McDonald's would not have kept their coffee so hot unless it helped sales. Sales only increase when the customer _prefers_ whatever variable is being changed, unless a monopoly is involved (see, this being/., I gotta slip some MS-bashing in however tenuous the connection). Needless to say, McDonald's did this because customers preferred it, even if indirectly. I don't drink coffee, so I don't know why, but I would guess because it helps keep the product warm until the customer is ready to consume it.
Was this woman a moron? Probably not, after she's apparently capable of hiring a decent lawyer. Is it a shame she was injured? Sure. No one should be hurt. Was McDonald's a jerk about it all? McDonald's is a huge faceless corporation. Duh! If a huge corporation isn't a total jerk and willing to go to the mat over any case however fatuous, every halfwit in America will be dialing whatever lawyer advertises during Jerry Springer and lawsuits would become the country's leading industry, instead of just one of the country's leading industries.
I dunno about you, but someone who manages to spill enough coffee on herself to cause that much injury should take her clumsiness into consideration. I'm a complete spaz, so I make sure when I'm handling something hot or sharp or radioactive or CowboyNeal, to take extra precautions like not opening it over my lap, or sticking it in my eye or trying to juggle it. But that's just me.
If it takes warnings on the coffee cups for a certain percentage of the population to realize that, then so be it. We already have warnings for practically every stupid behavior that could conceivably be taken with a product already because there are always twelve people too stupid to get out of jury duty who are more than willing to award the Litigation Lottery to some schmuck who happens to be stupid or clumsy or excessively unlucky.
Just because the projecting device is close to your eyes doesn't mean your eyes have to focus close. I'm sure the angle of the projection is such that your eyes can comfortably focus at a (virtual) distance of 18" or so.
Your government rarely tells you the truth, and you fall for it every time.
I plan to continue falling for the truth every time the government tells it, however often or rare that might be.
...carpet bomb an entire country...
If that were true, Afghan civilian deaths would be in the millions, not dozens or hundreds.
You might have had a point here, but your grotesque exaggeration undermines all your credibility as a critic of the U.S.
Have you seen "Pearl Harbour?" It's another typical piece of turd-munching American propaganda...
I don't recall seeing one review of Pearl Harbor that did not criticize it for being incredibly inaccurate to the point of stupidity, or anything other than 90 minutes of total crap wrapped around 30 minutes of great special effects. The general reaction in the press was (sarcastically) "Until I saw 'Pearl Harbor', I never knew the U.S. won that battle."
While you're at it, please tell me why a perfectly good Red Cross installation (including inhabitants) was demolished for your war effort;
Maybe in the process of delivering millions of pounds of ordnance some mistakes, however few were made. At least we weren't targeting civilians on purpose, and every time I hear hand-wringing over civilian deaths in Afghanistan, the numbers are rarely more than a dozen or two. All the Taliban had to do was cooperate with us when we asked them to turn over Al-Qaeda members and we made it very clear what we would do if they didn't. By defying us, they declared their allegiance with the terrorist organization in no uncertain terms. Regardless of what you think of the U.S. and its motives, I'm sure most citizens of Afghanistan, especially women, will be musch better off in the long run for our actions, and that's not even why we did it.
Ummm... correct me if I'm wrong (and I probably am), but if the winning submission use GPL libraries, and Google it, aren't they then subject to the GPL with respect to the submission?
Don't they then need to make their new tool Open Source as well?
The beta tester should only be compensated if that is the agreement made beforehand. Now, in your case, I think it would be worth the good will to have let you keep the prototype (at least...), but unless you signed some kind of agreement with them that they would compensate you for any significant improvements you made to their device then they really don't owe you anything.
And no, it's not stealing. If you give something away to someone, that someone is not stealing from you unless you both agreed beforehand that you would be compensated for whatever you gave to him or her.
Swing is fine if you want your app to look like VB shareware from 1993. If you are going to develop anything non-trivial, you're much better off sticking with MFC despite its learning curve and sometimes less-than-elegant implementation.
Having done only a tiny amount of Swing work (so I'm not the most qualified judge of it in the world, but hey, this is/.), I spent much more time trying to get the GUI to draw nicely and look decent than making it work.
If cross-platform is your highest criteria, than some implementation of Java is probably your best bet, but otherwise, I'd stick with native code and API's.
This is definitely not the case here in Northern Virginia, although some stores carry significantly more than others, and the selection seems to cary from store to store.
