Saturday, January 30, 2010

Yokels, Get OUT!

If I have to wait for one more Cletis exiting the 405 to gather enough courage to merge with Wilshire traffic, I'm going to scream! There's a solid line there! You're not supposed to cross it! You're supposed to turn right and keep straight until the line breaks, THEN start making your lane changes. Don't just sit there and wait for Wilshire traffic to die down so you can make your three lane changes stress-free. I don't care how little time you have to make it to your left turn on Veteran. Grow some cajones and GET OUT OF MY WAY!

Look, I'm not an aggressive driver, but I will assert myself if I have to make three lane changes within several hundred feet. I do it all the time. In fact I got so sick of waiting for one of these namby-pambies that I went into the right lane to bypass them, which meant I had to make four lane changes instead of three. But guess what. I did it! I made all of my lane changes in time to turn left on Veteran and I did it in the pouring rain where my visibility was compromised. It may have been foolish, but I did what I had to do and I didn't back up the entire Wilshire off-ramp in the process.

I don't get it. If you're too afraid to change that many lanes in such a short time, make a right on Veteran and then do a U-turn. Or just keep straight, make your left when you can, and then back track. Do ANYTHING but sit there! Why do these people drive like they've never been to the "Big City" before? I see nothing but California license plates on these cars. Where are they from? Yuba City? Wheatland? Needles? Happy Camp (WTF!)? Some other town I had to Google because I never heard of it before? (BTW: I'd bet my life-savings the people in that last town enthusiastically refer to themselves as "Happy Campers." smdh)

Are these the same people who insist on driving slowly in the fast lane? Ugh! Now there's a class of cretins conspiring to raise my blood pressure. I don't understand the mentality of driving 40 mph in the fast lane. What would ever possess anyone to choose the fast lane of all things to take their leisurely stroll? Are they clueless about what that lane is for? Are their speedometers malfunctioning? Are they distracted by their cell phone conversation? Are they eating? Drinking? Filling out a crossword puzzle? Are they concentrating on their
executive board presentation? Are they practicing for a movie audition? Are they making sure no one holds them up even if it means holding everyone else up? Did they--for variety's sake--draw from a hat to choose which lane to drive in and the fast lane was the lucky winner? Do they want a closer view of traffic headed in the opposite direction? What is it!

And since I'm in a complaining mood, what is it with pedestrians who don't push the button to cross the street and then stand around looking perplexed when they don't get the "walk" signal? I swear, if I don't see them push the button with my own eyes, I'll always walk up there and push it myself. I don't care how closely they're standing next to the button. If I invade their space or come off as distrustful of their common sense (or lack thereof), TOUGH!
I can't just trust these people. There are too many bumpkins walking and driving around this city for me to take any chances. I just wish to God someone would clue them in and tell them if they can't function properly in an urban environment, they should make like Changing Faces and G.H.E.T.T.O.U.T.!

ARG!!!

Friday, January 29, 2010

I Don't Know about This One...

I understand the environmental motivation behind this and I'd welcome any measure that would prevent further layoffs. But I wonder if now is the time for this.

Unless I absolutely NEED to buy something in particular, I generally won't patronize a business if a parking fee is involved. Before my office moved to Westwood, I rarely did business there for that very reason. Businesses in Westwood are notorious for having difficulty staying afloat, mainly because of the expensive lease payments their owners have to pay. But I wonder if part of the blame lies with people taking their money elsewhere to avoid the concomitant $8 parking fee, like I would regularly do.

With the economy still in the red, a spontaneous drive to Baskin Robbins to buy a $5 sundae is less attractive when there's an additional $3 parking fee tacked on. The dissuasion from shopping caused by high parking fees could be mitigated, in part, by a robust public transportation infrastructure. However, public transportation--in L.A. anyway--is laughable at best. I hope this move doesn't inadvertently encumber commerce in the state even more than is already the case.

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

First Ammendment Rights for Corporations?



