I used google image searches to search for LA locations. I got close to a dozen phone calls, texts, and fb messages asking me to hang out while I was in LA.
You don't even need selfies.
Add to that the fact that you simply don't expect to be lied to in such a straightforward manner, I see no shame in being able to be fooled in this way.
Also fascinating how hostile some of the commenters are here. The project explores the illusion social media sites create. I think it's pretty cool.
It's not an unobvious thing to do.
Sitting everyone down for pictures is almost gloating; but when you remove the obligations, people's desires to be nice, helpful and curious kick in so they take a look and click like.
But yeah, I'm surprised that companies involved in travel aren't all over social media. My only guess is that it might be difficult to change the messaging from "travel is exciting" to "travel with Xyz travels pty ltd is exciting" because of the industry's commoditization.
To be honest, it's just that social media already does most of the job for them, for free (travelers post pictures on their own, nowadays even tagging the location or establishment), so why push it?
So why even show it to them in the first place?
You can download "Captain Park's" from the Cheapass "Boulevard of Broken Games" at http://cheapass.com/node/115 which basically has downloads for games that haven't been updated in 10+ years.
Doubtless - thanks for picking up the slack! :)
You and your friends are globetrotting explorers. Or so you say. Actually, you are all liars and cowards, and despite your claims to the contrary, you've never left London.
I doubt I would be angry to find out it was a university project and she never went anywhere, but whatever I would feel probably wouldn't end up being pleasant. Maybe it wouldn't be bad, but the stress put on the parents doesn't seem right. I don't think children know how much parents care about them sometimes.
She was in university, not 14 years old.
First strawman. I never said it's "completely safe". Staying in your parents house is not "completely safe" either. You can fall of the stairs for example, or get an electric shock. Or they can bore you to death by overprotection.
However such travelling is perfectly common. Tons of young people go backpacking in several foreign countries (you say it as "foreign country" means danger. In actuallity going to places like e.g Paris, Denmark or Singapore is a heck of a lot safer than staying home in Baltimore, Atlanta or Los Angeles).
Besides "just out of high school" translates eighteen, so it's not a "kid" anymore (heck, in most countries, it also legally an adult). Heck, eighteen year olds were conscribed in most major wars, including Vietnam.
>There is no reason a parent would have to worry about their kid doing that.
Of course there's a reason: being over-protective. A little worrying is OK. The BS "I'll be reading the news for that part of the world" (for what? In case there was some avalance or earthquake or armed robbery and a news story mentions their child?) is not.
"Foreign country" is not necessary more dangerous then the country you live in.
Not, but you should have stopped being the parent of a child when she grew up.
>Should I feel sorry for your kids or are you not a parent?
You should feel sorry for yourself, and the idea that your ideals of parenting are the only ones there are out there. Here's a small pointer to a larger universe for you: http://www.amazon.com/Bringing-Up-B%C3%A9b%C3%A9-Discovers-P...
Second, she was supposed to be travelling. It usually means changing towns and hotels every other day. The only reasonable way to send her money is to transfer them to her usual bank account. Moreover, hotels in Asia are often cheaper if you find them in place and negotiate. You do not know the address in advance.
That reminds me of a BBC documentary called "But is it art?", where a Goldsmiths, University of London art student, for her final project, went to several art exhibitions, stole objects on display, swallowed them, and then showed them as her art after defecating them.
Source: I'm a Goldsmiths alumnus.
Of course, I suppose I'm weird. I go to bars and beer festivals with my parents. But I never got into binge drinking in college.
Some Leeds art students faked a trip to Malaga on student grant money. Caused great outrage. I was friends with one of the 13. He dined out on it for a while, had a whale of a time.
Next up: 99 days without hackernews :)
I'll bet you that will be a lot harder to do than breaking with facebook. So far I haven't managed.
She is so cool and smart.