I have managed to bump into a few extremely knowledgeable employees there, but YMMV.
The plural of "radius" has two i's because the base "radi-" already has an i.
An analogous plural of "virus" would be "viri" because the word is "virus" and not "virius".
But two i's looks cooler, so people use it, even when it doesn't make sense.
I don't care if virus is not a true Latin word or if the dictionary shows its plural as "viruses", but if people want to "borrow" the Latin pluralization (or a reasonable imitation thereof), they should at least do so consistently.
I second the recommendation of Forrest Mims books. He was a true hardware hacker, built and tested all his own designs and meticulously wrote out all his books by hand on engineering paper.
And, no, it's not a handwritten font like you see 99% of the time these days.
The books are _very_ basic up to about, I dunno, intermediate level. There's not a whole lot of reading involved, mostly tons of examples of circuits with brief explanations of interesting aspects of them. Those books would also be great for science project ideas.
Furthermore, I _would_ talk to guys at Radio Shack, but you need to find the experienced ones. usually a manager or someone older who's worked in the store for a long time, and is really interested in electronics. These guys often who a lot more than you would guess. Of course, the majority of them, especially the younger ones wouldn't know which way to put the batteries in.
I would further recommend the plethora of Web sites, mailing lists and newsgroups. I won't even bother to list any because there are so many. Just his Yahoo! or Google.
Another fun thing to do is hit all the on-line electronics vendors and download their catalogs. Quite a number of them target hobbyists like:
www.mpja.com - Marlin P. Jones, which sells basic components and lots of assorted suprlus random stuff
www.bgmicro.com - BG Micro is even better, they have a downloadable PDF catalog of about 20 dense pages
www.elexp.com - Electronics Express also has a downloadable catalog
IIRC, I've ordered from all three of these, and a few other I don't recall at the moment. In each case, service was good and orders were delivered promptly.
Let's face it. Based on the movie trailer, it was obvious this was going to be a real cinemtic suppository (to quote Dr. Clayton Forrester). You always know the funnies gags are in the trailer for any low-budget parody, and none of these gags were funny.
I think Katz did all he needed to do: state the movie wasn't worth watching, briefly explain why, and open the floor up for discussion of bad movies in general, how the MPAA causes cavities and impotence and how much almost everyone hates Katz.
"stuff that Matters" is relative, and all of the typical/. audience should understand the concept of something mattering deeply to someone which no one else cares about... it's a common
situation with "nerds". "Nerds" and obsession go hand-in-hand, so enough with the "Topic X doesn't matter." If the story is pointless, skip over it. If JonKatz and CmdrTaco and CowboyNeal, et al, notice a certain kind of topic not generating any discussion, they can keep it in mind for the next time.
I also like the idea of 1,000,000 pundits. Almost everyone here is an expert in something, no matter how narrow. It's often just a BS session with thousands of participants. Anyone who takes it more seriously than that is looking at it wrong. But every BS session has the chance to teach someone something, or alter a point of view or even educate. Let's face it, assertions made on/. aren't really any less rigorously backed up than a lot of the news stories we are seeing (like that perpetual motion machine story that Yahoo! ran mentioned here last week). At least when someone on/. speaks about a technical subject, there's a decent chance he actually knows what he is talking about. When does that happen in the mainstream media.
If you take/. the right way, for all its problems, stupidities, abuses and other garbage, it can be a valuable resource, or at least less of a waste of time than watching your harddrive defrag.
You seem to have missed my point. I wasn't stating that Doom didn't or shouldn't have done well, or that people didn't or shouldn't have liked it, just that it wasn't a game that I found deeply engrossing, nor did I find it to have any real interest longevity as a game _for me_.
Sure it's fun to blow stuff up, but let's face it, every game that id has made since Wolf3D has been one where you run around in a maze and shoot things. Period. Now, obviously a lot of people like this or these guys wouldn't be making money hand-over-fist rehashing the same idea every time the computer hardware gets better.
But, my point goes back to the original poster who worried that developers would forsake coming up with good ideas for simply making prettier pictures with the newest hardware.
Quake, for the most part, would be Doom, or even Wolf3D but for the massively improved hardware capabilities. Does that discount the kungfu of the guys bright enough to make our beige boxes into VR combat simulators? No, these guys are sharp, but no one can argue that any of those games are very innovative or a more-than-incremental departure from what has gone on before. That's not a bad thing from a marketing point of view. After all, how many people watch hours upon hours of football even though the game hasn't changed radically in 100 years or so. The angle I was taking is that when you want to find something new, something that you really have never seen before, something revolutionary, not evolutionary, you are just going to have to look a little harder.
