Of all the questions about monetization, advertising, and scale that have surfaced since Yahoo announced its $1.1 billion acquisition of Tumblr, one giant point is getting buried: what to do with Tumblr’s porn?
Not just the fact that it’s there—11.4% of Tumblr’s 200,000 most visited domains are adult; 16.6 percent of Tumblr traffic happens on adult blogs; and 22.37% of referral traffic from external sites comes from adult websites, according to a study by the SimilarGroup.
The real problem is that much of that adult material gets shared and reposted into oblivion—easy reblogging is one of Tumblr’s greatest selling points and the fabric of many of its communities. But porn, unlike pretentious food or non-porny things fitting perfectly into other things, is strictly regulated. By federal law, anyone who creates adult content must maintain a detailed database of records proving that everyone appearing in the project is above the age of 18 (a set of regulations commonly referred to as 2257 regulations). But the law doesn’t just apply to people who shoot adult content (also referred to as “primary producers”), it also applies to people who upload and distribute adult content (known as “secondary producers”), who are expected to maintain their own records—or, at the very least, maintain a list with the location of the records that apply to the content they’re showcasing. Not maintaining these records is considered a federal offense—even if everyone in the content you’re distributing is above the age of 18.
Tumblr porn rebloggers often use stolen or unsourced material. And they generally do not include legally compliant 2257 statements in the sidebars of their Tumblrs; more to the point, they are pretty much incapable of doing so, as it’s generally hard to source a legal name and ID for an actress you don’t even know the name of. David Karp’s announcement Monday morning re-stated his mission to, “empower creators to make their best work and get it in front of the audience they deserve” (italics his). But most people who upload or post porn on Tumblr aren’t creators at all—they’re “curators” at best, and thieves at worst.
Tech journalists have long wondered whether Tumblr’s porn-friendly stance would prevent it from achieving higher levels of success (or at least a major sale). But the focus has mostly been on whether too many pink pixels taint Yahoo’s taupe brand—most mainstream advertisers might squirm when promos for their products appear alongside smut. Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer seems fine with some of that, saying in a conference call Monday, “I think the richness and breadth of content available on Tumblr—even though it may not be as brand safe as what’s on our site—is what’s really exciting and allows us to reach even more users.” Already, Yahoo-owned Flickr allows photographers to upload adult-themed photos (albeit with the requirement that they be labeled “restricted” so as to hide them from under-18 eyes). And competitor Google’s Blogspot begrudgingly allows adult-themed blogs (as long as they exist behind a page that alerts the reader that they contain mentions of sex.
If the adult section of Tumblr were solely made up of erotic artists like Nikola Tamindzic and Ellen Stagg, a simple adult content flagging/warning system would likely be enough to keep Tumblr (and Yahoo) safe. But because that’s not the case—because those porn GIFs are, more often than not, clips lifted from professionally made porn movies—Tumblr’s porn problem is complicated by the twin issues of rights and records-keeping. While the likelihood of a federal crackdown on Tumblr is rather slim (at least while Obama remains in the White House), it’s certainly not impossible; Yahoo’s in-house counsel may not be willing to continue Tumblr’s policy of turning a blind eye to its users’ violation of federal law.
The greater rights issue at play here isn’t limited to porn, of course: Virtually all sites that are driven by user uploaded content have had to contend with users uploading content they don’t have the rights to, to which anyone caught up in YouTube’s frequent purges of copyright-violating content can attest. But because adult content exists in a rarified legal state, one very different from any other form of content, the copyright issue adds an additional wrinkle that creates a potentially ugly legal situation that Yahoo will likely want to avoid.
If it were so inclined, Tumblr could hold on to the porn and remain in the good graces of the feds by requiring its users to upload and share original content only—content that they could warrant that they had the proper records for—in other words, to limit adult content to the creators that Karp cites in his mission statement. (Tumblr cut erotica from its official directory not long after its launch.) But the infrastructure required to do that is likely more than Yahoo is willing to invest in porn; which means that, in order to remain legally compliant, Yahoo is far more likely to abandon adult content entirely, casting out the creators along with the curators, and creating a kinder, gentler, and vastly more investor-friendly Tumblr in the process.
What is adult life really about? In this legendary college commencement speech in 2005, David Foster Wallace attempts to explain. Animation by The Glossary.
