Bizarre Confessions

General => Questions, Quizzes & Games => Topic started by: Psidefect on November 13, 2009, 09:31:46 AM

Title: Stupid Questions
Post by: Psidefect on November 13, 2009, 09:31:46 AM
I have a friend that collects $1 bills that were made in Dallas (they have the letter K on them - some family tradition or something) and puts them in her vacation fund.

She's getting married soon and I wanted to get her a stack of these singles with Ks.

Anybody have any idea how one might go about getting these in bulk? Can you call up a mint/bank and get them? I can't imagine they get this kind of request very often.

My Googling has turned up nothing, but that's not Google's fault.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: stormneedle on November 13, 2009, 10:01:39 AM
www.ustreas.gov is the main site but how about uncut sheets of bills? http://www.moneyfactory.gov/store/section.cfm/69/83
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Psidefect on November 13, 2009, 11:11:01 AM
That would work if I could be sure they'd all be Ks.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on November 13, 2009, 12:23:19 PM
I collect bills too, and I'm not picky about the denomination or the letters on them  :batteyes:

But if I have to get married to get a stack, forget it.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 13, 2009, 12:45:15 PM
It would be a pain, but . . . you could go to your bank and get, say, $200 in $1's.  They should do that at no charge.  Then you'd have to pick out the non-Dallas bills and redeposit them.  Rinse, repeat.

There's bound to be a better way -- if you get uncut sheets, they should all be from the same engraving plant, after all -- but that might be the least-resistance method.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: flipper on November 13, 2009, 01:07:08 PM
Here's a how to for you Hoss (http://money.howstuffworks.com/counterfeit.htm)
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: whidB on November 13, 2009, 02:08:14 PM
Quote
The allure of counterfeiting is obvious. If you could do it without getting caught, you would be able to print your own money and buy whatever you want with it.

No fucking way, dude...not even for a million dollars...
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on November 13, 2009, 02:24:01 PM
To Live And Die In LA was a completely bad ass movie.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on November 13, 2009, 02:29:25 PM
I collect bills too, and I'm not picky about the denomination or the letters on them  :batteyes:

But if I have to get married to get a stack, forget it.



na. you could get married and lose a fucking stack though

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on November 13, 2009, 03:17:17 PM
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas: 800-333-4460
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: NexR on November 13, 2009, 03:40:10 PM
Without reading any of the links in this thread, I'd say you'd have to go to a bank that distributes Dallas mint bills.  Then just buy a bunch.  You should get a pretty good rate for your crappy Philly bills.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: stormneedle on November 13, 2009, 08:25:24 PM
Hoss - the uncut stuff is all from a single printing press. You can choose which one, but they only have so many a year.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 14, 2009, 07:05:08 PM
I'm hoping this is more obscure than stupid:  Years ago, my brother and I saw like two episodes of a miniseries on BBC America, and he recently asked me if I could remember the title.

Umm . . . :hmm: . . . I can't.  I thought it was 'Fire House' or something like that, but I can't find it.

It was Empire, whether it was British or not -- might've been Australian or (more likely) New Zealish.  Been so long that I can't say.  It was basically a tense soap opera that had a lot of Wuthering Heights in it and also some hints of incestuous problems.  (But, then, Wuthering Heights is full of incest issues, too.)

The basic plot, from what we saw, is that there's this guy, who has a very nice wife.  But there's also this woman who he was best friends with while they were growing up, and they have some kind of too-too intense past history.  The guy clearly has an impulse to abandon his wife and have a mad go at his friend, and his wife is aware of it.  The friend, meanwhile, is a crazy self-destructive artist sort (I'm pretty sure), and there are skeletons bursting out of closets everywhere (child abuse? incest? etc?).

It was all set in foggy-rainy stone-walls small-town somewhere.  The acting and dialogue and all that were a notch above.  It was compelling, which is why we watched a couple of episodes, but it did not give the impression that it was going to have a happy ending.

I can't find a trace of it through IMDb or the googles.  My guess is that it was made between 1985 and 1995.  Anyone have any ideas or know what I'm talking about?  I told my brother I was sure I could find it, but no dice, and I hate that.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 14, 2009, 07:07:02 PM
Oh, for crying out loud.

I found it through an indirect Wikipedia angle.

But I'm still curious if anyone else has seen it / heard of it and can ID it from my frantic garble.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Hedaira on November 14, 2009, 07:28:50 PM
:slap:

That was my last marriage.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 14, 2009, 08:40:23 PM
Ah, but you're not British.

Well, not recently.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: stormneedle on November 14, 2009, 08:42:21 PM
She's got an eerily good American accent, does she not?