I haven't had time to research and really understand this. Proponents of this Supreme Court decision argue that corporations deserve free speech rights when it comes to campaign contributions. (I think!)

I can't say I understand how this benefits American democracy. But what I can say is how alarmed I felt when I heard this ruling could allow foreign holders of American debt (i.e. China) to have an increasing say in how things are run in this country.

I know I promised to give the NWO conspiracy theories a rest, so I'll just say this: while I'm gravely concerned about this ruling (and even a bit scared), I'm not exactly surprised.

Sunday, January 24, 2010

Piracy as Pay?

So I've been listening to my friend's collection of songs from Rihanna's latest album, Rated R. I describe it that way because it seems like less of a CD and more like a collection of randomly acquired songs downloaded to the same iPod. What tipped me off was the fact that the songs are out of order and there's a mix of tracks with either explicit lyrics or censored lyrics, which wouldn't be found on the same album.

I'll give my friend the benefit of the doubt and assume she bought the songs off iTunes and simply didn't pay attention to which album she was downloading each song from (assuming both a clean and raunchy version were available at the time). At any rate, in order to get the fully intended listening experience I had to do a little research to find the correct track order and organize the Rated R "collection" accordingly.

During my research, I learned that my personal favorite "Rude Boy" had been slated as the next single to be released from the album. Interestingly, it will replace "Wait Your Turn" as the third released single, making this the second time that "Wait Your Turn" was pushed back. ("Hard" usurped it the first time, becoming the 2nd single to be released after "Russian Roulette.")

With my previous raving about "Rude Boy," it's probably no surprise that I fully support this move on the part of the record label. And apparently I'm not alone. When not listening to my friend's iPod, I tune in to the RihannaRatedR YouTube channel, where I've noticed that this song has been getting the most views (over 1.5 million as of Jan. 24 PST). "Wait Your Turn" has a much lower number (just under 600,000). This could be because there's already a video for the latter song and people are watching the video instead. However, "Wait Your Turn" is also ranked lower than "Rude Boy" when you sort by popularity in iTunes. Is this why it keeps getting pushed back? "Stupid in Love" is looking pretty popular right now too. Is it next in line?

Maybe I'm late to the party in figuring this out, but are the record labels monitoring sites like YouTube and iTunes to make their decisions on which singles to release, based on information the public is giving away for free? If so, then I guess I can't blame them for using whatever tactic they can to get an edge in the sinking ship that is the music industry. Still, when people volunteer their preferences like this, it saves the record labels from spending money on focus groups, market researchers, and other "suits" whose salaries would lower their profit margins, which seems a little like cheating to me.

So if my friend did "acquire" the tracks through unsavory means, should she be faulted for pirating their music? I, of course, would NEVER condone such a thing! Still, if people are essentially working for free to fatten the pockets of record executives and recording artists, shouldn't they get something in return besides an overpriced CD or an ephemeral download from iTunes? Just saying....

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Who Will Be the Grownups?

A recent Time article described the difficulty teens are having finding employment. Today only 17% of high school students have jobs, whereas only 10 years ago, as many as 45% of teens were working. In the 1970's, 9% of the people employed in the U.S. were teenagers. Now the number has dropped to 1/3 of that value.

The main culprits are adults who, by necessity, are out-competing teens for jobs. Of course, the implicit tragedy in all of this is that adults--many with families and crippling financial obligations--are now working the lower-paying jobs without benefits that formerly went to teens. All-around it's a bad situation for everyone involved as well as for society as a whole.

The article gives interesting statistics about people's future earning potential based on the economic climate during their first job. Basically, if you started working in a rotten economy, you'd most likely earn less money than if you had started in a thriving economy. The article also explains some of the negative social consequences of teen unemployment, such as higher rates of teen pregnancies and single-parent households. The only upside to all of this is that teens are staying in school longer than ever before, either to build technical skills or to gain higher credentials. Having better-educated adults in society is the only silver lining in all of this mess. Or is it?

