| ||||||||||||
RefBan
Thursday, August 23, 2012
The Most Annoying Things You Do with Your Phone That You Should Quit (or At Least Be Aware Of)
August 23rd, 2012Top StoryThe Most Annoying Things You Do with Your Phone That You Should Quit (or At Least Be Aware Of)By Thorin Klosowski
Last week we asked you what annoys you most about how people use their smartphones. Many of you shared your pet peeves, but just as often you'd admit you're also guilty of doing these annoying things. It's impossible to make hard rules about phone etiquette, since you might find annoying what I find perfectly acceptable, but at the very least, it's worthwhile to know that some people might be annoyed by your behavior. In this post, we're rounding up the most common, most annoying smartphone habits, offering some quick fixes, then providing a longer list of other common complaints you may want to keep in mind next time you reach for your phone. Problem: The Multi-Tasking Driver
Solution: Remove the TemptationWhen we talked about how to drive safely while using your cell phone, we emphasized that the only real way to use a cell phone safely in your car is to not use it all. That's easier said than done for some people. If your willpower for blocking out a cell phone ring is weak, silence your phone before you get in the car so you're not distracted by it. For those who absolutely must answer their phones, your best bet is to grab a bluetooth headset for hands-free use (here are five good ones to get you started). If your phone also doubles as a GPS and music player, you can integrate your phone into your car for easy access, voice control, and music playing. Photo by eyeliam. Problem: The Smartphone Addict
Solution 1: The Crossword RuleIn Real Simple's Tech Etiquette Manual, author Will Schwalbe suggests that if you wouldn't work on a crossword puzzle in a situation, then it's probably not a good time to dawdle away on your smartphone. You can break the rule for minor things like a call or text, but as a guide to knowing when it's okay to sit around and play a game or check Facebook, the crossword rule is a handy reminder. Essentially, if someone is in front of you and wants your attention, it's probably not the best time to tap away on your phone. Solution 2: Wean Yourself AwaySometimes, your smartphone addiction is just that: an addiction. You should treat it like any other addiction and wean yourself off of it. We've talked about doing this by outlining your own rules of use (no phone usage at social events, no answering calls on a date, or no smartphone usage during short-term interactions), and disabling alerts. If you're struggling to unhinge your smartphone addiction, you can also forceably block social networks during certain times of the day so you can reclaim your attention span and enjoy the moment. Photo by John. Problem: The Poorly Timed Smartphone Photographer
Solution: Take the Picture Now; Edit and Upload LaterThis solution is pretty simple. If you're in a situation where you're interacting with people, say, at dinner, or a concert, feel free to take as many photos as you want. But when you're done, hold off on the editing, cropping, and sharing until after the event. Photo by Chris Radcliff. Problem: The World Is Your Phone Booth
The issue only gets worse when that annoying someone goes on to talk loudly it public spaces, hold business conversations in the bathroom, or talk about his breakup on the bus. Josh Smith's issue is the weirdness of one-sided conversation:
Solution: Step Away from Groups of People or Respond LaterJust because you don't care if your conversation remains private doesn't mean everyone wants to hear it. The basic rule of thumb here is pretty simple: if you're going to talk on the phone in a public spot, step away from other people. Always. When you take that call, make sure you excuse yourself politely. If you're stuck in a small public space, like a bus, try and keep the conversation as short as possible, and speak at a normal volume. The same goes for any other small room you might find yourself in. And don't talk on the phone in a public restroom. No excuses—just don't do it. Photo by Lee Brimelow. Problem: Texting vs. Phone Call
Solution: The Response Time TestIn most cases, choosing between a call and a text depends a lot on your history with a person. For many, the two forms of communication mean different things: a call usually means you're looking for an immediate response. A text message is often seen as more passive, and it's acceptable if it gets ignored for a while. This isn't a hard and fast rule by any means, and your previous interactions with people should help define how they prefer contact. So, ask yourself, how quickly do I want a response? If you're making plans for dinner right this second, you need a response to a question, or anything else right now, a phone call is the preferred way to go. If time isn't a big deal, and the response is likely just a couple sentences, a text message is fine. Photo by Joi Ito. What You Said: More of Your Biggest Annoyances
The Checkout ChatterboxNobody likes the person using their cell phone in the checkout lane (or worse, when they're the person operating the checkout lane). Being on the receiving end of these moments, reader PamalaW80 is justifiably annoyed and points out how talking on your phone in line inconveniences pretty much everyone:
The Loud TyperReader HateCellPhones echoes a common annoyance from the thread: people who keep the sound on their touchscreen keyboards:
The Movie Theater RingtoneYou know that person who doesn't silence their phone in the movie theater and ruins the movie for everyone? Reader sums up the problem well:
The Walkie-TextieWhen you're texting and walking, you're not paying attention to your surroundings, and subsequently you're more likely to run into someone (or something). Reader Jonnowitts explains:
All of these annoyances boil down to one simple thing: people are annoyed when others draw attention to the fact they're on a cell phone. It's as simple as that. If you don't want to annoy those around you, make a mental note of the above annoyances, and try being polite whenever you can.  |
