Edward Snowden is currently holed up in Russia, but the Guardian recently paid him a visit, and today published an interview today in which the former government contractor discussed numerous privacy violations, including the “routine enough”…
The news that Microsoft is shuttering Xbox Entertainment Studios won’t have an effect on its Signal to Noise series, the first episode of which focuses on the rise and fall of former gaming giant Atari. Fuel Entertainment’s (the production house…
It’s no secret that more users than the young, white, straight, American male plays video games here in 2014. Whether or not that means that Atari’s latest mobile game Pridefest is a good fit for the next generation of gamers is another subject entirely. Today ATARI adds more detail to their social-sim game which has players “create and launch their … Continue reading
You may soon get the option to buy something neat you find via Facebook. The company has announced they are testing a “Buy” button on posts which would let you purchase an item on display right from Facebook. The service works from either desktop or mobile. Facebook says your privacy and security are forefront of this feature, and “none of … Continue reading
The Destiny Beta has begun, and just like clockwork, the PlayStation Network – aka PSN – is down. Due to high volume created by what we must assume IS the Destiny Beta release, PSN is experiencing “Connectivity Issues.” You can see the official post via PlayStation Support – if you can access it – which suggests that you Try Again … Continue reading
We’re always on the lookout for interesting new watches, and there seems to be something innovative and exciting cropping up every week. TokyoFlash may be near and dear to my heart, but there are many other watches out there that are eye-catching. If you’re in the market for a new watch, but don’t want something every Joe Schmoe is going to have, then what would you want to snazz up your wrist?
If retina verification is your thing, then the FiDELYS smartwatch may be up your alley, but if you’d prefer projection display, then you might want to look into the Ritot. This is a crowdfunding campaign that is already wildly successful, hitting its goal several times over. They claim that this is the first-ever projection watch. While it may not be a new concept, I haven’t previously seen it for day-to-day wear. Whenever you want to see the time, touch the watch or shake your wrist, and the time will appear on your hand.
The light that it emits can be whichever color from the 20+ options that are available to choose from on the clock base. Messages it displays can also be color-coded to your specifications. It can display caller ID, when you have a text, email, reminder, calendar alert, Facebook message, and more. There is even a vibrating alarm if you want to wear this to bed. There are bracelet and sport versions of this watch, and you can guess which one can take a little more rough and tumble. You will be able to see the projected light no matter day or night, and it should be able to keep it’s light for 150 hours while on, or a month straight in standby on a single charge. It is waterproof, and can display in 12 or 24 hour modes. If you’re worried about being left or right handed, you’ll be happy to know that you can change the side it projects on to. This will cost you around $120, and should it reach another stretch goal, will also include activity tracker capabilities.
Available for crowdfunding on Indiegogo
[ The Ritot is a watch that will project the time on your wrist copyright by Coolest Gadgets ]
Initially the Xbox One wasn’t meant to be just a gaming machine. Microsoft showed off countless features that positioned it as an entertainment device as well. But in the end that didn’t help console sales, which were left far behind by Sony’s PlayStation 4. Microsoft corrected that course by no longer making Kinect mandatory and seeing Xbox One sales almost double and its latest move to align Xbox with the purpose of gaming sadly marks the end of the road for Xbox Entertainment Studios.
Xbox Entertainment Studios was responsible for original shows that were to debt on the console. A new series came out just last month while the Steven Spielberg produced Halo series is also on the cards. Microsoft today confirmed that there will be no new projects which means that there will be no more original shows for the Xbox.
The announcement came through an internal memo sent by Xbox chief Phil Spencer. Acknowledging that while change is never easy Spencer says that the changes announced today will help the company achieve its long-term goals.
Entertainment options on the Xbox are now limited to the TV experience which Microsoft promises to enhance via monthly console updates as well as app partnerships which brings content from other providers like Netflix.
Microsoft announced its biggest round of layoffs today. Over 18,000 people will lose their jobs by next year. The company is also killing Nokia X Android based smartphones and will be moving products over to Windows Phone so that it may continue to compete in the low-end market.
Microsoft Giving Up On Original Shows For Xbox
, original content from Ubergizmo. Read our Copyrights and terms of use.
