Profile

Cover photo
Shawn Willden
Works at Google
Attended Weber State University
1,832 followers|1,118,678 views
AboutPostsPhotosYouTube+1'sReviews

Stream

Shawn Willden

Shared publicly  - 
 
Political Polarization in America

I blame technology

I can't believe I haven't run across this Pew Research study before. It was released in June 2014, and it's probably the best explanation I've seen for how we've ended up in a situation where we may very well see a presidential contest between Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders.

What the study provides is solid data to demonstrate that the left and the right in this country have become so divided that they've all but stopped talking to one another. Not only have Democrats become more rigorously liberal and Republicans more rigorously conservative, but members of both parties have become certain that the other party is going to damage the country.

Some key numbers:  In 1994, 16% of Democrats had a "very unfavorable" opinion of the Republican party, in 2014 that jumped to 38%. On the other side, 17% of 1994 Republicans had a "very unfavorable" opinion of the Democratic party, in 2014 that leaped to 43%. Perhaps even worse, 27% of Democrats in 2014 believed that Republican policies were a threat to the well-being of the country, and 36% of Republicans felt that way about the Democrats.

My guess is than in 2016 the numbers are worse than they were in 2014.

I see this regularly in my Google+ feed. I follow a number of left-leaning people who regularly excoriate Republicans as not just wrong about political goals and methods, but as a large group of stupid sheep following a small number of outright evil leaders, bent on enslaving the populace to enrich themselves. For one example, +David Brin is a very intelligent and insightful man, and one who posts regularly about very interesting topics... but when the discussion moves to politics his foaming-at-the-mouth bombast is so one-sided and so hate-filled that I finally had to stop following him.

On the other side, most of my personal friends tend conservative, and my involvement in pro-gun discussion groups (e.g. I'm a moderator on the Guns across Google community) means I'm regularly exposed to conservative viewpoints. There I find liberals consistently ridiculed as a large group of stupid people following a small number of outright evil leaders, bent on enslaving the populace to gain power. Absolute, deep hatred of President Obama is common. To my conservative friends, Obama is not just the worst president in history, singlehandedly bent on destroying all that's good about the nation, he's almost an anti-christ. I find that particularly baffling given that he hasn't actually done much at all.

How is it that we've gotten to this point? As I said at the top, I blame technology, specifically our modern communications technologies and the way they allow us to seek out and live in echo chambers. President Obama said this well in his YouTube interview with Destin Sandlin (+SmarterEveryDay). He pointed out that media has become divided, with some people getting all of their information from Fox News and others going only to the New York Times, and that as a result they aren't even working from a common base of facts (note I'm not saying either news organization lies, but they both choose which facts they publish).

Even worse, online fora, and especially social media, have made it easier than ever for people to congregate only with like-minded folks. In Eli Pariser's 2011 book The Filter Bubble, he posited that Google's personalization of search results was going to result in this sort of effect, that Google would learn that conservatives only want to see conservative information and similar for liberals and that the search engine would only show them results that confirm what they already want to believe. I don't think this turned out to be true, partly because Google's personalization isn't that good, and partly because people at Google do think about these problems and have considered deliberately up-ranking alternative viewpoints.

But although it hasn't happened that way with Google search, it definitely has happened that online discourse has become increasingly siloed, even as it has become the primary way in which we hold political discussions. Social media is perhaps the most pernicious example, because it's subtle. If I choose to participate in, say, a Reddit pro-life forum, it's obvious I'm stepping into a bubble. But when I friend people whose comments resonate with me and un-friend those who don't (using Facebook terminology, though I don't use Facebook), it's much less obvious that I'm creating my own personalized echo chamber.

Essentially, online fora take our inbuilt psychological handicap, confirmation bias, the tendency to give more weight to information that supports our current beliefs and less to information that contradicts them, and gives it powerful technological assistance. Now, not only can our minds try to filter out what we disagree with, we can avoid hearing it at all. And there's a good deal of research that shows that when we embed ourselves in polarized online fora, we become far more extreme in our views and more antagonistic to opposing views.