In his novels and short stories, and in sharp essays, David Foster Wallace paid careful attention to life, to the truth of being human. Full bio »
Why can’t two slices of pizza be used as a slide clicker? Why shouldn’t you make music with ketchup? In this charming talk, inventor Jay Silver talks about the urge to play with the world around you. He shares some of his messiest inventions, and demos MaKey MaKey, a kit for hacking everyday objects.
Jay Silver and Eric Rosenbaum’s MaKey MaKey kit lets you turn everyday objects into computer interfaces — inspiring both fun and practical new inventions. Full bio »
The commemoration is often accompanied by a flurry of opinion pieces and news stories conveying the Palestinian narrative of Israel’s independence, which frequently contain false charges.
In May 2008, for example, an Op-Ed in the New York Times claimed “a people had been expelled from their land in a comprehensive ethnic cleansing operation, given the name ‘Plan D’ by Israelis” (Elias Khoury, 5/18/08, “For Israelis, an Anniversary. For Palestinians, a Nakba”). In fact, notwithstanding a limited number of tactical expulsions, “a people” was certainly not expelled. And Plan D was not at all a “comprehensive ethnic cleansing operation” — you can read the text of that plan here.
A news story published in the Washington Post likewise passed along this false charge of mass expulsion. Reporter Sylvia Moreno relayed, from organizers of an anti-Israel rally, the accusation that every Palestinian that fled the war was actually “expelled.” She wrote: “To make way for Israel, 750,000 Palestinians were expelled from their homes and more than 400 of their villages were destroyed, organizers of the event said” (5/18/08, ”Palestinian Quilt Presents a Different Viewpoint; Creation of Israel Came At Great Cost, Some Say”). The reporter didn’t bother pointing out that this accusation has been debunked by prominent historians.
The piece below provides needed facts and context about the frequently distorted refugee issue.
During and after the 1948 war, hundreds of thousands of Arabs and Jews fled, and in some cases were forced from, their homes in Mandate Palestine and beyond. The effects of this flight are still today a major issue, as politicians, diplomats and other concerned parties try to resolve the Palestinian “refugee problem” — the status of the original Arab refugees and millions of their descendants, many of whom still live in refugee camps. The vast majority of Jewish refugees went to Israel, where they were absorbed with great difficulty. Despite having found a country committed to taking them in, they still seek redress and acknowledgment of their largely ignored plight.
Estimates vary on the number of Palestinians who became refugees as a result of the war. Israel’s Foreign Ministry and Central Bureau of Statistics estimated the number to be between 500,000 and 600,000. [Update: Historian Ephraim Karsh reached a similar conclusion after breaking down the flight by locale.] The British Foreign Office suggested the number was between 600,000 and 760,000. A 1950 report by the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine endorsed an estimate of 711,000 refugees by an “expert of the Statistical Office of the United Nations.”
Most broadly, the Arab flight can be divided into two time periods corresponding with the two major phases of fighting. Roughly half of those fleeing did so between November 1947 (when Palestinian Arabs responded to the United Nations partition recommendation with anti-Jewish violence) and May 1948 (when the armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Lebanon invaded Palestine). During this period, the conflict more closely resembled a civil war, with Palestinian Jews battling Palestinian Arabs and several thousand Arab militiamen. A second phase of the fighting and flight occurred after May 1948, when neighboring Arab armies initiated the conventional phase of the war by joining in the fighting on the side of the Palestinians.
Some commentators divide the Palestinian exodus into three or four somewhat shorter waves. One prominent example of the ‘four wave’ characterization refers to 1) the flight of the Palestinian elite between November 1947 and March 1948; 2) a flight coinciding with the shift by the Jewish Haganah militia from defensive to offensive operations in April 1948 and lasting until a truce in June of that year; 3) the period between July, when that truce expired, and October, when a second truce ended; and lastly, 4) the period from October through November 1948.
Causes of Flight
Historians agree that there was no single cause of the Arab flight from Palestine. In large part, the masses fled because they saw the Palestinian elite doing the same thing. In part, it was in response to exhortations by Arab military and political leaders that Palestinian civilians evacuate their homes until the end of the fighting. Vast numbers were simply fleeing the heavy fighting that surrounded them, or that they expected to soon disrupt their lives. In some instances, Palestinians were forced from their homes by the Jewish military.
