"I wonder what religious zealots think about this evolution though."
They won't think about it, they don't do the "thought" thing. They will pray (or say they did) about it and do what God (or their better interests) tells them they should do. This will most likely be a condemnation of it.
I am from kansas, and no the chip will not work here (the church SIGs probably wont let it). Or it will work and we just wont be able to tell our childern about it in school.
I'm pretty tired of companies advertising things they do not intend to deliver. I knew it was a silly marketing ploy as well as this guy did.
The fact remains that they showed a very expensive mockup of a harrier (the one seen in the movie "True Lies", I believe). And they went to great expense to use the same effects to make it look real. If they said you can get "A" harrier then he should be sold a "real" harrier costs be damned and they (nor any other company) will EVER make that mistake again.
If on the other hand, they said you can get "THIS" harrier he should be given the mockup and the support equipment that is required to operate it as seen in the commercial. After all I bet the pepsi jacket is exactly like the ones seen in the ad. I think it is reasonable to assume that if you have the required points to get a prize you should get the exact prize shown in the add.
Can the Lottery Commission say who would ever believe we would ever give anyone 75 million just for buying one ticket, can they say they were kidding, or instead pay off in Monopoly money?
Also there is cause and effect here and it plays on many levels, bare with me here......
Cause: Pepsi makes a commercial and a promotional offer. Effect: Guy sees said ad, and proceeds to attempt to jump through the required hoops to get the prize he wanted.
Would the guy have done what he did (raising the money to get the item he wanted) had he NOT seen the ad? I think not. Did Pepsi think all people would ignore the promotion and it's prizes. No. Otherwise they would never have done it in the first place.
Cause: Guy manages to jump the hoops as required. Effect: Pepsi changes the prize price because now they fear they may (rightly so) be required to pay off.
America bought it when uncle George said "read my lips, No New Taxes." Yes they should have known better but it didn't save his ass in the next election. Did it?
If Pepsi thought they were not liable to have to settle up, why change the commercial later to make the price higher?
When they did change the price of the harrier, did they do it because it wasn't high enough to be to totally unbelievable (it wasn't so high as to be an obvious joke), or was it to make the cost just high enough to keep it out of the contestant's reach (a kind of bait and switch scam) ( or specifically make it more difficult for the man to win the prize they never had in the first place).
Cause: Guy shows up with the required promo points (he bought them but I don't think that is an issue). Effect: Pepsi says " your kidding right, because we were kidding"
I suspect this will be what happens to lots of social security applicants in a few years. Should the Gov. get away with it?
End effect ?
I say coporate language and the media has been milking us sheep covertly and on the sly this way for too long already. Didn't anyone here ever buy X-ray Specks as a kid? I did and was pretty disillusioned when I found I'd been had. They hadn't broken any laws because I had received what they sent, I should have known better right? Then I Find out Santa is a sham and the tooth fairy, and the great pumpkin. Is it any wonder we hate and suspect everything?
I say if pepsi wont give the guy what he worked for, then they should pay him off for all the points he earned as a refund in the price of the drinks he would have purchased, not the price of the points, but the cost it would have been to buy that much of their crappy beverage.
I wonder how many women have had the crap beat out of them because they let the car run dry of oil? If not beaten, certainly belittled and ridiculed.
As for helping people, I might and I might not, depends on how I feel at the time. I used to love doing stuff like when I was younger, immortal, all knowing, and the world was a seemingly less dangerous place, but now?
For me, I would be more worried that a person might misinterpret my motives and react from fear and suspicion.
I suppose it probably didn't occure to the man but couldn't she have been a bit more paranoid and also armed with a gun?
This poor guy did a good deed and it didnt go totally unpunished. Suppose this guy is brought up on some stupid politically correct sexual harasment charge (you know the kind that happen every day) do you think for a minute that his lawyer will not have to defend/explain his action?
Suppose this guy were firing up after he got home to unwind after work. Or cleaning his gun collection, or any number of things that ppl do that might cause the police to react or be nervous.
This story is sad on many levels but it could have been much worse. Lots of nastier situations could have evolved here. I really wish I didn't think along those lines but there it is.
Not making a point really. Its a difficult world and as soon as I hear of a working time machine I'm taking my wife and my PC to 1955 where things were simpler. I already learned how to stop worring and love the bomb, so the 50s should be a walk in the park. Not to mention that sat-phones wont be a problem then either.
Slashdot Mirror
"I wonder what religious zealots think about this evolution though."
