I do that all the time, though it seems to be an instinctual reaction to contain the mess. I don't know why, though, it never works. Last time it happened, my kids were in a shopping cart I was pushing through the dairy aisle of our local supermarket. My son wasn't acting quite right the entire trip and then he suddenly, violently, hurls over the edge of the cart. Luckily, he faced *away* from our little one or we'd have had two kids to clean up. Unfortunately, though, my "catch the puke" reflex took over and I put my hands into the stream. Then my wife had to get paper towels from the supermarket staff for both my son *AND* for me while I stood around like an idiot with puke-filled hands.
When our oldest son was a baby, he had projectile poops and I had no problem dodging those (unlike my wife). Don't know why my instinct is to contain the puke when it hasn't worked ever.
Sure. Caveat, this didn't happen to me or my wife but to a member of a "mommy board" she belonged to. This mother was sitting down to eat when she realized her baby needed a change. So she gets up, changes her baby's poop-filled diaper, washes her hands, and sits back down to eat her hot dog. She sees some mustard on her wrist so she licks it off.... that's when she discovers that it's not actually mustard. Yes, little baby poop can look a lot like mustard in both color and consistency!
If you you have little kids, or have spent any time with them, you'd know that they'll happily put anything in their mouths if you don't stop them. The idea of contamination is deliberately taught to children, using words like "icky," "yucky," and "ohmigodwhatisthatinyourhand."
Which is ironic when you consider that parents frequently have to overcome previously decided upon levels of contamination to function as a parent. To use myself as an example, during my wife's first pregnancy test, my job was to hold the filled urine cup and dip the test strip in. I didn't even have to touch the urine, but the thought of it being in a cup so close to me made me nauseous.
Now, after being a parent to two boys, I can eat lunch, stop to change a poop-filled diaper, and then resume eating lunch (after washing my hands of course!). The idea of changing a poop-filled diaper or wiping the bottom of a young child does not make me nauseous at all. Sometimes I'll forget the different parent-nonparent revulsion levels and tell stories that are perfectly ok by parent standards but make non-parents run to the nearest bathroom to hurl. This can be useful if your coworker brought in something that you'd like. "Hey, that's a nice pudding cup... Though it kind of reminds me of my son's diaper yesterday. I opened it up and stuff just spilled out everywhere and... what's that? You don't feel like pudding anymore? I guess I can eat it."
At least they took your money. I decided to upgrade my Yahoo Mail to Yahoo Mail Plus and had a problem on their order form. Repeated attempts to contact them resulted in no progress so I decided to stick with the free Yahoo Mail. Upon reflection, though, I think you're worse off.... At least my problem occurred *BEFORE* Yahoo got my money.
As a followup, the feature I wanted to upgrade to Yahoo Mail Plus for appears on GMail not too much later as a free feature. So I wound up not needing to pay Yahoo for the feature after all.
Unfortunately, the RIAA interprets your "not buying their music" as being the same as "another Internet pirate illegally downloading/sharing their music." After all, they reason, their music is vital to everyone's life and anyone who doesn't buy the minimum that the RIAA deems necessary must be pirating the rest. (This comment would be going for the Funny tag if it weren't true.)
No, no, no.... You're doing it wrong. You need to link the BSA, MPAA, and RIAA to child pornography and terrorism. Then politicians will outlaw these organizations and angry mobs will gather pitchforks and torches while marching to the organizations' respective headquarters. Don't make the link just yet though. I still need time to set up Jason's Pitchfork and Torch Emporium.;-)
It's pretty much the same in Judaism. Nearly all of the Jewish laws get suspended when it is a matter of life or death. For example, I don't drive or use the telephone on Shabbat. But if there's a medical emergency, it's actually considered a *SIN* for me to refuse to help by calling 911 or driving the person to the hospital. In other words, I'd be sinning by putting the observance of Jewish laws above someone's life. It's the same for dietary laws. If I was starving (literally, as in life or death, not just "very hungry") and a ham sandwich was placed in front of me, I'd be sinning to pass it up and risk death.
