Norma Lewis (Mare Winningham) is the wife of a down-and-out loser named Arthur (Brad Davis). One day, a smartly-dressed stranger (Basil Hoffman) comes to their door and hands them a special box. He says that if they press the button, they will receive a large sum of money - but someone elsewhere in the world will die; someone they don't even know.
After the stranger leaves, the Lewises agonize over whether to press the button. Norma rationalizes saying they could make good use of the large sum of money, and that the one who dies might be some Chinese peasant who is living a miserable life. Arthur takes the side that since she does not know who will die; her pressing the button may cause the death of an innocent baby. They open it up, and find that there is no mechanism inside it - it's simply an empty box with a button on it. Arthur angrily throws the box in the trash, yelling "This guy can find his money in the city dump!" but eventually Norma retrieves it. The next day, Arthur leaves for work and sees Norma sitting at the kitchen table, her gaze transfixed on the button. He returns from work and it appears that nothing has changed; Norma is still concentrating only on the button and sitting. However, she tells Arthur that while he was at work she pushed the button. The next day the stranger returns, takes back the box and gives them the money. The Lewises ask him what will happen next. The stranger ominously replies that the button will be 'reprogrammed' and given to someone else - the last line being "It will be offered to someone you do not know."
I always thought that this was a great episode. It's too bad that the original Twilight Zone, Outer Limits and Night Gallery are too old and crappy to be re-broadcast today.
Circumcision itself is still questionable surgery on a child. The cutting-off of a perfectly useful part of one's anatomy for purposes of religious or family tradition or "cleanliness" is sad.
I don't know about you, but I'll be turning 45 next week and I'm pretty sure that "phone rage" often comes from the generation that likes to speak to real people rather than push buttons that only lead to another recorded message/someone in Bogusistan that's only reading a script and bumping you back to the original machine answerer anyway while not answering your question.
We're too old and dumb to figure out that there's no point in trying anyway and also tend towards long sentences when angry.
Yeah, it's kinda like that Simpsons episode where Homer meets his mother again after so many years. Except with murder. Maybe the killing didn't really happen. Or maybe she was framed.
Smugly said:
Lotteries are a voluntary tax on innumeracy (mathematical illiteracy).
But eventually *someone* (someone probably undeserving in your evaluation) does win. A couple of bucks thrown at a multi-million dollar potential prize doesn't seem all that wasteful. Or are you on about the compulsive types and seek to control them? Just think of the billions of wasted dollars that could be spent for the better good if only you controlled that money!
Parents have used this tactic for eons. Trust me, when a little kid keeps asking "why" to everything you explain to him/her when it's bedtime any out is a convenient one. My offspring seems to have turned out OK though, I never told him bullshit and "waited him out" when it came to Daddy Question Time.
Canada (access to the US market, multicultural) + Australia (proximity to China, relative isolation from outside influences) is going to be a big challenge. It's happening already.
They're not wired for exact sums, they're wired for approximation. Once you can convince people of their ignorance of math they'll fly off into all kinds of logically-predicted directions of randomness. BINGO! People do not understand math! Simple.
16 years ago my ex-wife and I had to travel to the US to buy one of those wheeled-walker things that babies can sit in and move themselves around with (getting leg exercise and learning to explore on their own). The province we lived in at the time had banned them because "some babies might fall down stairs" while using them. As if any parents buying one for their little munchkin were on crack and never watched them like hawks as they found the joys of being more mobile before they could walk on their own.
That's a pretty good example of a nanny state, I think, and liability is probably just half the reason. Some people just get a kick/ego boost out of dictating to others what they can and cannot do.
The kids are buying into it because it's fancy and new and their parents are paying in order to keep them happy. Kids, by definition, aren't old enough to know what's worth spending money on, and who cares - mommy and daddy are footing the bill! Cell phone companies know that the youth market is easy to manipulate. A few ads encouraging peer pressure/coolness, that's all that's needed to get word-of-mouth going.
Hermes Conrad: On to new business. Today's mission is to go to the brain slug planet.
Dr. Zoidberg: What are we going to do there?
