are at war with. That doesn't mean that all Arab-Americans and Muslims are all bad and trying to conspire to kill Americans. Like I said before, if people accused it of being an inside attack, they would be accused of being racist.
I think that this article was very shocking because it was "friendly fire." But then, as I read into it, I learned that he was a Muslim and his fellow soldiers had been making fun of him and calling him things like "Camel Jockey" and other politically incorrect things. I understand that they were just joking around but apparently it really got to him.
2. What role do you think terrorism played in this massacre, if any? Why? Do you think that there was an terrorist organization behind the shooting?
I think that how our society acts about terrorism is pretty bad. Meaning that we always say things that could hurt people who are the race of the people that we are at war with, even though we obviously know that they are not terrorists. I think that this could have been a planned event from an organization but I don't think its likely. Regardless if it is an inside job or not, I bet that some people would consider it racist if we were to claim that it was a terrorist attack just because of what race he is.
3. What role did racism or religious persecution play in this incident? Why?
above.
4. Do you think a lot of Muslim Americans have the same feelings as this man? Why or why not?
I bet that there are a lot of Muslims that feel that way but I don't think that they are in the army or on a military base. I think that if there are Muslims that feel that way, then they should not be any leader of any sort in the military. This is unacceptable.
5. What do you think the military could have done to prevent this from happening? Why do you believe this? Were there signs that this man had the potential to do something like this? What were they?
I think that the military should definitely done something about it because he had already expressed his opinion on America and how he doesn't want to be in the military. I think that its a little bit ridiculous because if someone was saying stuff like that, they should not be able to be a leader of any sort. Those were signs that he could have done something like this.
6. Talk about the leadership of Kimberly Munley (the woman who stopped the shooter). What did she do? How would you have reacted in the same situation?
I think that Kimberly Munley had a huge amount of leadership. She risked her life to save other people. She was trained for something like this that you go right after the shooter right away, risking yourself, and there will be less fatalities. Even though she was being shot at, she still went on to take the shooter down. I would like to say that I would try to take them out but I probably would have ran or hid. I've had dreams about this sort of thing where I attacked the shooter from when they weren't looking. That's probably the only thing I would be brave enough to do.
7. What does this incident say about race relations in America? Specifically with Arab-Americans and Muslims? Is there a reason that Muslims and people from the Arab world feel a certain way about
America?
I think that people in America, often see all Muslims as the enemy just because of what happened in 2001 and who we are at war with. That doesn't mean that all Arab-Americans and Muslims are all bad and trying to conspire to kill Americans. Like I said before, if people accused it of being an inside attack, they would be accused of being racist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
