Four for Friday

(Link in blogroll)

Q1 - Military Baggage: Some airlines are now charging U.S. soldiers extra baggage fees to take their military kits with them as they set off for duty. Military personnel carry large, heavy kit bags containing boots, clothing and gear. In the past few months, airlines have instituted fees for all travelers ranging from $15 for one bag to $250 for a third bag. The Veterans of Foreign Wars is asking the trade group representing the nation's major airlines to encourage its members to waive fees for a third piece of luggage checked by servicemen and women. Do you think military personnel should be charged extra baggage fees?

Oh dear heavenly GOD, this is a freakin' travesty. I think the Army (et al.) should pick up the cost, but really, this is just ridiculous of the airline industry. They've got the space for Pete's sake--who else checks luggage if they don't have to anymore?!--and the baggage handlers are unionized (mostly) so they're going to have to unload the plane either way. How could it take longer than it does now?? How greedy and horrible U.S. corporations have become....

Q2 - Opt Out: When possible, search engines like Google and Yahoo! match your search results with advertisements related to those results. Yahoo! call this "ad matching," (sometimes also called ad customization), and they do this in order to make the ads you see more relevant and useful for you. Recently, Yahoo enacted an opt-out option for users who don't want their searches to be tracked and analyzed for relevant advertisements. While the company has framed this development as a move toward transparency, choice and greater privacy, it also predicts that most users will prefer to remain seeing ads that suit their searches. What do you think? If you saw an opt out button, would you use it to remove advertisements from your search results, or do you like seeing ads alongside your searches.

I would totally use the opt-out. I almost never--like less than 2% of the time--click on a site Google has marked as an ad. In fact, I don't even SEE the ad results, which means that I don't see the ads on people's websites even when I want to support them financially that way. Auto-editing, caused by 15 years of Internet usage!

Q3 - Bigfoot: At a press conference scheduled for later today in Palo Alto, California, two Georgia-based law enforcement officials are set to reveal both photographic and DNA evidence of what they claim is the captured body of Bigfoot, the alleged ape-like creature said to inhabit remote forests throughout the world. Do you believe creatures like Bigfoot exist?

I don't see why not. I don't care either. Much like Nessie, it just doesn't impact me in any useful way. I'm much more afraid of bears than Bigfoot (Bigfeet? Bigfoots?). However, I fear that this is yet another in a long line of hoax or misguided "news" on the subject. I'm really still just stunned about the first topic....

Q4 - Funerals: A funeral home in Idaho is offering funeral webcasts for people who cannot attend a funeral in person. If you could not attend a funeral in person, would you watch it online?

If I could do it in person, I would. However sometimes it's not possible. It would be awesome for out-of-town family and friends or even those nearby who are too ill to leave the house, but I think there needs to be some kind of check placed on this so that you can't literally broadcast to the universe what is essentially a fairly private event. In other words, I think they should require viewing be enabled only for invited guests, and probably only as a live-feed--sorry, but what else would you call it?--rather than on tape. [This would have been a wonderful option in some cases for us this past week, by the way]