Parents’ advocacy groups in Canada and the US are successfully getting schools to ban wireless internet access due to health concerns.

Awww, don't cry little guy

It seems as though there have been more of these stories over the last year or so.

Although I think that keeping phones out of the classroom is a good idea (you are there to learn, not text, right?), is banning wifi in public places based on evidence or unjustified fear?

Points from the story:

• In May of 2011 the World Health Organization classified the RF signals sent via cell phones and wifi connections as “possibly carcinogenic”

• Health Canada states that there is “strong evidence” that current exposure levels to wifi signals are not dangerous and no additional precautions are necessary

• Some parents believe that their children have experienced headaches, nausea and heart problems due to exposure to wifi signals

• Magda Havas, a Trent University professor argues that there is research showing that exposure to radio frequencies leads to an increase in tumors for rats

• Dave Michelson, an electrical engineering professor at the University of British Columbia believes that wireless internet is safe and that groups trying to enforce bans are doing more harm than good

What do you think? Is our precious wifi access slowly killing us (get in line wifi, you have a lot of competition), or is this just a “sky is falling” overreaction with not enough evidence to back it up?  

Original Article: WiFi foes fight to rid schools of wireless Internet

It’s not all negative though. Case in point: Facebook announced a program today that may be helpful for people experiencing suicidal thoughts.

Hopefully the service will be helpful

Here’s how it works:

If you see one of your friends expressing suicidal thoughts or intentions, you will be able to click a link next to the comment. Facebook then sends a link to the user with the opportunity to instantly connect (online chat or on the phone) with a crisis counsellor from the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline.

Good idea I guess. Do you think there is a possibility it will be abused though (e.g., pranks)?

www.TechAddiction.ca

Promotes bullying?

“Throughout the entire movie, Santa Clause is saying ‘you cannot be on my team because you have a disability.”

 

Or, if you live in the UK you can also say "yes" - it's your call.

The family advocate behind the move says it will push families to think about what their children are looking at online, but civil libertarians worry that adults could be caught up in — and potentially get used to — online censorship.

“The choice needs to be framed as a choice about parental controls,” said Jim Killock, the chief executive of Britain’s Open Rights Group. “Adults should not be being asked to make choices about content they may wish to view, or may need to view in the future.”

Like their counterparts elsewhere, British Internet providers have long offered customers the option of installing parental blocks to protect children from objectionable content — including not just pornography and gambling but also websites that promote eating disorders, self-harm or suicide.

But a government-ordered review into the sexualization of children published in June recommended that parents be forced to make an explicit choice whether to include the blocks. The review’s author, family advocate Reg Bailey, told BBC television that the issue with existing parental controls is that “the default position is that they’re turned off.”

He said forcing the choice is a way to confront parents with the question: “Do you actually want to access adult material on the Internet through this device?”

“That persuades parents in many ways to have a conversation with children and young people about whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing,” he told the broadcaster. “It’s a much more active process than it is at present.”

Killock said he didn’t have a problem with stronger parental controls — so long as they remained just that. The danger, he said, was that forcing adult consumers to explicitly state whether they wanted to access pornography or other material might intimidate some into agreeing to a form of censorship.

“If you’re faced with the question: ‘Do you wish to switch on adult content, yes or no?’ then people will switch it off because they might think: ‘Oh my partner won’t approve,’” he said. “It’s inappropriate to get adults to start living in a censored world.”

The four providers who’ve pledged to implement the new measure are the BT Group PLC, British Sky Broadcasting Ltd., Virgin Media and the TalkTalk Telecom Group PLC. None of the providers gave a precise timeline for when the measure would be put into place.

Teen Facebook users are three times more likely to drink alcohol

That’s according to Columbia University’s National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA). CASA recently polled more than 2,000 teens online or by phone, as well as 528 parents of teens.

The results show that compared to teens who don’t visit social networking sites daily, those who do are:
- Five times more likely to use tobacco
- Three times more likely to drink alcohol
- Twice as likely to use marijuana

Most teens — 70% — said they spend anywhere from one minute to hours a day on social networking sites.

But it’s not the fact that teens visit social network sites that makes them more likely to abuse alcohol or other drugs. Instead, the issue seems to be what they view on those sites. Forty percent of the teens in CASA’s survey said they have seen images of intoxicated kids, including some who are passed out, as well as pictures of peers using drugs. 

The CASA report does not prove that social networking caused teens to abuse alcohol or other drugs. Surveys like this show associations but cannot prove cause and effect.

Do Parents Understand?

Parents may not see the risk. CASA’s report shows that about nine out of 10 parents don’t think that social networking raises their teens’ risk for drug or alcohol abuse.

But they may not know what’s on those sites. The survey showed that 64% of parents whose teen has a presence on a social network said they don’t monitor what goes on there.

“Parents need to monitor their kids with respect to social networking and the TV shows they watch, and know what their kids’ lives are like,” says CASA President Joseph Califano Jr.

Social networking sites pose some unique challenges for parents. These sites expand cliques and peer groups almost exponentially. As a result, parents should know what their kids are doing, what their friends are doing, and even what their friends’ friends are doings, Califano says.

Reality TV, Cyberbullying Also an Issue

It is not just what they see on the Internet that influences these decisions. Teens who watch “suggestive teen programming” such as reality TV shows like Jersey Shore, Teen Mom, 16 and Pregnant, and teen dramas such as Skins or Gossip Girl are also more likely to use tobacco, alcohol, or marijuana, CASA’s survey shows.

