“Does that $200 Dunkin’ Donuts gift card you’ve just received really tie in with your New Year’s resolution? If not,use Gift Card Rescue to exchange it for cards you actually want to use — or sell it (at a slight loss) for cold, hard cash.

The site gives you $225 for a $250 gift card from, say, Tiffany & Co., or $95 for a $100 card from Home Depot. (You can also visit Gift Card Rescue to buy discounted cards.) You get paid through PayPal — and your aunt will never know what you did with the TJ Maxx card she gave you. So go on — take the money and run!” – - VSL

 http://www.giftcardrescue.com/

“Drop.io is a totally free, totally private server space that allows you to upload and share documents and (unlike Google Docs) music and video files.

“Drops” can hold up to 100MB of data and come with their own e-mail addresses and fax and voice-mail numbers: Once you’ve built one, you create a password to allow others inside.  The best part? Unlike other file-sharing sites — YouSendIt, box.net — drop.io doesn’t ask you to register or provide an e-mail address.” – - VSL

http://drop.io/

“If you balk every time a website asks for your e-mail address, you’ll love Mailinator: It’s a free service that lets you surf the Web in virtual anonymity.

Here’s how it works: When you don’t want to use your Yahoo or work e-mail address to register at a site, you simply invent a Mailinator address (e.g., trixie@mailinator.com), and you’re in. The beauty of Mailinator is that you don’t have to provide your personal information (the way you do with, say, a Yahoo account). The app creates an inbox to absorb all the spam you don’t want, and you won’t have to worry about your real e-mail address ending up in the hands of marketing agencies and scam artists. It’s like checking into a hotel under an assumed name — and checking out with no paper trail to worry about.” – - VSL

http://mailinator.com/ 

I thought this was an amazing idea…I look forward to checking out this book when it hits our library!!

“Twenty-four years ago, Peter Feldstein set out to photograph every one of Oxford Iowa’s 676 residents. In 2005, he did it again, and asked Stephen G. Bloom along to record their life stories. They’ve come away with an extraordinary book, The Oxford Project, which is equal parts history lesson, art exhibit, and social experiment: See freckled boys become soft-bellied fathers, and young women turn into matrons. Watch lives come together and fall apart (there are marriages, births, divorces, and deaths). The accompanying text describes dreams deferred — and realized — but it’s the stark, black-and-white images that will stay with you.” – - VSL 

http://www.oxfordproject.com/about.html

“Before annoying your friends with yet another ten-minute YouTube clip, go to Splicd — the website that removes everything but the part you really want them to see.

Paste the clip’s URL into Splicd, along with the in and out times of the segment you wish to isolate. Send it off. Done! Either way, your friends will thank you.” – - VSL 

http://splicd.com/

“Could you identify your friends just by looking at photos of their behinds? Researchers put the same question before chimps at the Yerkes National Primate Research Center, in Atlanta — and the answers were surprising.

The scientists wanted to know how chimps — which are especially social primates — recognize one another. Do they rely on facial features alone? Or do they use “whole body representations,” which include the ass?

And so, a simple anatomical match game was devised: The scientists asked chimps to pair photographs of various chimp behinds (the chimps used in the experiment were all acquaintances) with photographs of chimp faces. The animals matched butts to faces immediately, suggesting that ass shapes were just as memorable to them as facial features. (Chimps do have memorable behinds — each animal inherits a unique pattern of pink and swollen skin.) While the researchers didn’t comment specifically on the implications for human ass perception, it’s impossible not to speculate; after all, chimps share 98 percent of their genome with humans.” – - VSL 

http://www.emory.edu/LIVING_LINKS/pdf_attachments/FacesBehinds2008.pdf

As a side note, I am pretty sure that I could pick my mate’s ass out of a line-up.    

E-Cards Notify Sex Partners About STDs

Email Service Reports Success in Notification of Sexually Transmitted Diseases

By Caroline Wilbert
WebMD Health News

Reviewed By Louise Chang, MD

Oct. 20, 2008 — It has never been so important to check your inbox.