I haven't a clue where to start looking for this one...
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Min on December 14, 2009, 05:01:27 PM
Did you ever figure this one out Psi?  I have 5 of them if you want them.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on January 12, 2010, 11:21:18 PM
At work today, a customer challenged me to name a 'golden' classic TV show that was great but had a terrible opening theme song or music.  His theory is that the opening theme is so important that a great theme makes a show and a bad one will kill any show.

I couldn't think of an example of a great show with a terrible theme, but there are plenty of classic shows that I can't remember the theme to, so maybe they were bad.  (I have a friend who seriously listens to those tapes of nothing but TV theme songs, and I don't regret that I don't do that.)  I have no idea if The Mary Tyler Moore Show had a bad theme song.

Still, it's easy to remember lots of 'classic' opening themes.  I personally hated the Laverne & Shirley theme, but I certainly remember it, and it was apt, and it conjures truckloads of warm fuzzy nostalgia for lots of people.

So . . . anyone have a great show with a truly lousy theme?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: stormneedle on January 13, 2010, 01:02:23 AM
Wow, talk about subjective criteria. I could see somebody loathing "Lost in Space" the theme, but think the show was wonderful. I would assume that if you liked a show, you got used to the theme, even if you didn't like it at first.

If you reverse the question, "Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea" qualifies - the show was silly (as if LiS wasn't), but the theme was a work of art.

/Nelson Riddle owns you now
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on January 13, 2010, 06:33:13 AM
I like this stupid question. I wish I didn't have to go to work - I'd sit around researching the theory on YouTube.

I think the theory might not be stated correctly though. Remember when I was looking for that word to describe a certain quality a song had due to outside influences? I think there's a similar phenomenon at play here. At some point in your viewing of a series, a Pavlovian type response to the theme song occurs, so it may be that initially you might not have cared for a theme song, but if you watched the show enough, and you enjoyed the show, then you would begin to like the theme song. I can't remember my initial response to the theme song of Gilligan's Island (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfR7qxtgCgY), but it's a pretty damn hokey song, so I can't imagine I would have liked it in the beginning.

I suppose it might be possible to intentionally come up with a theme song that was so horrible that it would override the show, like maybe something by The Chipmunks, but my theory is that over time it would grow on you.

NCIS (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aP4W5FmJReU) has a pretty crappy theme song (IMO), and I've been watching that show ever since Defect mentioned it on here a long time ago. I've watched many many episodes, and that theme song hasn't really grown on me, but it does create a Pavlovian response that I'm about to be entertained for an hour.

LOST (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MiwoDpbcdk) doesn't even have a theme song, just a sound effect, and it creates the same response.

Dammit, you're going to make me late for work...!
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on January 13, 2010, 06:47:44 AM
Also, there are studies that show that the brain releases more Endorphins when you are told that you will receive a treat than when you are actually enjoying the treat itself. For example, the Endorphin release rate is higher when you are about to take a bite out of the doughnut than immediately after you have taken the first bite. Another factor at play here.

 
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on January 13, 2010, 12:11:07 PM
I realize how subjective this is -- I think the goal is to find an example that most people agree with.

Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea and Lost in Space both started off serious and got hokier and hokier.  Lost in Space was intentionally changed to super-campy as a reaction to the success of . . . I think it was Batman, actually.  VttBotS got hokier mostly because its budget got slashed and slashed again, and hokey was all that was left.  Franky, though, underwater shows always flounder (pun not really intended) because they're hard to write.  They do sea monster, Atlantis, evil enemy submarine, and, uh, sea monster . . . Aquaman and Seaquest DSV and Man From Atlantis and so on -- it's never brilliant.  Gerry Anderson did a whole submarine show, and there's the Stargate one (which I never watched), but it's a thin herd.

People tend to love-hate themes like the Gilligan's Island song.  I'd have to say that that theme is more popular than the show, really.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on January 13, 2010, 12:43:46 PM
theme to sanford and son. gold.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Hedaira on January 13, 2010, 12:48:29 PM
Ah uh oh shit! Earworm!
*roll for saving throw*
..........
FAILED


AHHHHHHHHGHGHGHGHGHGHGHGHHH
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: stormneedle on January 13, 2010, 01:01:00 PM
Be grateful you didn't throw a critical failure. No, I don't know what that'd do, and I don't want to.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on January 13, 2010, 01:05:44 PM
hail yeah! dow dow DOW now.... dow dow Dow now Dow now now... dow dow Dow now....


Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: flipper on January 13, 2010, 02:20:04 PM
 :love: Sanford and Son theme.

I can't think of any off hand, but I love all the hokey theme songs like Gilligan's Island, Mr. Ed, Lost in Space, etc.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mrcookieface on January 14, 2010, 12:26:29 AM
Tales From The Darkside (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnE3-0X-174).  Great show; hated the intro/theme.