If all of that weren't bad enough, the perception of anonymity and distance provided by online discourse makes it easy for people to be much more vicious than they would ever dream of being in person. Not everyone; some people behave just as nastily in real life as they do online, but those sorts get marginalized in real life, while online they lead the charge.

Destin's interview with President Obama highlights the difference. While Destin is a nice guy and not the sort who I think would ever be really vicious online, he disagrees with and probably disliked President Obama. But face to face he found himself able to make a human connection with the man. Granted that it didn't change Destin's political views, and granted that you don't get to be president of the United States without being a consummate politician, and that means being able to make people feel connected to you, but watching Destin's post-interview discussion, it's clear that he did achieve a greater ability to look at Obama's policies from his perspective. Understanding and civil discourse is how we progress, and those are much easier to do in person than on-line.

How do we fix this? Are we doomed to a vicious cycle of ever-increasing levels of polarization, becoming more and more mutually antagonistic? I sure hope not, but I don't see the way out. Technology can offer tools that enable us to find alternative viewpoints, but it can't make us want to.
Republicans and Democrats are more divided along ideological lines – and partisan antipathy is deeper and more extensive – than at any point in recent history. And these trends manifest themselves in myriad ways, both in politics and in everyday life.
7
2
Kirby Bohling's profile photoShawn Willden's profile photoblanche nonken's profile photoJoshua Lee's profile photo
6 comments
 
Here's another graph that goes back further. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2014/02/13/polarization-in-congress-has-risen-sharply-where-is-it-going-next/

It goes back to 1879 which, being only a decade after the Civil War had to also be a time of extreme polarization, and the 1879 levels correspond roughly to the 1980s.
Add a comment...

Shawn Willden

Shared publicly  - 
 
I've always said big conspiracy theories are obviously bunk, because people just aren't that good at keeping secrets. Now there's a mathematical analysis of just how likely it is that a conspiracy could survive.

Of course, this just means the Illuminati have been working for centuries to inject subtle flaws into mathematics itself in order to hide. The operation that monitors all mathematics courses in the world to prevent anyone from noticing the flaws is mankind's greatest organizational achievement. Obviously the "Math is hard, let's go shopping" Barbie doll was an attempt to reduce their workload, and the fact that people can proudly proclaim that they're bad at math without negative social repercussions (or with positive results in most cases) is deep evidence of the success of this conspiracy. I mean, given that mathematics is obviously the most powerful tool human kind has ever created, it's a tremendous accomplishment to convince the majority of the population to avoid learning it as much as possible.
 
Benjamin Franklin offered the wisest advice for how to keep a conspiracy secret: three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead. In a recent paper, David Grimes has worked out the mathematics of secret conspiracies: how things like actuarial tables and conspirators' propensity towards mutual murder affects the odds of a conspiracy remaining secret over time.

The answer, as you may guess, is that complicated conspiracies don't really work. If your nefarious plan requires recruiting every single scientist in the world (or all but a handful, since you've already recruited all the media organizations and they will discredit anyone who escapes you), or requires a steady staff of thousands of people to maintain your alien spacecraft research lab, it's probably going to come out sooner rather than later.

But there's great fun to be had along the way.
“Three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead.” — Benjamin Franklin
96 comments on original post
5
Steve Dodson's profile photoShawn Willden's profile photo
4 comments
 
+Steve Dodson that argument assumes that the 500 people existed to have some motive to refute the claim, or that someone was able to try to track them down to get their refutation. Given modern communications, it would be reasonable for people in one part of the world who are skeptical of the story to attempt to find some of the people, or their individual accounts, but that wasn't the situation in the ancient world; only people nearby could even attempt to debunk the claim, and even if they did they'd have no easy way to spread their debunking... or prove it even if they took the step of traveling to another part of the world.

So when Paul wrote to the Corinthians that 500 people saw the resurrected Christ, they really had no way to validate that claim, and since it was written to the faithful, not much motivation.

In the case of other appearances, it could also be that the story was written much later, and far away, and not widely disseminated until much later yet (after the Nicene Council chose which to canonize). So by the time anyone could even try to check, the purported witnesses, so unless they left written records or it could be found in the oral records of their descendants, there would be no way to check, even if someone were motivated enough to try.