According to an essay from a recently published book entitled This Will Change Everything: Ideas That Will Shape the Future, extended schooling prolongs the helpless, dependent stage that humans go through as children. Author, Alison Gopnik, describes childhood as a time when flexible, limitless learning yet helplessness and dependence on caretakers occurs, whereas adulthood is when less learning, but more planning and active mastery of knowledge (as well as independence) takes place. The positive result is that all this learning may result in the Flynn Effect where we'd see an increase in absolute IQ scores across the population. But if all this learning arrests independence and the ability to plan and act on mastered knowledge, Gopnik believes there may be a negative consequence to all of this and thus ends her essay by asking, "When we are all babies forever, who will be the parents? When we're all children who will be the grown-ups?"

I'll tell you who: The trust fund babies whose parents' connections can secure them positions of influence and wealth or whose allowances can support them until they can financially support themselves. They'll become the so-called "grownups" making the decisions for the rest of us so that the gap between the have's and the have-not's can widen even further.

That's who! Isn't that how the system was designed to work?

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Now It May Be Cold on the East Coast, but on the Other Side of Town...

I flew in from Boston on Monday where it was bitterly cold and snowy. The weather was so bad that it caused delays in flights from both ends--Boston and Los Angeles. I'm an L.A. girl through and through so I literally can't comprehend temperatures that go below 40 degrees. I couldn't wait to get back to L.A. where we were boasting 70-degree weather less than a week ago. After an exhausting 10 hours of travel--3 of them added on because of weather-related complications--I was ecstatic to be home again.

And then came Tuesday. In my best Ricky Ricardo voice: Wha happened!

I drove in to work at around 11 a.m. and actually had the wipers going full blast, which is rare. Once I arrived at work, I couldn't park in my preferred space because there was this huge puddle threatening to swallow my feet whole and give me pneumonia. I swear that parking lot gets so many deep puddles, I should seriously consider investing in a pair of galoshes just to get to the front door of my building. (I'm not exaggerating, by the way.) It's a veritable obstacle course in that parking lot trying to find two cars that are not only spaced far enough apart for me to fit through them, but also lack an ankle-deep puddle in between them.

Once I got past all the cars, I came across what was essentially a river rushing southward down the last aisle of the parking lot. I literally stood there for 10 seconds trying to figure out how to cross it. When I finally made it to the front door, there was this massive waterfall plunging down from the roof onto the keypad where we punch in the code to enter the building. My God! At 11:30--which is late even for me!--I'm already having to force myself to go to work after an exhausting day of travel. Now I'm faced with the prospect of drowning in a oil slicked puddle or getting electrocuted?

It's days like this that jolts L.A. natives like me back into reality because, in all honesty, it does rain in Southern California. Sometimes really hard! It's easy to forget this when we only get 35 sporadic days of rain each year. I remember when the O.J. Simpson trial was televised. It was the lead story of the 11 o'clock news every single night--which was completely ridiculous, but I digress. The only event that could ever bump it out of the lead was, as you've probably guessed, the RAIN. Even if it simply drizzled for 5 minutes in one small remote section within the greater L.A. area, we found out about it before hearing the details of that stupid trial. Rain in Southern California makes the headlines because it's so infrequent. It catches people off-guard here and lulls everyone (here and abroad) into believing that it never rains here.

Which probably explains why Tony Toni Tone (and others?) could get away with a song like "It Never Rains (in Southern California)." I love that song, only because I like to sing it every time it does rain here. It always tickles me for some reason. I may have a weird sense of humor, but apparently I'm not alone. Some D.J. on KJLH decided to relish in the irony of that song by playing it on the air during my rainy commute today. I couldn't help but chuckle at our shared sense of humor. It put me in just enough of a good mood to keep trekking towards work, in spite of the exhaustion from yesterday's flight and the dreaded anticipation of those torrential rivers and waterfalls waiting for me in the parking lot.

Ay que lluvia!

Senate Democrats Lose Their Filibuster-Proof Majority
















Why don't people realize that filibusters means nothing gets done in this country?
The American electorate is useless. What a waste of voting privileges! Grrrrrr!