Of course, if it came down to my personal survival or killing someone else for food, I'm pretty sure that Jewish law would regard killing a man for food as the greater sin. But if I'm starving on a desert isle and there's a pig around, Porky's going down.
I've come to the conclusion that there are people who are so desperate for fame (no matter how fleeting or insignificant it really is), that they'll burn every bridge around them to get it. Fox, IIRC, had a show on where people would routinely be subjected to a lie detector which would ferret out embarrassing and relationship-destroying details of their lives. All for tiny cash prizes. (I never actually watched the show, so I just know what the commercials said.) At the time I saw the commercials, I wondered what kind of person would consent to 1) go on the show in the first place and 2) reveal their secrets backstage (you know they had to so the "proper" questions could be asked). These kind of people seem to crave fame more than any family/friend/spouse/child relationship they have. I seriously pity them.
administrators said using the college's name in e-mail addresses could potentially confuse people.
The administrators seem to be trying to keep people from using the college's name in their private e-mail addresses. So why are they going after abbreviations? I guess I could see it if someone registered SantaRosaJuniorCollege@yahoo.com and started spamming people, but attempting to claim ownership on SRJC? That's simply ridiculous.
As the very least, non-commercial copyright infringement (e.g. file sharing without seeking a profit), should carry fines more in line with reality. The current fine is $750 - $150,000 per offense. The basic price of an online song (as per iTunes) is 99 cents. This means that one song file sharing can land you a fee over 750x-150,000x the price of what you shared out. I can understand raising the fee above the cost as a penalty, but that's ridiculous. Five times the market value sounds a lot more in line with reality. Before: Get caught sharing 100 songs. Get sued and face a $75,000 - $15,000,000 fine. Fine could land you in bankruptcy. After: Get caught sharing 100 songs. Get sued and face a $500 fine. Fine stings financially but doesn't put you in bankruptcy.
As a bonus, it would stop the RIAA from terrorizing individuals into settling. If you were facing a lawsuit where the threatened penalty was $15 million, you'd seriously consider settling for $3,000. If you were facing a lawsuit where the threatened penalty was $500, you'd laugh at pretty much any settlement offer.
The 88MB file is the combination of a series of XML files. I'm analyzing the information on a series of users. Each user's data is in XML format. To analyze it, I need to remove some unneeded parts of the XML file. (I've found that text search/replacing was faster than using an XML parser.)
I hope it handles search/replace better. I tried doing a search/replace on a 88MB large string and the stupid script crashed!;-)
Seriously, though, if anyone knows of any good tactics for large-string searching/replacing, I'd be happy to hear them. My current attempt is multiple page loads in an iFrame while the user is presented with a "working on it..." message.
So that, during election season, they can proclaim that they were responsible for "tough new measures against...." It is a lot more impressive than "closed a few loopholes to make an existing law better." If they can get spin any opposition their opponent gave as being soft on crime/terrorism/child porn/etc, then all the better. In other words, they pass unnecessary new laws to help themselves out, not to help us out.
I'm 33 years old (so I'm in your age group) and I pay for cable. I don't watch sports and while I do have Internet access (and thus access to Hulu), I don't use it often merely because I prefer to watch my shows on my TV (32" standard definition) not on my computer. Besides, I don't want to hand my computer over to my kids (5 and 2) every time I let them watch a show. (Side note: I've noticed that this is a weakness of Hulu. There is virtually no kids' programming.) As for Netflix, we've looked into it, but just can't justify the expense.
I've explored my options and am intrigued by the set top boxes coming on the market now that let you play Internet videos on your TV. This would take care of virtually all of the shows we watch except for Mythbusters and my kids' favorite shows. Those last two are (excuse the pun) show-stoppers, though. I need my weekly dose of Mythbusters (Jason want big boom!) and my kids like watching Sesame Street and the like. I can definitely see the handwriting on the wall, though. Give it five years and I think that the amount of shows offered (legally) online will skyrocket and the hardware to play them on your regular TV will become more common/less expensive. I have no doubt that cable companies see this handwriting too and are afraid.