Following the Leaders
The Palestinian leadership and elite set an example for the rest of society by evacuating their towns and villages early during the conflict, usually long before fighting neared their towns, and some even before the civil war began. (Or as commander of the Arab Legion John Bagot Glubb put it, “villages were frequently abandoned even before they were threatened by the progress of war.”) This behavior not only shattered the morale of the Palestinian masses, but also, in the words of historian Shabtai Teveth, “amounted to clear — albeit unwritten — instructions to flee Palestine.”
The British High Commissioner for Palestine at the time, General Sir Alan Cunningham, described this phenomenon and its effect on the general population:
You should know that the collapsing Arab morale in Palestine is in some measure due to the increasing tendency of those who should be leading them to leave the country. For instance in Jaffa the Mayor went on 4 days leave 12 days ago and has not returned, and half the National Committee has left. In Haifa the Arab members of the municipality left some time ago; the two leaders of the Arab Liberation Army left actually during the recent battle. Now the Chief Arab Magistrate has left. In all parts of the country the [elite] effendi class has been evacuating in large numbers over a considerable period and the tempo is increasing.
Another British official, Palestine’s Chief Secretary Sir Henry Gurney, wrote that “It is pathetic to see how the [Jaffa] Arabs have been deserted by their leaders.”
Palestinian refugees at the Ein al-Hilweh camp in Lebanon
After Haifa’s chief Arab magistrate abandoned that city, a British intelligence report described the act as “probably the greatest factor in the demoralization of Haifa’s community.”
Explicit Instructions to Flee
Palestinian leaders also explicitly instructed Palestinians to leave their homes. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al Husseini, told a delegation of Haifa Arabs in January 1948 that they should “remove the women and children from the danger areas in order to reduce the number of casualties,” and continued to encourage evacuations in the months that followed. Indeed, just a few months later, when Haifa’s British, Jewish and Arab leadership were working to negotiate a truce, the Arab side, in line with the Mufti’s orders but to the great surprise of everyone involved, insisted on a complete evacuation of all Arab residents.
Similarly, the national Palestinian leadership (or “Arab Higher Committee”) published a pamphlet in March 1948 urging the evacuation of women, children and the elderly from areas affected by the fighting. The local Palestinian leadership (or “National Committee”) in Jerusalem heeded this call, ordering Jerusalem Arabs to evacuate these populations, and asserting that those who resisted doing so would be seen as “an obstacle to the Holy War” and as “hamper[ing]” the actions of the Arab fighters.
Jordan’s Arab Legion ordered women and children out of Beisan, a town near the Jordanian border and an anticipated point of invasion by the Legion.
In Tiberias, local Arab leaders chose to clear the town of its Arab residents, and did so with the help of the British authorities. In Jaffa, after the British forced Jewish militiamen to withdraw from the city, local Arab leaders organized the evacuation of the roughly 20,000 residents who hadn’t already fled during or before the fighting.
Similar scenes played out in dozens of Arab villages across the land.
Some villagers were not merely instructed to leave, but actually expelled by Arab militiamen from outside the country who feared local Arabs might ally themselves with the Jews, or who wanted to use the residents’ homes for lodging.
In a number of instances, the Jewish leadership appealed for the Arabs stay. The surprise announcement by the Palestinian leadership of Haifa that “the Arab population wished to evacuate” was immediately followed by a tearful plea by the town’s Jewish mayor, Shabtai Levy, for the leaders to reconsider. The Haganah’s chief representative in Haifa also assured the Arabs that if they stayed, “they would enjoy equality and peace, and that we, the Jews, were interested in their staying on and the maintenance of harmonious relations.” The British commander in Haifa, Hugh Stockwell, emphatically insisted that the Arabs were making a mistake, and also urged them to change their decision, which reportedly came from the Arab Higher Committee in Beirut.
Even as Haifa’s Arabs were streaming out of the city on British boats and trucks, the Jewish establishment continued to urge an end to the exodus and to insist that those who had departed should return. “[E]very effort is being made by the Jews to persuade the Arab populace to stay and carry on with their normal lives,” reported the British Superintendent of Police. A member of the Arab National Committee, Farid Saad, admitted that Jewish leaders “have organized a large propaganda campaign to persuade [the] Arabs to return.” (Most, however, did not return. The Arabs fleeing Haifa made up approximately 10 percent of the total number of Palestinian Arab refugees, and influenced countless others to follow in their wake.)
