12/08/2025
Knee cap
During the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, Hamas kneecapped[10] Gazans suspected of working with Israel. Amnesty International published a report on kneecapping in Gaza and called on Hamas to end “the campaign of abuses.”[10]
Writing in 2021, historian Farah Peterson saw the performance of the gesture in 2016 as a subversion and a reclamation of black confrontations with power, given that historically images of black people kneeling have been associated with oppression.[41]
Josiah Wedgwood pottered the image of a black man kneeling in shackles and depicting slavery on the emblem of the British abolitionist movement during the 18th and 19th centuries—a movement to ban slavery and ill-treatment of people.[42]
In 1965, Martin Luther King Jr. knelt in prayer with a group of equalities marchers during the Selma to Montgomery marches.[42]
In 1962, American photographer Danny Lyon took a picture in Cairo, Illinois, showing three demonstrators on bended knee praying in front of the city's racially segregated swimming pool. Used in a poster of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), it quickly became an iconic image of the US civil rights movement.[43]
History
edit
See also: Paramilitary punishment attacks in Northern Ireland
During the Troubles in Northern Ireland, paramilitaries considered themselves to be law enforcers in their own areas. They used limb shootings to 'punish' alleged "political" and "normal" criminals. The IRA defined "political" crime as informing or fraternizing with British soldiers, while "normal" crime was judged to include vandalism, theft, joyriding, r**e, selling drugs, and antisocial behaviour. See Paramilitary punishment attacks in Northern Ireland. If the crime was considered to be grave, the victim was also shot in the ankles and elbows, leaving them with six gunshot wounds (colloquially known as a six pack).[5] Approximately 2,500 people were victims of these paramilitary attacks, known as 'punishment shootings' at the time, through the duration of the conflict. Those who were attacked often faced social stigma.[6]
The Red Brigades, an Italian militant organization, employed limb shootings (gambizzazioni) to warn their opponents. They used the method to punish at least 75 people up to December 1978.[7][8]
The Bangladesh Police have started kneecapping in the country since 2009 to punish the opposition and prevent them from participating in protests against the government. Human Rights Watch (HRW) has published a report on kneecapping in Bangladesh.[9]
During the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, Hamas kneecapped[10] Gazans suspected of working with Israel. Amnesty International published a report on kneecapping in Gaza and called on Hamas to end “the campaign of abuses.”[10]
During the March of Return protests of 30 March 2018, Israeli snipers spoke about shooting Gazan protestors in the knees.[11] Amnesty International condemned the attacks as unlawful.[12]
Social stigma
Article Talk
Language
Watch
Edit
Learn more
This article needs additional citations for verification. (March 2023)
Stigma, originally referring to the visible marking of people considered inferior, has evolved to mean a negative perception or sense of disapproval that a society places on a group or individual based on certain characteristics such as their socioeconomic status, gender, race, religion, appearance, upbringing, origin, or health status. Social stigma can take different forms and depends on the specific time and place in which it arises. Once a person is stigmatized, they are often associated with stereotypes that lead to discrimination, marginalization, and psychological problems.[1]
This process of stigmatization not only affects the social status and behavior of stigmatized persons, but also shapes their own self-perception, which can lead to psychological problems such as depression and low self-esteem. Stigmatized people are often aware that they are perceived and treated differently, which can start at an early age. Research shows that children are aware of cultural stereotypes at an early age, which affects their perception of their own identity and their interactions with the world around them.
Main theories and contributions
edit
Émile Durkheim
edit
French sociologist Émile Durkheim was the first to explore stigma as a social phenomenon in 1895. He wrote:
Imagine a society of saints, a perfect cloister of exemplary individuals. Crimes or deviance, properly so-called, will there be unknown; but faults, which appear venial to the layman, will there create the same scandal that the ordinary offense does in ordinary consciousnesses. If then, this society has the power to judge and punish, it will define these acts as criminal (or deviant) and will treat them as such.[6]
Erving Goffman
edit
Erving Goffman described stigma as a phenomenon whereby an individual with an attribute which is deeply discredited by their society is rejected as a result of the attribute. Goffman saw stigma as a process by which the reaction of others spoils normal identity.[7]
More specifically, he explained that what constituted this attribute would change over time. "It should be seen that a language of relationships, not attributes, is really needed. An attribute that stigmatizes one type of possessor can confirm the usualness of another, and therefore is neither credible nor discreditable as a thing in itself."[7]
In Goffman's theory of social stigma, a stigma is an attribute, behavior, or reputation which is socially discrediting in a particular way: it causes an individual to be mentally classified by others in an undesirable, rejected stereotype rather than in an accepted, normal one. Goffman defined stigma as a special kind of gap between virtual social identity and actual social identity:
While a stranger is present before us, evidence can arise of his possessing an attribute that makes him different from others in the category of persons available for him to be, and of a less desirable kind—in the extreme, a person who is quite thoroughly bad, or dangerous, or weak. He is thus reduced in our minds from a whole and usual person to a tainted discounted one. Such an attribute is a stigma, especially when its discrediting effect is very extensive [...] It constitutes a special discrepancy between virtual and actual social identity. (Goffman 1963:3).
