So last night I was chilling with a bunch of friends over a few beers when we got to discussing long distance relationships. Blah blah blah....and somebody says, "that's so gay". Bam! One of us takes offense to that. She immediately wants him to clarify what he means by using that word in that manner. This leads to discussions of how the word isn't used to denigrate gay people but as a synonyms to mean lame. This lead to the argument that gay people would find that offensive but the counterpoint was gay people have been known to call things gay, in a derogatory way, themselves. Gay in old english originally meant nice, which has been appropriated to mean two male partners to now being known as lame, sorta. It's an interesting phenomenon. The discussion then went to how the word "nice" used to refer to ladies of the night to now mean ...nice. How "terrific" used to be Terror-fying or how "awesome" was slackjawed agape faces....etc etc etc. So is there any other current words that have originally meant one thing to have been appropriated to mean something else. I'm sure there's lots. Nigga' doesn't count, too easy. Nice try though.
Obviously I've got no scientific research to back any of this up, all of this heard from drunken people so could be complete and utter BS. Oh and it's marketing fault that there's a new dictionary every year. Business wise I understand why they would do that otherwise why/how could they stay in business? It's a dictionary!
I'm just awaiting works like Fuck-tards or Unfriend or other stupid internet words to make it into.....
Oh wait, they have. We're all doomed.
This blog has unofficially been brought to you by Tankhouse and Indian Pale Ale.
Beer is the reason: Principal getting screwed by teacher.
For once someone is calling it like they see it. So instead of being all PC about children being fragile little things, the principal writes a joke letter and since a stupid or vindictive teacher sends it home and guess what a "helicopter" parent gets it and brings the crazy wroth of the PTA stay at home lazy ass parents on him. Let's put it in perspective, if your kid is stupid they should be in a general school. If your has a disability, say nut allergy or some disorder, then deal with it. Why should the rest of the class be held back because they need to be accommodated? Once they're out of school they're screwed. I'm eating my PB&J sandwich in their face if they sit beside me and I won't move. Go crying home to mama wussy boy.
The math we do is really easy. If your child is either too lazy or too stupid to finish it in class, I'm sending it home so that you can work with them and judge for yourself whether it is laziness or idiocy that inhibits your child's progress. We do part of it in class. How on earth they can NOT finish it is beyond me, but please help them with the part that we do NOT do in class. If your child is one of the mediocre few who excels on the homework, please congratulate them with a warm handshake or perhaps a halfhearted high-five, since finishing this homework is the equivalent of a twenty-year-old wanting to be congratulated for knowing how to tie his shoes.
Regarding Field trip lunches: We have a peanut allergy in our room and a few in second grade in general. Because of this, everyone must eat nut-free foods. We also have a child who is mourning their puppy who got run over last week by a garbage truck, so we ask that no one wear anything resembling puppy fur, or that is red and flat. Further, one of our students has a nervous tick that causes him to slap himself in face several times a minute. In order to help this child not feel conspicuous, we ask that your child imitate a crazed masochist for the length of this field trip."
This post has been unofficially brought to you by how Ron Sterr "C"'s it.
Well it's been a few days since the coming of the iPad. Let's get it out right now. That is the stupidest name Apple has come out with for this product. Beyond that let's explore exactly what it isn't.
It's not a full fledged laptop. For Apple to undercut their own laptop lines would not make any business sense.
It's not the iPhone/iTouch though it share many of it's characteristics, except for the phone and camera portions.
It's a closed OS that restricts you from playing with it's internals, like the iPhone/iTouch. Expect that to be jailbroken once devs get ahold of it.
What is it then? The iPad is a closed electronic device, much like the PSP or the DS in that yes you can install/insert programs but only Manufacturer approved products. No one bemoans Sony/Nintendo that but complains when Apple does it. Apple is doing the exact same thing with the App store. Every piece of software that the above three mentioned companies approve for their device guarantees that it will work and you won't have to worry about compatibility issues. Like a phone, tv, car, you pick up the item turn it on and expect instant usability. Apple's iPad was made, in this ever complex world to simplify and distill your user experience to something enjoyable.
Sure we'll have the open source guys, the tech nerds, gadget geeks complaining and moaning how they can get a full feature laptop running XXX OS system for less. There is no arguement there what they say is true. I sure as heck would have added some USB ports and a camera to the device to give it more functionality. Truthfully this is a Apple's MO. They'll come out with a revision next year with these options. As a business they need to fund R&D somehow and they product that they have put out isn't that bad. On the other had if you want to hear some negative words ask me about the iPhone 3G vs 3GS.
What we are getting from Apple with the iPad is exactly what people have been asking for. Let's ignore all the techy people out there who can and will dive into a computers guts. What are the responses non-tech people give you when you ask them what exactly are they buying a computer for. The most common answers are, "Internet. Email. Office suite. Playing a little games on the side". Let's include some extras like music, photos, and watching videos/movies. So what does the iPad do? Internet. Check. Email. Check. Office suite(iWorks). Check. Games. Game Apps-check. Music. Check. Photos. Check. So far it does what the layman essentially wants,a stripped down computer that does all of the above without having to learn what DLL's are virus problem or worse. Tech-savvy people should be praising this device because what it's going to do is give you back your weekends. No more, "Hi it's Mom/Dad/GF/BF/Parrot/Ape. My PC doesn't work. Can you come fix it?" calls anymore. That should be a plus in and of itself.
So why are the armchair tech pundits on the bloggerspheres calling this a failure? Well it's because it's too simple and doesn't do what THEY want. This is the exact same argument they used when the iPods and iPhones came out. Not enough features. Too simple. Not complicated enough so that laymen couldn't use it so techs are the only recourse for people when they don't get how to use it. Well we all know how that ended and who's the undisputed champion of the personal music player. People like gadgets that just work. No fancy instructions, no pre-startup rituals. Just pick up and go.
It all boils down to keeping things simple and simple is exactly what people like my parents need.
Real? Fake? I don't care. It's awesome! Like when Stan Bush's the Touch comes out you know it's Optimus Primes music they should make this my background music. And I can get the funky light cycles that can make solid walls on bad drivers. That would be even more awesome. Oh and Flynn Lives!
By now, if you know me, I have hated flash with a vengence for years. Resource hog, stupid use for ridiculous menus, impossible to update without redesigning wholes sites, etc etc etc. Finally because of the iPad, awesomely STUPID name for Apple's new tablet, people are realizing this.
The main arguments against Flash running on the iPad are that it's a resource hog and a security risk. Both true! Hopefully the web is moving away from relying on Flash for videos and ugly menus, with HTML5 acting as a more-than-adequate replacement. But we're not there yet. While I can appreciate the fact that Apple is trying to keep the iPad more stable by not including Flash, the fact that it kills off most online gaming and video streaming in the process makes the tradeoff questionable. [Adobe]