Although fighting between Jewish and Arabs in Palestine began in late 1947, the Jewish military began offensive operations only in April 1948. (Before this point, the Jewish fighters operated only defensively.) Things had been going poorly for the Yishuv early in the fighting. The combination of the Jews’ precarious position and the knowledge that professional armies of neighboring Arab countries would soon be invading prompted a change in strategy — loosely along the lines of the Jewish contingency plan known as Plan D, which called for gaining control of key territory in order to protect Jewish towns and the frontiers of the Jewish state against the attacking armies. Already before this Jewish switch to the offensive, about 100,000 Arabs, mostly those with the financial resources to relocate to somewhere more comfortable, had fled their homes. As the expected date of the invasion by Arab countries approached, Israeli military commanders saw the control of Arab villages along the borders (which were expected to soon become the front lines of fighting and points of entry for Arab armies) and of villages along key transport routes as a key objective. If a village could not be searched and controlled due to resistance, Plan D allowed for troops to force residents from their homes, something that indeed happened in a number of cases.
There were never any blanket orders to expel the Arabs, and in fact the new Israeli army, at the behest of the government, made clear in July 1948 that “it is forbidden … to expel Arab inhabitants from villages, neighborhoods and cities, and to uproot inhabitants from their places without special permission or explicit order from the Defense Minister in each specific case.”
Although no such orders would be issued by Defense (and Prime) Minister David Ben-Gurion, the military in some cases nonetheless chose, mostly for operational reasons (such as securing vital roads, preventing sniping, preventing the use of villages as a base for Arab armies), to expel Arab residents who remained behind after their neighbors’ spontaneous flight. These decisions were occasionally overturned by government officials.
Lydda, an Arab town near Tel Aviv, which was the temporary Jewish capital, is a prominent example in which the combination of military expulsion orders, the government’s overturning of these orders, the military’s interpretation of the government’s position, significant fighting, and spontaneous flight resulted in a substantial numbers leaving.
In July 1948, the Israeli army invaded Lydda and the neighboring town of Ramle to help secure Tel Aviv and drive out Arab Legion troops based in the towns. As the fighting began, a considerable number of civilians fled in panic. The battles ended quickly, and the towns surrendered, Ramle formally and Lydda informally.
Then, with a few hundred Israeli troops controlling a pacified Lydda, Arab Legion armored cars attempted to enter the town, only to encounter Israeli resistance. This minor encounter spurred local residents, who seemed to think — wrongly — that the vaunted Legion was staging a counter-attack, to themselves open fire on Israeli troops.
The troops, shaken by the attacks, aware of their small numbers, and worried about their vulnerable position in a town of thousands of hostile residents, responded harshly to end the attack, striking at homes thought to be used by snipers and firing at townspeople who violated curfew. Some estimate that 250 were killed by Israeli troops during the fighting. The incident helped convince further masses of Arab residents to flee, and simultaneously helped convince the Israelis to clear the town of its insurgent population. An Israeli military order called for immediately expelling the residents of Lydda.
But as troops were still figuring out how to transport the Arabs, many of whom were already streaming out of the town on their own, Israel’s Minister for Minority Affairs, Bechor Shitrit, arrived in Lydda. Shitrit was furious when he learned of the deportation orders, and indignantly reported what was happening to Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett, who in turn spoke with Ben-Gurion. Sharett and Ben Gurion, in turn, told the IDF leadership that those who wanted to leave must be allowed to do so, those who wished to remain behind would be responsible for themselves, and women, children, elderly and sick residents must not be forced out of the town. The new orders, though, failed to end the removal or the voluntary exodus of the towns residents.
Factors associated with war in general — the deterioration of public services, food shortages, demoralization, the breakdown of law and order, misbehavior by armed militiamen and, not least, the din and danger of the fighting itself — all put strains on Palestinian Arab life, and certainly contributed to the flight.
Volunteer Arab militiamen from neighboring states, ostensibly sent to Palestine to protect local Arabs, often terribly mistreated the population of towns that hosted them. According to an account by one leading Palestinian, militiamen based in Jaffa and other cities robbed the locals, looted their homes, and defiled the “women’s honor.” A British report noted that the officers of one of these foreign militias “treat the locals like dirt.”
Rumor was also a factor. Arab-spread rumors about supposed Jewish atrocities apparently compelled some already demoralized locals to flee, while others left as a result of Jewish psychological operations — which intentionally spread rumors about impending attacks so as to induce an exodus from several villages.