The stigmatized, the normal, and the wise
edit
Goffman divides the individual's relation to a stigma into three categories:
the stigmatized being those who bear the stigma;
the normals being those who do not bear the stigma; and
the wise being those among the normals who are accepted by the stigmatized as understanding and accepting of their condition (borrowing the term from the homos*xual community).
The wise normals are not merely those who are in some sense accepting of the stigma; they are, rather, "those whose special situation has made them intimately privy to the secret life of the stigmatized individual and sympathetic with it, and who find themselves accorded a measure of acceptance, a measure of courtesy membership in the clan." That is, they are accepted by the stigmatized as "honorary members" of the stigmatized group. "Wise persons are the marginal men before whom the individual with a fault need feel no shame nor exert self-control, knowing that in spite of his failing he will be seen as an ordinary other," Goffman notes that the wise may in certain social situations also bear the stigma with respect to other normals: that is, they may also be stigmatized for being wise. An example is a parent of a homos*xual; another is a white woman who is seen socializing with a black man (assuming social milieus in which homos*xuals and dark-skinned people are stigmatized).
A 2012 study[8] showed empirical support for the existence of the own, the wise, and normals as separate groups; but the wise appeared in two forms: active wise and passive wise. The active wise encouraged challenging stigmatization and educating stigmatizers, but the passive wise did not.
Ethical considerations
edit
Goffman emphasizes that the stigma relationship is one between an individual and a social setting with a given set of expectations; thus, everyone at different times will play both roles of stigmatized and stigmatizer (or, as he puts it, "normal"). Goffman gives the example that "some jobs in America cause holders without the expected college education to conceal this fact; other jobs, however, can lead to the few of their holders who have a higher education to keep this a secret, lest they are marked as failures and outsiders. Similarly, a middle-class boy may feel no compunction in being seen going to the library; a professional criminal, however, writes [about keeping his library visits secret]." He also gives the example of blacks being stigmatized among whites, and whites being stigmatized among blacks.
Individuals actively cope with stigma in ways that vary across stigmatized groups, across individuals within stigmatized groups, and within individuals across time and situations.[9]
The stigmatized
edit
The stigmatized are ostracized, devalued, scorned, shunned and ignored. They experience discrimination in the realms of employment and housing.[10] Perceived prejudice and discrimination is also associated with negative physical and mental health outcomes.[11] Young people who experience stigma associated with mental health difficulties may face negative reactions from their peer group.[12][13][14][15] Those who perceive themselves to be members of a stigmatized group, whether it is obvious to those around them or not, often experience psychological distress and many view themselves contemptuously.[16]
Although the experience of being stigmatized may take a toll on self-esteem, academic achievement, and other outcomes, many people with stigmatized attributes have high self-esteem, perform at high levels, are happy and appear to be quite resilient to their negative experiences.[16]
There are also "positive stigma": it is possible to be too rich, or too smart. This is noted by Goffman (1963:141) in his discussion of leaders, who are subsequently given license to deviate from some behavioral norms because they have contributed far above the expectations of the group. This can result in social stigma.
The stigmatizer
edit
From the perspective of the stigmatizer, stigmatization involves threat, aversion[clarification needed] and sometimes the depersonalization of others into stereotypic caricatures. Stigmatizing others can serve several functions for an individual, including self-esteem enhancement, control enhancement, and anxiety buffering, through downward-comparison—comparing oneself to less fortunate others can increase one's own subjective sense of well-being and therefore boost one's self-esteem.[16]
21st-century social psychologists consider stigmatizing and stereotyping to be a normal consequence of people's cognitive abilities and limitations, and of the social information and experiences to which they are exposed.[16]
Current views of stigma, from the perspectives of both the stigmatizer and the stigmatized person, consider the process of stigma to be highly situationally specific, dynamic, complex and nonpathological.[16]
Gerhard Falk
edit
German-born sociologist and historian Gerhard Falk wrote:[17]
All societies will always stigmatize some conditions and some behaviors because doing so provides for group solidarity by delineating "outsiders" from "insiders".
Falk[18] describes stigma based on two categories, existential stigma and achieved stigma. He defines existential stigma as "stigma deriving from a condition which the target of the stigma either did not cause or over which he has little control." He defines Achieved Stigma as "stigma that is earned because of conduct and/or because they contributed heavily to attaining the stigma in question."[17]
Falk concludes that "we and all societies will always stigmatize some condition and some behavior because doing so provides for group solidarity by delineating 'outsiders' from 'insiders'".[17] Stigmatization, at its essence, is a challenge to one's humanity- for both the stigmatized person and the stigmatizer. The majority of stigma researchers have found the process of stigmatization has a long history and is cross-culturally ubiquitous.[16]
Link and Phelan stigmatization model
edit
Bruce Link and Jo Phelan propose that stigma exists when four specific components converge:[19]
Individuals differentiate and label human variations.
Prevailing cultural beliefs tie those labeled to adverse attributes.
