"children are more likely to condone harm between different social groups when the explicit rules are removed."
What that means is in the air--learned from parents/peers? inherent in the human makeup? something else?Forbes covers how, when people are jealous, 1 out of 5 times it's due to posts on Facebook...
but this misses the point. A social network should allow people to celebrate with the celebrating, mourn with the mourners.Another Facebook complaint -- this time about the users -- tries to set up boundaries about the (im)proper ways to post...
but the blanket judgments can lead to poor conclusions about human behavior. Rather, it seems one's decision to post should be based on whether it could be interesting to others. Again, though, as it is social, "friends" should be able to be friends: supporting and cheering you on, or (this latter assumes a privacy setting).Is writing down emotions as healthy in the internet environment as Pennebaker's 1986 study showed?
Interesting discussion albeit without substantial new evidence.Another advocating for privacy setting on Facebook (new graph search)
Forbes on why you shouldn't give stores your zip code
How to Identify and Avoid Spreading Misinformation
Jay Lake on the unknowing/knowing annoying glare.
The ineffable: Miracle in traffic
This post on a Chinese zoo passing off a dog as a lion...
makes me wonder how cool would a whole zoo of such animals be?De-cluttering the Brain
Win at Monopoly using statistics.