Good Old Neon

Bebot - it's not free, but it's well worth all 199 pennies.

A review:

There are some iPhone apps that are just plain ridiculous, and there are others that look ridiculous, but under the surface, contain something extraordinary. Normalware’s BeBot—Robot Synth is one of those remarkable apps.

At first glance, the $2 BeBot simply presents a fun retro style robot character. As you run your fingertip along the screen of your iPhone or iPod touch, you can produce sound and make the robot dance and sing. This alone can entertain a three-year-old (or the three-year-old in you) for hours. What’s not so apparent, though, is that underneath it all, BeBot is a very powerful, four-voice synthesizer.

If you double-tap the icon in the lower right corner, this will expose controls for various presets, such as Theremin, Syntharp, and Pulse Wave Modulation. (You can also save presets of your own.) Within each preset are other controls, such as Synth Control, Effects and Scale. Without going into too much detail, these controls give you an almost infinite range of voicings you can produce.

The best way to learn how to use an app this complex and powerful is to actually see it in action. The developer’s Web site provides some examples, but Jordan Rudess, keyboardist for the progressive rock band Dream Theater, has put together a video that is the best BeBot tutorial I’ve seen.

BeBot—Robot Synth is a good example of what the iPhone platform is all about. From the perspective of both a musician and software developer, the iPhone provides a new and unique framework upon which completely new classes of instruments (and other programs) can be created. The only improvements I would suggest would be the ability to record/save your BeBot creations and to share custom settings with other users. In any case, BeBot is a truly incredible application that can entertain both serious musicians and three-year-olds equally as well.

BeBot—Robot Synth is compatible with any iPhone and iPod touch running the iPhone 2.x software update.

link - http://www.find.macworld.com/appguide/app.html?id=69922

I disagree. I've got three boys (one isn't five yet) and used to teach pre-school: they can comprehend full consequences. Depends on the kid, too, of course.

It varies by the child, but more often than not, young children are impulsive and do not understand the real world consequences of their actions, which is why we spend the first half a dozen years or so teaching them how to not kill themselves – among a million and one other things. They understand the concept of right and wrong (more or less), but at five years of age, even though they may understand that playing with matches is dangerous (because mommy or daddy told them), they don’t really and truly understand, say, that their actions could kill them, burn the house down, etc.

Somehow, the vast majority of us get the point across without the need to have our children “arrested” when they display, or repeatedly display inappropriate behavior. It is certainly possible that this child is or has been displaying anti-social behavior, but again, at five years old, that type of behavior, if it is to be corrected, is best treated in a doctor’s office, not the backseat of a police car.

Funny that a show with a Chinese name would inspire a 3 year old child to learn Japanese.

Hence the need for a translator.

As would I. This mother isn't one of them. She passed the buck to a ridiculously stupid public safety officer. Saying, "If you do something stupid and dangerous, there will be serious consequences" is great, but saying, "If you do something stupid and dangerous, I will flip my shit, overreact, and apply consequences that are not age appropriate" doesn't send a good message to the kid.

 

Kids in the age demographic for Blue's Clues and Sesame Street don't belong in the back of a cruiser, unless it's a tour at a block party or they actually have broken a law.

This.

At five years old, a child is simply not equipped to comprehend the full consequences of their actions, up to and including being handcuffed and then deposited into the back of a police cruiser for playing with matches. The fact that this person had to go to such lengths suggests, to me, that at some point, her ability to parent and/or control her child (or secure her matches/lighter) suffered a major breakdown – and rather than involve the police, she and her child would be better served by a trip to a child psychologist – assuming the child is crazy obsessed with fire, and wasn’t just being a toddler.

I can forgive a child for making a poor decision, playing with matches - I’m not as charitable with respect to the parent. There’s tough love, and then there’s poor parenting – this is a case of poor parenting.

To stop watching crappy shows?

Crappy to you and I? Perhaps – but to a 3 year old, it’s pure unadulterated sugary day-glo goodness. However, her TV watching time is strictly monitored, to the degree to which she, rather than her mom or I, shuts the TV off after watching her 1 allotted episode of the show of her choice – it’s usually a toss-up between Ni Hoa, Max and Ruby or my personal favorite, The Wonder Pets. Plus, half of our conversations now involve the use of Japanese, a direct result of Ni Hao – I have no idea what the hell it is she’s saying, and I’ve weighed the benefits of hiring a translator.

 

How many of you that don't think this is a big deal would do this to your kid? I mean, if it's not a big deal, then it would be a no-brainer, right? Kid does something dangerous, call a cop and throw them in the back of a cruiser. Or is this just okay for other parents to do?

I called Homeland Security on account of my 3 year old daughter always yelling “jihad Taliban, jihad Taliban, jihad Taliban” turns out she was really just begging to watch her favorite show, Ni Hao Kailan. Whoops – my bad, but I think she learned a lesson- what that lesson is, I’m not sure, but whatever.

I mentioned the pediatrician because playing with matches, chronically and obsessively, is dangerous, anti-social behavior, thank you.