July 20 marks the 10 year anniversary of Ashlee Simpson’s debut album “Autobiography.” Let that sink in. It means a full decade has past since the “Saturday Night Live” lip-sync debacle, and also since you probably holed up in your room listening to “Shadow,” “Pieces of Me,” “La La” or any one of the album’s 12 angst-ridden tracks.
Over at Myspace (yes, there is something still going on over there, just don’t ask us what) the album’s producer and primary songwriter, John Shanks, recalls the making of the album, and if you are a Simpson fan it’s worth a read.
Here, let’s look back at Simpson in 2004. She was somewhat of an anomaly for a pop star. Like Avril Lavigne, Simpson was marketed as the anti-Britney, or specifically the anti-Jessica — her older, blonder sister — in whose “shadow” Ashlee lived in for years.
To be real, Simpson’s career was born out of pure nepotism. Not to say she wasn’t talented, but it’s likely her pop career would never have happened without her sister. But as we all know, it’s who you know that really matters.
After the “SNL” incident in October 2004, Simpson lost any hope of being taken seriously — even on that minute level people take pop stars seriously — but it didn’t stop her from releasing two more albums and giving the world a song about how she didn’t steal Wilmer Valderrama from Lindsay Lohan (even if she denied that was the track’s intentions, we’re not buying it).
Regardless of how she found her footing in Hollywood, let’s all just take a moment to appreciate the full-on angst she and Shanks gave the world with a few of these super deep lyrics. We won’t blame you if you have the urge to put “La La” on full blast.
“I walked a thousand miles while everyone was asleep/Nobody’s really seen my million subtleties” – “Autobiography”
“I am moody, messy/I get restless, and it’s senseless/How you never seem to care.” – “Pieces of Me”
“I was stuck inside someone else’s life and always second best.” – “Shadow”
“You make me wanna la la, la la la, la la, la la la la la la la la la” – “La La”
“I’ve been waiting all my life/To finally find you/ Just so I can push you away/ And when you’re crawling over broken glass to get to me/ That’s when I’ll let you stay. ” – “Love Me For Me”
“This life’s like livin’ in the gutter/All this pain just makes you feel dead.” – “Giving It All Away”
By Natalia Mehlman Petrzela for Slate
Author’s daughter with her nanny, Nancy.
I was frantically tapping away at my office computer when my phone buzzed. “Nancy,” our nanny’s name, flashed on the screen. Smiling, I swiped through the images of my children she had texted: my 2-year-old daughter, wet from the playground sprinkler, her older brother scooting down the street. The third image was a “selfie” of Nancy and our daughter, their faces crowding the frame.
The picture was sweet, so I did what has become almost instinctual to compulsively connected, smartphone-toting parents like me — I uploaded it to Facebook. And then, writing the caption, I realized: No one would recognize Nancy. Though she has been caring for my family for five years, ever since we arrived home from the hospital clueless as to how to clean the belly button or change the diapers of our newborn son, most of my Facebook friends don’t know her face. During this half-decade of 50-hour workweeks, I’ve shared hundreds of family pictures on social media, yet somehow I had hardly ever before posted a picture of Nancy.
A few minutes scanning through the feeds of friends (an admittedly imperfect sample set) who also share family photos confirms I am not alone. Despite working long hours and performing major emotional labor in the intimate spaces of our homes and with our children, nannies are quite literally left out of the picture. In constructing the most public expressions of our family experience, we — knowingly or unwittingly — are editing out some of the most important people in our children’s lives.
So I added a caption asking my Facebook friends why, exactly, this is. Those imperfect metrics of resonance, “likes” and comments, suggested I hit a nerve, as people I hadn’t heard from in years chimed in with responses ranging from upbeat (“I’ve never thought about this!,” wrote a mom friend of mine. “I’m going to take a picture of my daughter and her nanny and share today!”) to frustrated (a former nanny described herself as “always behind the camera” or “holding the bags” yet too intimidated to ask her employer to snap a photo with her charges), to indifferent (photos of my nanny, one friend wrote, is “something my friends just wouldn’t be interested in seeing”).