The mathematics includes a lot of hidden assumptions about the free flow of information that we have in the modern era. By "modern" I really mean post-Gutenberg. Information flows even better in the information age, but mass printing and decent postal services were the epochal change. That made it feasible for almost anyone to spread information about the conspiracy broadly and durably.

A better application of this theory to apologetics is to Mormon apologetics. For example, we have the signed statements of 11 witnesses who saw and held the gold plates on which the Book of Mormon was allegedly written. They lived in an era of newspapers and pamphlets, and many of them carried on voluminous correspondence, much of which we have. So, the theory would predict that the odds of maintaining that conspiracy, if it was a conspiracy, were very, very low. There were many other events in early Mormon history which were equally well-documented and involved much larger groups of people.

If you don't find that convincing, then you have to expect that others will find the ancient claims of post-resurrection appearances will be even less convincing. So, no, I don't think it's of much use to Christian apologetics.
Add a comment...

Shawn Willden

Shared publicly  - 
9
Add a comment...

Shawn Willden

Shared publicly  - 
 
Quick summary:

A new Linux kernel vulnerability was just announced.  Preliminary conclusions from the Android security team:

1. No Nexus devices are at risk.
2. Android 5.0 (Marshmallow) and above devices have the bug but are protected by SELinux.
3. Android 4.3 (Jelly Bean) and earlier devices don't have the bug.
 
On January 19th, 2016, Perception Point and Red Hat announced a security issue (CVE-2016-0728) in the mainline linux kernel that affects some Android devices. We have received some questions, so I want to quickly provide an update.

We have prepared a patch, which has been released to open source and provided to partners today. This patch will be required on all devices with a security patch level of March 1 2016 or greater.

In addition, since this issue was released without prior notice to the Android Security Team,  we are now investigating the claims made about the significance of this issue to the Android ecosystem.  We believe that the number of Android devices affected is significantly smaller than initially reported. 

We believe that no Nexus devices are vulnerable to exploitation by 3rd party applications.  Further, devices with Android 5.0 and above are protected, as the Android SELinux policy prevents 3rd party applications from reaching the affected code. Also, many devices running Android 4.4 and earlier do not contain the vulnerable code introduced in linux kernel 3.8, as those newer kernel versions not common on older Android devices.
25 comments on original post
5
Add a comment...

Shawn Willden

Shared publicly  - 
 
Simon & Garfunkel's "The Sound of Silence" is a great song, but Disturbed's cover is fantastic. David Draiman knocks it out of the park with his powerful voice and carefully measured intensity, starting very gentle and melodic and gradually building to something close to his normal semi-scream. My wife (who does not care for Disturbed -- I do, though I hadn't listened to their recent album) is the one who shared it with me.

Give it a listen. It's worth your time.
7
1
Shawn Willden's profile photoMauri Joensen's profile photoLarry Leiter's profile photo
2 comments
 
Incredible! 
Add a comment...

Shawn Willden

Shared publicly  - 
 
Good to know...
 
When Owen asked C-3PO if he spoke the binary language of moisture vaporators, the proper answer for him to give (in binary) would have been "with neither too many hands nor too few," that being the idiom for speaking politely and properly. Moisture vaporators use their hands as communication ports, each finger transmitting or receiving a single channel, and touch hands to one another in order to speak; if you were to speak with more hands than the listener had available, they would miss part of what you were saying, and (especially if that were crucial metadata) they would not be able to understand you. Conversely, if you spoke with fewer hands than they listened with, your transmissions would be slow, stilted, taking far too much time. Speaking with the appropriate number of hands is a key aspect of their culture.

But as with many societies, etiquette conceals notions of class: the number of hands a moisture vaporator has is largely determined by wealth and their role. As a result, a common worker with only two or three hands will always seem slow-witted and foolish when trying to speak to a five-handed member of their bourgeoisie, and that burgher would in turn feel profoundly uncomfortable in "seven-handed society." 

An eighth hand, by law and by custom, is permitted only to their Emperor, and in fact "the eighth hand" is both a symbol of and metaphor for Imperial power.