The first season had the best episode where a stubborn old grandpa doesn't realize that he died.  He kept sitting in his rocking chair on the front porch, and he was starting to rot and draw flies.

People kept telling him that he was dead and he needed to go lay down for the big sleep, but he Bah'ed them away.  He was after all, quite stubborn.  If I remember correctly, his nose finally fell off his face and that's what finally convinced him that his time had (long past) come.  The last shot was grandpa walking up the stairs with his cane, and toward his "death bed".

Oh hey!  IMDB has the episode listed (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0716919/)!
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Psidefect on January 14, 2010, 10:49:48 AM
Did you ever figure this one out Psi?  I have 5 of them if you want them.

No, but I'm willing to pay $1.50 for each one if anyone wants to start collecting them.

Seriously, if any of you work with cash, this is a serious offer.

...

Dali, your subjectivity theories remind me of how one's perception of color is greatly affected by the colors in close proximity to it (example here (http://web.mit.edu/persci/people/adelson/checkershadow_illusion.html), with shades of grey).

I'm not sure exactly how that fits with your theories, but that's what they made me think of. I think of stuff like this a lot when people talk about ranking or rating movies, music, tv shows, paintings, or whatever, but I've done a lot of drugs over the years, so take that wi- Ooo, shiney!


theme to sanford and son. gold.

AMEN! :worship:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on January 14, 2010, 11:14:35 AM
I'll have to look for the theme to Tales From the Darkside.  I can't remember it at all.

What happened in that episode, cookieface, is that the kid goes to some witch doctor-y sort of person for help.  The witch doctor gives the kid a mysterious package, which turns out to be a napkin full of pepper.  The dead granddad goes to open the napkin to put it in his lap at dinner, sneezes, and his nose comes off.

That episode was hilarious, I agree.  The guy's zombie makeup progressed, and he says, "I told you I ain't dead so often I'm blue in the face!"  :lol:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on January 14, 2010, 06:02:55 PM
Tales From the Darkside reminds me of Dark Shadows, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dpr6IfYW5Lg) which I heard the theme of a million times, but I don't think I ever watched a full episode - I just couldn't get into it. It used to come on after school, about the same time as Gilligan's Island, Leave it to Beaver, Andy Griffith, etc. Although I never watched the show, I'd always listen to the theme song, because I loved it.

I'm not sure how that fits into the theory though.

*steals bong from Defect*

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on February 12, 2010, 07:31:18 PM
I don't remember which thread we were having the pot roast conversation in...

So I've been cooking it in the crock pot on high for about 6.5 hours now, and it's still not falling apart. Some parts of it are, like the parts around the fat, but the other pieces feel kinda tough. I guess I should've used the low setting, huh? Or maybe I should've gotten a piece of chuck roast with more fat in it?

I browned it in a skillet first. Maybe I left it in there too long. I kinda like the charred outside part. I used two envelopes of the Lipton's Onion soup mix and 3/4 cup water. The recipe on the Lipton box says on high for 4 - 6 hours or low for 8 - 10 hours. That's for a 3.5lb piece. The one I got was like 2.75lb.

Should I just keep cooking?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: vox8 on February 12, 2010, 07:50:51 PM
The best way to tell is to taste it. You may be right about it being better to cook it on low for longer.

I am afraid I cannot give you much advice on the whole crock-pot thing. I always do my pot roast in the oven, in a dutch oven. I cook it at around 300 - 325 for several hours.

I like the crock pot for many things, but I prefer the roasted-ness that pot roast gets in the oven.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on February 12, 2010, 07:53:09 PM
Forty-five degrees for three hundred and fifty minutes, if I remember the recipe correctly.





Maybe you need more water in there?  Is there still a significant amount of watery liquid at the bottom of the pot?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mybabysmomma on February 12, 2010, 08:09:00 PM
Ok, I have a stupider question.  I want to change my pic and can't get it to work.  Can I not download from iPhoto?  Cause apparently I can't download from iPhoto.  Please help the computer retard.   :(
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on February 12, 2010, 08:23:47 PM
Open iPhoto and drag the pic you want to your desktop. It should be easier to upload from there.

Keep in mind there's a size limitation. 

Why do I get the feeling that's going to end up in TFJ's sig line?


Maybe you need more water in there?  Is there still a significant amount of watery liquid at the bottom of the pot?

Yeah, there's a lot of liquid still in there, and I just checked on it and it's starting to come apart a little bit more now.

I knew I probably should have cooked it on low, but I just had to try it the fast way so I'd learn the hard way.