Almost as quickly as social media has become a primary mode of self-expression, writers and academic researchers have recognized the negative psychological implications of what is casually known as “Fakebooking”: posting carefully curated tableaus of an idealized life that can be distressing if interpreted as reality. The “mommy blogosphere” has been especially attuned to these issues, spawning a movement to counteract what some see as the troubling exclusion of mothers (with our stretch marks, perennial yoga pants, and tired eyes) from pictures featuring our perfectly groomed offspring. There has been no similar movement to counteract the exclusion of nannies. But when employers refrain from including them in the public displays of family life, we’re giving the false impression that those smiling children are solely the fruits of the efforts of a nuclear family and perpetuating the fiction that some of us really can do it all. Even worse, erasing nannies from the chronicles of our daily lives — which they make possible, as anyone who has had a nanny call in sick will tell you — is a small, insidious contribution to the continued marginalization of domestic labor at large. As one caregiver interviewed by sociologist Arlie Hochschild in her 2012 book, The Outsourced Self, remarked, excelling at her job can mean “making herself invisible.”
“The only time I was ever in a photo was if I initiated,” one woman who worked as a Manhattan nanny for several years told me. “I spent countless hours with this family, but when they moved away, it was my husband I had to ask to take a picture of us together. A lot of people have nannies in New York City, but it sometimes feels like they pretend we don’t really exist until we’re needed. It is my experience [that] the family wants the nanny to feel a part of the family when it is convenient for them. Adding [nannies] to photos could add a new dynamic.”
Communications strategist Erika Soto Lamb told me that she treasures the few visual records of her “camera-shy” nanny with her two children, especially a video in which she and her husband captured her toddler being lovingly scooped up by his nanny while stumbling through his first steps. Lamb, however, almost never shares these images online: “It hasn’t really been a conscious decision not to, [but] I guess it could only be subconscious, right?”
Other mothers — and it is women who most frequently use social media and mothers who tend to navigate the delicate relationship with nannies — cite practical obstacles to sharing photos of their children and nannies online. One mother of three, a professor, “very, very rarely” shares such images because “[our nanny] takes care of my kids when we aren’t around—it’s her experience, not mine.” Parenting blogger Ilana Wiles worries that sharing photos of her nanny might compromise her children’s safety by making them more recognizable, though she acknowledges, “I think our nanny is much more integral to my life than my blog suggests, and I could work harder to show how important she is to our family … both to give her credit where credit is due and to make it really clear to my readers that I am not doing it all.”
There are other concerns I hadn’t considered: The professor remarked she hadn’t thought about this issue, but explained, “Ours is a professional relationship, and I don’t presume she’d want me circulating her images.” Another mother of two commented, “I am not sure about her immigration status, and sharing her image online could be incredibly invasive.” (One answer to these parents: You could simply ask.)
Others directly challenge the warm-and-fuzzy assumption that the nanny is “part of the family” and therefore should be part of the family image. Mother of two and attorney Jenna Lauter Miara commented:
I feel a general discomfort when parents talk about their nannies as “family” because this is often code for an employer who, because he thinks [he is] treating his workers well, doesn’t have to follow rules about wages, hours, etc. I know I sometimes find myself rationalizing getting home late by thinking about how much she likes the kids and how nice we are to her by buying her dinner or giving her an old bookshelf. But that’s not fair—we have to treat her with the same respect we all want as employees.
Mother of two and writer Francesca Kaplan Grossman echoed this ambivalence about the assumptions implicit in inclusion in family photos: “I haven’t thought about this much, but it does strike me that she may not want to be included in my family. And that’s OK. This is her job … there is a slippery danger in supposing too much someone wants to join my family; it makes me feel I am suggesting her family is not worth being in, which I would never want to do.”
For my family, however, I’m convinced that I should include Nancy more fully in our photo chronicles of family life, especially given how I use social media to document my days and, most importantly, her enthusiasm for the idea. Including Nancy publicly explodes any illusion that I “do it all,” since so many of my photos depicting my life working, parenting, and experiencing New York City imply a reserve of energy (and hours) unfathomable without her. More photos of her would furnish an honest and unambiguous reply to that loaded question of “where ever do you find the time?” Answer: in the 50 hours a week she helps care for our children.