Monday, January 18, 2010

Know Thyself: Know Others

We've already known how "near-work"--reading or using the computer--can hasten the onset of myopia due to constantly focusing on up close objects which reshapes the eyeball and places the retina out of range for converging light rays. Well now a recent study suggests that playing outdoors for 2 hours a day can reduce a child's risk of developing nearsighted vision by a third once they've reached the 8th grade. Indoor exercise is not enough; the activity has to be conducted outdoors in the sun. The results were the same no matter what amount of reading or other near-work the children did. Regardless of the circumstances, it seems that activity in the sun has a protective effect on vision.

What's interesting is that the researchers wouldn't have known this if they weren't observing a diverse range of children from all walks of life. The subjects included typical American children who get less outdoor activity because of safety concerns or because of the panoply of gadgets they have to entertain them (e.g. cell phones, internet, video games, etc.). But it also included children who were more active and did less reading, texting, and gaming (similar to children in developing countries).

As such, knowledge about our own vision has greatly benefitted from observing others with lifestyles different from our own. Similarly, our knowledge of podiatry has been elucidated by studies comparing foot morphology in our own shoe-wearing culture with that in barefoot cultures. So to truly understand our own physiology, it helps to study others. But it doesn't just stop with the physical. A recent NYT article claims that certain mental disorders are not common to all human beings but may actually reflect the culture and time frame in which the patient lives.

Stepping outside of our own existence and observing others who live differently from us engenders a more nuanced understanding of our own bodies and minds as well as the environments that shape them. This is just one more justification (and reminder) for me to expose myself to an array of peoples, cultures, and perspectives in order to truly know myself and the world in which I live. That's what my life (and this blog) is all about. Bon appetite!

Thursday, January 14, 2010

Text "HAITI" to 90999

The devastation in Haiti is unimaginable. I started viewing the images on CNN's website and I couldn't even finish. This picture shows the home of President Rene Preval, who said he had no idea where he'd be sleeping at night. That right there says it all.

So for the first time in my life, I'm using my clunky cell phone to donate $10 to the American Red Cross by texting "HAITI" to 90900. (Texting "YELE" to 501501 donates $5 to the Yele Haiti Earthquake Fund for those who can't spare the extra $5.) I promise I'll find more traditional ways to donate, but for now the text will suffice. I hope many others join me since it's takes virtually zero effort to do.

My heart goes out to all the people in Haiti and to anyone with loved ones in Port-au-Prince.

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Militarism on Autopilot?

Americans are already too detached from the realities of war as it is, and now we're using pilot-less aircraft and other robotic technology to do our dirty work? Yes, according to P.W. Singer, author of Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century. In a recent interview Singer explained that using these higher precision drones will result in fewer casualties and fewer condolence letters being sent to families of fallen soldiers. But will the prospect of "safer" combat deepen our complacency even further and lead us to wage more war over the long run? And what will it mean for those countries who don't have this technology yet? Is all this lopsided use of military force really fair. And do we care?

Americans would do well to seriously consider that last point since we're not the only country investing in this type of technology. Moreover, we're not exactly the envy of other nations when it comes to our science scores and we don't invest enough in educating people with the technological know-how to churn out and operate this type of machinery. If we're not careful, we may end up becoming the innocent victims of war we so callously disregard now.

The program had a lot of interesting points, but the comments section had even more thought-provoking questions. Here are a few of them:

Tom, you're letting Singer get away with addressing only the perspective of the remote drone operator. What about the perspective of the innocent lives that are being remotely decimated, along with the few intended targets that this cowardly method has managed to kill.

If you're not willing to spill your own blood for a cause, then you can not justify spilling the blood of others for it.

Posted by Todd, on January 5th, 2010 at 11:22 am EST

Here, here! Another person had this to say:

The Terminator series of movies and book tells us a lot about the endgame of this kind of at-a-distance robotic war. Facing a real live enemy is far, far different than facing living breathing human beings. Perhaps we would not be exponentially increasing the number of our enemies if we were not killing their avatars on a computer screen.

