Have you ever had someone ask you what was wrong with you? I'm sure you have, whether you'll admit it or not. I know it has happened to me a many number of times. For a long time I was not be able to come up with a generally good response to that question, but now I think I've come across the solution.
Make a list. It's actually quite simple. Just make a list of all the things that are "wrong" with you, the more nonsensical the better. You should keep it with you at all times, possibly in your wallet or purse.
The look on people's faces when you actually pull out a list is priceless, even more so once you proceed to name each item on it. I have attempted this a total of four time on unique people and have received some fairly hilarious responses. Most people have a puzzled look and just are speechless.
P.S. Remember to add the fact that you carry the list around with you as an item on your list.
February 8, 2007
February 7, 2007
'Homophobic' Snickers
Apparently Snickers insights homophobia. Or at least, that is what The Human Rights Campaign and GLAAD are claiming.
If you are one of the people who did not see the Super Bowl this past weekend, then you pissed a nonsensical and fairly benign advertisement put on by Snickers. The ad showed two garage mechanics working on a car and one of them pulls out a Snickers bar puts it in his mouth and attempts to eat it without hand while continuing his work on the car. The other mechanic looks longingly at the Snickers bar and begins to eat it from the other man's mouth, eventually ending is a "kiss". The two men jump back and one nervously proclaims that they just kissed while the other decides they need to do something manly to counteract the kiss. They then proceed to pull hair off their chest while yelling in pain.
I found the commercial somewhat amusing the first time I saw it, but once was enough. I did not see any harm in the ad, and I am sure most of America did not as well.
What gay rights groups do not seem to understand is that is was meant to be humorous, not a serious bash against gays. Now if one of the mechanics started acting gay and the other one beat the hell out of him, that would obviously be crossing the line, but it was a harmless joke. A harmless, 30 second, fairly lame joke. Get over yourselves and realize that gays are the butt-end (no pun intended) of many jokes in our society. We all need to be able to laugh at ourselves and each other, so the best thing you can do is make a joke right back.
I think Carlos Mencia puts it best, "Gay people, if you can take a penis, you can take a joke."
If you are one of the people who did not see the Super Bowl this past weekend, then you pissed a nonsensical and fairly benign advertisement put on by Snickers. The ad showed two garage mechanics working on a car and one of them pulls out a Snickers bar puts it in his mouth and attempts to eat it without hand while continuing his work on the car. The other mechanic looks longingly at the Snickers bar and begins to eat it from the other man's mouth, eventually ending is a "kiss". The two men jump back and one nervously proclaims that they just kissed while the other decides they need to do something manly to counteract the kiss. They then proceed to pull hair off their chest while yelling in pain.
I found the commercial somewhat amusing the first time I saw it, but once was enough. I did not see any harm in the ad, and I am sure most of America did not as well.
What gay rights groups do not seem to understand is that is was meant to be humorous, not a serious bash against gays. Now if one of the mechanics started acting gay and the other one beat the hell out of him, that would obviously be crossing the line, but it was a harmless joke. A harmless, 30 second, fairly lame joke. Get over yourselves and realize that gays are the butt-end (no pun intended) of many jokes in our society. We all need to be able to laugh at ourselves and each other, so the best thing you can do is make a joke right back.
I think Carlos Mencia puts it best, "Gay people, if you can take a penis, you can take a joke."
Walker Lever
It has been nearly 3 years since NBC merged with Universal Studios. Once this happened Conan O'Brien had a running joke on his show in which he would pull a lever and have small clips of Walker, Texas Ranger, which was previously owned by Universal, to be shown.
I had almost completely forgotten about this segment until I came across a couple of clips on YouTube. If you haven't seen it yet, or just want a good laugh for the day, I have posted both bellow. It just shows how awesomely bad the writing and acting was on that show (which lasted for 8 years!). Enjoy!
If you find more clips, please let me know. I would love to be able to post all of them here.
I had almost completely forgotten about this segment until I came across a couple of clips on YouTube. If you haven't seen it yet, or just want a good laugh for the day, I have posted both bellow. It just shows how awesomely bad the writing and acting was on that show (which lasted for 8 years!). Enjoy!
If you find more clips, please let me know. I would love to be able to post all of them here.
January 12, 2007
Format War with No Winners
Lately I've seen a lot of people in Digg arguing about whether Blu-ray or HD DVD will win the current format war and most of them are either bashing Sony about Blu-ray or bashing the Sony bashers. It's a vicious cycle. The problem with these arguments (other than a lot of personal attacks), is that neither format will win this war.
If you have not heard about the format war between Blu-ray and HD DVD, then you probably are not into technology all that much. But in any case, there is a format war going on for supremacy of the next generation multimedia medium. Blu-ray is technically superior, but costs a bit more to make. Neither format is inexpensive at this point and the main reason to get a standalone player for these formats is if you want to watch video in high definition (both are currently encoded in 1080p, the highest definition in present commercial TVs). Blu-ray can hold quite a bit more data than HD DVD and comes standard on a PlayStation 3. Microsoft released an HD DVD attachment for the Xbox 360 late last year as well.