Labeled individuals are placed in distinguished groups that serve to establish a sense of disconnection between "us" and "them".
Labeled individuals experience "status loss and discrimination" that leads to unequal circumstances.
In this model stigmatization is also contingent on "access to social, economic, and political power that allows the identification of differences, construction of stereotypes, the separation of labeled persons into distinct groups, and the full ex*****on of disapproval, rejection, exclusion, and discrimination." Subsequently, in this model, the term stigma is applied when labeling, stereotyping, disconnection, status loss, and discrimination all exist within a power situation that facilitates stigma to occur.
Differentiation and labeling
edit
See also: Labelling and Infrahumanisation
Identifying which human differences are salient, and therefore worthy of labeling, is a social process. There are two primary factors to examine when considering the extent to which this process is a social one. The first issue is that significant oversimplification is needed to create groups. The broad groups of black and white, homos*xual and heteros*xual, the sane and the mentally ill; and young and old are all examples of this. Secondly, the differences that are socially judged to be relevant differ vastly according to time and place. An example of this is the emphasis that was put on the size of the forehead and faces of individuals in the late 19th century—which was believed to be a measure of a person's criminal nature.[citation needed]
Linking to stereotypes
edit
The second component of this model centers on the linking of labeled differences with stereotypes. Goffman's 1963 work made this aspect of stigma prominent and it has remained so ever since. This process of applying certain stereotypes to differentiated groups of individuals has attracted a large amount of attention and research in recent decades.
Us and them
edit
Thirdly, linking negative attributes to groups facilitates separation into "us" and "them". Seeing the labeled group as fundamentally different causes stereotyping with little hesitation. "Us" and "them" implies that the labeled group is slightly less human in nature and at the extreme not human at all.
Disadvantage
edit
The fourth component of stigmatization in this model includes "status loss and discrimination". Many definitions of stigma do not include this aspect, however, these authors believe that this loss occurs inherently as individuals are "labeled, set apart, and linked to undesirable characteristics." The members of the labeled groups are subsequently disadvantaged in the most common group of life chances including income, education, mental well-being, housing status, health, and medical treatment. Thus, stigmatization by the majorities, the powerful, or the "superior" leads to the Othering of the minorities, the powerless, and the "inferior". Whereby the stigmatized individuals become disadvantaged due to the ideology created by "the self," which is the opposing force to "the Other." As a result, the others become socially excluded and those in power reason the exclusion based on the original characteristics that led to the stigma.[20]
Necessity of power
edit
The authors also emphasize[19] the role of power (social, economic, and political power) in stigmatization. While the use of power is clear in some situations, in others it can become masked as the power differences are less stark. An extreme example of a situation in which the power role was explicitly clear was the treatment of Jewish people by the N***s. On the other hand, an example of a situation in which individuals of a stigmatized group have "stigma-related processes"[clarification needed] occurring would be the inmates of a prison. It is imaginable that each of the steps described above would occur regarding the inmates' thoughts about the guards. However, this situation cannot involve true stigmatization, according to this model, because the prisoners do not have the economic, political, or social power to act on these thoughts with any serious discriminatory consequences.
"Stigma allure" and authenticity
edit
Sociologist Matthew W. Hughey explains that prior research on stigma has emphasized individual and group attempts to reduce stigma by "passing as normal", by shunning the stigmatized, or through selective disclosure of stigmatized attributes. Yet, some actors may embrace particular markings of stigma (e.g.: social markings like dishonor or select physical dysfunctions and abnormalities) as signs of moral commitment and/or cultural and political authenticity. Hence, Hughey argues that some actors do not simply desire to "pass into normal" but may actively pursue a stigmatized identity formation process in order to experience themselves as causal agents in their social environment. Hughey calls this phenomenon "stigma allure".[21]
The "six dimensions of stigma"
edit
While often incorrectly attributed to Goffman, the "six dimensions of stigma" were not his invention. They were developed to augment Goffman's two levels – the discredited and the discreditable. Goffman considered individuals whose stigmatizing attributes are not immediately evident. In that case, the individual can encounter two distinct social atmospheres. In the first, he is discreditable—his stigma has yet to be revealed but may be revealed either intentionally by him (in which case he will have some control over how) or by some factor, he cannot control. Of course, it also might be successfully concealed; Goffman called this passing. In this situation, the analysis of stigma is concerned only with the behaviors adopted by the stigmatized individual to manage his identity: the concealing and revealing of information. In the second atmosphere, he is discredited—his stigma has been revealed and thus it affects not only his behavior but the behavior of others. Jones et al. (1984) added the "six dimensions" and correlate them to Goffman's two types of stigma, discredited and discreditable.
There are six dimensions that match these two types of stigma:[22]
Concealable – the extent to which others can see the stigma
Course of the mark – whether the stigma's prominence increases, decreases, or disappears
Disruptiveness – the degree to which the stigma and/or others' reaction to it impedes social interactions
Aesthetics – the subset of others' reactions to the stigma comprising reactions that are positive/approving or negative/disapproving but represent estimations of qualities other than the stigmatized person's inherent worth or dignity
Origin – whether others think the stigma is present at birth, accidental, or deliberate
Peril – the danger that others perceive (whether accurately or inaccurately) the stigma to pose to them
Types
edit
In Unraveling the contexts of stigma, authors Campbell and Deacon describe Goffman's universal and historical forms of Stigma as the following.