However, in the far-less-populated outer reaches of the galaxy, hands maintain their noncommunicative functional use, and these customs are absent. It has been reported that among the small ice moons, where "down" is a matter of opinion, that it is not uncommon for a vaporator to have ten or even twelve hands, radiating in all directions from their central core. These terrestrial customs are entirely unfamiliar there, conversation normally being had with however many hands someone has free at the moment. But it makes one wonder what would happen if emissaries of vaporator "society" were to ever encounter these prospectors: would they mistake the great frequency of many arms for a sign that somewhere there is tremendous wealth hidden? Would they try to plunder asteroid belts in search of a hidden City of Water?

This is the real role of a protocol droid: to communicate to all sides the subtle nuances of each other's cultures, before oil is spilled.

(Below: Moisture vaporators in conference. The small number of arms on the ones on the left indicate that they are common workers, while the ones on the right are likely supervisors. Photo via http://www.propstore.com/blog/star-wars-prequel-trilogy-on-location-in-tunisia/)
83 comments on original post
4
Add a comment...

Shawn Willden
moderator

Discussion  - 
 
When would you not shoot?

The post about the doofus trying to shoot a Subway restaurant robber made me want to ask this. I wish I could do it as a "check all that apply" poll, but G+ polls are single-answer, so instead I'll just ask.

If you carry a gun on a regular basis, what is the most extreme circumstance in which you would choose to leave it holstered and just be a good witness? If it's easier to describe, the situations in which you would shoot, feel free to do that.

Pretty much anyone who carries, would, for example, shoot to defend their child's life. Nearly everyone who carries would defend their own life  -- though I have spoken with a couple of people who carry but are sufficiently opposed to killing that they would not defend their own lives.

When it comes to defending the lives of strangers, it gets to be more varied. Some people just wouldn't. Others would, but only if they could be 100% certain of the situation.

And what about defending others from crimes other than homicide? Would you shoot to stop a rape?[1] A beating? What about defending yourself from rape (not an issue for women only)?

And what about property? Would you shoot to protect your car from being stolen? Your wallet? Your TV?[2] What about someone else's property? If you see your neighbor's home being burglarized and you know that your neighbor is in Belize and so safe, would you shoot to protect your neighbor's TV?

What about your pride/honor? Or your spouse's (or significant other's, if not married) pride/honor? Or your nation's? Or <insert person/entity here>?

What about other situations/events?

Oh, and if you carry a gun and this post is making you think about these questions for the first time, it's about time! Everyone who carries, or even owns a gun, should think really hard about when they would or would not use it against another human being.

[1] Note that if you would shoot to prevent a rape, be very careful that you know what's going on. A few years ago a man saw a woman screaming and struggling while being raped in a park and shot and killed her rapist. Except... the "rapist" was her husband and not only was the "rape" consensual, it was her idea.

[2] I'm assuming that you have some way to be fairly certain that only your property is at risk, not your life. I'm not sure how you'd know that, but suppose you did.
4
S Spitz (‫لحم الخنزير الأكل الكافر‬‎)'s profile photoErik Pontius's profile photoShawn Willden's profile photoWilliam Kennison's profile photo
9 comments
 
+Erik Pontius my family knows if I pull my weapon to get out away from the subject and perpendicular to me. It has happened before.
Add a comment...
Have them in circles
1,832 people
Sebastien Seguin's profile photo
Kareen Perry's profile photo
Siti Nafiatunairoh's profile photo
Kaycee Sprague's profile photo
Uzay Sener's profile photo
Olyn KOTNS's profile photo
Rowan Murphy's profile photo
mohamed crackèr's profile photo
Abu Rayhan's profile photo

Shawn Willden

Shared publicly  - 
 
My thoughts on the Pixel C

I received a Pixel C late last week, complete with keyboard. I got it because there's a bug, apparently related to my code, that seems specific to the device, and I needed one to track it down. It's a fairly minor issue that will affect few people, but I'll dig into it.

This post isn't about that, it's about the Pixel C.

In a nutshell: I love this tablet. It is by far the best tablet I've ever used, Android or iOS. The Pixel brand is supposed to be about premium devices that showcase what's possible, cost be damned, and I think the Pixel C hits the mark.