Then you get situations like my wife and mine. My wife was a teacher (all girl's Catholic middle school). When our second son was born, we crunched the numbers. Her salary after taxes minus after-school care for our oldest son (so someone would be looking after him from when his school let out to when my wife would be able to pick him up) minus daycare for our youngest son. We came out with $3,000. This meant that, after these two expenses, my wife would only be adding $3,000 *PER YEAR* to our income. We decided that, even though she loved teaching, it just wasn't worth it. She could get a part-time job at night and make more than that. So she quit. If her pay was higher, it would have been more worth her time/effort to keep teaching. Our culture is really messed up when a guy gets paid millions of dollars to throw a ball but a person who makes a lifelong difference in a child's life gets a tiny salary.
And just to add to your point and address the "good teacher/bad class" points brought up elsewhere: A good teacher will notice when one teaching style is not working for his/her class (or individual student) and will adjust their teaching style accordingly. Not every class will learn with the "writing on the blackboard lecture" style. Sometimes you need to engage the students in a different manner and they will understand the subject matter. When my wife was in the classroom, she would come home and tell me about how she needed to switch things up on the fly to get kids to understand this concept or that subject. She would give students who were lagging behind extra help after class while pushing the entire class on to the next topic. Yes, I'm biased, but I think she was a great teacher (as did her students). If a great teacher is in a class full of "problem kids", the great teacher will adjust. No, he/she won't turn the class into Grade A geniuses, but the great teacher will do all they can to instruct them and instill a love of learning into the class. If even one of those "problem kids" decides that he or she likes learning at school, the teacher has been a success.
My own marketing story: I used to work for Windows Magazine. We were a pretty successful publication, or so we thought. One day, everyone was called into a meeting (never a good sign) by our corporate marketing department. They literally told us: "You guys have a great product. Wonderful writing and content. Phenomenal staff. But we don't know how to sell your magazine. So we're killing it." Yes, because *they* couldn't figure out what to do with *our* great content, *they* decided that we needed to be fired.
Luckily, I survived that as the shut-down magazine went Dot-Com-only (WinMag.com). We figured we were pretty safe since we were the biggest traffic draw our company had. But then came an impromptu phone meeting (again, never a good sign) during which our corporate overlords told us that they had come to a decision. Instead of producing their own content, they would pull other people's content and show that. How successful were they? Well, when's the last time you visited Techweb.com? Personally, I never visit it and even had to Google it to make sure I had the name right!
I'm old before my time. Only 33 and the songs I grew up listening to (80's rock) are on the oldies stations, TV shows I remember watching as a kid are referred to as Classic TV, and I've begun referring to teenagers as "kids these days..." I think I'll go buy a rocking chair to better protect my lawn.;-)
"No actively searching for news" probably means that someone is doing a Google search on the normal Google home page but the search terms match up with some news story. For example, I'm going to Disney World soon, so when I heard about a possible Swine Flu case in Orlando/Disney, I was interested. I searched Google for "Swine Flu Orlando". Along with the search results were Google News results. I wasn't actively looking for news, but the Google News links were welcome additions to the search results.
You presume that they would set the metered prices fairly for the customer. They would actually set the metered prices fairly for themselves. Joe Average wouldn't see his bill change at all (beyond perhaps a token drop so the ISPs could claim that they lowered their rates). Anyone who used a single GB more than Joe Average, however, would get slammed with overage fees.
Ok, if a teen goes for In-Vitro Fertilization, yes they can get pregnant. As far as getting pregnant "the old-fashioned way", though, abstaining from sex is more effective than relying on birth control. When my sons get to that age, however, I don't plan on pushing an abstinence-only view. I will tell them that having sex is a serious step in a relationship that can have serious consequences. I'll let them know that they should only have sex with someone that they are really committed to and they should use condoms (even if the girl's on the pill) should they decide to have sex. I'd even be willing to go to the store and buy my sons condoms though I realize they might find that a bit creepy. (Kind of like the time my dad tried to bond with me by turning on the Playboy channel. There are just some things you don't want to share with your dad!!!)
