Page 8 of 18
Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 2:22 pm
5 - 1m rest
1 - 30s rest
3 - 2m rest
2 - 3m rest (near my normal max effort here with 9 minutes to go!)
1 - 30s rest
1 - 30s rest
1 - 30s rest
1 - 1m rest
1 - 2m rest
1 - stopped at 19:39 after a "NO WAY!"
The pushups are coming back - thus the increase in rounds from previous D1
My 17month old was doing the squats with me - hilarious. She even put her arms out "just like daddy." Can't wait until she and her big sister can do the workouts with me.
Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 4:15 pm
Aren't kids cute! My 6 and 8 year old boys show me up everytime :evil: The can both do dead hang pullups till the cows come home. I can still beat them on DDR though, just!
Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 9:02 pm
Good progress. My youngest mimics me as well, I just wish his 14-year old brother would tear himself away from World of Warcraft for at least five minutes and join us.
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 2:29 am
If I wasn't freaked out about internet safety, I'd get a video of her squats - I mean it is amazingly funny. She's at the age where she is going from just mocking to putting her own personality in it.
We try to get outside as much as possible. My 4 yr old has been kicking and chasing a ball since she was 10 mos old! Lately - per my posts regarding the weather - we've been inside :cry: .
Anyway - I will be playing volleyball when they're old enough. I also need tennis, badminton (killer sport!), racquetball partners - so they'll be on the move.
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 4:03 am
If I wasn't freaked out about internet safety,
Yeah, my wife keeps putting pictures of the kids on facebook, and I go ballistic everytime.
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 5:17 am
facebook + kids pictures = bad, links to too much personal information from themselves or immediate family (aka your wife). Open ground rule: pictures online are fine, as long as it is anonymous and your kids are in no way identifiable by location, name, or anything that makes them more than a random google search of images. My 2 cents, though it doesn't sound like either of you need the advice.
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 9:20 am
Any benefit to posting them has no value against safety. I also don't like the idea of someone lusting after them.
I'm gonna be a bastard when they're old enough to date. Hopefully, I'll look like a killer crossfit animal!
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 9:25 am
100% with you (both of you) on this. Need to get the kids together so they can whine about their horribly unreasonable dads.
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 9:31 am
There was a very frightening study about the tactics used by predators to locate and contact children they see online. It is important to train kids to stay anonymous and not give any personal info if they are going to be online.
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 9:36 am
I guess we've all seen the Dateline shows. I watch, fascinated and sick at the same time, wondering why some of these guys don't have legal aged girlfriends. I'm having a physical reaction to typing this. YUCK!
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 9:47 am
Gave me a good idea for reverse proxy anonymizing software to protect kids identification, I will look around and see if it already exists.
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 9:58 am
I haven't seen those Dateline things you mention, I guess they're U.S. TV shows, any chance of finding them on youtube or similar?
There's buckets of anonymizing proxies (TOR
being one) but they all suffer from various faults, the major one being they don't protect the user from being silly/stupid, and we all know kids thrive on being silly AND stupid (I used to be a kid you know...)
Something about this that really riles me is, I work with Internet security every day. I know
what goes on in some places. Still I'm being shrugged at by both kids and their parents when I try to tell them... I guess ignorance actually is bliss.
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 10:07 am
My idea would protect kids from stupidity, not anonymizing the source IP but the user by doing deep traffic inspection and data rewriting withing the tcp stream. Does not look like such a thing exists but I am almost 100% sure it is possible.
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 10:23 am
Hmm, don't want to turn vbm's log into a geek-fest but he's a mathematician, he can take it.
This is off the cuff with a major headache, so it might be lacking any sense at all:
Theoretically it should work. I think there are some practical problems though, for the same reason stateful packet inspection firewalls have been preferred to application proxies (so far), namely performance and manageability. I expect you want to search outgoing packets for names, addresses etc? You will need to scan every kind of application to cover every option (web, msn, irc, NextBigThing, whathaveyou) and then actually change the interesting data, which could also be a challenge as some application protocols will barf at any changes, while others (skype f.i.) are actually encrypted.
Do you think it could be made totally transparent to the user? If a young teen find out her dad actually censors her online life, she'll find a way around it.
I'm still with you on the needs for such software, I think especially for the younger kids, but I'd say a good dose of common sense and awareness ingrained(sp?) into kids from a young age would go a long way.
Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 11:03 am
taifun wrote: but he's a mathematician, he can take it.
I am calculating the characters and adding up the ascii values to see if there is a message from above hidden in the statements. I know where my bets would be...
My thoughts - and here's where I go from techy programmer to the IS side: if you build one, they'll break it and you'll have a false sense of security which will actually compromise your safety. Door locks on houses never stopped any real thief.