Here's what I like:

1. The keyboard. It's thin, light but very solid-feeling, with great keys. The layout is a little bit odd, but I got used to it quickly. But the coolest thing about the keyboard is the superbly well-implemented magnetic attachment.

The keyboard attaches magnetically to the tablet, in one of three ways. First, you can place it against the screen and it holds tightly in place, acting as a cover, giving you a completely metal exterior which looks and feels great in your hand. Second, you can place it against the back of the tablet. Again, it holds tightly in place, giving you a usable tablet, just one that's slightly thicker, though still not terribly thick. Third you can touch the back of the tablet to the upper edge of the keyboard, a roughly 1.5" strip above the keys. That strip is actually hinged, so when the keyboard is attached you can position the tablet at whatever angle you like, from flat (parallel to the keyboard) to very nearly vertical (perpendicular to the keyboard). The keyboard provides a solid platform to support the screen.

Or, if you're not using it, you can simply set the keyboard aside. The really cool thing is all of these transitions are very fast and easy. Just pull the keyboard from wherever it is and put it where you want it.

2. The screen. The screen is gorgeous. Very bright, extremely high resolution, easily the crispest, nicest display I've ever seen on any device, including my Macbook Pro with its "retina" display. Many phone screens are just as good, but something about seeing that quality in a larger size is impressive. HD video looks amazing on it.

3. Performance. It's really fast, and really smooth. I suppose it ought to be, given the specs: 8 core CPU, 256-core GPU, 3 GiB RAM. It's a serious little computer. Whatever, it's always quick and responsive.

There are some other things that are nice about it. The battery life is very good. It charges quickly via USB-C. I like the little chrome color bar on the back that you can tap to get battery status without waking the device. The speakers are good. All in all, it looks, feels and operates like a high-end product.

The downside of the device is, of course, the price. The 64 GiB model (the one I have) is $600, and the keyboard is another $150. This is where most of the reviewers have panned it. For that much money, people want to be able to use it for "productivity", rather than just watching movies and surfing the web, and the lack of multi-window support in Android Marshmallow limits its utility. There are rumors that Android N will rectify this problem.

But, even without that, if you can find a way to justify the price tag, I don't think you'll be disappointed. This is a very nice device. In fact, I find that it has replaced my laptop for a lot of tasks, including some "productivity" work. That's partly because my laptop is fairly large, but mostly it's because the Pixel C is so nice to use that I'd rather reach for it.

Highly recommended.
6
Shawn Willden's profile photoMatthew Garbett's profile photo
10 comments
 
+Shawn Willden Yeah I think this is the main problem but if they can port the Chrome OS desktop why reinvent the wheel :P I still envision a hybrid UI that changes based on your needs and changes in form factor. Such as connecting to an external monitor or TV. It could change to desktop mode or Android TV UI.
Add a comment...

Shawn Willden

Shared publicly  - 
9
1
Adam K's profile photoTevya Washburn's profile photo
Adam K
 
Ouch  : P
Add a comment...

Shawn Willden

Shared publicly  - 
 
Fascinating

h/t +Yonatan Zunger 
 
The unique characteristic of the Chinese system is its willingness to execute massive amounts of its own leaders.  In fact, the CPC's willingness to appease the grievances of the masses with the blood of its own elites is the ultimate source of its strength, it's very foundation.  Despite its troubles, it has proven to be a remarkably durable institution.  

The Party, in effect, has managed to internalize and institutionalize revolutionary Terror.  Once upon a time, Mao Zedong rose to power on the back of his ability to rouse a nation of peasants into murdering their landlords and expropriating their property.  Decades later, he roused their children into violent revolt against the government he created.  Now Xi Jinping, a child of one of Mao's high officials, himself imprisoned in that tumult of the Cultural Revolution, is instituting a new round of purges. 

This is the characteristic pattern of the Party's response to social tension.  When the masses are restless, it offers up a fresh crop of sacrificial victims from its own ranks.  Revolt from outside becomes unnecessary.  We have a sort of weird closed loop; the Party's officials become lax and corrupt, the masses grow angry, and that anger is appeased with a brutal culling.  The very anger of the masses is internalized as a support for the regime.

Thus the Party has institutionalized revolt; it overthrows itself, attacks itself.  The paradox is that this secures its position all the more firmly.