Oh, and we're Jewish so we don't need to worry about any virgin birth hypocritical-ness.;-)
Slashdot Mirror
I do that all the time, though it seems to be an instinctual reaction to contain the mess. I don't know why, though, it never works. Last time it happened, my kids were in a shopping cart I was pushing through the dairy aisle of our local supermarket. My son wasn't acting quite right the entire trip and then he suddenly, violently, hurls over the edge of the cart. Luckily, he faced *away* from our little one or we'd have had two kids to clean up. Unfortunately, though, my "catch the puke" reflex took over and I put my hands into the stream. Then my wife had to get paper towels from the supermarket staff for both my son *AND* for me while I stood around like an idiot with puke-filled hands.
When our oldest son was a baby, he had projectile poops and I had no problem dodging those (unlike my wife). Don't know why my instinct is to contain the puke when it hasn't worked ever.
Sure. Caveat, this didn't happen to me or my wife but to a member of a "mommy board" she belonged to. This mother was sitting down to eat when she realized her baby needed a change. So she gets up, changes her baby's poop-filled diaper, washes her hands, and sits back down to eat her hot dog. She sees some mustard on her wrist so she licks it off.... that's when she discovers that it's not actually mustard. Yes, little baby poop can look a lot like mustard in both color and consistency!
If you you have little kids, or have spent any time with them, you'd know that they'll happily put anything in their mouths if you don't stop them. The idea of contamination is deliberately taught to children, using words like "icky," "yucky," and "ohmigodwhatisthatinyourhand."
Which is ironic when you consider that parents frequently have to overcome previously decided upon levels of contamination to function as a parent. To use myself as an example, during my wife's first pregnancy test, my job was to hold the filled urine cup and dip the test strip in. I didn't even have to touch the urine, but the thought of it being in a cup so close to me made me nauseous.
Now, after being a parent to two boys, I can eat lunch, stop to change a poop-filled diaper, and then resume eating lunch (after washing my hands of course!). The idea of changing a poop-filled diaper or wiping the bottom of a young child does not make me nauseous at all. Sometimes I'll forget the different parent-nonparent revulsion levels and tell stories that are perfectly ok by parent standards but make non-parents run to the nearest bathroom to hurl. This can be useful if your coworker brought in something that you'd like. "Hey, that's a nice pudding cup... Though it kind of reminds me of my son's diaper yesterday. I opened it up and stuff just spilled out everywhere and... what's that? You don't feel like pudding anymore? I guess I can eat it."
Just don't ask to hear my mustard story!
At least they took your money. I decided to upgrade my Yahoo Mail to Yahoo Mail Plus and had a problem on their order form. Repeated attempts to contact them resulted in no progress so I decided to stick with the free Yahoo Mail. Upon reflection, though, I think you're worse off.... At least my problem occurred *BEFORE* Yahoo got my money.
As a followup, the feature I wanted to upgrade to Yahoo Mail Plus for appears on GMail not too much later as a free feature. So I wound up not needing to pay Yahoo for the feature after all.
Unfortunately, the RIAA interprets your "not buying their music" as being the same as "another Internet pirate illegally downloading/sharing their music." After all, they reason, their music is vital to everyone's life and anyone who doesn't buy the minimum that the RIAA deems necessary must be pirating the rest. (This comment would be going for the Funny tag if it weren't true.)
No, no, no.... You're doing it wrong. You need to link the BSA, MPAA, and RIAA to child pornography and terrorism. Then politicians will outlaw these organizations and angry mobs will gather pitchforks and torches while marching to the organizations' respective headquarters. Don't make the link just yet though. I still need time to set up Jason's Pitchfork and Torch Emporium. ;-)
It's pretty much the same in Judaism. Nearly all of the Jewish laws get suspended when it is a matter of life or death. For example, I don't drive or use the telephone on Shabbat. But if there's a medical emergency, it's actually considered a *SIN* for me to refuse to help by calling 911 or driving the person to the hospital. In other words, I'd be sinning by putting the observance of Jewish laws above someone's life. It's the same for dietary laws. If I was starving (literally, as in life or death, not just "very hungry") and a ham sandwich was placed in front of me, I'd be sinning to pass it up and risk death.
Of course, if it came down to my personal survival or killing someone else for food, I'm pretty sure that Jewish law would regard killing a man for food as the greater sin. But if I'm starving on a desert isle and there's a pig around, Porky's going down.
