The Wikipedia page for Hofstadter's Law has, within the stated law, a link to the Wikipedia page for Hofstader's Law.
Nice touch.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hofstadter%27s_Law
I am easily amused.
Monday 27 June 2011
Sunday 26 June 2011
We are allowed to hate the guy, right?
So Daniel Craig, the guy who gets to be James Bond (and not the rather disturbing, rape-y, 60s James Bond... I started watching Thunderball a little while ago but had to stop when the lady at the health farm said she could lose her job and JB agrees not to let that happen as long as she doesn't leave the room he's handily shutting them in but that's not the DC JB so I'm not going to hold that against him), has now also married Rachel Weitz.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-13918943
I think this does, in fact, mean that anyone who's genitals are pointed in the female direction is allowed to hate him.
Unless you don't think that Rachel Weitz is attractive. In which case there's something wrong with you.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-13918943
I think this does, in fact, mean that anyone who's genitals are pointed in the female direction is allowed to hate him.
Unless you don't think that Rachel Weitz is attractive. In which case there's something wrong with you.
Saturday 25 June 2011
Strippers: Lewd?
Now, I don't want anyone reading this to think that I'm a judgemental prick. Actually, I don't want anyone not reading this to think that I'm a judgemental prick either. Also, I've noticed that I have a habit of starting a sentence with one word then using a comma and writing an actual point that didn't really need that first word to work.
Anyhoo.
As I was saying: I don't want anyone, at all, to think that I'm a judgemental prick (editing? What are you talking abou... oh, oh right, nah) mostly because I'd rather that people thought that I was dashing, intelligent, witty, charming, good looking and generally wonderful (regardless of whether or not I actually am any of those things) but also because I do try to make allowances for people.
As such, I would like to point out that I am not, in any way, judging the people mentioned in the link piece to which I am about to link. I have no problem with the fact that some people become strippers. I have no particular urge to go and see a stripper or visit a strip club or do anything stripper-related but this in no way means that I think that strippers are bad people. Dealing cocaine, which some of the people in the piece to which I about to link (I am here using "about to" in the sense of "when I get around to it after all of this meandering rubbish") are alleged to have done, is something else, but I see it as no worse that it is a stripper selling the cocaine than it would be if anyone else were selling cocaine.
The point? Oh yes, that. OK.
The point is held here: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/25-florida-strippers-nabbed?page=9
Now there's some rather entertaining stuff about the Foo Fighters 2011 tour rider on the site as well but that's not really why I'm writing this so I shall return to the point. The point is, specifically, the charge with which the stripper on page nine is being charged: Lewdness. I may have missed something in the whole 'stripper' thing but isn't lewdness rather the point? Were I someone who wanted to be entertained by a stripper I think that I'd be pretty put out if the stripper wasn't at least a little bit lewd. I wouldn't have thought that a strip club was the sort of place that counted as public when thinking about public lewdness. I think it's perfectly reasonable for people to not want lewdness thrust in their faces while they're walking around but if you were of the opinion that, actually, you quite fancied having some lewdness thrust in your face, or groin, or general direction, then a strip club would be just the kind of place for it. Positively designed for it in fact.
Some of the other women have been charged with "exposure". I can only conclude that they're not being charged with causing frostbite and are, in fact, being charged as strippers who have exposed themselves.
Strippers who have exposed themselves. Whatever next?
Anyhoo.
As I was saying: I don't want anyone, at all, to think that I'm a judgemental prick (editing? What are you talking abou... oh, oh right, nah) mostly because I'd rather that people thought that I was dashing, intelligent, witty, charming, good looking and generally wonderful (regardless of whether or not I actually am any of those things) but also because I do try to make allowances for people.
As such, I would like to point out that I am not, in any way, judging the people mentioned in the link piece to which I am about to link. I have no problem with the fact that some people become strippers. I have no particular urge to go and see a stripper or visit a strip club or do anything stripper-related but this in no way means that I think that strippers are bad people. Dealing cocaine, which some of the people in the piece to which I about to link (I am here using "about to" in the sense of "when I get around to it after all of this meandering rubbish") are alleged to have done, is something else, but I see it as no worse that it is a stripper selling the cocaine than it would be if anyone else were selling cocaine.