Posted by Dee, on January 5th, 2010 at 11:23 am EST


I couldn't agree more. And in my opinion those video games are just plain rotten. No good at all. Another commenter offered this perspective:

Your guest mentioned science-fiction. "A Taste of Armeggdon" a Star Trek episode, featured an inter-planetary war conducted by computers. No bombings, no blood, just computers telling each other which sector of the planet had been attacked. Residents reported to extermination booths, willingly. Without the horror and human involvement the war continued for centuries. Are we headed towards that?


Posted by Elena, on January 5th, 2010 at 11:15 am EST


Yikes. I certainly hope not. What an existence! Finally, this person reminded us of the following:

Hello
Given time, any new Weapons eventually becomes part of the enemies arsenal.(Eg# Nuclear, chemical PETE, etc). So what happens when the enemies start using unmanned robots to hit US remotely ?

As a species this is a downward spiral into destroying ourself.

Regards,
Abhi

Posted by abhijit, on January 5th, 2010 at 11:26 am EST


Good point.

God help us all.

Sunday, January 10, 2010

Giddy Up, Rude Boy

I listened to Rihanna's "Rated R" for the first time and immediately noticed a lot of questionable lyrics in many of the songs. But even more than that, I noticed how strongly I resonated with the music on many of tracks. I really, REALLY enjoy the music on this album. So I'll probably end up willfully ignoring the laughable and, at times, alarmingly objectionable content in the lyrics.

This compromising of my principles reminded me of a quote from Aldous Huxley's Brave New World Revisited which states: "Nonsense which it would be shameful for a reasonable being to write, speak, or hear spoken can be sung or listened to by that same rational being with pleasure and even with a kind of intellectual conviction."

Yup, that's me. Especially when it comes to the song, "Rude Boy."



I'm a bit of a preppy and I have somewhat high standards when it comes to lyrical content. Lyrically-speaking, "Rude Boy" has to be one of the stupidest songs I've ever heard. But dammit if the music doesn't smack the prim and proper out of me and have me twerkin' like I ain't got no sense! My favorite part of the song is probably the dumbest line in the entire album where she sings, "I wa-wa-want what you wa-wa-want. Give it to me, baby like boom boom boom. What I wa-wa-want is what you wa-wa-want. Na na ah." (My head hangs in shame as I type this.)

Just to raise the bar on contrived ignorance, she employs the ebonics-inspired "Is you," as in "Is you big enough?" (Take a wild guess at what that means.) And if that level of idiocy weren't enough, she entices her "rude boy" to "ride her" with the ever-enchanting eloquence of "Giddy up!"

Why is she cavorting with a self-proclaimed "rude boy" and why is she being so crass and unladylike about it? Who cares! Have you heard the down beat in that song, especially the way it synchs up with the bass returning to the low note? That alone makes it easily my all-time favorite song of hers. And yes, this "rational being" won't hesitate to sing and dance to this nonsense "with pleasure and even with a kind of intellectual conviction."

Giddy up!

T&F--Literally!

You know I had to add a picture of the real thing, right?




















Bon appetite good people!

Thursday, January 7, 2010

Video Game Degrees?



Before the economic crisis, I would have rolled my eyes at the absurdity of a Gaming Degree and at the reckless exuberance of American culture that would inspire such a thing. Now, I just hope the economy bounces back enough for ordinary citizens to indulge in such unnecessary luxuries in the future. Time will tell....

Tuesday, January 5, 2010

It's a Thin Line...