It is worth considering why it took me five years to reckon with this issue. In part, my hesitation stemmed from my own ambivalence about how much “help” a working mother “should” have. Would my Facebook friends judge me for missing bedtime for a lecture? An exercise class? A dinner?
The deeper, more vexing questions this issue raises, however, are about race and class. Five years ago, a few days after I posted my first-ever baby album to Facebook, I ran into an acquaintance while on a stroller walk. “You must have hired someone,” she offhandedly commented. “I thought I saw a black hand in one of your pictures.” I didn’t understand at first, and when I did I was tongue-tied. I hadn’t deliberately excluded Nancy from the (probably too many) pictures I’d posted of my son’s first week in the world, but I was instantly ashamed that the woman who had been sleeping on our couch for three nights, who taught me how to nurse and swaddle and burp, was only accidentally visible in our public narrative of this special time, and even worse, identifiable as an anonymous “hired someone” purely by the color of her skin.
Not a single person I spoke with for this article mentioned race, even though a familiar arrangement is a working-class nanny of color employed by a socio-economically privileged white family. (Worth noting: I spoke with employers of color for this piece as well, who, just like their white counterparts, told me they rarely thought to include their nannies in their shared albums.) Though one white nanny recounted to me, “No white families were having this white nanny in any family photos,” my sense is that the prospect of sharing images of a white family ministered to by a caregiver of color raises visceral and uncomfortable emotions about race and power many would rather avoid, especially in the breezy, look-how-perfect-we-are world of Facebook and Instagram. I know on some level I felt this way, too, and in a political culture that shrouds care work in a gray area, there is little pressure to grapple with these emotions at all, much less to do so publicly.
It is easy to dismiss this rumination as old-fashioned guilty white liberal hand-wringing, and there is an element of truth to that criticism: There are far more important, basic issues to tackle in this realm, like fair wages and benefits for domestic workers. And it is of course a great privilege to afford private child care, not to mention to theorize about the social implications of its presence in our visual culture. Yet in disdaining, remaining silent, or ignoring these fraught questions, we miss powerful opportunities to do right by our kids, our caregivers, and our fellow working parents.
Natalia Mehlman Petrzela is assistant professor of history at the New School and is the author of Classroom Wars: Sex, Language, and the Creation of Modern Political Culture, forthcoming from Oxford University Press in 2015. Follow her on Twitter.
Protecting Western Massachusetts Farms: Down with Fracking and the Kinder Morgan Pipeline
Posted in: Today's ChiliCoauthored by Portia Williams Weiskel
For residents of Western Massachusetts, the famous Shay’s Rebellion of 1786-87 has yet to come to an end. The issue then was the rights of farmers who had fought for the American Revolution. Through the years other misguided and invasive projects have been proposed for our beautiful New England region and subsequently halted — the most spectacular act of resistance being local resident Sam Lovejoy’s daring gesture (on George Washington’s birthday, 1974) of toppling the huge weather data collecting towers erected by Northeast Utilities intending to build twin nuclear reactors in the town of Montague.
Now the issue is the extension of the Tennessee Valley Gas pipeline proposal by Kinder Morgan starting in the Berkshire/Tanglewood region on the Massachusetts-New York border. As planned, the 100-foot-wide pipeline is intended to cross the northern tier of Massachusetts bringing fracked gas from Pennsylvania to an export site in the town of Dracut on the Atlantic coastline north of Boston. All things considered (read on) this is the most insane idea to come our way in a long time. For one thing, the pathway will uproot hundreds of acres of pristine forested land, productive farmland, and orchards supported by state funding and tax dollars to be preserved in perpetuity. And gas acquired by fracking? We do need energy sources, but “fracked” gas, in the judgment of many well-informed — and others just using their common sense — is not a sound solution.
So, once again, we stop our lives (perhaps better to think these efforts are our lives) and head to a part of Franklin County we know well from years of searching for wild grapes to make jam each fall. The event is an anti-pipeline demonstration, part of a “rolling walk” along the proposed pipeline route, which ends in Dracut with a rally planned on the Boston Common on July 30 at 11 a.m. Today we are at the Clarkdale Fruit Farms in Deerfield. (See more information on the rolling walk on the group’s website.)