The point? Oh yes, that. OK.
The point is held here: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/25-florida-strippers-nabbed?page=9
Now there's some rather entertaining stuff about the Foo Fighters 2011 tour rider on the site as well but that's not really why I'm writing this so I shall return to the point. The point is, specifically, the charge with which the stripper on page nine is being charged: Lewdness. I may have missed something in the whole 'stripper' thing but isn't lewdness rather the point? Were I someone who wanted to be entertained by a stripper I think that I'd be pretty put out if the stripper wasn't at least a little bit lewd. I wouldn't have thought that a strip club was the sort of place that counted as public when thinking about public lewdness. I think it's perfectly reasonable for people to not want lewdness thrust in their faces while they're walking around but if you were of the opinion that, actually, you quite fancied having some lewdness thrust in your face, or groin, or general direction, then a strip club would be just the kind of place for it. Positively designed for it in fact.
Some of the other women have been charged with "exposure". I can only conclude that they're not being charged with causing frostbite and are, in fact, being charged as strippers who have exposed themselves.
Strippers who have exposed themselves. Whatever next?
Saturday 18 June 2011
I have seen a link to something on the internet
I am puzzled by the content.
The post in question is: http://celebmanmeat.blogspot.com/2009/05/matt-damon-you-were-bourne-to-be-hot.html
Now, you may be thinking "oh like women aren't objectified" and while you would be right, that doesn't make it OK, but it's actually not what's bothering me anyway, I'm OK with the tone, it's fine. You may be thinking "what the hell is this blog about anyway? Do you ever make any sense? Are you ever interesting?" which is a slightly trickier thing to deflect. Um... sorry. I'll try harder. OK, probably not, but we'll see.
Anyhoo.
There are a couple of things that bother me about the site in question. The first one is that there is a Breaking Dawn counter on the site. Really, if you want to ogle guys can't you just watch some porn or something? The writing's not really much worse and there's a lot more manflesh on show. Admittedly most porn is misogynistic bullshit but I'm sure there's something out there that can work.
The other thing about it is something that I find really strange and that is specific to the post in question rather than the site in general. This thing is specific to the measurement of just how hot Matt Damon is. It is summed up in this quote handily placed after this here colon: "We wanted to be that Franka Potente girl in the Bourne movies".
Now if this had been about just the first film then OK, I can get with that, fair enough. There is, however, a plural aspect to this and it's that that I find strange. Yes, it's the 'Franka Potente's character gets shot in the head in the second film' aspect. If we're continuing this with the third film as well then by the end of that one she's going to be pretty far advanced in the rotting stakes.
I really need to get out more.
The post in question is: http://celebmanmeat.blogspot.com/2009/05/matt-damon-you-were-bourne-to-be-hot.html
Now, you may be thinking "oh like women aren't objectified" and while you would be right, that doesn't make it OK, but it's actually not what's bothering me anyway, I'm OK with the tone, it's fine. You may be thinking "what the hell is this blog about anyway? Do you ever make any sense? Are you ever interesting?" which is a slightly trickier thing to deflect. Um... sorry. I'll try harder. OK, probably not, but we'll see.
Anyhoo.
There are a couple of things that bother me about the site in question. The first one is that there is a Breaking Dawn counter on the site. Really, if you want to ogle guys can't you just watch some porn or something? The writing's not really much worse and there's a lot more manflesh on show. Admittedly most porn is misogynistic bullshit but I'm sure there's something out there that can work.
The other thing about it is something that I find really strange and that is specific to the post in question rather than the site in general. This thing is specific to the measurement of just how hot Matt Damon is. It is summed up in this quote handily placed after this here colon: "We wanted to be that Franka Potente girl in the Bourne movies".