Compare this with the Soviets. Perhaps the fall of the Soviet Union became inevitable once the generation of leaders following Stalin tried to reform it.  But Stalinism was not reformable.  The very cruelty of the system was its foundation.  Because it was not a normal state but a revolutionary state, it was born in purges and terror, and could not stop without changing its very nature.  

If a new Stalin had emerged in the mid-50's to institute a new round of purges, the Soviet Union would probably still exist today.  Instead it tried convert itself into a normal state, drifted about in a desultory manner for a few decades and collapsed.  It's notable how its fall required no war.  The old regime put up scarcely any fight.  It simply gave up.

Xi Jinping, a Maoist of the old school, a man who has been on both sides of Revolutionary violence, and a student of history, of the fall of the Soviets, is not liable to make the same mistake.  It is nto clear to me that Xi desires to be the new Mao, but he desires to preserve the the Party, and this is what the situation calls for.  His personal predilections are irrelevant. It seems to me that the purges will only continue and intensify.  
When President Xi Jinping launched his crackdown on official corruption two years ago, he vowed to target both “tigers” and “flies”—the country’s most ...
2 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...

Shawn Willden

Shared publicly  - 
4
Add a comment...

Shawn Willden

Shared publicly  - 
 
Northern Utah is safe from the so-called "enlightened" mind manipulators.

Seriously... zero MUs under enemy fields is awfully tough to achieve in a populated area. Kudos to all the people who made it possible. I did my very small part, blowing up a few fields near my home.

Intel report for #Ingress regional cell AM01-ECHO-09.
22
Dirk Willden (daknife)'s profile photoWillis's profile photoSarah Rosen (Silencieux)'s profile photoMichael Snowden's profile photo
8 comments
 
+Dirk Willden just read your comment, that does change things
Add a comment...
People
Have them in circles
1,832 people
Sebastien Seguin's profile photo
Kareen Perry's profile photo
Siti Nafiatunairoh's profile photo
Kaycee Sprague's profile photo
Uzay Sener's profile photo
Olyn KOTNS's profile photo
Rowan Murphy's profile photo
mohamed crackèr's profile photo
Abu Rayhan's profile photo
Work
Occupation
Software Engineer
Skills
Software development, security engineering
Employment
  • Google
    Software Engineer, 2011 - present
  • IBM
    I/T Architect, 1997 - 2011
  • Open Highways, LLC
    Lead Software Engineer, 1996 - 1997
  • Philips Broadcast Television Systems
    Lead Software Engineer, 1994 - 1996
  • Streamlined Information Systems
    Lead Software Engineer, 1993 - 1994
  • Unisys
    Intern, 1992 - 1993
  • Weber State University
    Programmer, 1987 - 1992
  • United States Air Force Reserve
    Security Policeman, 1987 - 1996
  • Mexico Veracruz Mission
    Missionary, 1988 - 1990
Basic Information
Looking for
Friends, Networking
Other names
Divegeek
Apps with Google+ Sign-in
  • MemoGlyph
Story
Introduction
Professionally, I'm an experienced software engineer, focused on security and networking.  Personally, I've been married for 22 years and am a father of four.  For fun I like to snowboard, SCUBA dive, hunt, and play with firearms.  I really enjoy photography.  I'm also a certified NRA firearms instructor and teach concealed firearm permit courses for Utah and Colorado.
Collections Shawn is following
View all
Education
  • Weber State University
    Mathematics and Computer Science, 1988 - 1996
  • Layton High School
    1985 - 1987
Links
Other profiles
Contributor to
Shawn Willden's +1's are the things they like, agree with, or want to recommend.
Blessed Peace
krisandshawn.blogspot.com

Nov 25th - My dear sweet grandpa Merritt passed away this morning. It is so hard and yet so wonderful. He has wanted to go for so long. I wi

GeoGuessr - Let's explore the world!
www.geoguessr.com

GeoGuessr is a geography game which takes you on a journey around the world and challenges your ability to recognize your surroundings.

Google to Buy Waze for $1.3 Billion
www.israelnationalnews.com

Huge deal is not finalized and still open to changes. Israeli start-up had been negotiating with Facebook, too.