Overt or external deformities – such as leprosy, clubfoot, cleft lip or palate and muscular dystrophy.
Known deviations in personal traits – being perceived rightly or wrongly, as weak willed, domineering or having unnatural passions, treacherous or rigid beliefs, and being dishonest, e.g., mental disorders, imprisonment, addiction, homos*xuality, unemployment, suicidal attempts and radical political behavior.
Tribal stigma – affiliation with a specific nationality, religion, or race that constitute a deviation from the normative, e.g. being African American, or being of Arab descent in the United States after the 9/11 attacks.[23]
Deviance
edit
Stigma occurs when an individual is identified as deviant, linked with negative stereotypes that engender prejudiced attitudes, which are acted upon in discriminatory behavior. Goffman illuminated how stigmatized people manage their "Spoiled identity" (meaning the stigma disqualifies the stigmatized individual from full social acceptance) before audiences of normals. He focused on stigma, not as a fixed or inherent attribute of a person, but rather as the experience and meaning of difference.[24]
Gerhard Falk expounds upon Goffman's work by redefining deviant as "others who deviate from the expectations of a group" and by categorizing deviance into two types:
Societal deviance refers to a condition widely perceived, in advance and in general, as being deviant and hence stigma and stigmatized. "Homos*xuality is, therefore, an example of societal deviance because there is such a high degree of consensus to the effect that homos*xuality is different, and a violation of norms or social expectation".[17]
Situational deviance refers to a deviant act that is labeled as deviant in a specific situation, and may not be labeled deviant by society. Similarly, a socially deviant action might not be considered deviant in specific situations. "A robber or other street criminal is an excellent example. It is the crime which leads to the stigma and stigmatization of the person so affected."[full citation needed]
The physically disabled, mentally ill, homos*xuals, and a host of others who are labeled deviant because they deviate from the expectations of a group, are subject to stigmatization - the social rejection of numerous individuals, and often entire groups of people who have been labeled deviant. [full citation needed]
Stigma communication
edit
Communication is involved in creating, maintaining, and diffusing stigmas, and enacting stigmatization.[25] The model of stigma communication explains how and why particular content choices (marks, labels, peril, and responsibility) can create stigmas and encourage their diffusion.[26] A recent experiment using health alerts tested the model of stigma communication, finding that content choices indeed predicted stigma beliefs, intentions to further diffuse these messages, and agreement with regulating infected persons' behaviors.[25][27]
More recently, scholars have highlighted the role of social media channels, such as Facebook and Instagram, in stigma communication.[28][29] These platforms serve as safe spaces for stigmatized individuals to express themselves more freely.[30] However, social media can also reinforce and amplify stigmatization, as the stigmatized attributes are amplified and virtually available to anyone indefinitely.[31]
Challenging
edit
Stigma, though powerful and enduring, is not inevitable, and can be challenged. There are two important aspects to challenging stigma: challenging the stigmatization on the part of stigmatizers and challenging the internalized stigma of the stigmatized. To challenge stigmatization, Campbell et al. 2005[32] summarise three main approaches.
There are efforts to educate individuals about non-stigmatising facts and why they should not stigmatize.
There are efforts to legislate against discrimination.
There are efforts to mobilize the participation of community members in anti-stigma efforts, to maximize the likelihood that the anti-stigma messages have relevance and effectiveness, according to local contexts.
In relation to challenging the internalized stigma of the stigmatized, Paulo Freire's theory of critical consciousness is particularly suitable. Cornish provides an example of how s*x workers in Sonagachi, a red light district in India, have effectively challenged internalized stigma by establishing that they are respectable women, who admirably take care of their families, and who deserve rights like any other worker.[33] This study argues that it is not only the force of the rational argument that makes the challenge to the stigma successful, but concrete evidence that s*x workers can achieve valued aims, and are respected by others.
Stigmatized groups often harbor cultural tools to respond to stigma and to create a positive self-perception among their members. For example, advertising professionals have been shown to suffer from negative portrayal and low approval rates. However, the advertising industry collectively maintains narratives describing how advertisement is a positive and socially valuable endeavor, and advertising professionals draw on these narratives to respond to stigma.[34]
Another effort to mobilize communities exists in the gaming community through organizations like:
Take This[35] – who provides AFK rooms at gaming conventions plus has a Streaming Ambassador Program to reach more than 135,000 viewers each week with positive messages about mental health, and
NoStigmas[36] – whose mission "is to ensure that no one faces mental health challenges alone" and envisions "a world without shame or discrimination related to mental health, brain disease, behavioral disorders, trauma, su***de and addiction" plus offers workplaces a NoStigmas Ally course and individual certifications.