I've come to the conclusion that there are people who are so desperate for fame (no matter how fleeting or insignificant it really is), that they'll burn every bridge around them to get it. Fox, IIRC, had a show on where people would routinely be subjected to a lie detector which would ferret out embarrassing and relationship-destroying details of their lives. All for tiny cash prizes. (I never actually watched the show, so I just know what the commercials said.) At the time I saw the commercials, I wondered what kind of person would consent to 1) go on the show in the first place and 2) reveal their secrets backstage (you know they had to so the "proper" questions could be asked). These kind of people seem to crave fame more than any family/friend/spouse/child relationship they have. I seriously pity them.
The administrators seem to be trying to keep people from using the college's name in their private e-mail addresses. So why are they going after abbreviations? I guess I could see it if someone registered SantaRosaJuniorCollege@yahoo.com and started spamming people, but attempting to claim ownership on SRJC? That's simply ridiculous.
As the very least, non-commercial copyright infringement (e.g. file sharing without seeking a profit), should carry fines more in line with reality. The current fine is $750 - $150,000 per offense. The basic price of an online song (as per iTunes) is 99 cents. This means that one song file sharing can land you a fee over 750x-150,000x the price of what you shared out. I can understand raising the fee above the cost as a penalty, but that's ridiculous. Five times the market value sounds a lot more in line with reality. Before: Get caught sharing 100 songs. Get sued and face a $75,000 - $15,000,000 fine. Fine could land you in bankruptcy. After: Get caught sharing 100 songs. Get sued and face a $500 fine. Fine stings financially but doesn't put you in bankruptcy.
As a bonus, it would stop the RIAA from terrorizing individuals into settling. If you were facing a lawsuit where the threatened penalty was $15 million, you'd seriously consider settling for $3,000. If you were facing a lawsuit where the threatened penalty was $500, you'd laugh at pretty much any settlement offer.
The 88MB file is the combination of a series of XML files. I'm analyzing the information on a series of users. Each user's data is in XML format. To analyze it, I need to remove some unneeded parts of the XML file. (I've found that text search/replacing was faster than using an XML parser.)
I hope it handles search/replace better. I tried doing a search/replace on a 88MB large string and the stupid script crashed! ;-)
Seriously, though, if anyone knows of any good tactics for large-string searching/replacing, I'd be happy to hear them. My current attempt is multiple page loads in an iFrame while the user is presented with a "working on it..." message.
So that, during election season, they can proclaim that they were responsible for "tough new measures against...." It is a lot more impressive than "closed a few loopholes to make an existing law better." If they can get spin any opposition their opponent gave as being soft on crime/terrorism/child porn/etc, then all the better. In other words, they pass unnecessary new laws to help themselves out, not to help us out.
To paraphrase (the obligatory) Futurama: "Microsoft is technically compliant! The best kind of compliant."
Hi,
I'm 33 years old (so I'm in your age group) and I pay for cable. I don't watch sports and while I do have Internet access (and thus access to Hulu), I don't use it often merely because I prefer to watch my shows on my TV (32" standard definition) not on my computer. Besides, I don't want to hand my computer over to my kids (5 and 2) every time I let them watch a show. (Side note: I've noticed that this is a weakness of Hulu. There is virtually no kids' programming.) As for Netflix, we've looked into it, but just can't justify the expense.
I've explored my options and am intrigued by the set top boxes coming on the market now that let you play Internet videos on your TV. This would take care of virtually all of the shows we watch except for Mythbusters and my kids' favorite shows. Those last two are (excuse the pun) show-stoppers, though. I need my weekly dose of Mythbusters (Jason want big boom!) and my kids like watching Sesame Street and the like. I can definitely see the handwriting on the wall, though. Give it five years and I think that the amount of shows offered (legally) online will skyrocket and the hardware to play them on your regular TV will become more common/less expensive. I have no doubt that cable companies see this handwriting too and are afraid.