Lauren Weinstein's Blog: Inside PRISM: Why the Government Hates Encryption
lauren.vortex.com

Addendum (1:12 PM): Google's Larry Page and David Drummond are categorically denying that Google gives the government open-ended, back-door

What the ...?
googleblog.blogspot.com

Dear Google users— You may be aware of press reports alleging that Internet companies have joined a secret U.S. government program called PR

Supersonic Flying Wing Nabs $100,000 from NASA
www.innovationnewsdaily.com

A futuristic aircraft resembling a flying ninja star can turn 90 degrees in midair to go into supersonic mode.

Google App Engine - Google Code
code.google.com

Getting Started. Sign up for an App Engine account. Download the App Engine SDK. Read the Getting Started Guide. Get Involved. Join App Engi

Google Politics &amp; Elections
www.google.com

Google Politics &amp; Elections. Your elections hub to study, watch, discuss, participate in and make your impact on the digital campaign trail.

Fitbit
plus.google.com

Fitbit is dedicated to helping people lead healthier, more active lives.

Google Politics &amp; Elections
www.google.com

Google Politics &amp; Elections. Your elections hub to study, watch, discuss, participate in and make your impact on the digital campaign trail.

YouTubePresents - YouTube
www.youtube.com

Live music and exclusive performances on YouTube

Probabilistic Graphical Models
www.coursera.org

Probabilistic Graphical Models is a free online class taught by Daphne Koller, Professor of Stanford University

Rethink Green with Bridgestone
www.bridgestonetire.com

Check out our Fuel Calculator to see how much you could save with Bridgestone tires. After completing the steps, you can enter for a chance

The Bill of Rights: Creation and Reconstruction
market.android.com

Are the deep insights of Hugo Black, William Brennan, and Felix Frankfurter that have defined our cherished Bill of Rights fatally flawed? W

WSPA
wspa.com

The Spartanburg County Sheriff’s Office made arrest in attempted armed robbery at an Upstate Waffle House.

Killeen - Google Maps
maps.google.com

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps

Aldiko Book Reader
market.android.com

Read and download thousands of eBooks right on your Android phone or tablet.Download one of the best Android eBook Readers now!★The leading

Contest: Win a Nexus 4 8GB From Droid Life! #5daysofnexus – Droid Life
www.droid-life.com

Accessories · Apps · Games · Extras · Appearances · Contests · Deals · Downloads · News · Breaking · Exclusive · Live · Opinion · Polls · Ru