Go to the factory parties in Brooklyn and ride my bicycle through
the POLISH Greenpoint section with the Catholic statues and
shrines in the house or apartment yard or garden.
SHAME ON YOU for only thinking the experiment or sociology
review or comment on Facebook is ABOUT FOOLING YOUR FRIENDS.
In general, most of your FRIENDS are DUMBER than you are and
even test lower on the IQ scale.
ITS ALL ABOUT THE EXPERIENCE. Can you get a real Chinatown
street food - yummy bizarre food high? Without going to Bangkok?
Without jet lag? without high amount of expense?
Sure scuba diving in the Caribbean is a high point of life. But I spent
most time looking behind me for there were sharks / barracuda etc.
So, experience and MILEAGE WILL VARY GREATLY.
CONCLUSION: no suprise, you ignoramousses. Read the book on
globalization. In Florida you can hear the NATIVE INDIAN from Mexico
who has NO PAPERS who is working construction IN FLORIDA.
Many friends have never been to the Metropolitan MUSEUM of NYC, NY, USA - post link. HUNGARIAN movies and cheap student films were
shot at the Hungarian Coffee Shop right near St. John the Divine Church.
Location is close to 116th street. Columbia University.
Here's proof. Simply come up with ONE HUNDRED QUESTIONS for
a reality movie /documentary / March of the Penguins in Antartica
MOST OF THE COLLEGE GRADUATES are clueless! Are they living
in a Matrix? Are MOST OF THE PENGUINS EXACTLY the same
and 95% or ninety five percent of all penguins seen are MALE?
Something is wrong, because "the illusion social media" or
rather the DEPENDENCE UPON VIRTUAL or almost reality.
PS. look carefully at the MONK PICTURES. DO you see Waldo?
that is a joke. Do YOU SEE FIVE THINGS WRONG?
are the light spectrum color variation appropriate?
Does water swirl down the drain in a counter-clockwise direction?
SHAVING HEAD USING A MODERN DAY RAZOR?
some teeth filled with gold by dentist while in the US they use
verneers and coverings and 'silver amalgam'?
I don't think doing academic research is a carte-blanch to lie to people. One girl might do this sort of thing for the ego boost of appearing cool. But what about the ego boost academics get from pulling this kind of trick on other people.
No, living in a free country is a carte-blanch to lie to people. She isn't doing anything illegal, and she is best to know if it's ok with them or not.
No one ever gives people the full details of their lives, whether via speech, writing, text message or facebook post, so, perhaps, everyone is always lying.
(...) An habitual truth-teller is simply an impossible creature; he does not exist; he never has existed. Of course there are people who _think_ they never lie, but it is not so--and this ignorance is one of the very things that
shame our so-called civilization. Everybody lies--every day; every hour; awake; asleep; in his dreams; in his joy; in his mourning; if he keeps his tongue still, his hands, his feet, his eyes, his attitude, will convey deception--and purposely. Even in sermons--but that is a platitude. (...)
Excerpt of "On The Decay Of The Art Of Lying", by Mark Twain: http://www.online-literature.com/twain/1320/
That said, there are some reasons why I would be more in favor of using deception in your example:
- Facebook doesn't claim to have mechanisms that prevent deception. It is an extension of social life, and people are already equipped to understand that other people might lie to them. Academia claims to be robust against deception, because of the impact that a single faked academic result could have.
- The purpose of a probe into academic deception would probably be to prove that the safeguards were inadequate. This research, on the other hand, is used as evidence that people are always being dishonest when they use Facebook. It is very bad evidence for this claim. I would object to submitting a fake paper, and using it as evidence that all academics are biased.
In fact, your post exhibits exactly the supercilious attitude that I was complaining about. The article implied that any academic research was sufficient reason to engage in deception that would otherwise be unethical. Now you are saying that I cannot comment on the ethics of research because the ethics panel has already decided the matter.
EDIT: I assumed some sarcasm in your (deleted) post, and if I was wrong in assuming that, I apologize.