|
How Women Could Easily Lose All Their Rights, As Told By A Game
August 23rd, 2012Top StoryHow Women Could Easily Lose All Their Rights, As Told By A GameBy Patricia Hernandez
Now imagine all of this happening during a time when we've perfected space travel and cryogenic stasis. Is that possible? Can we waltz into the future without carrying 'progress' there with us? Won't technology pave the way for a better tomorrow; isn't this the promise found at the nucleus of science? Christine Love, developer behind Analogue: A Hate Story and current Indiecade finalist, isn't so sure. Analogue, which takes the previous surreal-sounding premise and was released earlier this year to much praise, is a game that takes the idea of an advanced civilization gone awry. This allows it to create a harrowing tale of a woman pushed too far. A woman who cannot deal with being treated as less than human and goes insane, killing everybody aboard her spaceship. The story is fictional, but it's based on an actual time period; the Joseon Dynasty in Korea. This was a point in Korea's life when its society became strangely backwards thanks to internal strife and crisis—much like 9/11 set up conditions that allowed the war on terror to become a perpetual state of being in the United States. Now that Christine Love is working on the follow-up, DLC for Analogue titled 'Hate Plus,' she hopes to tackle one of the failings of Analogue. Some players might've not realized that the point is that we are always just a step away from the type of society depicted in Analogue. "It's sort of easy to dismiss as just 'oh, that's just how it was in the past, it's all cool now!' Christine told me via instant messenger. Neo-Confucianism—the central ideology behind the Joseon Dynasty—making a comeback? Not likely. Of course, it would be naive to think such a thing is completely impossible, especially with the burgeoning science of cliodynamics—or, the study of historical dynamics which has uncovered that "history repeats itself" is more than a tired cliche. It's a thing whose existence is more and more proven real by mathematics. And with the constant media reminders of politicians who seem keen on mandating the ways a woman can be in charge of her own body, fearing a future where similar basic human rights are stripped from women is not wholly outlandish. "I think it's a cop-out to dismiss philosophies as unimaginable and unempathizable, just because they're also reprehensible. For one thing, you can't fight what you don't understand." "It WAS a huge regression… in a way that North America right now kinda scarily reminds me of! You know, troubled times leading to nostalgia for the good old days (that didn't really exist), presenting modern inventions as being tradition," Christine mused. "A lot of the tenets of neo-Confucianism were not actually things that were ever tradition; it makes me think of, say, the notion that being anti-abortion is a fundamental part of being Christian in the United States right now when really it's just something that dates to like the '70s. Only instead of selectively quoting Confucius, it's selectively quoting the bible." Plus, it's curious to note that modern times have no shortage of what Naomi Klein calls "shock doctrines," or man-made crises engineered specifically to create the opportunity to push problematic reforms—like the destruction of women's rights. Hypothetically, of course. But shock doctrine is why we have an utter erosion of rights in the in the United States right now—the Patriot Act is an example—all in the name of democracy. Anna Anthropy puts it best when she states "a woman's apocalypse is not the terror of technological regression, but of social regression: not a strange and unknown future but the imposition of an all-too-familiar past....doesn't describe a far future nightmare, but a near one: the protagonist is a woman like me or you, living in her own house, dressing how she wants, fucking partners of her own choosing, whose world is changed overnight into one in which she is property, a walking, breathing womb, existing only so that she may carry a man's child." It's no accident that the central character of Analogue is a teenager much like any other that might exist today. For Christine, creating the story is no easy thing. During development she would often remark on the necessity of being drunk—which is not uncommon for a writer, to be sure. But you don't often hear about authors who have difficulty writing because the subject is just that reprehensible and disgusting...but it takes playing Analogue to have a good idea of what this means, exactly. Suffice it to say that as I personally played, it wasn't uncommon for me to feel uneasy if not nauseated by the tale. "Oh god, it's going to be terrible and scary to live in [the villains'] head for months...they're an evolutionary psychologist!" Christine exclaimed. Still, it's an important exercise for her to undergo. "I'm kinda interested in how those ideas take root, both in people, and also in society. Nobody ever just wakes up one day and says "yeah, I hate women, I wish we'd stop letting them read." The curiosity, to me—as a personal friend of Christine—seems to extend beyond needing to get into the appropriate headspace to write. As someone who struggles with mild Autism, Christine can sometimes have difficulty with social interactions, if not understanding feelings and emotions . It also seems like no mistake that most of her games feature AIs—her early game, Digital: A Love Story, can be said to be a story where you teach an AI how to love. In this way, writing to me can sometimes seem as something Christine does to come to terms with her issues, if not overcome them. But there's a more tangible benefit of figuring out how to write from the point of view of a misogynistic society, too. It can help us consider how to better deal with the reality it proposes. "I think it's a cop-out to dismiss philosophies as unimaginable and unempathizable, just because they're also reprehensible. For one thing, you can't fight what you don't understand," Christine explained. "And secondly… when presented with things that are unimaginably