Now if this had been about just the first film then OK, I can get with that, fair enough. There is, however, a plural aspect to this and it's that that I find strange. Yes, it's the 'Franka Potente's character gets shot in the head in the second film' aspect. If we're continuing this with the third film as well then by the end of that one she's going to be pretty far advanced in the rotting stakes.
I really need to get out more.
Pandas: Overrated
Yes, that's right, Pandas. Giant Pandas to be specific but I'm just going to call them Pandas for the purposes of this meandering post.
I was, as is my wont, reading through various articles within the fun space that is http://hellogiggles.com/ and I read http://hellogiggles.com/things-i-like-enthusiasm and took a lot of it to heart. I'm not really what would be described as a positive person (unless the definition were to include the idea that I am positive that a lot of things piss me off as I'm rather grumpy) but I do realise that positive people are, well, a positive thing, and I am also aware that I should try to be a bit more cheery.
As such I am a little bit ashamed that one of the things said on there stuck with me and has made me think something rather negative. It's in one of the comments (a very nice comment it has to be said, the person is in all probability lovely and has excellent taste, I have only that comment to go on) and it is the following part: "Pandas, the world's most underrated bears."
Underrated? Pandas? Really?
I think that it would be hard for me to think of a more overrated bear (aside from the Care Bears but I am, as I said, rather grumpy) than a Panda. Have you ever seen a Panda try to do another Panda? Have you ever seen a Panda try to do anything? (I suppose I should point out that I am using a different type of "do" in that second part there. I am not talking about Pandas attempting to hump trees or anything. Although they'd probably be as rubbish at that as they are at everything else.)
Pandas eat bamboo. OK, that wouldn't be so bad but for the fact that their digestive system isn't built for bamboo, and bamboo has very little nutritional value. So even though Pandas spend most of their time sitting on their butts (cute and fuzzy butts but butts none the less) they have to do nothing but eat. Now Pandas are actually pretty darned good at manipulating things, they have to be, bamboo is a pain to manipulate, but that level of coordination is pretty much completely wasted on manipulating bamboo in to something other than furniture.
Pandas are built like omnivores but they're too stupid and lazy to wander over and eat carrion every so often. They're certainly not capable of hunting anything that is more manoeuvrable than something that is basically a large stick (and even then they have their problems with it; as a side note, have a look on-line for videos relating to "Panda vs stick" or some variation, the Panda nearly loses).
If a Panda were someone you knew you'd either cut them loose because you were sick of their laziness or you'd give them a stern talking to. "You want kids? Well then maybe you should try being horny for more than 2-3 days of the year." Or "you're tired all the time and you're always hungry? Well then maybe you should try doing some exercise and possibly eating something that's actually good for you." Or "you need how much room to get by? You don't even have any stuff." Really, do you know how much acreage a Panda needs to survive? Neither do I. But the article that I was reading just now (yes, I did a little research, but not enough for it to get in the way) certainly had some large numbers knocking around in the part where they talked about the amount of land that Pandas need. I know it takes a lot of land to support me but I have a lot of stuff and I am trying to reduce the amount of supporting I need.
Now I'm not suggesting that we should leave Pandas to die. That would be mean. Nor am I suggesting that I don't like Pandas. I kind of do. I cannot deny that they're cute and funny. But one thing that they are very definitely not is underrated.
I was, as is my wont, reading through various articles within the fun space that is http://hellogiggles.com/ and I read http://hellogiggles.com/things-i-like-enthusiasm and took a lot of it to heart. I'm not really what would be described as a positive person (unless the definition were to include the idea that I am positive that a lot of things piss me off as I'm rather grumpy) but I do realise that positive people are, well, a positive thing, and I am also aware that I should try to be a bit more cheery.
As such I am a little bit ashamed that one of the things said on there stuck with me and has made me think something rather negative. It's in one of the comments (a very nice comment it has to be said, the person is in all probability lovely and has excellent taste, I have only that comment to go on) and it is the following part: "Pandas, the world's most underrated bears."