The FPS games owe as much to the hardware they run on than the software they are. Master of Orion will run on a 386, and it's as much fun to play now as it was in 1993, despite the crude graphics and interface. I think playing Wolf3D now would be pretty tedious compared to in 1992, after seeing what can be done these days.
The Wolf3D->Doom->Quake evolution is fine and shows great technical achievement, and is fun to look at (at least if you're into twitching crucified bodies, and clouds of arterial spray), but it wasn't until games like System Shock, Thief and even Descent that there was _game innovation_ rather than _technology innovation_ in the FPS genre beyond what was done in the Wolf3D.
I've got a very bad feeling that the gaming industry is heading towards a black hole of development...
However, you can put all the greatest graphics in the world, but if you don't add something interesting in terms of the game itself... then all you've got is a pretty looking game that no one is going to buy.
Ummmm... this problem's been around since the days of the Amiga. Given that Moore's Law has more lives than a herd of cats in a clone factory, there will always be plenty of games that feature style over substance, just like every other kind of media. As long as there are serious game enthusiasts in the world like you and me, there will always be good games to find, even if they are harder to find.
One example: id gave us "Doom", Irrational gave us "System Shock"
Doom blew everyone away with its revolutionary 3D engine, but the game was pointless. Fun, but pointless, and got old fast. Same with the bazillion Doom-clones that came out soon after (including everything id has done since), but then came "System Shock", which I hadn't even heard of until after the fact, which took the Doom-style 3D engine and put a real plot with lots of interesting backstory, role-playing elements, and world that didn't consist of endless brown labyrinths.
Did "System Shock" do incredibly well? I doubt it sold anywhere near what id's software sells (even on a bad day), but I will always remember it as one of my favorite games ever (same with "SS2").
There are only so many hours in a day, if you are discriminating about what you purchase, I think you will find there are more really good games out there than you could ever play.
If someone abuses legitimate practice X, make X illegal.
It doesn't do any good, but it easy and allows the politicians to claim they did something useful. Drunk driving is already illegal. How does making it _more_ illegal (for 18-20 year olds) make a difference?
Ironically, my sister bought a used VW from about that period that _only_ had the motorized shoulder strap attached to door. No lap belt at all! If the door was open, there was literally nothing holding you in the car.
I can't believe something like that was ever allowed to be sold. (Or that my sister and her husband would buy such a car (which they no longer own)).
That's just it. Our (U.S.) culture is extending adolescence to the point where for many people, it lasts until the mid-20's. A simple example is when I was in Virginia Tech my senior year in 1987. I heard that they had established a "freshman" dorm and had programs to help freshmen get acclimitized to college.
These are 18-year-olds for crying out loud, not 6-year-olds. The best thing that happened to me when I started college was to live on a hall with mostly upperclassmen. A group of college freshman will act like high-school students. I group of college freshman _and_ upperclassmen do not. (Of course, that could be worse, but that's another story;-)
Society seems to be following a similar pattern, which is what the original poster was complaining about. The amendment to lower the minimum voting age was probably the last of the trend to allow younger people more responsibility rather than less. But as I noted in my joking post above that everyone took as a troll: No one cares, because once you can do something about the problem, you don't have it anymore.
We need the real-life version of that ol' short-lived DC comic from the 70's called "Prez" about the first teenage president. Wait. No we don't. We already suffered through enough presidents with arrested development (cough*Clinton*cough).
IANAS but I thought the Earth's magnetic field flipped with a frequency on the order of millions of years, but Ice Ages come on the order of thousands or tens of thousands of years.
Are we talking about the same thing? I think it's fascinating if there is a correlation.
Slashdot Mirror
McDonald's would not have kept their coffee so hot unless it helped sales. Sales only increase when the customer _prefers_ whatever variable is being changed, unless a monopoly is involved (see, this being /., I gotta slip some MS-bashing in however tenuous the connection). Needless to say, McDonald's did this because customers preferred it, even if indirectly. I don't drink coffee, so I don't know why, but I would guess because it helps keep the product warm until the customer is ready to consume it.