Hermes Conrad: Nothing. Just walk around not wearing a helmet.
in many IT groups, the preferred infrastructure for the non-IT personnel would be un unplugged PC in a locked room
I just got a new dedicated server for my sites, one of which will be running Slash. Here's a photo the hosting company sent me of it. I demand to have my locked room!
You are too verbose and understanding your message is difficult because it is buried inside the writing. You obviously like to write, but your approach is wrong if your intent is effective communication.
People that use superfluous language usually are trying to bafflegab the reader into silence.
I'm always wary of people that say (or write), "having said that" or "that being said". It's just a way to weasel out of the much-despised "but" after making a statement and is just another method of ass-covering.
People that are not clear and concise in their efforts to communicate are usually hiding something, parroting or just clueless.
Is there any part of what I wrote above unintelligible or confusing?
I don't have a degree in communication but what I do for a living depends on clear communication, often with people that are not native English-speakers.
a significant portion of the earth's surface is under aggressive active 'management,' it's an obvious recipe for disaster that we are not, in fact, managing it. But it seems like Al Gore is the only person in politics who has figured out how to articulate this effectively as a source of fear
Whoops, your wheels fell off (or at least it seems they only turn left).
No need to explain, my heritage is 100% Nova Scotian (half Cheticamp, half Spryfield), popped out in Sydney. I've been through the Cabot Trail many times, it's gorgeous.
Tracking back ancestry on the French side is easier; for the other side we've run into a dead-end. So the assumption is that the English-speaking side of the family were slimeballs, liars and general n'er do-wells. I guess that's why I post at Slashdot but I can't figure out why I'm not now in marketing or advertising.
Slashdot Mirror
"Looking at photos like these scares and fascinates me in equal doses".
For what it's worth, I don't think the person you're replying-to represents many Canadians' outlooks or attitudes.
I think you should replace the word "rain" with either "urine" or "excrement". Rain is a pleasant, refreshing thing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Button%2C_Button_(The_Twilight_Zone)
Norma Lewis (Mare Winningham) is the wife of a down-and-out loser named Arthur (Brad Davis). One day, a smartly-dressed stranger (Basil Hoffman) comes to their door and hands them a special box. He says that if they press the button, they will receive a large sum of money - but someone elsewhere in the world will die; someone they don't even know.
After the stranger leaves, the Lewises agonize over whether to press the button. Norma rationalizes saying they could make good use of the large sum of money, and that the one who dies might be some Chinese peasant who is living a miserable life. Arthur takes the side that since she does not know who will die; her pressing the button may cause the death of an innocent baby. They open it up, and find that there is no mechanism inside it - it's simply an empty box with a button on it. Arthur angrily throws the box in the trash, yelling "This guy can find his money in the city dump!" but eventually Norma retrieves it. The next day, Arthur leaves for work and sees Norma sitting at the kitchen table, her gaze transfixed on the button. He returns from work and it appears that nothing has changed; Norma is still concentrating only on the button and sitting. However, she tells Arthur that while he was at work she pushed the button. The next day the stranger returns, takes back the box and gives them the money. The Lewises ask him what will happen next. The stranger ominously replies that the button will be 'reprogrammed' and given to someone else - the last line being "It will be offered to someone you do not know."
I always thought that this was a great episode. It's too bad that the original Twilight Zone, Outer Limits and Night Gallery are too old and crappy to be re-broadcast today.
Circumcision itself is still questionable surgery on a child. The cutting-off of a perfectly useful part of one's anatomy for purposes of religious or family tradition or "cleanliness" is sad.
I don't know about you, but I'll be turning 45 next week and I'm pretty sure that "phone rage" often comes from the generation that likes to speak to real people rather than push buttons that only lead to another recorded message/someone in Bogusistan that's only reading a script and bumping you back to the original machine answerer anyway while not answering your question.
We're too old and dumb to figure out that there's no point in trying anyway and also tend towards long sentences when angry.
Yeah, it's kinda like that Simpsons episode where Homer meets his mother again after so many years. Except with murder. Maybe the killing didn't really happen. Or maybe she was framed.
Smugly said: Lotteries are a voluntary tax on innumeracy (mathematical illiteracy).