“It is a phenomenal assault on public health that we subject teens to pictures of drugs, alcohol, or teens being drunk or passed out on the Internet, in films, and on TV shows that are suggestive and glorify drinking and drugging,” Califano says.

Cyberbullying also plays a role. In CASA’s survey, teens who reported that someone had posted nasty or embarrassing things about them online are at greater risk for substance abuse. One in five teens aged 12 to 17 have been cyberbullied, the survey showed.

Teens have always been subject to peer pressure, and virtual peer pressure via social networking sites is no exception, says Andres Huberman, MD, the medical director of Project Outreach in West Hempstead, N.Y., which is part of Zucker Hillside Hospital in Glen Oaks, N.Y.

“They see these images and there are no moral or educational statements accompanying them, so teens may be left with the impression that this is what the real world is about and that everybody is doing it, so it is OK,” Huberman says.

Parents should keep an eye on what is happening, but social networks can make it difficult to do so, says Huberman, who is a parent of teens. Parents need to find a way to “meet” their teen’s virtual friends in the same way that they would their actual friends, he says.

Love = $194, Sex = $121

According to the online dating study, men seeking casual or no-strings-attached relationships paid an average of $121 for a first date, whereas single men looking for serious long-term relationships paid an average of $194 for the opportunity of finding love.

“We often hear the stereotype that men value sex and women value love,” says Founder & CEO of WhatsYourPrice.com and MIT alumni, Brandon Wade. “Our online dating study shows this stereotype is wrong. In fact, men value love more than sex by over 60%.”

The online dating study also finds that men who seek only casual or no-strings attached relationships tend to be serial daters and more prolific, paying for first dates over 2.1 times more, than commitment-minded men.

Over 50,000 men were included in this online dating study. To determine the value of love and sex, the average price members paid for a first date on WhatsYourPrice.com was calculated. The value of love is determined as the price paid for a first date by singles looking only for long-term relationships and marriage. The value of sex is calculated as the price paid for a first date by those seeking short-term relationships, extra-marital affairs and casual relationships.

No thank you.

Charming fellow isn't he?

 ”Love is not abuse” is an iPhone app that simulates teenage relationship cruelty and mistreatment.

Once the app is launched a public service message appears featuring Project Runway’s Tim Gunn and Judge Jeanine Pirro. Then a series of lessons appear and you can run simulations of abuse. Immediately your cell phone will start ringing, a series of bizarre text messages will pop up and you’ll recieve emails. Keep in mind, you have to enter your phone number and email address to get the full effect.

Anyone feel like the app creator just found a brilliant way to collect our phone numbers and email addresses? Here’s a tip: use a junk email address and a Google phone number, if you have one.

Exactly what’s the purpose of all this? 
App creator Liz Claiborne Inc. hopes that showing symptoms of abuse will help parents spot if their kids are being victimized.

According to the organization’s website, “A common characteristic of unhealthy and abusive relationships is the control that the abusive partner seeks to maintain in the relationship. This includes telling someone what to wear, where they can go, who they can hang out with, calling them names, humiliating them in front of others.”

You're doing it wrong

The survey by Telenav found people are more likely to give up a variety of habits instead of their smartphones. More than 50 percent of people would rather give up caffeine, chocolate or exercise than part with their iPhones or Blackberrys for a week, while a hygienically questionable 22 percent would be willing to part with their toothbrushes.

Telenav’s survey dovetails with psychologists’ recent findings that more people that would rather fiddle with their smartphones than interact with other human beings. An increasing number of people sleep with their phones and check them incessantly, fearing that they will miss something unless they stay plugged-in.

According to another study by OkCupid, overly-active Twitter users have shorter relationships than those who use the service sparingly or not at all. Maintaining a sturdy Twitter following requires people to update status messages all the time, making heavy users feel the need to constantly pull out their cell phones and read their latest tweets. The habit disconnects them from the world around them, including their loved ones.

Telenav’s study went one step further and broke down its findings specifically by the types of smartphone that people used. Just 10 percent of iPhone users admitted to ending a relationship via text message, voicemail, Facebook or Twitter, as opposed to 18 percent of Android users and 15 percent of BlackBerry users.

Perhaps iPhone owners are luckier in love because they try to date their own kind. More than 80 percent of iPhone users said they think other iPhone owners would make the best romantic partners.

The survey didn’t specify whether these iPhone users think it’s the ability to Facetime, sync their music libraries or just geek out over Apple products that assures them a lifetime of happiness.

Please don't tell me facebook access will become a "human rights" issue.

Facebook has agreed to disable the profiles of prison inmates in California whose accounts have been updated while they are behind bars.

“Access to social media allows inmates to circumvent our monitoring process and continue to engage in criminal activity,” California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation secretary Matthew Cate said in a statement Monday.

“This new cooperation between law enforcement and Facebook will help protect the community and potentially avoid future victims.”

CDCR said prison inmates are allowed to have Facebook profiles created prior to their incarceration but “if any evidence shows the account has been used while in the facility, Facebook Security will disable the account.”

Facebook accounts set up or updated on behalf of an inmate will be reported to the Facebook Security Department and removed as a violation of the social network’s user policies.

CDCR said there have been “numerous instances in which inmates, using their Facebook accounts, have delivered threats to victims or have made unwanted sexual advances.”

Inmates are maintaining their accounts using smuggled cellphones or having someone on the outside do it for them, according to CDCR.

It pointed to a “massive influx” in the number of cellphones being used by prisoners. Some 7,284 cellphones were confiscated in the first six months of this year, up from 261 devices in 2006.