In a 7–2 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States has struck down a California law outlawing the selling certain violent video games to minors. Parents have to take responsibility for the games their children play.
I don’t play and don’t like shoot–em–up style video games. But nevertheless, this decision is the correct one.
Americans are some of the most uninformed people on the planet. Part of this is due to the quasi–propaganda that is fed to people by talking heads on cable news. It causes a divisive society where people don’t think critically, where they believe demonstrably false lies, and where the pundits form their opinions and do the thinking for them.
If a proposed new regulation at the CRTC goes through, that is what will happen to Canada. What those regulations do is make it easy to spread false or misleading news.
Many comments have already been sent to the CRTC; those comments are negative. You can send your own comments by clicking here and scrolling to “2011–14″ and clicking on the submit button. I sent in my comment and (if you’re Canadian) so should you. Let the CRTC know what a bad idea this new regulation is.
(Note: I’m stickying this post until the CRTC comment period expires; scroll down for new posts)
Wikipedia is celebrating ten years today.
This is an example of the amazing democratization of information the internet and Web 2.0 have wrought. Other examples include things such as blogs, social networking sites, and “sharing” services like YouTube. Web 2.0 gives easy access to pretty much whatever information you want (no guarantees of quality, though). Web 2.0 also gives you easy access to other people. In many ways, we all know more facts and more people.
In light of my comments above, Wikipedia is an excellent example of Web 2.0. It is certainly more accurate than some random rant page, if only because so many people see it. This also has disadvantages, as it is obvious that a lot more people are interested in celebrities than in third world legislators. Hence, the surplus of coverage in one area and the deficiency in the other. Other problems might be the bureaucracy and power structure behind the users.
All in all, Wikipedia is far from perfect; one of the reasons it got so big was because it got started first. There are certain to be challenges in the years ahead, as society and the internet continue to evolve.
I found out from SUZIE ALLCAPS’s place that Lieshite, I mean LifeSiteNews, has run out of money and is raising funds.
The appropriate reaction to this is as follows:
Play the world's smallest violin
For those who don’t know, the website in question is a news site that covers various events from a Christian, anti–abortion perspective.
My advice to them is as follows. If you look at their front page, you’ll see stories such as a new anti–gay law in Malawi, the progress of a Canadian bill that will include gender identity in anti–discrimination measures, whining about increased secularism in Europe, an initiative by the Brazilian government to combat homophobia, and additional rubbish along similar lines.
The key thread here is that those things have absolutely nothing to do with abortion. Rather than trying to be inyourunderwearnews.com— I get first dibs on that website 
— Lieshite should stop covering things that are irrelevant to the abortion debate. If it instead focused solely on abortion, and covered things such as how contraception and sex education reduce the abortion rate, it would be more responsible with its money and therefore not have to try raising funds, as well as advance its cause better.
Picture from the archives of Pam’s House Blend.
I have extremely important and exclusive information. It involves the War on Christmas. Did you know that the Homosexual Agenda is targeting it? The information is after the jump and, before you go there, make sure to pray to end this persecution.
Wikipedia has surpassed the 3 million article milestone. Article 3 million is Beate Eriksen.
Wikipedia has both good stuff and bad stuff. For example, it covers American roads, recent tropical cyclones, and popular culture very well. And these are some interesting topics. But it is also lacking in the hard sciences; coverage of those is rather deficient.
There’s also the power structure involved. For example, there is a claim that being a sysop/administrator (a kind of user with special privileges) is “No big deal“. That claim is utter nonsense. You see, if being an administrator is no big deal, why is (you or someone else) losing it such a big deal? And again, if adminship is no big deal, why is (you or someone else) remaining an admin such a big deal?
I am not sure whether Wikipedia will be a success in the long term. By its nature it covers current events better as articles can be updated in nearly real time as information becomes available. But this will not improve its coverage of neglected topics; lesser–known countries, more obscure fields, and the like. However, its power structure and hierarchy will simply get worse as users try to pad their egos and have power over others.