Both formats are going head to head with each other, but my prediction is that neither will win. Friends of mine often talk about the format war while not understanding what's actually behind it all. The assumption many have is that there has to be a winner in a format war. This is just not true. Many formats that seem superior to others in the past have failed to become adopted (can you say laser disc, MiniDisc, Betamax). The truth of the matter is that there really is not a relatively high demand for either of these formats.
Back when VHS's ruled the world there was this thing that came out called a DVD. It supported a huge technical advantage over VHS and was eventually adopted as the current standard format for video and many other applications. We didn't just change formats for video, we changed the entire medium. There was a relatively large plastic box with magnetic tape in it and then there was a small disc that held much more data, easy tracking, no need to rewind, and enough space to now put movie "extras" in with the movie. Now we have the choice of going from a small to disc to another small disc that basically only increases the resolution of the video and room for more extras. The only real reason to change to this new format is if we want to see movies in HD on our new shiny HDTVs. The only problem is that just about everybody has a regular DVD player and those who don't can get one for very cheap. This along with the price of the DVD being about half of a Blu-ray or HD DVD makes a very bad case for buying one of these new format players.
Consumers don't like format wars. It confuses them and so most will wait until just one remains standing. Of course, Warner Bros. recently developed a disc that will store both Blu-ray and HD DVD formats on it at the same time. Unfortunately, unless this is heavily marketed, the majority of people will still think there is a format war going and will be hesitant to decide on a format. The biggest chance this generation of media has of succeeding is if the PS3 begins selling like hotcakes around the world. This is what happened with the PS2, which helped the DVD get adopted much faster, along with the fact that there were not real competitors to the DVD format.
So with all of these factors, my prediction is that these formats at best will get a lukewarm adoption in the world, as they have so far. Most likely what will happen is the actual medium will change eventually, just as when we went from VHS to DVD. The next step in the media evolution seems to be solid-state memory. Flash drives have been exponential decreasing in price and companies like IBM and SanDisk have found new ways to create high density solid-state drives. By the time Blu-ray or HD DVD has the chance to become well adopted there may be a new format dangling in people's faces.
Of course, I could be wrong about this format war as I have been wrong about things like this is the past. I once predicted that MiniDiscs would take over the CD format, but I was obviously proved wrong and that is what partly leads me to my conclusions this time through. The MiniDisc was technically superior to CDs in many ways, but there was already a high adoption rate for CDs and MiniDiscs and their players were generally more expensive.
So you won't be seeing me watching at Blu-ray or HD DVD any time soon. The lower resolution DVD format still looks fine, even on my beautiful HDTV. Once you're immersed into a movie, your eyes will not really care if the video is in 480p or 1080p, they're busy enjoying everything else about it.
If you have not heard about the format war between Blu-ray and HD DVD, then you probably are not into technology all that much. But in any case, there is a format war going on for supremacy of the next generation multimedia medium. Blu-ray is technically superior, but costs a bit more to make. Neither format is inexpensive at this point and the main reason to get a standalone player for these formats is if you want to watch video in high definition (both are currently encoded in 1080p, the highest definition in present commercial TVs). Blu-ray can hold quite a bit more data than HD DVD and comes standard on a PlayStation 3. Microsoft released an HD DVD attachment for the Xbox 360 late last year as well.
Both formats are going head to head with each other, but my prediction is that neither will win. Friends of mine often talk about the format war while not understanding what's actually behind it all. The assumption many have is that there has to be a winner in a format war. This is just not true. Many formats that seem superior to others in the past have failed to become adopted (can you say laser disc, MiniDisc, Betamax). The truth of the matter is that there really is not a relatively high demand for either of these formats.
Back when VHS's ruled the world there was this thing that came out called a DVD. It supported a huge technical advantage over VHS and was eventually adopted as the current standard format for video and many other applications. We didn't just change formats for video, we changed the entire medium. There was a relatively large plastic box with magnetic tape in it and then there was a small disc that held much more data, easy tracking, no need to rewind, and enough space to now put movie "extras" in with the movie. Now we have the choice of going from a small to disc to another small disc that basically only increases the resolution of the video and room for more extras. The only real reason to change to this new format is if we want to see movies in HD on our new shiny HDTVs. The only problem is that just about everybody has a regular DVD player and those who don't can get one for very cheap. This along with the price of the DVD being about half of a Blu-ray or HD DVD makes a very bad case for buying one of these new format players.
Consumers don't like format wars. It confuses them and so most will wait until just one remains standing. Of course, Warner Bros. recently developed a disc that will store both Blu-ray and HD DVD formats on it at the same time. Unfortunately, unless this is heavily marketed, the majority of people will still think there is a format war going and will be hesitant to decide on a format. The biggest chance this generation of media has of succeeding is if the PS3 begins selling like hotcakes around the world. This is what happened with the PS2, which helped the DVD get adopted much faster, along with the fact that there were not real competitors to the DVD format.
