Mildred Lovingthe joint plaintiff alongside her husband Richard Loving in the landmark civil rights case of Loving v.
Oren Chervinsky February 1, at 1: As you are aware, a number of additional blogger sites picked up the story and continued with this important conversation, and I would like to thank you for bringing more light to this growing problem.
Your article was forwarded to me by a parent friend of mine in Washington D. I know from my own life, that he is not alone and many parents across the US, North America, and the World are struggling with these very questions. The article struck a particular cord with me, and Why peds should be legal in on a problem we are attempting to address at my work Otono Networkswhere we are launching the first fully integrated kid-lines.
Rowan describes, and uses her approach of small incremental time allotments to introduce kids to wireless. So where does that leave us? Looking for a technology solution that helps parents introduce children to the world of wireless technology, while protecting them from the variety of risks.
Easy enough, you might say, there are a myriad of technology solutions that offer parental control apps, kids cell phones etc. But what we have found is that these solutions become quite cost prohibitive for large swaths of the population once applied as intended especially if you look at the total cost of ownership — including the cost of airtime and parental data requirementsand most only offer monitoring type control or post hoc lists.
Very few offer prophylactic solutions that help parents keep children from trouble in the first place. This becomes a particularly interesting problem for me as both a concerned and engaged adult, but also as a Telecom executive, that has spent the better part of his career peddling cellular technologies.
In my defense, no one expected the path smartphones have taken, and certainly no one expected how quickly our youngest generations would adopt and master these technologies.
In any event, my industry is now a prime player in the struggle to protect our children. In her article, Ms.
Rowan advocates limited time allowances for younger children being introduced to wireless devices. With that in mind, I am proud to report that Otono Networks f. Roam Mobility has actually taken this problem to heart.
We believe that the best way to introduce kids to wireless technology is not by banning access. We also recognize that supervised use is often impractical and can lead to kids feeling untrusted.
For these reasons, we decided that parents needed to be able to activate and deactivate their kids phones in small increments remotely ideally from their device directly. Once we understood that this feature was evolutionary and revolutionary in the cellular industry, we built an entire prepaid, non-contract service for families around it called Krew Mobile.
In and of itself, the best deal in prepaid wireless. Given the state of the economy both North and South of the borderwe recognized that you this is simply too important to try and price gauge customers. To that end, we are committed to keeping Krew Mobile accessible to all budgets.
However, we also that to be competitive we need to provide all the bells and whistles parents and kids need. So instead of just building in the standard features, we are asking parents to help us build the service from the ground up.
We have just launched a Krew Pilot Program, where parents can sign up to free or dramatically discounted service and are providing feedback on the product development roadmap.The food was great, the company was excellent, and while we watched how the traffic, especially bikes, crossed the most dangerous junction in the whole of The Netherlands, we saw several almost incidents which were enough to demonstrate why this junction is a problem.
The causes of adolescent substance use are multifactorial, but the media can play a key role. Tobacco and alcohol represent the 2 most significant drug threats to adolescents.
More than $25 billion per year is spent on advertising for tobacco, alcohol, and prescription drugs, and such advertising. Performance enhancing drugs should be legalized because athletes should be able to make the decision to use or not And finally, we should legalize PEDs because all of us, including athletes, have the right to do what we want with our own body.
The use of performance enhancing drugs in the modern Olympics is on record as early as the games of the third Olympiad, when Thomas Hicks won the marathon after receiving an injection of strychnine in the middle of the race.1 The first official ban on “stimulating substances” by a sporting organisation was introduced by the International Amateur .
Influenza Updates: Flu activity in the U.S. is low now, but expected to pick up in the coming weeks. CDC on Flu Vaccine: CDC’s vaccine recommendations for the flu season are now available.; CDC recommends yearly flu vaccination for people 6 months and older.
Performance enhancing drugs do just this; help athletes reach their pinnacle. Currently most are not legal in professional sports, but this should change. With performance enhancing drugs legal it would make professional sports far more entertaining, reduce underground and unsafe drug use, give everybody the option to be on a level playing .