Four years after the launch of inSPOT.org, which allows people with sexually transmitted diseases to notify sexual partners via email, nearly 50,000 e-cards have been sent, according to an article published in PLoS Medicine.

The site is designed to increase the notification of partners — part of an overall strategy to prevent and control sexually transmitted diseases. In the U.S. there are 19 million new cases of sexually transmitted diseases diagnosed each year, including 900,000 cases of chlamydia, 330,000 cases of gonorrhea, and 55,400 HIV infections, according to the PLoS Medicine article.

In 2004, the San Francisco Department of Public Health and the Internet Sexuality Information Services conducted research on gay men and men who have sex with men. Researchers concluded that while men are likely to tell their primary partners about diagnoses, they are not as likely to inform casual partners.

The study showed that men overwhelmingly said they would inform casual partners if there were a convenient and anonymous way to do so. The San Francisco Department of Public Health and the Internet Sexuality Information Services then partnered to launch inSPOT. It has since been expanded to other parts of the country and now targets heterosexuals as well.

The email service of inSPOT allows users to choose whether they want to include their own email addresses or not. E-cards include links to information about where and how to get tested. So far, more than 30,000 people have sent over 49,500 cards. In 2007, 28.5% of recipients clicked through the link for testing information.

In 2006 and 2007, e-cards were sent because of these STDs:

• 15.4% of e-cards were sent for gonorrhea
• 14.9% for syphilis
• 11.6% for chlamydia
• 9.3% for HIV
• 48.8% for other STDs (such as trichomoniasis, viral hepatitis, pubic lice or “crabs,” and others)

SOURCES: Levine, D. PLoS Medicine, October 2008; vol 5.

©2008 WebMD, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

http://www.emedicinehealth.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=93554

A couple weeks ago, one of my on-line friends, Becky, talked about a book she was reading, called, The Shack by William P. Young. She gave a specific warning to me that the book was not “benign,” meaning that it was religious in mature, Christian specifically – - since I had just bitched about a book that I picked up which had NO description that it was religious in nature. Now, I am not sure how to put in words my feelings when it comes to religious literature……but, I am gonna try.
I am not opposed to purchasing and reading books that are religious in nature. As a matter of fact, I have more “holy books” than anyone else I know. The problem comes in when it is not specifically noted on the book cover/description. (In my bitch blog, Becky noted that the author of the book I was bitchin’ about was unabashedly Christian. Okay, that is fine and dandy; however, since it is not my chosen genre, how the hell am I suppose to know that she is a Christian?)
When it comes to religious books, I tend to read “holy” books or those which explain the “holy” books to laymen, like myself. LOL! I have read the occasional fiction novel which touches in some way, religious thoughts/concepts: for instance “The Five People We Meet in Heaven.”
I typically do not read books that discuss how a person who is Christian should live – - or how their lives are better if lived a certain way (which was the point of the book I was bitching about). The reason I don’t read them is because I have researched Christianity and have specifically CHOSEN NOT to be a Christian; therefore, I have no desire to read books which tout living a certain way as living the “right” way. It just pisses me off – - and I don’t need or want to be pissed off when I am trying to read a book.
Does all that make sense? I hope so, ‘caue I am ready to move on…..

The day after I read her book comments, I saw it at Wal-Mart and read the back cover. It did sound interesting. So, when I saw it again at my library, I decided to give it a shot. I figured that I could always put it down if I didn’t like it. Well, as it turns out, I liked it very much. As a matter of fact, I would like my own copy of the book for future readings (and/or studies).

 

Now, for my thoughts on the book:
The description on the inside cover is a great “basic description” of the book: “Mackenzie Allen Philip’s youngest daughter, Missy, has been abducted during a family vacation and evidence that she may have been brutally murdered is found in an abandoned shack deep in the Oregon wilderness. Four years later, in the midst of his Great Sadness, Mack receives a suspicious note, apparently from God, inviting him back to that shack for a weekend.
Against his better judgment, he arrives at the shack on a wintry afternoon and walks back into his darkest nightmare. What he finds there will change Mack’s world forever.”