Was this woman a moron? Probably not, after she's apparently capable of hiring a decent lawyer. Is it a shame she was injured? Sure. No one should be hurt. Was McDonald's a jerk about it all? McDonald's is a huge faceless corporation. Duh! If a huge corporation isn't a total jerk and willing to go to the mat over any case however fatuous, every halfwit in America will be dialing whatever lawyer advertises during Jerry Springer and lawsuits would become the country's leading industry, instead of just one of the country's leading industries.
I dunno about you, but someone who manages to spill enough coffee on herself to cause that much injury should take her clumsiness into consideration. I'm a complete spaz, so I make sure when I'm handling something hot or sharp or radioactive or CowboyNeal, to take extra precautions like not opening it over my lap, or sticking it in my eye or trying to juggle it. But that's just me.
If it takes warnings on the coffee cups for a certain percentage of the population to realize that, then so be it. We already have warnings for practically every stupid behavior that could conceivably be taken with a product already because there are always twelve people too stupid to get out of jury duty who are more than willing to award the Litigation Lottery to some schmuck who happens to be stupid or clumsy or excessively unlucky.
Just another few centillion grouchtoseconds and they might become a real standard.
I'm also sure any day now they'll discover the sneezy quark.
Just because the projecting device is close to your eyes doesn't mean your eyes have to focus close. I'm sure the angle of the projection is such that your eyes can comfortably focus at a (virtual) distance of 18" or so.
Have you ever used a ViewMaster?
Ummm... we're not talking about scanning the retina for identification. This is a new kind of display.
Your government rarely tells you the truth, and you fall for it every time.
...carpet bomb an entire country...
I plan to continue falling for the truth every time the government tells it, however often or rare that might be.
If that were true, Afghan civilian deaths would be in the millions, not dozens or hundreds.
You might have had a point here, but your grotesque exaggeration undermines all your credibility as a critic of the U.S.
Have you seen "Pearl Harbour?" It's another typical piece of turd-munching American propaganda...
I don't recall seeing one review of Pearl Harbor that did not criticize it for being incredibly inaccurate to the point of stupidity, or anything other than 90 minutes of total crap wrapped around 30 minutes of great special effects. The general reaction in the press was (sarcastically) "Until I saw 'Pearl Harbor', I never knew the U.S. won that battle."
While you're at it, please tell me why a perfectly good Red Cross installation (including inhabitants) was demolished for your war effort;
Maybe in the process of delivering millions of pounds of ordnance some mistakes, however few were made. At least we weren't targeting civilians on purpose, and every time I hear hand-wringing over civilian deaths in Afghanistan, the numbers are rarely more than a dozen or two. All the Taliban had to do was cooperate with us when we asked them to turn over Al-Qaeda members and we made it very clear what we would do if they didn't. By defying us, they declared their allegiance with the terrorist organization in no uncertain terms. Regardless of what you think of the U.S. and its motives, I'm sure most citizens of Afghanistan, especially women, will be musch better off in the long run for our actions, and that's not even why we did it.
Ummm... correct me if I'm wrong (and I probably am), but if the winning submission use GPL libraries, and Google it, aren't they then subject to the GPL with respect to the submission?
Don't they then need to make their new tool Open Source as well?
I think S.I. should be extended a little further to stay ahread of science. I recommend prefixes for smaller and smaller powers:
Zeptosecond
Chictosecond
Gumtosecond
Harptosecond
Grouchtosecond
The beta tester should only be compensated if that is the agreement made beforehand. Now, in your case, I think it would be worth the good will to have let you keep the prototype (at least...), but unless you signed some kind of agreement with them that they would compensate you for any significant improvements you made to their device then they really don't owe you anything.
And no, it's not stealing. If you give something away to someone, that someone is not stealing from you unless you both agreed beforehand that you would be compensated for whatever you gave to him or her.
Swing is fine if you want your app to look like VB shareware from 1993. If you are going to develop anything non-trivial, you're much better off sticking with MFC despite its learning curve and sometimes less-than-elegant implementation.
/.), I spent much more time trying to get the GUI to draw nicely and look decent than making it work.
Having done only a tiny amount of Swing work (so I'm not the most qualified judge of it in the world, but hey, this is
If cross-platform is your highest criteria, than some implementation of Java is probably your best bet, but otherwise, I'd stick with native code and API's.
This is definitely not the case here in Northern Virginia, although some stores carry significantly more than others, and the selection seems to cary from store to store.
I have managed to bump into a few extremely knowledgeable employees there, but YMMV.