Organizational stigma
edit
In 2008, an article by Hudson coined the term "organizational stigma"[37] which was then further developed by another theory building article by Devers and colleagues.[38] This literature brought the concept of stigma to the organizational level, considering how organizations might be considered as deeply flawed and cast away by audiences in the same way individuals would. Hudson differentiated core-stigma (a stigma related to the very nature of the organization) and event-stigma (an isolated occurrence which fades away with time). A large literature has debated how organizational stigma relate to other constructs in the literature on social evaluations.[39] A 2020 book by Roulet reviews this literature and disentangle the different concepts – in particular differentiating stigma, dirty work, scandals – and exploring their positive implications.[40]
A social networking service or social networking site, abbreviated as SNS, is a type of online social media platform which people use to build social networks or social relationships with other people who share similar personal or career content, interests, activities, backgrounds or real-life connections.[1][2]
Understanding Social Engineering
Social engineering refers to techniques used to manipulate individuals into divulging confidential information or performing actions that compromise security. It relies on psychological manipulation rather than exploiting technical vulnerabilities.
Key Techniques
Phishing: Attackers impersonate trusted entities via email or messages to trick victims into revealing sensitive information.
Baiting: This involves enticing victims with false promises, such as free software, to lure them into downloading malware.
Pretexting: Attackers create a fabricated scenario to gain the victim's trust and extract information.
Tailgating: Unauthorized individuals gain access to restricted areas by following authorized personnel.
Common Forms of Attack
TYPE DESCRIPTION
Phishing Emails or messages that appear legitimate, prompting users to share sensitive data.
Baiting Offers that entice users to download malware or provide personal information.
Pretexting Creating a false identity to gain trust and extract information.
Tailgating Following someone into a secure area to gain unauthorized access.
Vishing Voice phishing, where attackers use phone calls to solicit sensitive information.
Importance of Awareness
Social engineering attacks are increasingly common and sophisticated. They exploit human psychology, making them difficult to detect. Organizations must implement training and awareness programs to help individuals recognize and respond to these threats effectively.
Updated 21 May 2021 at 19:13 IST
'Real risk': MI5 chief slams Facebook over increase in extremist content online
The head of the UK domestic intelligence better known as MI5 slammed social media giant Facebook in particular and said that the extremism on social media.
World News
2 min read
Reported by: Aanchal Nigam
The head of the UK domestic intelligence better known as MI5, Ken McCallum slammed social media giant Facebook in particular and said that the extremism on social media is as much of national security risk as the terrorism budding from Afghanistan or Syria. In an interview with Times Radio that aired on May 21, the MI5 chief said that the “self-initiated terrorists” is the British authorities’ preferred term for “lone wolves” on social while noting that they remain a bigger threat than the planning of significant terror attack plots including 9/11 or the "7/7" attacks of July 2005 on London.
McCallum said that especially in the last four years, the British intelligence agency and London’s Metropolitan anti-terrorism command have discovered and disrupted at least 29 “large-state” plots with 10 of them initiated by far-right white extremists. He further revealed that the suspects of such planning on social media have been as young as 13 years old and are subjected to radical thoughts online.
"It is the case, especially around default encryption, that yes, decisions taken in California boardrooms are every bit as relevant to our ability to do our jobs as decisions taken in Afghanistan or Syria," McCallum said. "That does pose a real risk for us."
‘Living room is a terrorist living room’
MI5 chief also said in the radio interview that he “could not agree more” with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg over the billionaire’s stated desire to protect policy. McCallum said “We absolutely do not want to live in a society where the state has a camera in everyone's living room.” However, he further noted that “But our job is to deal with a one-in-a-million case, where the living room is a terrorist living room. And they may be building a bomb, or filming a martyrdom video before some ... devastating plot that they might be planning."
MI5 chief explained that “In that scenario or in cases of online child s*xual abuse, Facebook's plan to roll out end-to-end encryption across all its platforms gives offenders "a free pass where they know that nobody can see into what they are doing in those private living rooms.”
Silicon Valley is a region in Northern California that is a global center for high technology and innovation. Located in the southern part of the San Francisco Bay Area, it corresponds roughly to the geographical area of the Santa Clara Valley.[1][2][3] The term "Silicon Valley" refers to the area in which high-tech business has proliferated in Northern California, and it also serves as a general metonym for California's high-tech business sector.
