But Seriously

Texting Lingo Every Parent Needs to Know (from FOTF)

Texting is everywhere. It seems that kids can text before they can even spell--but some of those misspelled and nonsense texts are actually codes. The article below describes some of the kinds of codes used in texting and links to a tech dictionary for text abbreviations. I did not copy the whole FOTF article, so click the link at the bottom of the page if you want to read it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assuming your son or daughter has a cell phone, do they text?

 

The Pew Research group recently concluded that most teens prefer texting to talking - with a third of them sending over 100 messages a day.

 

Tolerance for this type of behavior varies by family, of course, but almost no parent would knowingly permit their son or daughter to text crude, lewd or obscene messages.

 

But what about more vague or coded communications?

 

It takes a deft and alert parent to stay up to date on texting lingo, especially since the lexicon is constantly expanding and often doesn't make any logical sense. For example, if your child happens to text "420" to a friend, you better be prepared for a serious talk.  That's because texting "420" is the equivalent of asking if the other person has pot - or wants to get high. Apparently "420" is a universal symbol for the use and appreciation of marijuana.

 

Online tech dictionaries can help get you up to speed (click here), but the proliferation of coded sexual texting is enough to make your head spin.

via www.focusonlinecommunities.com

 

Adobe Photoshop CS5 Learning Center

via www.photoshopuser.com

National Association of Photoshop Professionals just launched their learning center for Adobe Creative Suite 5. This new version does some amazing things. Check out the link above and watch the videos on Content Aware Fill and HDR processing.

NAPP members get special perks like Photoshop User magazine, great online tutorials and discounts (including discounts on Adobe CS5 products).

Click the image below to join NAPP:

Spelling City

SpellingCity.com can give you the spelling help you need to make spelling fun for your kids.

Can you imagine watching your child tackle his or her weekly spelling list with as much enthusiasm as a video game? Do you find yourself at a loss for how to make weekly spelling practice exciting? Are you looking for some free spelling help  for your child?

SpellingCity.com is on a mission to make spelling more fun, and give you the spelling help you are looking for. Our spelling program is a breakthrough.  All parents and students, whether you are involved with a public, private, or homeschool, can use SpellingCity.com to make spelling lists, practice for spelling tests, and make instant spelling and word games to play online or print out.

Want to see how it works? Watch SpellingCityTube!

via www.spellingcity.com

Today, in a parent-teacher conference, I mentioned that we are linking my son's video game privileges to his school performance, specifically spelling. He just doesn't like writing his spelling words over and over. She suggested SpellingCity.com, where he can practice spelling words in a computer based game. She said that her kids love it. I am all for making learning fun so we are adding SpellingCity to our arsenal of learning tools. If you're kids are like mine and they don't like spelling, check it out and watch those grades go up.

Adobe Creative Suite 5 Launch

Adobe Creative Suite 5 Launch

Adobe Creative Suite 5 is on the way. Launch date is April 12 at 8 am PDT. Click the link above to register.

CS5 promises to be AMAZING!  Check out this video demonstrating "Content Aware Fill"

Real Clear Politics: The Climate Change Travesty

WASHINGTON -- With 20,000 delegates, advocates and journalists jetting to Copenhagen for planet Earth's last chance, the carbon footprint of the global warming summit will be the only impressive consequence of the climate change meeting. Its organizers had hoped it would produce binding caps on emissions, global taxation to redistribute trillions of dollars, and micromanagement of everyone's choices. . . .

. . . Were their science as unassailable as they insist it is, and were the consensus as broad as they say it is, and were they as brave as they claim to be, they would not be "goaded" into intellectual corruption. Nor would they meretriciously bandy the word "deniers" to disparage skepticism that shocks communicants in the faith-based global warming community.

Skeptics about the shrill certitudes concerning catastrophic man made warming are skeptical because climate change is constant: From millennia before the Medieval Warm Period (800 to 1300), through the Little Ice Age (1500 to 1850), and for millennia hence, climate change is always a 100 percent certainty. Skeptics doubt that the scientists' models, which cannot explain the present, infallibly map the distant future.

via www.realclearpolitics.com

I spent years studying natural sciences and I have a degree in biology. From the time Al Gore came out with his inconvenient "documentary" I have been skeptical of his claims because the only thing constant about our climate is change. George Will of Real Clear Politics does a fantastic job of expressing what I, and many other scientifically minded individual, have been thinking. 

On the political front, his article is clear and concise. On the scientific front, one can find an abundance of evidence that global warming is not occurring at an alarming rate to include articles by the New York Times about stable temperatures and evidence that polar bears, the global warming mascot, are increasing in numbers.  One could correctly argue that the New York Times is not politically neutral, but the NYT's political bias is generally in favor of the global warming alarmist, so an NYT article that publish facts that contradict the hysteria of global warming should spur thought even among GW adherents.

Image sourced from ClimateProgress.org

Welfare Cell Phones

via www.safelinkwireless.com

Verified by TruthorFiction.com

On the surface, it sure seems nice that our government provides welfare phones to needy individuals. Phones are the best way to contact emergency services, like 911. Interestingly, the purpose of the program is not to provide a means to contact emergency services (even a deactivated cell phone can still call 911). Rather, the purpose of the program is to allow recipients to stay up to date with current communication technologies. According to Reuters, the FCC says it is meant to " keep the right to communicate in pace with technology." Yes, the FCC says communication is a right and therefore, everyone should have a cell phone.

The Lifeline cell phone program has been around since 1984. Participants must prove eligibility by being currently enrolled in good standing in another government assistance program (food stamps, etc) and they must verify eligibility requirements annually.

Depending on the state, participants receive a cell phone and approximately 60 minutes of air time. They are able to purchase additional air time if they desire. 

Digging beneath the surface, one must wonder when cell phone communication became a right?  Why does the government feel it is necessary to give phones and phone service away?  Is the program providing a legitimate benefit to people with legitimate need?  Of course it is--but that benefit is more of a "luxury" than a "right."  To my knowledge, there is no audit or oversight of how the minutes are used. How does the FCC assure me that public funded cell phones are not being abused?  I would hate to think that my tax dollars pay for a cell phone to be used to coordinate drug deals or some other illegal activity.

One must wonder if the FCC is attempting to expand this so called right into the realm of the internet through a concept called "net neutrality."  Net neutrality would force internet service providers to deliver the broadband internet bandwidth they promise--which doesn't sound bad.  Take a moment, though, and consider internet bandwidth in terms of traffic: during rush hour, traffic travels significantly below the speed limit.  During low traffic times, vehicles are able to travel at (if not above) the speed limit.  If service providers are going to have to guarantee bandwidth, they will likely guarantee the lowest possible speed to avoid government penalties.  Internet service across the board will become slower and less efficient.  If you visit the FCC's website, Openinternet.gov, you will be able to view a video to explain why the FCC wants to interfere with Internet Service Providers and you will be able to read comments from people who support and oppose the net neutrality argument.  While net neutrality is not built around the concept of government provided "free" internet for all, some of the supporters cry out for free internet service (like this "free" cell phone service).  

I argue that free internet service can already be obtained at most schools and libraries for people who really need it.  I don't think, however, that the government needs to use my tax dollars to subsidize someones internet game habit (or worse).

Google Tips and Tricks

The video below will show you interesting and little know functions in the google search page.  While it won't make you a googling genius or qualify you for a raise at your job, these functions are helpful, convenient, and not widely known.

The video will show you how to use google at a calculator, weather station, and clock.  It will also show you how to search for specific file types or search a specific domain.

Google Secrets - video powered by Metacafe