<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for RattusMaximus</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/RattusMaximus/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/RattusMaximus/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:25:49 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Skype for iPhone and iPod Touch!</title><link>http://kindalearning.blogspot.com/2009/03/skype-for-iphone-and-ipod-touch.html#comment-7647350</link><description>&lt;p&gt;People are still getting excited about the iPhone gradually catching up with every other phone on the market, then?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Oh, and :)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">RattusMaximus</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:25:49 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: 'Infantilising' - social networking under attack again</title><link>http://kindalearning.blogspot.com/2009/02/infantilising-social-networking-under.html#comment-6627702</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'm supposing that you've already seen Ben Goldacre with both parties on this, what with it appealing to your ever-questioning nature.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gg8LlUME-IM&amp;amp;eurl=http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/the-evidence-aric-sigman-ignored/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gg8LlUME-IM&amp;amp;eurl=http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/the-evidence-aric-sigman-ignored/"&gt;http://www.youtube.com/watc...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">RattusMaximus</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 20:02:32 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Dire predictions for future health... as per usual...</title><link>http://kindalearning.blogspot.com/2009/02/dire-predictions-for-future-health-as.html#comment-6467102</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Even Ben Goldacre refused to touch this one, and on the basis of most of the newspaper articles about it, I can't blame him.&lt;br&gt;( &lt;a href="http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/a-rock-of-crack-as-big-as-the-ritz/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.badscience.net/2009/02/a-rock-of-crack-as-big-as-the-ritz/"&gt;http://www.badscience.net/2...&lt;/a&gt; )&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sigman's own site ( &lt;a href="http://www.aricsigman.com/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.aricsigman.com/"&gt;http://www.aricsigman.com/&lt;/a&gt; ), however, claims "NOTE: This paper has been misrepresented by many news reports as claiming that social networking causes cancer or disease. This is not true."  For all I know, this is correct.  The link above to the actual study appears to be dead at the moment, and as I'm not a member of the IOB, I can't find another route to it.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">RattusMaximus</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2009 11:47:02 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>