Mostly generally, and perhaps most understandably, it was fear of war that spurred the Arabs of Palestine to decide to leave their homes. Whether they fled well before the fighting began, just as a battle for their village was set to begin, or during the exchange of fire itself, local townspeople did not want themselves or their families in harm’s way.
- “Charging Israel With Original Sin,” Shabtai Teveth, Commentary, September 1989
- “1948, Israel, and the Palestinians — The True Story,” Ephraim Karsh, Commentary, May 2008
- “The Palestine Arab Refugee Problem and its Origins,” Shabtai Teveth, Middle Eastern Studies, April 1990
- Fabricating Israeli History: The New Historians, Ephraim Karsh
- Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, Benny Morris
- Genesis 1948: The First Arab-Israeli War, Dan Kurzman
Jewish refugees from Iraq at Lod airport, 1950
Although relatively overlooked, a large number of Jews — over 800,000 — became refugees during and after Israel’s war for independence. An overwhelming majority were driven from their homes in the Arab world, a result of anti-Jewish sentiment amplified by the war. Others lost their homes in British Mandate Palestine as a direct result of the fighting — they either fled or were captured by Arab troops as the armies of neighboring states overran and destroyed their villages.
Jewish Refugees from Mandate Palestine
The number of Jews who lost their homes within the territory of Mandate Palestine as a direct result of the fighting was significantly less than the number of Arabs who fled from the region. In large part, this was because Arab armies failed to capture many Jewish towns, thus allowing many of the roughly 10,000 Jewish evacuees who fled the fighting to return to their homes after the war. It was also because, in the words of Palestinian leader Muhammad Nimr al-Khatib, “[t]he Palestinians had neighboring Arab states which opened their borders and doors to the refugees, while the Jews had no alternative but to triumph or to die.”
Still, in some cases Jews fled their homes when it became clear their village was on the verge of being lost to Arab forces. For example, women and children were evacuated from Gush Etzion, a block of four villages southwest of Jerusalem, as the situation there started to deteriorate. At Yad Mordechai and Kfar Darom, in the south, residents escaped just before the Egyptian army captured and destroyed the towns. The village of Atarot, north of Jerusalem, was evacuated under fire, its residents escaping on foot to Neve Yaakov. When the Arab Legion attacked Neve Yaakov the following day, the residents of that town fled and, along with the displaced from Atarot, found refuge in Hadassah Hospital.
Jewish villagers who did not flee before Arab forces gained control of their town were generally removed from their homes and held as prisoners of war. Prisoners from areas that remained under Arab control after the war were eventually transferred to Israel, where they had to find new homes. For example, residents of the Gush Etzion villages of Mesuot Yitzhak, Ein Tzurim and Revadim, which came under the control of the Arab Legion, were taken captive and resettled in new Israeli villages after the war. (The residents of the fourth Gush Etzion village, Kfar Etzion, were almost all massacred by Arab gunmen.)
The surrender of Jerusalem’s Jewish Quarter to Arab Legion troops was immediately followed by the exile from the ancient city of roughly 1,300 Jews. Almost 300 others — males of fighting age — were taken captive. The impossibility of keeping a Jewish presence in the Old City, which had been inhabited by Jews from time immemorial, was underscored by the Arab mobs that marched on the departing residents and on a hospital housing severely injured Jews, only to be held off by the well-disciplined Arab Legion. The Jewish Quarter was ransacked and burned.
Even when Israel regained control of a captured village by the end of the war, residents generally could not return to their homes, as they were destroyed by the Arab conquerors. The residents of Mishmar Hayarden, for example, were taken into captivity by Syrian troops, who then destroyed the village before Israel regained control. The same happened when Nitzanim was overrun by Egyptian troops.
Jewish Refugees from the Arab World
Between 1948 and 1951, as a result of the War of Independence, about 400,000 Jewish refugees were absorbed by Israel after being driven from their homes from Arab lands. In total, well over 800,000 Jews indigenous to Arab and Muslim countries lost their homes and property following Israel’s independence, roughly 600,000 of whom found refuge in Israel. Although the number of Jewish refugees and the total area of their lost land exceeded that of their Arab counterparts, the similarity in the numbers of Jewish and Arab refugees has led some to describe the exodus of the two groups as a de facto population transfer.
With the UN’s 1947 decision to partition Palestine, the Jewish community in Iraq, which only a few years earlier had suffered a devastating pogrom, faced a new wave of harsh persecution.