Then you get situations like my wife and mine. My wife was a teacher (all girl's Catholic middle school). When our second son was born, we crunched the numbers. Her salary after taxes minus after-school care for our oldest son (so someone would be looking after him from when his school let out to when my wife would be able to pick him up) minus daycare for our youngest son. We came out with $3,000. This meant that, after these two expenses, my wife would only be adding $3,000 *PER YEAR* to our income. We decided that, even though she loved teaching, it just wasn't worth it. She could get a part-time job at night and make more than that. So she quit. If her pay was higher, it would have been more worth her time/effort to keep teaching. Our culture is really messed up when a guy gets paid millions of dollars to throw a ball but a person who makes a lifelong difference in a child's life gets a tiny salary.
And just to add to your point and address the "good teacher/bad class" points brought up elsewhere: A good teacher will notice when one teaching style is not working for his/her class (or individual student) and will adjust their teaching style accordingly. Not every class will learn with the "writing on the blackboard lecture" style. Sometimes you need to engage the students in a different manner and they will understand the subject matter. When my wife was in the classroom, she would come home and tell me about how she needed to switch things up on the fly to get kids to understand this concept or that subject. She would give students who were lagging behind extra help after class while pushing the entire class on to the next topic. Yes, I'm biased, but I think she was a great teacher (as did her students). If a great teacher is in a class full of "problem kids", the great teacher will adjust. No, he/she won't turn the class into Grade A geniuses, but the great teacher will do all they can to instruct them and instill a love of learning into the class. If even one of those "problem kids" decides that he or she likes learning at school, the teacher has been a success.
My own marketing story: I used to work for Windows Magazine. We were a pretty successful publication, or so we thought. One day, everyone was called into a meeting (never a good sign) by our corporate marketing department. They literally told us: "You guys have a great product. Wonderful writing and content. Phenomenal staff. But we don't know how to sell your magazine. So we're killing it." Yes, because *they* couldn't figure out what to do with *our* great content, *they* decided that we needed to be fired.
Luckily, I survived that as the shut-down magazine went Dot-Com-only (WinMag.com). We figured we were pretty safe since we were the biggest traffic draw our company had. But then came an impromptu phone meeting (again, never a good sign) during which our corporate overlords told us that they had come to a decision. Instead of producing their own content, they would pull other people's content and show that. How successful were they? Well, when's the last time you visited Techweb.com? Personally, I never visit it and even had to Google it to make sure I had the name right!
I'm old before my time. Only 33 and the songs I grew up listening to (80's rock) are on the oldies stations, TV shows I remember watching as a kid are referred to as Classic TV, and I've begun referring to teenagers as "kids these days..." I think I'll go buy a rocking chair to better protect my lawn. ;-)
Shazbot!
"No actively searching for news" probably means that someone is doing a Google search on the normal Google home page but the search terms match up with some news story. For example, I'm going to Disney World soon, so when I heard about a possible Swine Flu case in Orlando/Disney, I was interested. I searched Google for "Swine Flu Orlando". Along with the search results were Google News results. I wasn't actively looking for news, but the Google News links were welcome additions to the search results.
So random freezes and jittering are to Windows what popping and hissing is to music on vinyl records?
You presume that they would set the metered prices fairly for the customer. They would actually set the metered prices fairly for themselves. Joe Average wouldn't see his bill change at all (beyond perhaps a token drop so the ISPs could claim that they lowered their rates). Anyone who used a single GB more than Joe Average, however, would get slammed with overage fees.
My wife's done that two or three times. Very worth charity and pretty easy to do.
Ok, if a teen goes for In-Vitro Fertilization, yes they can get pregnant. As far as getting pregnant "the old-fashioned way", though, abstaining from sex is more effective than relying on birth control. When my sons get to that age, however, I don't plan on pushing an abstinence-only view. I will tell them that having sex is a serious step in a relationship that can have serious consequences. I'll let them know that they should only have sex with someone that they are really committed to and they should use condoms (even if the girl's on the pill) should they decide to have sex. I'd even be willing to go to the store and buy my sons condoms though I realize they might find that a bit creepy. (Kind of like the time my dad tried to bond with me by turning on the Playboy channel. There are just some things you don't want to share with your dad!!!)
Oh, and we're Jewish so we don't need to worry about any virgin birth hypocritical-ness. ;-)