Slow, expensive and not all that good. I know good food. I like good food. I don't mind paying for good food. This is not that good, and certainly not worth the price. In addition, even though my party was the only one there (apparently not many others like it, either), it took over two hours for us to be served. I won't be returning.
Public - 6 months ago
reviewed 6 months ago
Hot pools are adults only, families not welcome Note that this may change from day to day depending on which staff member is setting the rules, but yesterday my family and I had a terrible experience. About 20 of us (extended family) went out for a nice afternoon, with the kids. We were the only ones in the pool we were in, and the little kids were having a great time splashing around. They weren't being obnoxious, or loud, weren't roughhousing or doing anything dangerous and weren't bothering anyone, but the "pool walker" told us the pool was for soaking only, no splashing allowed, and if we didn't get them so sit still we'd have to leave. Yeah, six year olds really enjoy sitting still in a pool and soaking. I pointed out that we were the only ones there, and that no one was being bothered, but he insisted. I understand that rambunctious behavior can get out of hand and become obnoxious, if not downright dangerous, and that it's better to nip it in the bud so it doesn't grow out of control. But there is a line, and if you want to welcome kids (and collect money for their admission!), you have to allow them to _be_ kids. If that weren't enough, later a young couple joined us in our pool and began engaging in rather over-the-top PDA. They didn't quite have sex in the pool, but weren't too far from it. The staffer didn't seem bothered by this in the slightest. They were also drinking. So, my conclusion is that the hot springs pools are for adults only. If you have kids, don't bother. Next time we'll go back to Crystal Hot Springs or the hot springs in Garland at Camperworld. The facilities aren't quite as nice, but kids can play.
• • •
Public - a year ago
reviewed a year ago
Some of the best Indian/Nepalese food around. The service is always great, too. The place is kind of a hole in the wall, but clean. We visit often.
Public - 2 years ago
reviewed 2 years ago
Food: ExcellentDecor: ExcellentService: Excellent
Public - 3 years ago
reviewed 3 years ago
31 reviews
Map
Map
Map
Food was mediocre to poor. The decor is cool, but jarringly wrong for a Mexican restaurant. Service was okay... but for a party of five they added a 22% tip to our bill!?! I might have tipped as much or more, but it's the height of obnoxious arrogance to simply include it in the bill. I understand why this is done for large parties, but for five people? Without the tip issue I'd probably have given them three stars. Maybe two.
Public - a year ago
reviewed a year ago
This is all about the location -- a few hundred feet from the main lift of Powderhorn Ski Resort. The rooms are so-so, and the service... well, I don't think I can really evaluate the service. The staff had been completely replaced three weeks before our stay, so they weren't yet on top of things. They were all very friendly and helpful, but there were a lot of gaps. We stayed for four nights, in a "Family Room", which sleeps 7. It had a king-sized bed, a bunk bed with two doubles and a twin trundle. My family of six slept in the room, but it was pretty cramped. The food at the hotel was fairly good, though they don't have a menu; it's kind of cafeteria style with one or two dishes on offer, plus assorted sides. It was on the expensive side for what it was, but that's to be expected at a ski resort. There's a game room with some gaming consoles (Wiis and an Xbox), a pool table and some board games. My kids hung out there a lot when we weren't on the slopes. The lounge area in the lodge above is quite comfortable and we hung out there quite a bit. That's also where the food is. The real attraction, of course, is the skiing, and while that varies a lot with the weather, it was fantastic while we were there. At least a few inches of fresh, light powder every night got us all lining up waiting for the lift to open every morning. The resort isn't large, and the lifts are slow, but there also aren't a lot of people so there was never much waiting in line and most of the time there were no lines at all. There are runs for all ability levels, though if you're a snowboarder who likes steep hills but doesn't like moguls there's not much for you, since there seem to be a lot more skiers than boarders so the black runs are all carved into moguls. If being on the slopes is what you're after, and if you get a decent price on your stay, Slopside is a great place to be. In our case, I got a promotional offer (through Google Offers, I think it was) that let all six of us stay for four nights for $290. We spent about that much again on food, plus another $700 on lift tickets, so it cost about $1500 for a five-day ski vacation for a family of six. Great value, and we had a great time.
• • •
Public - 2 years ago
reviewed 2 years ago
One of my teens has ongoing struggles with various issues, so I'm (unfortunately) more than a little familiar with treatment facilities of various sorts, ranging from hospital mental health holding areas, to short-term and long-term residential facilities to day treatment programs and outpatient therapy. I mention that to explain where I'm coming from when I say AFIC isn't just bad, it's scary. Another reviewer commented that the founder has a God complex, and I can't think of a better description. It's possible that he manages to help some kids with his program, but at the expense of abusing the rest of the family. I understand and agree that most every family with a troubled teen can benefit from counseling and change, and that in many cases the (perhaps well-meaning, perhaps not) actions of the parents and family may be a big part of the cause of the teen's issues, but at AFIC the assumption going in is that the parents and the family are the cause of all that is wrong, and the "cause" is attacked very aggressively. Bottom line: Expect to pay exorbitant fees to be treated like crap. Perhaps it gets better later. I don't know. Our child only spent a few hours there, because our initial experience was so horrible that by the time we got home, we turned around and drove back. Our teen also reported feeling very uncomfortable and fearful of the founder and staff, and was very happy to leave. They treated our child well while abusing us... until we left. Unfortunately, I don't know of another place I'd recommend in Colorado. We had a much better experience and results -- at much lower cost -- from Life Line in Utah. They didn't "cure" my teen, but there are no cures for the condition, only skills to be learned to manage it and between Life Line and the outpatient therapist we found in Boulder, improvement is coming. I honestly don't think AFIC could have done any better, and fear they might have done much damage.
• • •
Public - 3 years ago
reviewed 3 years ago