 

See, I think this is a situation where there are absolutes, so we really *don't* need to know what happened. (ETA: For the record, there are equally as many aspects of parenting for which there ar not absolutes). Parents do many, many things out of frustration, but as you say, they don't usually involve psychiatrists or handcuffs. And this one involved foresight. She actually thought, in that excellent brain of hers, that this was a good idea, and found someone equally dumb enough to go along with her. Lucky her!

 

I'm not saying parents don't get frustrated - I was raised by two, in fact, and have the ability to recognize that I wasn't an easy kid to raise. My parents made their own mistakes, one of which I not only remember, but I also remember that my mother didn't apologize, and I'm still doing that same behavior (not picking up after myself 100%) today.

 

I'm saying that there are things you absolutely do not do to five year-old kids, one of which is making their public safety officer a fearful figure, the second of which is introducing the penal system regarding something that, let's remember, isn't even a crime.

This.

Edit: With that said, the kid should contact Gloria Allred and press wrongful arrest charges against his mother, the cop, the state of Florida, Walt Disney’s corpse and a bunch of other stuff.

Thanks for proving me correct on the kidnappings.

You neglected to super-size an important point:

From the LA Times:

Despite perceptions, crime in border areas, including Arizona, mostly down

Before and after Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signed the state’s new law to crack down in illegal immigration, we heard the rhetoric about crime and the Grand Canyon State. "We cannot sacrifice our safety to the murderous greed of drug cartels,” Brewer said last month when she signed SB 1070 into law.

Well, as so often happens with immigration -- not to mention Arizona -- the reality is complicated and nuanced. It’s true that Phoenix has experienced a spike in kidnappings, thanks to the warring cartels. In an eye-popping article last year, our colleague Sam Quinones described the troubling trend in a report from Phoenix:

Arizona has become the new drug gateway into the United States. Roughly half of all marijuana seized along the U.S.-Mexico border was taken on the state's 370-mile border with Mexico.

One result is an epidemic of kidnapping that many residents are barely aware of. Indeed, most every other crime here is down. But police received 366 kidnapping-for-ransom reports last year, and 359 in 2007. Police estimate twice that number go unreported.

But in an equally eye-popping report, another Times staffer wrote recently that “by many measures, Arizona has become safer since illegal immigrants began pouring into the state in the 1990s.” Staff writer Nicholas Riccardi added:

Crime has dropped all across the country since then, but the decrease has been as fast or faster in Arizona. The rate of property crimes in the state, for example, has plummeted 43% since 1995, compared with 30% nationwide.

Then on Friday's front page (remember front pages?) Riccardi reports that crime has dropped along the entire U.S.-Mexico border. This isn’t to say crime doesn’t exist. But in many places it has hopscotched the border area itself, as Riccardi notes:

But a review of crime statistics for the largest communities and interviews with law enforcement officials from Texas to California show that, despite a widespread perception that the violence in Mexico has spread north, U.S. border communities are fairly secure. Some have even become safer.

"It's not spilling over to our side of the border," said William Lansdowne, police chief in San Diego, where violent crime has dropped 8% in the last three years. "We police it really well."

Which all goes to show that, as is so often the case with immigration and politics and crime, perception is a powerful thing.

-- Steve Padilla

But see, what I stated is correct. What you state is not.

 

Arizona - the city of Phoenix in particular has one of the highest rates for kidnappings. That is the truth.

 

 

From the LA Times:

Despite perceptions, crime in border areas, including Arizona, mostly down

Before and after Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signed the state’s new law to crack down in illegal immigration, we heard the rhetoric about crime and the Grand Canyon State. "We cannot sacrifice our safety to the murderous greed of drug cartels,” Brewer said last month when she signed SB 1070 into law.

Well, as so often happens with immigration -- not to mention Arizona -- the reality is complicated and nuanced. It’s true that Phoenix has experienced a spike in kidnappings, thanks to the warring cartels. In an eye-popping article last year, our colleague Sam Quinones described the troubling trend in a report from Phoenix:

Arizona has become the new drug gateway into the United States. Roughly half of all marijuana seized along the U.S.-Mexico border was taken on the state's 370-mile border with Mexico.

One result is an epidemic of kidnapping that many residents are barely aware of. Indeed, most every other crime here is down. But police received 366 kidnapping-for-ransom reports last year, and 359 in 2007. Police estimate twice that number go unreported.

But in an equally eye-popping report, another Times staffer wrote recently that “by many measures, Arizona has become safer since illegal immigrants began pouring into the state in the 1990s.” Staff writer Nicholas Riccardi added:

Crime has dropped all across the country since then, but the decrease has been as fast or faster in Arizona. The rate of property crimes in the state, for example, has plummeted 43% since 1995, compared with 30% nationwide.

Then on Friday's front page (remember front pages?) Riccardi reports that crime has dropped along the entire U.S.-Mexico border. This isn’t to say crime doesn’t exist. But in many places it has hopscotched the border area itself, as Riccardi notes:

But a review of crime statistics for the largest communities and interviews with law enforcement officials from Texas to California show that, despite a widespread perception that the violence in Mexico has spread north, U.S. border communities are fairly secure. Some have even become safer.