So with all of these factors, my prediction is that these formats at best will get a lukewarm adoption in the world, as they have so far. Most likely what will happen is the actual medium will change eventually, just as when we went from VHS to DVD. The next step in the media evolution seems to be solid-state memory. Flash drives have been exponential decreasing in price and companies like IBM and SanDisk have found new ways to create high density solid-state drives. By the time Blu-ray or HD DVD has the chance to become well adopted there may be a new format dangling in people's faces.
Of course, I could be wrong about this format war as I have been wrong about things like this is the past. I once predicted that MiniDiscs would take over the CD format, but I was obviously proved wrong and that is what partly leads me to my conclusions this time through. The MiniDisc was technically superior to CDs in many ways, but there was already a high adoption rate for CDs and MiniDiscs and their players were generally more expensive.
So you won't be seeing me watching at Blu-ray or HD DVD any time soon. The lower resolution DVD format still looks fine, even on my beautiful HDTV. Once you're immersed into a movie, your eyes will not really care if the video is in 480p or 1080p, they're busy enjoying everything else about it.
December 20, 2006
Bush, A Page Behind the Rest of the Nation
President Bush finally admitted to the nation today that the United States is not winning the war in Iraq. It only took him 3 1/2 years to realize the obvious, while the rest of us have been yelling this at him for quite some time. I guess when 70% of the American public disapprove of your handling of the war it becomes harder and harder to be oblivious to reality.
Mr. Bush, you say that the insurgents are the ones hurting US efforts in Iraq, but they wouldn't even be there if you would have followed the first basic rule of occupation, secure the entire country. There were so many things that went wrong that I'm not going to even begin listing them here. My point is, we need to admit to ourselves that this war is not worth it any more.
I don't like drawing too many similarities to Iraq and Vietnam, but some are unavoidable. During the 1968 presidential election, Richard Nixon ran on the platform of getting us out of Vietnam. In the four years of Nixon's first term, he tried just about anything to "win" the Vietnam War without a full military withdrawal (read: defeat). Nixon even contemplated using nuclear weapons on North Vietnam. Even with the best efforts of the White House, America was unable to solve the debacle that was Vietnam. Hence, in 1972, Nixon ran on the same platform as '68, ending the Vietnam War.
So what was accomplished during those four years? The war was still raging in '72 and American society was at an interesting point in our cultural history. Oh yeah, also an approximation of 32,000 US military personnel were killed during that four year period. And what happened in the end? We pulled out because the war was not worth it. From a military standpoint America was "winning" the war in Vietnam, but from a realistic standpoint there was nothing to win, nothing to gain, no real accomplishment. So, here we are, more than three decades later in the same sort of situation.
Mr. Bush, you failed your country by not learning the lessons of history. You failed your country by not planning a realistic occupation. You failed your country by ignoring reality for more than three years. If we are to fight a war against terror we must first look within ourselves before trying to quell the external forces. You cannot fight an enemy abroad if you cannot even fight your own incompetence within.
I hope for the sake of our brave soldiers and their families that you realize what you've done. Realize that there is no victory in occupation. There is no victory in sending soldiers off to die for nothing. The only victory that we can hope for, is that America will finally learn its lesson after history repeats itself for a second time.
Mr. Bush, you say that the insurgents are the ones hurting US efforts in Iraq, but they wouldn't even be there if you would have followed the first basic rule of occupation, secure the entire country. There were so many things that went wrong that I'm not going to even begin listing them here. My point is, we need to admit to ourselves that this war is not worth it any more.
I don't like drawing too many similarities to Iraq and Vietnam, but some are unavoidable. During the 1968 presidential election, Richard Nixon ran on the platform of getting us out of Vietnam. In the four years of Nixon's first term, he tried just about anything to "win" the Vietnam War without a full military withdrawal (read: defeat). Nixon even contemplated using nuclear weapons on North Vietnam. Even with the best efforts of the White House, America was unable to solve the debacle that was Vietnam. Hence, in 1972, Nixon ran on the same platform as '68, ending the Vietnam War.
So what was accomplished during those four years? The war was still raging in '72 and American society was at an interesting point in our cultural history. Oh yeah, also an approximation of 32,000 US military personnel were killed during that four year period. And what happened in the end? We pulled out because the war was not worth it. From a military standpoint America was "winning" the war in Vietnam, but from a realistic standpoint there was nothing to win, nothing to gain, no real accomplishment. So, here we are, more than three decades later in the same sort of situation.
Mr. Bush, you failed your country by not learning the lessons of history. You failed your country by not planning a realistic occupation. You failed your country by ignoring reality for more than three years. If we are to fight a war against terror we must first look within ourselves before trying to quell the external forces. You cannot fight an enemy abroad if you cannot even fight your own incompetence within.
I hope for the sake of our brave soldiers and their families that you realize what you've done. Realize that there is no victory in occupation. There is no victory in sending soldiers off to die for nothing. The only victory that we can hope for, is that America will finally learn its lesson after history repeats itself for a second time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)