The plural of "radius" has two i's because the base "radi-" already has an i.
An analogous plural of "virus" would be "viri" because the word is "virus" and not "virius".
But two i's looks cooler, so people use it, even when it doesn't make sense.
I don't care if virus is not a true Latin word or if the dictionary shows its plural as "viruses", but if people want to "borrow" the Latin pluralization (or a reasonable imitation thereof), they should at least do so consistently.
I second the recommendation of Forrest Mims books. He was a true hardware hacker, built and tested all his own designs and meticulously wrote out all his books by hand on engineering paper.
And, no, it's not a handwritten font like you see 99% of the time these days.
The books are _very_ basic up to about, I dunno, intermediate level. There's not a whole lot of reading involved, mostly tons of examples of circuits with brief explanations of interesting aspects of them. Those books would also be great for science project ideas.
Furthermore, I _would_ talk to guys at Radio Shack, but you need to find the experienced ones. usually a manager or someone older who's worked in the store for a long time, and is really interested in electronics. These guys often who a lot more than you would guess. Of course, the majority of them, especially the younger ones wouldn't know which way to put the batteries in.
I would further recommend the plethora of Web sites, mailing lists and newsgroups. I won't even bother to list any because there are so many. Just his Yahoo! or Google.
Another fun thing to do is hit all the on-line electronics vendors and download their catalogs. Quite a number of them target hobbyists like:
www.mpja.com - Marlin P. Jones, which sells basic components and lots of assorted suprlus random stuff
www.bgmicro.com - BG Micro is even better, they have a downloadable PDF catalog of about 20 dense pages
www.elexp.com - Electronics Express also has a downloadable catalog
IIRC, I've ordered from all three of these, and a few other I don't recall at the moment. In each case, service was good and orders were delivered promptly.
But that doesn't stop people from taking every word in the language that ends in -us and pluralizing it by changing it to -ii.
Which just goes to prove people would rather look cool than smart.
The worst part is that even when you confront people with the analogy with "radius" they don't care and still want to put two i's.
Sorry. It's a peeve of mine, too.
Let's face it. Based on the movie trailer, it was obvious this was going to be a real cinemtic suppository (to quote Dr. Clayton Forrester). You always know the funnies gags are in the trailer for any low-budget parody, and none of these gags were funny.
/. audience should understand the concept of something mattering deeply to someone which no one else cares about... it's a common
/. aren't really any less rigorously backed up than a lot of the news stories we are seeing (like that perpetual motion machine story that Yahoo! ran mentioned here last week). At least when someone on /. speaks about a technical subject, there's a decent chance he actually knows what he is talking about. When does that happen in the mainstream media.
/. the right way, for all its problems, stupidities, abuses and other garbage, it can be a valuable resource, or at least less of a waste of time than watching your harddrive defrag.
I think Katz did all he needed to do: state the movie wasn't worth watching, briefly explain why, and open the floor up for discussion of bad movies in general, how the MPAA causes cavities and impotence and how much almost everyone hates Katz.
"stuff that Matters" is relative, and all of the typical
situation with "nerds". "Nerds" and obsession go hand-in-hand, so enough with the "Topic X doesn't matter." If the story is pointless, skip over it. If JonKatz and CmdrTaco and CowboyNeal, et al, notice a certain kind of topic not generating any discussion, they can keep it in mind for the next time.
I also like the idea of 1,000,000 pundits. Almost everyone here is an expert in something, no matter how narrow. It's often just a BS session with thousands of participants. Anyone who takes it more seriously than that is looking at it wrong. But every BS session has the chance to teach someone something, or alter a point of view or even educate. Let's face it, assertions made on
If you take
You seem to have missed my point. I wasn't stating that Doom didn't or shouldn't have done well, or that people didn't or shouldn't have liked it, just that it wasn't a game that I found deeply engrossing, nor did I find it to have any real interest longevity as a game _for me_.
Sure it's fun to blow stuff up, but let's face it, every game that id has made since Wolf3D has been one where you run around in a maze and shoot things. Period. Now, obviously a lot of people like this or these guys wouldn't be making money hand-over-fist rehashing the same idea every time the computer hardware gets better.
But, my point goes back to the original poster who worried that developers would forsake coming up with good ideas for simply making prettier pictures with the newest hardware.