But eventually *someone* (someone probably undeserving in your evaluation) does win. A couple of bucks thrown at a multi-million dollar potential prize doesn't seem all that wasteful. Or are you on about the compulsive types and seek to control them? Just think of the billions of wasted dollars that could be spent for the better good if only you controlled that money!
Parents have used this tactic for eons. Trust me, when a little kid keeps asking "why" to everything you explain to him/her when it's bedtime any out is a convenient one. My offspring seems to have turned out OK though, I never told him bullshit and "waited him out" when it came to Daddy Question Time.
Canada can spare three tanks (Leopard 2), 3 CF-18s and a bunch of Boy Scouts trained in the use of knives. You got transport?
JTF2 will go in first.
Canada (access to the US market, multicultural) + Australia (proximity to China, relative isolation from outside influences) is going to be a big challenge. It's happening already.
They're not wired for exact sums, they're wired for approximation. Once you can convince people of their ignorance of math they'll fly off into all kinds of logically-predicted directions of randomness. BINGO! People do not understand math! Simple.
Unless I'm mistaken (could be the first time!), Wired magazine did a similar story a couple of years ago.
You can't get toys for your kids...
16 years ago my ex-wife and I had to travel to the US to buy one of those wheeled-walker things that babies can sit in and move themselves around with (getting leg exercise and learning to explore on their own). The province we lived in at the time had banned them because "some babies might fall down stairs" while using them. As if any parents buying one for their little munchkin were on crack and never watched them like hawks as they found the joys of being more mobile before they could walk on their own.
That's a pretty good example of a nanny state, I think, and liability is probably just half the reason. Some people just get a kick/ego boost out of dictating to others what they can and cannot do.
...telling us is what we want?
The kids are buying into it because it's fancy and new and their parents are paying in order to keep them happy. Kids, by definition, aren't old enough to know what's worth spending money on, and who cares - mommy and daddy are footing the bill! Cell phone companies know that the youth market is easy to manipulate. A few ads encouraging peer pressure/coolness, that's all that's needed to get word-of-mouth going.
He's the guy that sold his low UID.
And to think that most of us guys spend most of our lives trying to get back in (at least partially)...
Hermes Conrad: On to new business. Today's mission is to go to the brain slug planet.
Dr. Zoidberg: What are we going to do there?
Hermes Conrad: Nothing. Just walk around not wearing a helmet.
"He" outbid me by $50 on the last day.
in many IT groups, the preferred infrastructure for the non-IT personnel would be un unplugged PC in a locked room
I just got a new dedicated server for my sites, one of which will be running Slash. Here's a photo the hosting company sent me of it. I demand to have my locked room!
This information exchange is over. Undoubtedly this decision means that I've lost the battle of words. Bask in your victory!
You are too verbose and understanding your message is difficult because it is buried inside the writing. You obviously like to write, but your approach is wrong if your intent is effective communication.
People that use superfluous language usually are trying to bafflegab the reader into silence.
I'm always wary of people that say (or write), "having said that" or "that being said". It's just a way to weasel out of the much-despised "but" after making a statement and is just another method of ass-covering.
People that are not clear and concise in their efforts to communicate are usually hiding something, parroting or just clueless.
Is there any part of what I wrote above unintelligible or confusing?
I don't have a degree in communication but what I do for a living depends on clear communication, often with people that are not native English-speakers.
a significant portion of the earth's surface is under aggressive active 'management,' it's an obvious recipe for disaster that we are not, in fact, managing it. But it seems like Al Gore is the only person in politics who has figured out how to articulate this effectively as a source of fear
Whoops, your wheels fell off (or at least it seems they only turn left).
No need to explain, my heritage is 100% Nova Scotian (half Cheticamp, half Spryfield), popped out in Sydney. I've been through the Cabot Trail many times, it's gorgeous.
Tracking back ancestry on the French side is easier; for the other side we've run into a dead-end. So the assumption is that the English-speaking side of the family were slimeballs, liars and general n'er do-wells. I guess that's why I post at Slashdot but I can't figure out why I'm not now in marketing or advertising.
http://www.weathernotebook.org/transcripts/2000/01/05.html
Scary weather, but who cares? All the coasts will be under 13 feet of ocean in a few years anyway...