Nicholas Hasselback, a senior at Temple University, turned himself in to police yesterday, accused of being the hit-and-run driver who critically injured a Temple University Law School student early Sunday on the Benjamin Franklin Parkway.

her son’s third-grade teacher at the Maude Wilkins Elementary School in Maple Shade, Burlington County, [NJ,] was asking the class, including the boys, to dress as women during a fashion show for a Women’s History Month pro-ject.

I’m from Maple Shade. I wish we were in the news for something better than this, but oh well.

Boys were allowed to wear anything women would have worn at some point in history, which seems to leave the door wide open for dressing as, well, boys.

Which brings an interesting point to mind: people look confused when a boy dresses like a girl, but not when a girl dresses like a boy.

After much debate, the House has passed the bill Truth in Caller ID Act of 2010” [PDF], H.R. 1258, an amendment to the Communications Bill of 1934.  The bill effectively bans caller spoofing in the U.S.  The Senate already passed a similar bill in February, so President Obama should soon sign the Act into law.

Q. What will users see?
A. You will start to see Tweets promoted by our partner advertisers called out at the top of some Twitter.com search results pages. We strongly believe that Promoted Tweets should be useful to you. We’ll attempt to measure whether the Tweets resonate with users and stop showing Promoted Tweets that don’t resonate. Promoted Tweets will be clearly labeled as “promoted” when an advertiser is paying, but in every other respect they will first exist as regular Tweets and will be organically sent to the timelines of those who follow a brand. Promoted Tweets will also retain all the functionality of a regular Tweet including replying, Retweeting, and favoriting. Only one Promoted Tweet will be displayed on the search results page.

Will “Promoted Tweets” be as useful to us as other forms of relevancy-based online advertising? After all, an algorithm’s idea of “relevant” differs vastly from what I actually consider relevant.

And, I was talking this morning to @chrissmari — http://twitter.com/chrissmari — about Google’s ads. While I never click on the ads served up at google.com, she said she occasionally clicks on one of the “relevant” ads served up in Gmail, because they’re so often hilariously irrelevant. I’m the same way.

But, at the end of the day, even if Twitter achieves relevancy, which is extremely doubtful, I predict that the overwhelming majority of users will be 1) eager to seem progressive and say “maybe it won’t be that bad” and then, finally, 2) powerfully annoyed by this development once it lands in their streams.

I could be wrong. I hope I’m wrong.

So, assuming I’m right (which, if you know me, you know I love to do)…

Two potential responses from javascript ninjas who don’t want to choke on “relevant” ads in their Twitter streams:

Passive = Script for removing Twitter ads from our streams

Aggressive = Script for automagically reporting Promoted Tweets as spam