Mack is what I would refer to as the “typical” Christian, as he believes there is a higher power but, he struggles with the teachings (of the only faith he knows), especially in light of the circumstances surrounding his daughter’s disappearance.
The way this author wraps theological concepts, is amazing; however, they are still based on the Christian teachings – - which would be my only gripe. (But, I do understand WHY the author did this.) I really liked many of the points the author made (which is why I would like my own copy….LOL!), especially when pulling away for a specific religious sect – - and focusing on conceptual ideas/thoughts/etc. Perhaps my favorite part was this line: “Paradigms power perception and perceptions power emotions. Most emotions are responses to perception – - what you think is true about a given situation. If your perception is false, then your emotional response to it will be false too. So check your perceptions, and beyond that check the truthfulness of your paradigms – - what you believe. Just because you believe something firmly doesn’t make it true. Be willing to reexamine what you believe.” WOW – - that is some FREAKING POWERFUL stuff, right there!!

So, should you read it?
Well, that is a tougher question. I don’t think everyone will appreciate it in the same way. I am certainly not “appreciating” it in view of some sort of religious thought process (which many would and obviously do); however, I appreciate it in a more unconventional conceptual kind of way. If you are not specifically a Christian or spiritual in nature, it will take some serious open mindedness on your part to be able to wrap your mind around the concepts presented.

I would love to hear your thoughts on this book and/or the concepts presented therein!!

“Given that the fortunes of our state-run lotteries are inversely proportional to the state of our economy, it’s no surprise that America’s lotto kiosks are currently reporting heretofore unheard-of earnings. And yet, the average lottery’s 53 percent rate of return — that is, for every $1 you wager, you get about half a buck back — is far worse than what you’ll find at any slot machine (most slots are required to return at least 75 percent of wagered money). Meant to fund public schools and other worthy government projects, those scratch-off tickets are also a de facto tax on the poorest and least educated among us.

Why are those with very little money most likely to spend what they have on the lottery? Recently, scientists at Carnegie-Mellon asked people to list their income on a scale that began at “less than $100,000” and moved upward from there, thereby instilling distinct feelings of financial insecurity in anyone making less than six figures a year. Next, participants were given $5 and the choice of keeping it or spending it on lottery tickets. Primed to feel poor, they became much more likely to purchase a lottery ticket than participants who’d been asked to plot their income on a scale that began at just $10,000 a year. In other words, state lotteries are an especially vicious circle: We play the lottery because we feel poor — and more of us feel poor when times are tough — but squandering our money on Moneyball ensures that we stay poor, and purchase yet another lottery ticket we really can’t afford.” – - VSL 

Read about it: HERE

Red state, blue state. Liberal, conservative. Hockey mom, latte lover. Every election year, the country is sliced into two warring factions. We’re reminded that Democrats and Republicans don’t just read and watch different newspapers and cable channels but subscribe to entirely different sets of facts. My truth is your truthiness. Your no-spin zone is my drip cycle.

Earlier this year, political scientists at Duke and Georgia State described the Bush administration’s claims about Iraqi WMDs to a group of adults, then gave those same people a convincing explanation that Iraq did not, in fact, have a WMD program in the works. How did the people react? Liberals became even more convinced that Iraq had no nuclear or chemical weapons; conservatives became even more certain that it did, with 64 percent of them insisting that Saddam was hiding the evidence. In other words, factual proof that a belief was false seemed only to reinforce that belief’s sway over reality. The scientists called it a backfire effect.

While some research suggests that conservatives are particularly vulnerable to such a cognitive flaw, other studies demonstrate that people on both sides of the political spectrum constantly engage in a reckless distortion of the facts. That we can’t help but edit the world to fit our ideology. That all of us are partisan hacks.

http://www.duke.edu/~bjn3/nyhan-reifler.pdf