Quake, for the most part, would be Doom, or even Wolf3D but for the massively improved hardware capabilities. Does that discount the kungfu of the guys bright enough to make our beige boxes into VR combat simulators? No, these guys are sharp, but no one can argue that any of those games are very innovative or a more-than-incremental departure from what has gone on before. That's not a bad thing from a marketing point of view. After all, how many people watch hours upon hours of football even though the game hasn't changed radically in 100 years or so. The angle I was taking is that when you want to find something new, something that you really have never seen before, something revolutionary, not evolutionary, you are just going to have to look a little harder.
The FPS games owe as much to the hardware they run on than the software they are. Master of Orion will run on a 386, and it's as much fun to play now as it was in 1993, despite the crude graphics and interface. I think playing Wolf3D now would be pretty tedious compared to in 1992, after seeing what can be done these days.
The Wolf3D->Doom->Quake evolution is fine and shows great technical achievement, and is fun to look at (at least if you're into twitching crucified bodies, and clouds of arterial spray), but it wasn't until games like System Shock, Thief and even Descent that there was _game innovation_ rather than _technology innovation_ in the FPS genre beyond what was done in the Wolf3D.
Do you see the difference?
I've got a very bad feeling that the gaming industry is heading towards a black hole of development...
However, you can put all the greatest graphics in the world, but if you don't add something interesting in terms of the game itself... then all you've got is a pretty looking game that no one is going to buy.
Ummmm... this problem's been around since the days of the Amiga. Given that Moore's Law has more lives than a herd of cats in a clone factory, there will always be plenty of games that feature style over substance, just like every other kind of media. As long as there are serious game enthusiasts in the world like you and me, there will always be good games to find, even if they are harder to find.
One example: id gave us "Doom", Irrational gave us "System Shock"
Doom blew everyone away with its revolutionary 3D engine, but the game was pointless. Fun, but pointless, and got old fast. Same with the bazillion Doom-clones that came out soon after (including everything id has done since), but then came "System Shock", which I hadn't even heard of until after the fact, which took the Doom-style 3D engine and put a real plot with lots of interesting backstory, role-playing elements, and world that didn't consist of endless brown labyrinths.
Did "System Shock" do incredibly well? I doubt it sold anywhere near what id's software sells (even on a bad day), but I will always remember it as one of my favorite games ever (same with "SS2").
There are only so many hours in a day, if you are discriminating about what you purchase, I think you will find there are more really good games out there than you could ever play.
...but you know the logic:
If someone abuses legitimate practice X, make X illegal.
It doesn't do any good, but it easy and allows the politicians to claim they did something useful. Drunk driving is already illegal. How does making it _more_ illegal (for 18-20 year olds) make a difference?
The same can be said for guns.
Ironically, my sister bought a used VW from about that period that _only_ had the motorized shoulder strap attached to door. No lap belt at all! If the door was open, there was literally nothing holding you in the car.
I can't believe something like that was ever allowed to be sold. (Or that my sister and her husband would buy such a car (which they no longer own)).
That's just it. Our (U.S.) culture is extending adolescence to the point where for many people, it lasts until the mid-20's. A simple example is when I was in Virginia Tech my senior year in 1987. I heard that they had established a "freshman" dorm and had programs to help freshmen get acclimitized to college.
;-)
These are 18-year-olds for crying out loud, not 6-year-olds. The best thing that happened to me when I started college was to live on a hall with mostly upperclassmen. A group of college freshman will act like high-school students. I group of college freshman _and_ upperclassmen do not. (Of course, that could be worse, but that's another story
Society seems to be following a similar pattern, which is what the original poster was complaining about. The amendment to lower the minimum voting age was probably the last of the trend to allow younger people more responsibility rather than less. But as I noted in my joking post above that everyone took as a troll: No one cares, because once you can do something about the problem, you don't have it anymore.
We need the real-life version of that ol' short-lived DC comic from the 70's called "Prez" about the first teenage president. Wait. No we don't. We already suffered through enough presidents with arrested development (cough*Clinton*cough).
Lighten up, it was a joke. Couldn't you tell?
...and you should be!
Quit griping. You can vote can't you? Just vote for someone who supports your rights as an adult.
Psych! No one cares about you. Most 18-year-olds are dirt broke, ergo, they have no political power. Bwah-hah-hah-hah!
(Sorry, I couldn't resist)
-ing right. It's a good book.
Well, since they have cubic watermelons now, I thought maybe someone had invented hyperbolic potatoes.
Are we talking about the same thing? I think it's fascinating if there is a correlation.