The cities of Sunnyvale, Mountain View, Palo Alto and Menlo Park are frequently cited as the birthplace of Silicon Valley. Other major Silicon Valley cities are San Jose, Santa Clara, Redwood City and Cupertino. The San Jose Metropolitan Area has the third-highest GDP per capita in the world (after Zürich, Switzerland, and Oslo, Norway), according to the Brookings Institution.[4] As of June 2021, it also had the highest percentage of homes valued at $1 million or more in the United States.[5]
Silicon Valley is home to many of the world's largest high-tech corporations, including the headquarters of more than 30 businesses in the Fortune 1000, and thousands of startup companies. Silicon Valley also accounts for one-third of all of the venture capital investment in the United States, which has helped it to become a leading hub and startup ecosystem for high-tech innovation, although the tech ecosystem has recently become more geographically dispersed.[6][7] It was in Silicon Valley that the silicon-based integrated circuit, the microprocessor, and the microcomputer, among other technologies, were developed. As of 2021, the region employed about a half million information technology workers.[8]
As more high-tech companies were established across San Jose and the Santa Clara Valley, and then north towards the Bay Area's two other major cities, San Francisco and Oakland, the term "Silicon Valley" came to have two definitions: a narrower geographic one, referring to Santa Clara County and southeastern San Mateo County, and a metonymical definition referring to high-tech businesses in the entire Bay Area. The term Silicon Valley is often used as a synecdoche for the American high-technology economic sector. The name also became a global synonym for leading high-tech research and enterprises, and thus inspired similarly named locations, as well as research parks and technology centers with comparable structures all around the world. Many headquarters of tech companies in Silicon Valley have become hotspots for tourism.[9][10][11]
Etymology
edit
"Silicon" refers to the chemical element used in silicon-based transistors and integrated circuit chips, which is the focus of a large number of computer hardware and software innovators and manufacturers in the region.
The popularization of the name is often credited to Don Hoefler, the first journalist to use the term in a news story.[1] His article "Silicon Valley U.S.A." was published in the January 11, 1971, issue of the weekly trade newspaper Electronic News. In preparation for this report, during a lunch meeting with marketing people who were visiting the area, he heard them use the term.[12] Earlier uses outside journalism exist; for example, a May 1970 advertisement in the Peninsula Times Tribune described a Palo Alto company that "helps production people in Silicon Valley."[13]
Silicon Valley derives its name from the silicon used in transistors and computer chips, pioneered in the region in the 20th century.
However, the term did not gain widespread use until the early 1980s,[1] at the time of the introduction of the IBM PC and numerous related hardware and software products to the consumer market.
The urbanized area is built upon an alluvial plain[14] within a longitudinal valley formed by roughly parallel earthquake faults. The area between the faults subsided into a graben or dropped valley.[15][16] Hoefler defined Silicon Valley as the urbanized parts of "the San Francisco Peninsula and Santa Clara Valley".[12] Before the expansive growth of the tech industry, the region had been the largest fruit-producing and packing region in the world up through the 1960s, with 39 fruit canneries.[17][18] The nickname it had been known as during that period was "the Valley of Heart’s Delight".[19][20]
Overview of Silicone Implants
Silicone breast implants are medical devices used for breast augmentation and reconstruction. They consist of a silicone outer shell filled with silicone gel. These implants are popular due to their natural feel and appearance.
Types of Silicone Implants
Common Types
Traditional Silicone Gel Implants: Filled with silicone gel, these implants provide a soft and natural feel.
Gummy Bear Implants: These have a thicker gel that maintains its shape even if the shell is broken. They are firmer and less likely to leak.
Approval and Usage
Silicone implants are approved for breast augmentation in women aged 22 and older and for reconstruction in women of any age.
Risks and Complications
Common Risks
Rupture: Silicone implants can rupture, often without noticeable symptoms. This is known as a "silent rupture." If a rupture occurs, the gel may remain trapped in the surrounding tissue.
Capsular Contracture: This is when scar tissue forms around the implant, causing hardness and discomfort.
BIA-ALCL: A rare type of lymphoma associated with textured implants.
Monitoring and Maintenance
Regular check-ups with a plastic surgeon are recommended to monitor the condition of silicone implants. Imaging tests like MRI or ultrasound can help detect silent ruptures.
Conclusion
Silicone implants are a popular choice for breast enhancement and reconstruction, offering a natural look and feel. However, potential risks and the need for ongoing monitoring should be considered before undergoing surgery.
Hot or Not was a rating site that allowed users to submit photos of themselves to be rated by other users on a scale of 1 to 10, with the average becoming the photo's score. The site also offered a matchmaking engine called 'Meet Me' and an extended profile feature called "Hotlists". The domain hotornot.com is currently owned by Hot or Not Limited,[1] and was previously owned by Avid Life Media. 'Hot or Not' was a significant influence on the people who went on to create social media sites like YouTube.[2]
Hot or Not
Owner
Hot Or Not Limited
URL
https://www.hotornot.com
Launched
October 2000; 24 years ago
History
edit
The site was founded in October 2000 by James Hong and Jim Young, two friends and Silicon Valley–based engineers. Both graduated from the University of California, Berkeley, in electrical engineering, with Young pursuing a Ph.D. at the time. It was inspired by some other developers' ideas.
The site was a technical solution to a disagreement the founders had one day over a passing woman's attractiveness. The site was originally called "Am I Hot or Not". Within a week of launching, it had reached almost two million page views per day. Within a few months, the site was immediately behind CNET and NBCi on NetNielsen Rating's Top 25 advertising domains. To keep up with rising costs Hong and Young added a matchmaking component to their website called "Meet Me at Hot or Not". The matchmaking service has been especially successful, and the site continues to generate most of its revenue through subscriptions. In the December 2006 issue of Time magazine, the founders of YouTube stated that they originally set out to make a version of Hot or Not with Video before developing their more inclusive site.