"It's not spilling over to our side of the border," said William Lansdowne, police chief in San Diego, where violent crime has dropped 8% in the last three years. "We police it really well."

Which all goes to show that, as is so often the case with immigration and politics and crime, perception is a powerful thing.

-- Steve Padilla

Link - http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/05/arizona-immigration-crime-border-safer.html

Well done posting something useless.

Thank you, you never fail to bring out the best in me.

 

 

 

 

 

HAHAHAHA

 

Rarely do they give a shit. Especially when it prevents them from going on a trip.

I don’t know, based on my experience, teens are often very idealistic – probably a result of not yet reaching adulthood and all the daily little compromises associated with it, adulthood.

You'll see, just wait until you turn 13.

Pretty much yeah I am.

 

Being on plenty of traveling sports teams, I have never nor has my teammates ever been happy about a canceled trip. We would for sure be super pissed if it was due to political games played by adults.

 

 

Have you even considered the possibility that the students/players were in favor of canceling the trip for political reasons? Teenagers especially can be very idealistic, and I would not be a bit surprised if they championed and/or played a role in the decision to stay the hell away from AZ – which, though the scenery is nice, is just way too fucking hot anyway. The one time I was there it was 110 degrees…at 2 in the morning.

One of these days, a house is going to fall on that bitch.

Really?! That didn't seem to foreshadow a little scene that we saw in a certain Season 5 Season Finale final scene?

 

I think we need to focus more on the actions and motivations of the characters rather than the mysitcal "box".

 

What type of man kills a man who killed who his parents in cold blood? It helped solidify the Sawyer character and lent him some closure. I don't think he could play house with Juliet in Dharmaville if he wasn't given the chance of closing the book on killing this man. He had to get it out of his system. This was integral to the story of Sawyer.

 

What type of man lets one man kill someone who wronged both of them and watches it before his eyes? This helped foreshadow the single instance where MIB probably said "this is my man right here. this guy is perfect for my scheme." This helped say a lot about Locke. Did he let this happen because he was pissed about Cooper and not being with Helen?

I don’t think any of these examples really lend further depth and/or help explain the future motivations of either character – both of whom had already expressed a desire to kill Locke’s dad for reasons that didn’t really require further emphasis – especially by way of a magic box that could, if I recall correctly, grant any wish – only to then disappear without further exposition. I suppose the “box” could be a metaphor for the island itself, blah blah blah…but one of my criticisms of the show has always been the often convoluted lengths the writers often go to explain, or, perhaps more commonly, set up scenarios that ultimately don’t add up to all that much or just sort of fizzle out.

I think there’s a fair amount of truth behind the charge that a good deal of what occurred in the first few seasons had little to do with where the show is now headed – all those red herrings that have gone and will mostl likely go unanswered. Maybe this has already been addressed in a previous season/episode, but what the hell was the point of bringing Locke’s “father” to the island using Ben’s special box, to have Sawyer kill him – why? What the hell does or did that have to do with anything? I can understand that the writers were attempting to create an elaborate mythos surrounding the show’s story, but they were really pretty sloppy at times, and I think some of that sloppiness will and/or has come back to haunt them in the end.

With that said, I think that the origins of that golden glowing watery stuff will be found within Marcellus Wallace’s brief case.

no one has said it verbatim, but it has been said, "people die" and "what were people supposed to do, CPR?" and I just sense a general "who really gives a fuck? it happens." those kinds of attitudes piss me off and justify the point of this thread - that there is a lack of responsibility among people who don't want to "get involved" or whatever. I can't even speak about it anymore. ugh! frustrating!

 

 

 

 

then I don't get the point. just because he may have died instantly doesn't make people's apathy excusable. that probably isn't your point either, but I just don't get the fact that people can make excuses for the lack of response to someone lying bleeding and motionless on the street.

My only point was that, if he was indeed stabbed in the heart, his death was probably near instantaneous – that’s it, I wasn’t passing value and/or moral judgment.

 

 

 

 

yeah, so then it's no big deal then. it's all good. carry on. whatever.

That wasn’t my point at all – I was just making a comment based on observation.

hello! there is video that SHOWS PEOPLE WALKING BUY AND DOING NOTHING FOR HOURS!!!!! it's on tape! it's a very big deal in my opinion. it's great that someone called 911, but they didn't call soon enough because he laid there for hours and DIED! he could have been saved.

I’m not making excuses or trying to justify the actions of those who were present, and I don’t know all the particulars, but if he was stabbed in the heart, which, based on the way he collapsed, it appears as though he was, in all likelihood, he was probably dead within minutes of collapsing.

but neither are benchmarks for the downfall of humanity.

That would be them liberals.

i'm looking for some good book recommendations.

 

i love vonnegut

It might take more than 46 years to change behavior that was probably pretty much built into our software, unfortunately.

I voted.

Like me, does it freak you out that a quarter century has passed since you took your last high school exam???

I’m totally freaking the f*ck out….