bad like that, people often like to think 'oh, I wouldn't be like that, I'd be different' and I think it's pretty important that people realize that no, they wouldn't. At least, not if they didn't understand the causes of it." Hate Plus takes place right after A Hate Story, with your character returning to Earth after having discovered the tragedy that occurred on the spaceship. The plan is to shed some light on what, exactly, were the circumstances that led to the society breaking down and reverting to a less progressive philosophy. Click to view Prior to Hate Plus, these circumstances were a piquant mystery: the player had no idea what happened to make things the way they were. This makes the prospect of Hate Plus an exciting one, as it will finally answer big questions that Analogue left unanswered. It's particularly enticing when you consider that it, too, will take many inspirations from actual history. Christine wants to "draft a plausible political program for women's rights being completely eroded." She expects to undergo heavy research in hefty tomes of Korean history, much like her first game. She teases that if players thought Analogue was sad, they're in for something else on Hate Plus. "I'm sure you can imagine that, if nothing else, what happened to *Mute [a central character in Analogue] in the transition from being in modern society to neo-Joseon was not heartwarming." Hate Plus is hoping to go for the jugular on January of the coming year. (Ryan Jorgensen | Shutterstock)  |
|
The Bain Files: Inside Mitt Romney's Tax-Dodging Cayman Schemes
August 23rd, 2012Top StoryThe Bain Files: Inside Mitt Romney's Tax-Dodging Cayman SchemesBy John Cook
Today, we are publishing more than 950 pages of internal audits, financial statements, and private investor letters for 21 cryptically named entities in which Romney had invested—at minimum—more than $10 million as of 2011 (that number is based on the low end of ranges he has disclosed—the true number is almost certainly significantly higher). Almost all of them are affiliated with Bain Capital, the secretive private equity firm Romney co-founded in 1984 and ran until his departure in 1999 (or 2002, depending on whom you ask). Many of them are offshore funds based in the Cayman Islands. Together, they reveal the mind-numbing, maze-like, and deeply opaque complexity with which Romney has handled his wealth, the exotic tax-avoidance schemes available only to the preposterously wealthy that benefit him, the unlikely (for a right-wing religious Mormon) places that his money has ended up, and the deeply hypocritical distance between his own criticisms of Obama's fiscal approach and his money managers' embrace of those same policies. They also show that some of the investments that Romney has always described as part of his retirement package at Bain weren't made until years after he left the company. Bain isn't a company so much as an intricate suite of steadily proliferating inter-related holding companies and limited partnerships, some based in Delaware and others in the Cayman Islands, Luxembourg, and elsewhere, designed to collectively house roughly $66 billion in wealth in its many crevices and chambers. When Romney left in 1999, he and his wife retained significant investments in many of those Bain vehicles—he claims they are "passive investments" and that they are managed in a blind trust (though the trustee isn't blind enough to meet federal standards of independence). But aside from disparate snippets of information contained in his federal and Massachusetts financial disclosure forms, his 2010 tax returns, and SEC filings, the nature of those investments has been obfuscated by design. When he disclosed his finances to the U.S. Office of Government Ethics in 2007, Romney took care to publish the underlying holdings of many funds he invested with—after disclosing his $1 million-plus stake in "GS 2002 Exchange Place Fund LP," for instance, he listed six pages of individual equities the fund held, from Panera Bread Co. to Tribune Co. But when it came to the Bain investments, he simply listed the value of his investments in odd-sounding entities like "Sankaty High Yield Partners II LP" with no indication of what was inside. In an accompanying note, he claimed that he had tried and failed to get the information: "The filer has requested information about the underlying holdings of these funds and values and income amounts for these underlying holdings. However, the fund managers have informed the filer in writing that this information is confidential and proprietary, and has declined to provide such information." That information—for Sankaty and 20 other funds—is now available here, in the form of 48 documents totaling more than 950 pages. They consist predominantly of confidential internal audited financial statements from 2008, 2009, and 2010, as well as investor letters from the same period, for Bain entities that Romney has previously disclosed owning an interest it. Owing to the timeframe—during and after the catastrophic economic meltdown of 2008—some of the investments show substantial losses. One limited partnership had even entered into liquidation as of October 2008 after failing to meet certain payments owed to partners. Others show astronomical gains. The documents are exceedingly complicated. We don't pretend to be qualified to decode them in full, which is why we are posting them here for readers to help evaluate—please leave your thoughts in the discussion below. We asked an attorney who specializes in complex offshore corporate transactions, including ones involving Cayman Island entities, to review them and help us understand them. (We also asked the Romney campaign. It hasn't responded yet.) The full set can be read here. Here's what we've found so far: Equity Swaps, AIVs, and Mitt Romney's Other Tax-Dodging TricksMitt Romney's Endless 'Retirement' PackageHow Mitt Romney Puts His Money Where Obama's Mouth IsDerivatives, Short Sales, and Mitt Romney's Other Exotic Financial InstrumentsMitt Romney Is the National Enquirer's Banker[Image by Jim Cooke; photo via Getty]  |
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)