I have a love/hate relationship with Time Warner Cable--well, really more of a hate relationship ever since they tricked me into replacing my perfectly good cable box with the more expensive digital upgrade, claiming it was necessary for the digital conversion when it really wasn't. (Love: 0 ; hate: 1)

Then again, in my 15 years as an internet subscriber, Time Warner Cable is the only provider that has given me consistent and reliable internet access. The ONLY one. And so, because the internet is like a second source of oxygen for me, I have no choice but to love Time Warner Cable, at least a little, for keeping the supply streaming in. (But I HATE having to do this! So, love: 1 ; hate: 2)

I guess I'm not the only one with this frienemy relationship with Time Warner Cable. Apparently, the company just settled a dispute with News Corp. that narrowly thwarted disruption of FOX programming on New Years Day. As it turns out, News Corp. wanted to charge $1 per subscriber for FOX programming or they would threaten to take their shows off the air starting Jan. 1.

I normally stay out of grown folks' business, but I'm gonna have to side with Time Warner on this one. I hate FOX Network and everything it stands for. I'll be damned if I'm gonna pay a dollar a month more for programming I think should be off the air anyway. With the exception of "The Simpsons" and a few others, the nation would be much better off without FOX programming--and that includes their football broadcasts, American Idol, and that joke of a news network they have. Time Warner's willingness to stand their ground against News Corp's ridiculous demands gets 2 thumbs up from me. Bravo! (Love: 2 ; hate: 2)

But now that I re-read the letter, I only see that the deal has staved off disruption in programming. It says nothing about preventing price hikes. It claims that Time Warner Cable is aware of customers' concerns with fee increases, but neglects to mention if they've actually succeeded in keeping prices at bay. Hmm... That letter is looking more and more suspicious with each rereading. Drat! (Love: 2 ; hate: 3)

Yeah, I hate 'em...

"Heaven Knows" by Lalah Hathaway

"Heaven, Heaven, Heaven, HEAVEN!"

So begins "Heaven Knows," the 2nd track of Lalah Hathaway's self-titled debut album. Some people may be more familiar with her father, Donny Hathaway, but I grew up listening to Lalah. And this is the song that made me take notice in the first place!

There are so many elements to appreciate in this song. The bass that seems to drive the song more so than the beat. The beat which in turn follows the direction of the bass, complementing, embellishing, and then accentuating it with an extra kick. The kalimba-sounding notes that open the song and then revisit the listener later in the track. The way the music stops and restarts between the major movements of the song. Lalah's swift mouthing of the word, "Baby," and the way the beat hammers to a halt when she sings "I'm not ashamed to tell you of that tingle deep down inside... Baby" (stop; restart).

As I've mentioned before, I love a good ad lib, and this song is brimming with ad libs. I love the different ways she draws out her notes, particularly on the word "knows" and "ooh," but also on "yeah," "good," "free," and the "-ly" in "only."

Lalah's alto is phenomenal: powerful and acidic. Her voice has the kind of timbre that could cut through diamond if tested. This is particularly evident on her third track, "Baby Don't Cry" when she sings "Oh, boy. What you trying to do to me. Come and knock me off my feet. Uh...." (I can't get enough of that "Uh"!) Apparently, Angela Winbush lent both instrumentation and vocals to that track, which might explain the piercing Chaka Khan-esque timbre heard in the refrain.

Other tracks on Lalah Hathaway are also good. Lalah eases the listener into the album with the first track, the sultry "Somethin." She then follows up with the rhythmic "Heaven Knows," the arresting "Baby Don't Cry," and the jazzy "Smile," the latter of which she ends on an upbeat note proclaiming "Nothing makes me happy like you do!" I also love the breakdown in "I'm Coming Back," especially when she wails, "Hold on! HOLD on! I'm coming back."

Most of the tracks on Lalah Hathaway are solid, and in spite of the album's 1990 release, all but a few have a timeless quality that can be appreciated even today. If you haven't heard the album, it's definitely worth listening to. Who knows. You just might liken the experience to tasting a bit of: Heaven, Heaven, Heaven, HEAVEN! (Sorry. I couldn't resist.)

All corniness aside, if you like good music and good singing, this is definitely an album to check out!