Hot or Not was sold for a rumored $20 million on February 8, 2008, to Avid Life Media, owners of Ashley Madison.[3] Annual revenue reached $7.5 million, with net profits of $5.5 million. They initially started off $60,000 in debt due to tuition fees James paid for his MBA.[4] On July 31, 2008, Hot or Not launched Hot or Not Gossip and a Baresi rate box (a "hot meter") – a subdivision to expand their market, run by former radio DJ turned celebrity blogger Zack Taylor.
In 2012, Hot or Not was purchased by Badoo, which is owned by Bumble Inc.[5] The app is currently rebranded as Chat & Date which uses a similar user interface to Badoo and shares user accounts between both sites.
Research
edit
In 2005, as an example of using image morphing methods to study the effects of averageness, imaging researcher Pierre Tourigny created a composite of about 30 faces to find out the current standard of good looks on the Internet. On the Hot or Not web site, people rate others' attractiveness on a scale of 1 to 10. An average score based on hundreds or even thousands of individual ratings take only a few days to emerge. To make this hot-or-not palette of morphed images, photos from the site were sorted by rank and used SquirlzMorph to create multi-morph composites from them. Unlike projects like Face of Tomorrow,[6] where the subjects are posed for the purpose, the portraits are blurry because the source images are of low resolution with differences in variables such as posture, hair styles and glasses, so that in this instance images could use only 36 control points for the morphs.[7] A similar study was done with Miss Universe contestants, as shown in the averageness article, as well as one for age, as shown in youthfulness article.
A 2006 "hot or not"-style study, involving 264 women and 18 men, at the Washington University School of Medicine, as published online in the journal Brain Research, indicates that a person's brain determines whether an image is erotically appealing long before the viewer is even aware they are seeing the picture. Moreover, according to these researchers, one of the basic functions of the brain is to classify images into a hot-or-not type categorization. The study's researchers also discovered that s*xy shots induce a uniquely powerful reaction in the brain, equal in effect for both men and women, and that erotic images produced a strong reaction in the hypothalamus.[8][9]
Overview of Facemash
What is Facemash?
Facemash was a website created by Mark Zuckerberg in 2003 while he was a student at Harvard University. It allowed users to compare photos of female students and vote on who was more attractive. The site was built quickly, reportedly in one night, and used images taken from student directories without permission.
Purpose and Functionality
Comparison: Users could rate the attractiveness of two students side by side.
Popularity: Within two days, Facemash attracted significant traffic, with 450 users casting around 22,000 votes.
Shutdown: The site was shut down by Harvard administration due to policy violations regarding the use of student images.
Impact on Facebook
Facemash's brief success highlighted the demand for social networking among students. This experience inspired Zuckerberg to create "TheFacebook," which launched in February 2004. Unlike Facemash, TheFacebook was designed as a social networking platform where users could create profiles, connect with friends, and share information.
Legacy
Facemash is often referenced as a precursor to Facebook, showcasing Zuckerberg's early interest in social networking and his programming skills. However, Zuckerberg has stated that Facemash was not directly connected to the development of Facebook.
Overview of Children's Mental Health Trends
Recent data indicates a concerning rise in mental health issues among children. Factors contributing to this increase include societal pressures, environmental stressors, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Key Statistics
Prevalence of Mental Health Conditions
General Diagnosis: Approximately 21% of children aged 3 to 17 have been diagnosed with a mental, emotional, or behavioral health condition.
Common Disorders:
Anxiety: 11% of children aged 3-17 are currently diagnosed.
Behavior Disorders: 8% of children in the same age group are affected.
Depression: 4% of children are diagnosed with depression.
Indicators of Positive Mental Health
Younger Children (6 months to 5 years): 78% show indicators of flourishing, such as affection and curiosity.
Older Children (6 to 17 years): 60% exhibit positive traits like interest in learning and emotional control.
Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic
The pandemic has exacerbated existing mental health challenges. Increased rates of anxiety, depression, and suicidal thoughts have been reported, particularly among marginalized groups.
Importance of Support
Addressing children's mental health is crucial for their overall well-being. Supportive environments at home, school, and in the community can help mitigate these issues. Regular check-ins and open conversations about feelings are essential for early intervention and support.
A virus is a submicroscopic infectious agent that replicates only inside the living cells of an organism.[1] Viruses infect all life forms, from animals and plants to microorganisms, including bacteria and archaea.[2][3] Viruses are found in almost every ecosystem on Earth and are the most numerous type of biological entity.[4][5] Since Dmitri Ivanovsky's 1892 article describing a non-bacterial pathogen infecting to***co plants and the discovery of the to***co mosaic virus by Martinus Beijerinck in 1898,[6]: 4 more than 16,000 of the millions of virus species have been described in detail.[7][8] The study of viruses is known as virology, a subspeciality of microbiology.