The Iraqi government adopted what author and journalist Edwin Black described as “Nazi confiscatory techniques,” levying “exorbitant fines as punishment for trumped-up offenses.” Zionism was made a criminal offense. As Arab countries invaded the newly declared Jewish state, the Iraqi police ransacked Jewish homes and arrested hundreds of Jewish citizens. Hundreds more were dismissed from their public jobs. Crippling restrictions targeted Jewish commerce and travel. The government seized Jewish property, cut off municipal services to Jewish neighborhoods, and shut down Jewish newspapers
Researcher Esther Meir-Glitzenstein explained that “what had begun as voluntary emigration turned into an expulsion.” Eventually, about 120,000 people — almost the entire Jewish community — would escape the oppression, with little more than the clothes on their backs.
A similar scenario played out in Egypt. The events of 1948 brought a revival of anti-Jewish sentiment, complete with anti-Jewish riots and murders, the confiscation of Jewish property, legal restrictions affecting the employment of Jews and mass arrests. This prompted a wave of Jewish flight from the country, a trend that only increased in the decade that followed.
Violent anti-Jewish rioting in Yemen in the wake of the UN partition plan help spur tens of thousands of Yeminite Jews to leave their homes and migrate to Israel as part of Operation Magic Carpet. Murderous pogroms in Morocco in 1948 and 1953, and in Libya in 1945 and 1948, yielded similar results.
- The Edge of the Sword: Israel’s War of Independence, 1947-1949, Natanel Lorch
- Atlas of the Arab-Israeli Conflict, Martin Gilbert
- Encyclopedia Judaica
- “1948, Israel, and the Palestinians — The True Story,” Ephraim Karsh, Commentary, May 2008
- “The evacuation of the noncombatant population in the 1948 war: three kibbutzim as a case study,” Nurit Cohen Levinovsky, Journal of Israeli History, March 2007.
- Jerusalem in the Twentieth Century, Martin Gilbert
- The Case of the Jews from Arab Countries: A Neglected Issue, Maurice Roumani
The Hunger Games, adapted from the Suzanne Collins novel, is set in a dystopian future where children are forced to take part in a televised death match where only one can survive. The reason? To punish citizens for a past rebellion and to prevent them from rising up again.
But It’s Suspiciously Similar To …
Battle Royale is Japanese movie adapted from a Japanese novel. It’s set in a dystopian future where teenagers are forced to fight each other to the death in a televised death match by a sick government to stop them from rising up in revolution. Of course, there are differences between the films, too. In Battle Royale, the kids are Japanese. And, well, no, that’s it.
They go tie shopping at the same store as the guys in Reservoir Dogs.
Remember this scene in The Hunger Games, where they’re introduced to the battlefield and forced to fight over backpacks and weapons?
Really, it’s not all that different from graduate school.
Battle Royale had almost that exact same scene. When the combatants are thrown into the combat area, they are allotted backpacks, provisions, and random weapons, and they start fighting almost immediately. Both films contain a command center that keeps track of the combatants and reads out lists of the dead over loudspeakers.
But one of the command centers didn’t secure their Wi-Fi.
And both films contain emotionally damaged previous winners acting as mentors.
Wait, they aren’t both Woody Harrelson?
The author of The Hunger Games said she never heard of Battle Royale, but that when she turned in the first draft of her novel, it was mentioned to her that there were huge similarities between the two. But that was the end of it. The makers of Battle Royale have not made any claim of plagiarism against the better known American film. In fact, Battle Royale has been enjoying a resurgence of popularity ever since a bunch of Japanophiles pointed out the similarities after seeing The Hunger Games. When the Japanese movie was re-released for American audiences, they included a cheeky reference in the trailer, which almost makes it sound like The Hunger Games was a remake:
“Not to imply anything …”
Nobody truly likes artificial sweeteners, but they’re an accepted evil, because how else can you replace all the sinks in your home with soda fountains without feeling guilty? Of course, we all know that such freedom comes at a price — in this case, that price being that they taste horrid, at least for the first few months before your tongue just gives up. What else can we expect when aspartame is concocted by Satan himself from beetle asses and baby tears? And hey, limitless soda, guys!
George Doyle/Stockbyte/Getty Images
“It’s like opening a can of freedom!”
Scientists noticed a strange trend: People who drink diet soda do not in fact lose any weight. They reason appears to have something to do with how your body processes sugar.