Underrated? Pandas? Really?
I think that it would be hard for me to think of a more overrated bear (aside from the Care Bears but I am, as I said, rather grumpy) than a Panda. Have you ever seen a Panda try to do another Panda? Have you ever seen a Panda try to do anything? (I suppose I should point out that I am using a different type of "do" in that second part there. I am not talking about Pandas attempting to hump trees or anything. Although they'd probably be as rubbish at that as they are at everything else.)
Pandas eat bamboo. OK, that wouldn't be so bad but for the fact that their digestive system isn't built for bamboo, and bamboo has very little nutritional value. So even though Pandas spend most of their time sitting on their butts (cute and fuzzy butts but butts none the less) they have to do nothing but eat. Now Pandas are actually pretty darned good at manipulating things, they have to be, bamboo is a pain to manipulate, but that level of coordination is pretty much completely wasted on manipulating bamboo in to something other than furniture.
Pandas are built like omnivores but they're too stupid and lazy to wander over and eat carrion every so often. They're certainly not capable of hunting anything that is more manoeuvrable than something that is basically a large stick (and even then they have their problems with it; as a side note, have a look on-line for videos relating to "Panda vs stick" or some variation, the Panda nearly loses).
If a Panda were someone you knew you'd either cut them loose because you were sick of their laziness or you'd give them a stern talking to. "You want kids? Well then maybe you should try being horny for more than 2-3 days of the year." Or "you're tired all the time and you're always hungry? Well then maybe you should try doing some exercise and possibly eating something that's actually good for you." Or "you need how much room to get by? You don't even have any stuff." Really, do you know how much acreage a Panda needs to survive? Neither do I. But the article that I was reading just now (yes, I did a little research, but not enough for it to get in the way) certainly had some large numbers knocking around in the part where they talked about the amount of land that Pandas need. I know it takes a lot of land to support me but I have a lot of stuff and I am trying to reduce the amount of supporting I need.
Now I'm not suggesting that we should leave Pandas to die. That would be mean. Nor am I suggesting that I don't like Pandas. I kind of do. I cannot deny that they're cute and funny. But one thing that they are very definitely not is underrated.
The long and short of it is that Pandas, while cute and funny, are actually a bit rubbish and that I should really get out more.
Oh, and here's one of the place that I read a little bit from: http://www.wwf.org.uk/what_we_do/safeguarding_the_natural_world/wildlife/giant_panda/?pc=AGT004002 . They know Pandas.
Friday 17 June 2011
July the 4th
I am English.
This is not, however, going to be me complaining about the US celebrating their Independence Day. Oh no, not I, not at all.
This does not mean that I am above mockery. I am very much not above mockery. Indeed, I am very much down with mockery. Were I a good deal cooler than I am then I would probably realise that saying "down with" isn't actually cool any more, nor is using the word "cool", but I digress. A lot. But that's not the point right now. The point, right now, is that I am quite happy mocking all and sundry.
Most years, when July the 4th rolls around, I am quite happy to post something on-line saying something along the lines of "letting off fireworks in celebration of not being in charge of people who'd ban the teaching of Evolution" or maybe "celebrating not having Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck be someone who's in any way connected to being in a colony of ours" or some such pithy, and let's face it, rubbish, joke. I am quite happy for the US citizens that it is my good fortune to know to tell me to go do one when I do this. It's OK, I deserve it, that's all fine and dandy. I am also quite happy for any and all US citizens to celebrate their independence. It is the kind of thing that nations celebrate.
Where things have become a bit strange is what I'm getting to. Where things have become a bit strange is that an e-mail was sent around where I work (by a manager no less) saying that there is going to be a celebration on July the 4th. Yes, you're thinking that you know that, but I was not clear and I don't feel like editing my previous sentence. We are going to be celebrating on July the 4th, in England, in the place where I work.
I find this to be a bit odd.