The human immunodeficiency viruses (HIV) are two species of Lentivirus (a subgroup of retrovirus) that infect humans. Over time, they cause acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS),[1][2] a condition in which progressive failure of the immune system allows life-threatening opportunistic infections and cancers to thrive.[3] Without treatment, the average survival time after infection with HIV is estimated to be 9 to 11 years, depending on the HIV subtype.[4]
Fear of missing out (FOMO) is the feeling of apprehension that one is either not in the know about or missing out on information, events, experiences, or life decisions that could make one's life better.[2] FOMO is also associated with a fear of regret,[3] which may lead to concerns that one might miss an opportunity for social interaction, a novel experience, a memorable event, profitable investment, or the comfort of loved ones.[4] It is characterized by a desire to stay continually connected with what others are doing,[2] and can be described as the fear that deciding not to participate is the wrong choice.[3][5] FOMO could result from not knowing about a conversation,[6] missing a TV show, not attending a wedding or party,[7] or hearing that others have discovered a new restaurant.[8] In recent years, FOMO has been attributed to a number of negative psychological and behavioral symptoms.[3][9][10]
Symptoms
edit
Psychological
edit
Fear of missing out has been associated with a deficit in psychological needs.[2] Self-determination theory contends that an individual's psychological satisfaction in their competence, autonomy, and relatedness consists of three basic psychological needs for human beings.[27] Test subjects with lower levels of basic psychological satisfaction reported a higher level of FOMO. FOMO has also been linked to negative psychological effects in overall mood and general life satisfaction.[3] A study performed on college campuses found that experiencing FOMO on a certain day led to a higher fatigue on that day specifically.[23] Experiencing FOMO continuously throughout the semester also can lead to higher stress levels among students.[23] An individual with an expectation to experience the fear of missing out can also develop a lower level of self-esteem.[10] A study by JWTIntelligence suggests that FOMO can influence the formation of long-term goals and self-perceptions.[28] In this study, around half of the respondents stated that they are overwhelmed by the amount of information needed to stay up-to-date, and that it is impossible to not miss out on something. The process of relative deprivation creates FOMO and dissatisfaction. It reduces psychological well-being.[2][18][29] FOMO led to negative social and emotional experiences, such as boredom and loneliness.[30] A 2013 study found that it negatively impacts mood and life satisfaction,[2] reduces self-esteem, and affects mindfulness.[31] Four in ten young people reported FOMO sometimes or often.[28] FOMO was found to be negatively correlated with age, and men were more likely than women to report it.[2] People who experience higher levels of FOMO tend to have a stronger desire for high social status, are more competitive with others of the same gender, and are more interested in short-term relationships.[32]
Behavioral
edit
The fear of missing out stems from a feeling of missing social connections or information.[9] This absent feeling is then followed by a need or drive to interact socially to boost connections.[9][10] The fear of missing out not only leads to negative psychological effects but also has been shown to increase negative behavioral patterns.[9] In aims of maintaining social connections, negative habits are formed or heightened.[23] A 2019 University of Glasgow study surveyed 467 adolescents, and found that the respondents felt societal pressure to always be available.[33] According to John M. Grohol, founder and Editor-in-Chief of Psych Central, FOMO may lead to a constant search for new connections with others, abandoning current connections to do so.[34] The fear of missing out derived from digital connection has been positively correlated with bad technology habits especially in youth.[35] These negative habits included increased screen time, checking social media during school, or texting while driving.[35][2] Social media use in the presence of others can be referred to as phubbing, the habit of snubbing a physically present person in favour of a mobile phone.[35] Multiple studies have also identified a negative correlation between the hours of sleep and the scale at which individuals experience fear of missing out.[10][23] A lack of sleep in college students experiencing FOMO can be attributed to the number of social interactions that occur late at night on campuses.[23]
Overview of the Child Catcher
The Child Catcher is a fictional character from the 1968 film Chitty Chitty Bang Bang and its stage adaptations. He serves as the main henchman for Baron and Baroness Bomburst in the fictional land of Vulgaria, where children are forbidden.
Character Traits
Appearance
Outfit: Wears a dark, old-fashioned costume with a top hat.
Physical Features: Slender build, long black hair, and a large pointed nose.
Personality
Nature: Cunning, devious, and cold-hearted.
Methods: Uses tricks and disguises, often luring children with promises of sweets.
Role in the Film
The Child Catcher is tasked with capturing children who are hiding in Vulgaria. He employs a butterfly net-like contraption to ensnare his victims. His character embodies the fears of children regarding abduction and punishment, making him a memorable villain.
Key Scenes
First Appearance: Arrives in a prison wagon, sniffing for children.
Luring Children: Disguises himself as a candy seller to entice children out of hiding.
Threats: He threatens the Toymaker, showcasing his cruel nature.
Cultural Impact
The Child Catcher has become an iconic figure in children's cinema, representing the archetype of "stranger danger." His eerie demeanor and sinister methods have left a lasting impression on audiences.
https://youtu.be/cuNU20bDTGU?si=jYy1Gvp4pbH7ktdk
Chumbawamba - Tubthumping (Original Video)
![Knee capDuring the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, Hamas kneecapped[10] Gazans suspected of working with Israel. Amnesty I...](https://img3.medioq.com/732/417/1348108967324176.jpg)