You see, with the exception of one organ in particular, your body is kind of a dumbass. That’s why, when you wash down your meal with a half-gallon of fake sweetness, your gut is all “Dur, sugar!” and tells your pancreas to get all revved up to process said shitload of sugar. Because your pancreas is not the sharpest tool in the shed, it starts cranking out insulin. This is a problem, since there is, in fact, no shitload of sugar to process.
“I just put straight meth into my coffee now, and I’ve lost 20 pounds in four hours.”
This kicks off a vicious cycle in which your body A) absorbs more of the sugar that you ingest from other foods and B) craves more food, since you got it all aroused with promises of sugar overload and then cockblocked it with a bunch of counterfeit sugar instead. Researchers point out that this “might explain in part why obesity has risen in parallel with the use of artificial sweeteners.”
So while you may think you’re helping out your diet by allowing yourself some low-calorie (but still sweet) alternatives, chances are you’re actually screwing over your waistline in the long run.
No, see, it’s healthy because it has a lemon in it.
Thai authorities rescued more than 50 migrant workers, including eight Burmese nationals, who had been trafficked and were forced to work as slave labourers on fishing boats in Chonburi on Wednesday.
Officials from the Royal Thai Police’s Anti-Human Trafficking Division along with local officials and the Royal Thai Navy rescued the 58 migrants, a majority of whom were Cambodian nationals.
The migrants had been working on four fishing boats at Samaesan fishing village in Sattahip town, according to Labour Rights Promotion Network’s director Sompong Srakaew.
The rescue mission was carried out after a Burmese migrant working on one of the boats contacted the NGO.
“The [Burmese migrant] phoned us and reported the situation a few months ago and since then, we have made about three attempts to approach the boats – it finally was successful,” said Sompong Srakaew.
“They were sold to the fishing boats by their ‘job broker’ and forced to repay the money [paid to the trafficker] with their labour – they were not allowed to leave the boats.”
He said the victims were being kept at the Protection and Occupational Development Centre in Pathum Thani province and are not allowed to see visitors as authorities proceed with the investigation.
The Thai police’s Department of Special Investigation is holding the three ship captains who oversaw operations on the suspect vessels in custody.
Following the rapid expansion of Thailand’s economy in the 1990s and 2000s, the Kingdom has been forced to rely largely on foreign migrants to fill manual labour positions in the country’s construction, agriculture and fishing sectors.
Impoverished migrants arriving near Thailand’s bustling coastal hubs are particularly vulnerable to falling victim to schemes were human traffickers pose as job recruiters and end up selling individuals to boat captains.
According to an investigation published on Global Post last year, labourers from Cambodia and Burma in Thailand’s commercial fishing hub at Samut Sakhon are “sold” for an estimated US$ 600 to fishing boats.
The Georgia Institute of Technology plans to offer a $7,000 online master’s degree to 10,000 new students over the next three years without hiring much more than a handful of new instructors.
Georgia Tech will work with AT&T and Udacity, the 15-month-old Silicon Valley-based company, to offer a new online master’s degree in computer science to students across the world at a sixth of the price of its current degree. The deal, announced Tuesday, is portrayed as a revolutionary attempt by a respected university, an education technology startup and a major corporate employer to drive down costs and expand higher education capacity.
Georgia Tech expects to hire only eight or so new instructors even as it takes its master’s program from 300 students to as many as 10,000 within three years, said Zvi Galil, the dean of computing at Georgia Tech.
The university will rely instead on Udacity staffers, known as “mentors,” to field most questions from students who enroll in the new program. But company and university officials said the new degrees would be entirely comparable to the existing master’s degree in computer science from Georgia Tech, which costs about $40,000 a year for non-Georgia residents.
“You know there is a revolution going on, right?” Galil said in a telephone interview. “And we have been a part of this revolution, but I thought we could be leaders in this revolution by taking it to the next level, by doing the revolutionary step.” That step, he said, is using technology to radically increase the scale of a for-credit offering while sharply reducing the price.
Galil said three-fourths of his 80 or so faculty members signed off on the arrangement in a series of March votes. Benjamin Flowers, who chairs the graduate curriculum committee at Georgia Tech, told the Associated Press that despite Faculty Senate concerns, it had left the decision about what to do up to the computer science program.
Udacity, which made a name for itself offering free not-for-credit massive open online courses, or MOOCs, is now planting a flag at Georgia Tech with a business model that may revolve around what its chief executive officer calls “MOOC 2.0.”