Across the familiar rolling orchard fields rising to the highest ridgeline is a line of red balloons marking the proposed pipeline route. Earlier in the day, farmers Tom Clark and son Ben (who will be carrying on the fourth generation of the family farm) took a group of people from the protest event up the hill to point out the 100-foot wide swath of peach trees, which the pipeline project will destroy. Everyone knows these peaches. Nectarines, cherries, grapes, plums, pears, quince, and about a hundred kinds of apples.
The Clarkdale Fruit Farms event brought together an impressive group of concerned citizens and landowners. State Senator Stephen Kulik addressed the crowd. “Is [the pipeline] necessary for Massachusetts? I’ve concluded that it’s not. I’m convinced that we can satisfy our energy needs for the future through conservation and more renewables, a smarter energy policy. Increasing the use of carbon fuels is not going to benefit us in the long term.” Kulik said:
The vast majority of the gas is going elsewhere, and yet we will bear the burden of the environmental impact, the public safety concerns and just the quality-of-life issue. Public awareness on this issue across the state is not where it is here. This march is a great way to bring attention to it.
Long-term local celebrity residents Bill and Camille Cosby issued a statement read aloud to the gathering: “
The Cosby Family has been and is committed to preserving nature’s beauties and a healthy environment for humans. We honor your collaborative determination and strength to oppose the Kinder-Morgan Tennessee Gas Pipeline’s plan to penetrate our region with its toxicities… and it has political allies; such as, all six New England governors. That is astounding.
Those entities are clear examples of disrespect for humans, flora and fauna. Thank you for challenging its egregious, exploitive strategies to encroach this magnificent area.
Kinder Morgan has already begun surveying land in Western Massachusetts, even as the number of landowners refusing access is growing. Last week, the New York Times reported on one farmer’s attempt to keep surveyors off his land. Without help from the state, landowners could be nearly powerless to stop this behemoth energy company. Only one Massachusetts state law, Article 97, may be able to protect landowners against Kinder Morgan’s taking of easements. The law requires a two-thirds vote by the state Legislature to allow the taking of any lands or easements on land that is already protected by the state. However, this only applied to certain segments of the proposed route.
Many citizens are concerned by the shady-backroom-deal feeling of the whole process. Nick Miller from Stop the Pipeline wrote:
[Kinder Morgan] would very much prefer that the public not know the details of their pipeline plans. They don’t want you questioning the wisdom of their preferred pipeline route and they certainly don’t want you questioning whether we in fact need this huge new pipeline at all.
Kinder Morgan plans to file for a permit to continue the surveying from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in September.
U.S. Congressman James McGovern (D-MA) has also expressed concern over Kinder Morgan’s lack of transparency. He told the Greenfield Recorder “The process is overly secretive and vague. …We’re being told we need this pipeline because it’s important to Massachusetts, yet we have no guarantee the price of energy is going to go down, but we know that Massachusetts ratepayers are going to pay for construction of this. People ought to know what they’re paying for.” He continued, “I am very much against this pipeline. The current proposal ought to be brought to a halt, and I’m joining the march to support people raising their voices and to make it clear I agree with them.”
Such an issue is sure to reactivate the old revolutionary energies to oppose this kind of corporate determination to control our lives. Once again it’s the very specific rights of farmers and landowners being dismissed, overlooked, not even considered…
One can picture the scene: Kinder Morgan officials, sitting around a table, designing this section of the route for the pipeline. Without our knowing what initial calculations were in place, we are certain those planners had no idea what consequences their pipeline would have for this part of the planet and the ecosystems within. The woodlands, breeding grounds, everything down to the insect colonies. The continuity of local economies based on the productive farms, pastures, and, orchards. All kinds of people, especially the landowners whose daily lives, livelihoods, long term plans, proud loyalties to family legacies and traditions. All of it changed utterly.
Portia Williams Weiskel is an organic farmer, writer, and editor living in Western Massachusetts.
Lucia Green-Weiskel is Portia’s daughter.