Upon seeing the notice in the break room I have seen that there will be a selection of US foods (hot dogs and brownies and, well, a lot of things that we eat too really) and that the people organising this would like people to dress up in an American theme. I wear a shirt/trousers combination to work. I am aware that a lot of Americans wear a shirt/trousers combination to work. But of course I'm an idiot! This isn't the idea at all! No, we're expected to wear things that are particularly American! So, as we're celebrating US independence you might think that we would be expected to dress up as, oh I don't know, George Washington or something. Maybe someone else notable (maybe JFK with head wound, heh heh heh, maybe not) like good ol' Ab' Lincoln. No, if you were thinking that then you too are an idiot, as of course we're supposed to dress as Elvis (Presley of course, not Costello, that wouldn't work at all) or something else pop culture related. Yes, not content with missing the point about it being a celebration, in essence, of kicking the asses of the vicious and greedy British Empire, they've also missed the point of it being a largely political celebration. Apparently we're just celebrating the US, its culture, and being blissfully patronising about it.
What bothers me isn't so much that the person organising our corner of Independence Day celebratory happenings is allowed to manage people, it isn't so much that they're allowed to vote and be active in society, it is that they are allowed at all.
This can't just be me can it? Surely people in the US would think that it was really stupid for people in Britain to be throwing a party on July the 4th.
I just do not get people.
This is not, however, going to be me complaining about the US celebrating their Independence Day. Oh no, not I, not at all.
This does not mean that I am above mockery. I am very much not above mockery. Indeed, I am very much down with mockery. Were I a good deal cooler than I am then I would probably realise that saying "down with" isn't actually cool any more, nor is using the word "cool", but I digress. A lot. But that's not the point right now. The point, right now, is that I am quite happy mocking all and sundry.
Most years, when July the 4th rolls around, I am quite happy to post something on-line saying something along the lines of "letting off fireworks in celebration of not being in charge of people who'd ban the teaching of Evolution" or maybe "celebrating not having Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck be someone who's in any way connected to being in a colony of ours" or some such pithy, and let's face it, rubbish, joke. I am quite happy for the US citizens that it is my good fortune to know to tell me to go do one when I do this. It's OK, I deserve it, that's all fine and dandy. I am also quite happy for any and all US citizens to celebrate their independence. It is the kind of thing that nations celebrate.
Where things have become a bit strange is what I'm getting to. Where things have become a bit strange is that an e-mail was sent around where I work (by a manager no less) saying that there is going to be a celebration on July the 4th. Yes, you're thinking that you know that, but I was not clear and I don't feel like editing my previous sentence. We are going to be celebrating on July the 4th, in England, in the place where I work.
I find this to be a bit odd.
Upon seeing the notice in the break room I have seen that there will be a selection of US foods (hot dogs and brownies and, well, a lot of things that we eat too really) and that the people organising this would like people to dress up in an American theme. I wear a shirt/trousers combination to work. I am aware that a lot of Americans wear a shirt/trousers combination to work. But of course I'm an idiot! This isn't the idea at all! No, we're expected to wear things that are particularly American! So, as we're celebrating US independence you might think that we would be expected to dress up as, oh I don't know, George Washington or something. Maybe someone else notable (maybe JFK with head wound, heh heh heh, maybe not) like good ol' Ab' Lincoln. No, if you were thinking that then you too are an idiot, as of course we're supposed to dress as Elvis (Presley of course, not Costello, that wouldn't work at all) or something else pop culture related. Yes, not content with missing the point about it being a celebration, in essence, of kicking the asses of the vicious and greedy British Empire, they've also missed the point of it being a largely political celebration. Apparently we're just celebrating the US, its culture, and being blissfully patronising about it.
What bothers me isn't so much that the person organising our corner of Independence Day celebratory happenings is allowed to manage people, it isn't so much that they're allowed to vote and be active in society, it is that they are allowed at all.
This can't just be me can it? Surely people in the US would think that it was really stupid for people in Britain to be throwing a party on July the 4th.
I just do not get people.