Sunday, January 3, 2010

The 72 Rule

When I first learned of the 72 rule, I promptly jotted it down for future reference. As it goes, if you have an interest-yielding account of any sort (savings, CD, stock, etc.), you can divide 72 by the APR and that will determine the number of years for your money to double. So $1,000 in a CD account at 4% interest will take 18 years (72/4) to become $2,000. Really nifty rule when interest rates are high, but when they're sitting around the current rate of 1 percent, it's not so thrilling.

It's no wonder the Dow Jones is now sitting comfortably above 10,000 points. With bank APR's at an all-time low, some people are feeling forced to return to the stock market. I'd follow suit if I didn't feel we were being herded into doing so. Some critics claim that the low interest rates set by the Federal Reserve will fuel a new stock market bubble. Others propose that this is being done deliberately as part of the cycle to create booms and busts in the economy to shift more wealth towards the rich.

Even if I weren't mistrusting of the Fed's actions, I'm still too skeptical of market fundamentals to rush into the stock market as of yet. The Dow Jones reportedly went from a low of 776 in 1982 to a high of 14,164 in late 2007. That's almost a 20-fold increase within a quarter of a century! In order for investors to experience that same rate of yield, the Dow would have to jump from 10,000 today to 200,000 by 2035. With the performance of the past decade (roughly 10,000 in 2000 back to 10,000 again in 2010), I doubt the fundamentals are good enough to repeat themselves. Hence, today's (and tomorrow's) investors will likely never experience the same gains in wealth as those of the early 80's.
I've always been more averse to risk than embracing of it, and this stance will likely harden with my growing fear of excessive loss of wealth due to market manipulation. Still, 72 years is a long time to wait for my savings balance to double. So don't be surprised if future posts reveal that I've taken the plunge into the market and you find me rejoicing (God-willing) or griping (God-forbid) about stock market performance.

Friday, January 1, 2010

More Trouble Than It's Worth

I've always been a bit antisocial--shunning the mall during middle school, avoiding high school dances, and frowning upon clubbing while I was in college. Today, is no different; if you've read my previous post you'd know that my "reserved" nature sometimes compels me to eat alone, in my car!

With this track record, it's no surprise that I've taken to social networking with less enthusiasm than most. I refuse to by a fancy cell phone that makes texting easier because I HATE texting. And don't even get me started on the futility of Twitter! The only social networking site that I "participate" in (if you can call it that) is Facebook, and even that's at a bare minimum.

I opened a Facebook account after the "extremely persistent encouragement" of a friend to join. I signed up and I actually enjoyed it--initially. Then the pressures started coming. The constant need to Superpoke people or risk hurting their feelings. The invitations to play the compatibility games. The requests to be someone's friend or to join this group or that. Who has time for all that? The few times that I am logged in, I see half a dozen people commenting on something a mutual friend has said, while I've been neglectfully silent. I even missed someone's baby announcement so of course my congratulations were absent. I feel guilty and I worry that my friends will think I'm being rude or callous. But trust, I'm never guilty or concerned enough to rev up my activity to keep better in touch. Please!

Maybe that's all for the better. Recently, a high level person from administration added me as their Facebook friend and is waiting for my confirmation. This is the last person anyone would want having access to their information. It's obvious they're trying to spy on me, but with office politics as they are, I have no choice but to confirm the invitation. Luckily, my antisocial nature may be advantageous since there's little activity in my profile to suggest that I goof off during work. But I'll still have to go through all the content that is there to remove anything that could be potentially incriminating, which is a hassle.

When I first signed up, my profile was only available to my real friends. I revealed everything about myself so that they could get a better sense of who I am. Now that I've added more non-friends as "friends," I've found that I have to "clean up" my profile and reveal less and less of who I am. Now it's more of a tool for making plans with true friends and for finding long-lost contacts.

Even revealing the bare minimum of information about myself started to lose its appeal when I learned that identity theifs could use your data to guess passwords and break into your bank accounts and other personal records. It became even more scary when I realized that the information could potentially be monitored, not only by your employers, but by even more powerful people.

All in all, I'm definitely under the impression that Facebook is becoming...