Udacity will receive 40 percent of the revenue from the new degree program, according to Georgia Tech, which will receive the rest. AT&T is subsidizing the effort financially to ensure that it will break even in its first year and is lending its name to the project, which the company said it hopes will educate more students for science, technology, engineering and mathematics jobs.
While established higher education institutions have offered online degree programs for a while, they have traditionally charged the same prices for online courses and programs as they do for their on-campus equivalents. Udacity is now working to dramatically lower the prices, something it has already done with several courses at San Jose State University, a public university in California.
The Georgia Tech program will have four enrollment tracks for students. Enrollment starts in January, though the first year will feature a small test run of several hundred paying students drawn mostly from the military and the corporate world, particularly AT&T.
The first of the four tracks will include traditional degree-seeking students who will be able to complete the 12-course master’s degree in roughly three years. Georgia Tech said it does not plan to lower admission standards to find 6,000 or so students for this track — a number than is 20 times larger than its current computer science master’s degree program. Instead, Georgia Tech hopes to attract more qualified applicants from across the world, including inside the military and at companies – places that harbor nontraditional students who could not previously come to a traditional campus or find the money for a full degree, on campus or online.
The second type of student will be “prospective degree-seeking” students who will be admitted to the program tentatively because they will not have to take the GRE as other applicants do. If they do well in two core classes, Georgia Tech will put them on the degree track. The university expects to enroll 2,000 such students in the next three years.
A third type of paying student will be students who can drop in to take several courses for a certificate short of a full master’s degree. Georgia Tech expects 2,000 such students.
The final type of students will resemble the students in a traditional MOOC and will be able to take the courses but will pay nothing or perhaps a small fee for a certificate of completion for a course. Tens of thousands of students would presumably sign up for these types of courses, an enrollment figure similar to existing MOOCs.
The deal started to come together eight months ago in a meeting between Galil and Udacity CEO Sebastian Thrun.
“Sebastian suggested to do a master’s degree for $1,000 and I immediately told him it’s not possible,” Galil said.
Eventually, the program came together for about $6,600 per degree. In a blog post, Thrun compared the day of the announcement to the day he proposed to his wife.
“I think it’s important for higher education to open access to people who can’t get access,” he said in a telephone interview.
Thrun said there will be a “crisp, clear” line between the responsibilities of his staff and George Tech professors and instructors. He said Udacity was nothing more than a “megaphone” for Georgia Tech, which he said would be making all the academic decisions.
It’s unclear how many staffers Udacity will need to hire to handle the number of students expected to enroll at Georgia Tech. Thrun said the staff-to-student ratio was something the company was still working through, though it is learning from San Jose State the number of hours of mentoring students need per course.
“We’ve put into our calculations the equivalent of about three to five hours of individual time,” Thrun said.
Galil and Thrun both said that Udacity-paid staffers could answer most of the questions students in the courses come up with.
“In many cases, the questions are simple. In many cases these questions can be found in FAQs, even though students don’t find them in FAQs,” Galil said.
Thrun said there’s no reason to make a professor answer the same question 200 times for 200 students. He said his staff will free up Georgia Tech instructors to do more difficult work.
Galil said faculty who work to develop the courses will do so in addition to their current course load but will receive additional compensation.
Georgia Tech’s provost said he thought the model could be inappropriate for other subjects, however.
“At the moment, we’re just doing this in computer science,” said Provost Rafael Bras. “We’ll wait and see. I believe this is quite appropriate for professional master’s degrees but I also believe it is less appropriate for non-master’s degrees and certainly for other fields.”
Galil and Bras both said they did not think the Udacity partnership would cannibalize Georgia Tech’s existing master’s degree program. They said the residential college experience would still appeal to students who are on a Ph.D. track, who want a full range of career services and who want visas to live in the United States while they study.
Bill Gates can’t give it away fast enough. Gates, who has vowed to give his entire fortune to charity, once again found himself the richest man in the world as Microsoft stock hit a five-year high, displacing Mexico’s Carlos Slim, who isn’t giving away anything.
Earl Cox is an international broadcaster and journalist who has served in senior level positions with four US presidents. Due to his outspoken support for Israel, he has been recognized by Prime Minister Netanyahu as a Good Will Ambassador from Israel to the Jewish and Christian communities around the world and named the Voice of Israel to America by former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.