Tuesday 7 June 2011
Victory is mine!
Previously on Thinking Up Blog Names Is Hard:
http://thinkingupblognamesishard.blogspot.com/2011/03/self-service-check-out.html
http://thinkingupblognamesishard.blogspot.com/2011/03/self-service-check-out-part-ii-this.html
Well today I showed that self-service checkout a thing or two. OK, so I didn't actually show it anything major, but I did get it to swallow those two pence pieces that it gave me last time.
I not only managed to get rid of that loose change but also to get rid of the rest of the change in my pocket. Oh yeah. Suck on that self-service checkout. Howd'ya like them apples?
And I have just realised that I;ve been holding on to these coins since March.
It's a good job that I've no real ambition because this level of stubbornness could really cause problems with someone who was actually trying to do something.
Or it could contribute something really useful to society at large... but I think it's pretty certain that that's not the way that this would go.
http://thinkingupblognamesishard.blogspot.com/2011/03/self-service-check-out.html
http://thinkingupblognamesishard.blogspot.com/2011/03/self-service-check-out-part-ii-this.html
Well today I showed that self-service checkout a thing or two. OK, so I didn't actually show it anything major, but I did get it to swallow those two pence pieces that it gave me last time.
I not only managed to get rid of that loose change but also to get rid of the rest of the change in my pocket. Oh yeah. Suck on that self-service checkout. Howd'ya like them apples?
And I have just realised that I;ve been holding on to these coins since March.
It's a good job that I've no real ambition because this level of stubbornness could really cause problems with someone who was actually trying to do something.
Or it could contribute something really useful to society at large... but I think it's pretty certain that that's not the way that this would go.
Monday 6 June 2011
Telephony is hard
In the course of my working day, what with me being a lowly office worker, I am obliged to answer the telephone at my side when it has the temerity to ring aloud. Given how softly spoken I am, and how unimpressed I am at interacting with the world, this can be a bit of a challenge.
Today, today I excelled myself, I really did.
We have, where I work, a script for when one answers the 'phone. This is fairly standard amongst companies and, like most companies, we do not have a complicated script. No having to remember an entire soliloquy for the workers at my place of employ, oh no, not for us. The script ends, after giving our respective names, with a friendly "how can I help you?" This is an excellent way to make someone feel welcome but it is something with which many of my colleagues have struggled.
A lot of people end with "how can I help?"
This is not a major problem in the grand scheme of things. It is, after all, still a friendly invocation of the matter in hand. But it is not what our employer wants us to say and, as they're paying us, at least in part, to say "you" at the end of the script, I feel it remiss of me to not do so. For the months since we obtained our new 'phone system I did not once fail to say "you" at the end of my script. I was, I think it safe to say, a bad "you"sayin' motherfucker. Until today.
Today while working on a spreadsheet and deleting certain selections from said spreadsheet I answered my 'phone but on this occasion I made the mistake of deleting something I didn't want to delete. this distracted me so much that I was too busy correcting the deletion (thank you 'undo' button) to get around to saying "you". This would not have been so bad had I not realised this mistake, started to say "you" a few seconds after it should have been said, realised that this was now a waste of time and instead settled for what I normally say in such situations.
"Oh, fuck."
This was not what I really wanted to say while I was on the 'phone as, while I must admit I have not checked, I believe that my employer would probably rather that I did not say "oh, fuck" to suppliers who are chasing payment of their invoices (or anyone else for that matter). I realised that I had said "oh, fuck" to a supplier who was chasing payment for their invoices, that this was a bad thing, and as this hit me I started to say "shit". I managed to stop myself at the "sh..." part but was still struggling to get a grip on proceedings. Visions of The Blues Brothers being beaten with a ruler for swearing, and this causing more swearing, did little to help me to focus.
Thankfully, due to my aforementioned softly spoken ways, the person at the other end of the 'phone was happily talking about wanting to speak to my colleague about her invoice so I think I got away with it.
I am not very good at this 'life' malarkey.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)