They won't think about it, they don't do the "thought" thing. They will pray (or say they did) about it and do what God (or their better interests) tells them they should do. This will most likely be a condemnation of it.
I am from kansas, and no the chip will not work here (the church SIGs probably wont let it). Or it will work and we just wont be able to tell our childern about it in school.
Ok here goes my $.02.
I'm pretty tired of companies advertising things they do not intend to deliver.
I knew it was a silly marketing ploy as well as this guy did.
The fact remains that they showed a very expensive mockup of a harrier
(the one seen in the movie "True Lies", I believe). And they went to great
expense to use the same effects to make it look real. If they said you can
get "A" harrier then he should be sold a "real" harrier costs be damned and
they (nor any other company) will EVER make that mistake again.
If on the other hand, they said you can get "THIS" harrier he should be given
the mockup and the support equipment that is required to operate it as seen
in the commercial. After all I bet the pepsi jacket is exactly like the ones seen
in the ad. I think it is reasonable to assume that if you have the required points
to get a prize you should get the exact prize shown in the add.
Can the Lottery Commission say who would ever believe we would ever give
anyone 75 million just for buying one ticket, can they say they were kidding,
or instead pay off in Monopoly money?
Also there is cause and effect here and it plays on many levels, bare with me here......
Cause: Pepsi makes a commercial and a promotional offer.
Effect: Guy sees said ad, and proceeds to attempt to jump through the required hoops to get the prize he wanted.
Would the guy have done what he did (raising the money to get the item he wanted) had he NOT seen the ad? I think not.
Did Pepsi think all people would ignore the promotion and it's prizes. No. Otherwise they would never have done it in the first place.
Cause: Guy manages to jump the hoops as required.
Effect: Pepsi changes the prize price because now they fear they may (rightly so) be required to pay off.
America bought it when uncle George said "read my lips, No New Taxes."
Yes they should have known better but it didn't save his ass in the next election. Did it?
If Pepsi thought they were not liable to have to settle up,
why change the commercial later to make the price higher?
When they did change the price of the harrier, did they do it because it wasn't high enough
to be to totally unbelievable (it wasn't so high as to be an obvious joke), or was it to make
the cost just high enough to keep it out of the contestant's reach (a kind of bait and switch scam)
( or specifically make it more difficult for the man to win the prize they never had in the first place).
Cause: Guy shows up with the required promo points (he bought them but I don't think that is an issue).
Effect: Pepsi says " your kidding right, because we were kidding"
I suspect this will be what happens to lots of social security applicants in a few years. Should the Gov. get away with it?
End effect ?
I say coporate language and the media has been milking us sheep covertly and on the sly this way for too long already.
Didn't anyone here ever buy X-ray Specks as a kid? I did and was pretty disillusioned when I found I'd been had.
They hadn't broken any laws because I had received what they sent, I should have known better right?
Then I Find out Santa is a sham and the tooth fairy, and the great pumpkin. Is it any wonder we hate and suspect everything?
I say if pepsi wont give the guy what he worked for, then they should pay him off for all the points he earned
as a refund in the price of the drinks he would have purchased, not the price of the points,
but the cost it would have been to buy that much of their crappy beverage.
I wonder how many women have had the crap beat out of them because they let the car run dry of oil? If not beaten, certainly belittled and ridiculed.
As for helping people, I might and I might not, depends on how I feel at the time. I used to love doing stuff like when I was younger, immortal, all knowing, and the world was a seemingly less dangerous place, but now?
For me, I would be more worried that a person might misinterpret my motives and react from fear and suspicion.
I suppose it probably didn't occure to the man but couldn't she have been a bit more paranoid and also armed with a gun?
This poor guy did a good deed and it didnt go totally unpunished. Suppose this guy is brought up on some stupid politically correct sexual harasment charge (you know the kind that happen every day) do you think for a minute that his lawyer will not have to defend/explain his action?
Suppose this guy were firing up after he got home to unwind after work. Or cleaning his gun collection, or any number of things that ppl do that might cause the police to react or be nervous.
This story is sad on many levels but it could have been much worse. Lots of nastier situations could have evolved here. I really wish I didn't think along those lines but there it is.
Not making a point really. Its a difficult world and as soon as I hear of a working time machine I'm taking my wife and my PC to 1955 where things were simpler. I already learned how to stop worring and love the bomb, so the 50s should be a walk in the park. Not to mention that sat-phones wont be a problem then either.
Did that put me on topic?
No?
Oh well, I tried.
To make it a bit easier I suppose it could be said the movie industry castrated itself to keep the government from cutting its penis off.
Maybe I missed the point?