I'm afraid to taste it because I'm starving. I wouldn't be able to stop and I haven't cooked my rice yet. I'm about to give in though.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mybabysmomma on February 12, 2010, 08:39:42 PM
How big is too big?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on February 12, 2010, 08:39:53 PM
Ok, I have a stupider question.  I want to change my pic and can't get it to work.  Can I not download from iPhoto?  Cause apparently I can't download from iPhoto.  Please help the computer retard.   :(

j00 pix0rz a knotty knotty pics from j00 dics lool nad aploads. than, 4 a GRATE TIMEE EMALE TADS NEEDLAS@ YOOHOO DOT CUM LOOOOOOLLLLL just kidning :needles: open up iPorno and clack j00 images and upgrage you b34-v4rlool  :rollin: :love: ok ok just kidding
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mybabysmomma on February 12, 2010, 08:43:31 PM
 :cry:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on February 12, 2010, 08:45:36 PM
:needles: :knotty: :knotty: :knotty: :love: :love: :love: :love::needles:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on February 12, 2010, 08:46:25 PM
The change-a-my-profile-avatar-picture-thing page for BC has a maximum This by That pixel size, if I remember correctly.  But for some reason I can't load my profile page at the moment.

I used to change my avatar a lot, but I just like this one so much.  [Thank you, Sinfest!]
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on February 13, 2010, 06:54:37 AM
 :lol: @ TFJ's sig.

How big is too big?

heh.

150 X 150 pixels is the maximum.

Back to the pot roast: it was pretty awesome  :thumbsup:

Boston Butt is next.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mybabysmomma on February 13, 2010, 09:10:00 AM
OK I changed it but have no freaking idea how.   :hmm:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on March 13, 2010, 01:07:32 PM
D&D Experts, prithee hark:

We recently got in some early First Edition AD&D rulebooks, like the ones everyone was using in the early 80s.  These are in really nice shape, whereas my own, for instance, are beaten to crap in typical fashion, reinforced with tape, written in (many amusing comments, etc), and so forth.  I was considering buying these nicer copies from the shop, but of course first I have to figure out what they're worth.

And while it's First Edition AD&D, that doesn't mean they're first-edition books, if you follow me.  So I look online, and, uh, WTF is this person selling (http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=417458700&xbf=b3MtcWctdWJ6cg__%2F78488127089487897897&afn_sr=para&para_l=0)?

Even guessing that the "132 pages" is a typo for "232 pages", I can't tell if they know what they're talking about or not.  I was under the impression that the only really valuable edition was the one with Monster Manual pages accidentally included.  This website seems to agree (http://www.acaeum.com/ddindexes/rulebooks.html), and see their helpful explanation of editions here (http://www.acaeum.com/ddindexes/setpages/dmg.html).

Am I missing something?

Our copy is apparently a fourth printing, anyway, and consequently nothing I should feel guilty about buying from the shop, but since it's a conflict of interest I want to be doubly sure.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on March 13, 2010, 01:18:18 PM
:doh:

Should have kept my original three-book set. I have no idea.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on April 26, 2010, 02:10:36 PM
When you get an email in MS Outlook, and the email itself is an "untitled attachment", how do reply to that so that the text in the attachment is visible? I guess this email was created in Word? There were two people cc'd on this particular email, and I had to reply to all, and I thought it would be weird if the question I was replying to wasn't visible.

I opened the attachment, hit reply on it, and entered all the email addresses manually. It doesn't show a subject, and it seems like there ought to be a better way.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on April 26, 2010, 03:28:50 PM
Copy and Paste?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on April 26, 2010, 03:40:21 PM
When you get an email in MS Outlook, and the email itself is an "untitled attachment", how do reply to that so that the text in the attachment is visible? I guess this email was created in Word? There were two people cc'd on this particular email, and I had to reply to all, and I thought it would be weird if the question I was replying to wasn't visible.

I opened the attachment, hit reply on it, and entered all the email addresses manually. It doesn't show a subject, and it seems like there ought to be a better way.

I'm not sure I understand. There was no header information in the email separate from the attachment?  Is that even possible?

Oh wait, it's Outlook. It's probably a feature.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on April 26, 2010, 04:34:33 PM
Copy and Paste?

Yeah, I guess that would be as simple, or simpler than what I did, and it would still have the subject line.


I'm not sure I understand. There was no header information in the email separate from the attachment?  Is that even possible?

Oh wait, it's Outlook. It's probably a feature.

I didn't view the source or whatever it's called in Windows, but yeah, no visible header. I mean, it's not like Mac's Mail, where you can view long headers or the raw source. When I open the email, there's nothing there but an untitled attachment, and when I open that, I see what you would expect to see in a normal email, except the header is blank.

I seem to remember the first time I launched Word, that it asked me if I wanted Word to be the "default email editor" (or something like that), and I clicked yes, and it did made the message an attachment, I think... I dunno, it's been several years.

I get these from time to time, and it's kind of aggravating. I guess I'm curious if anyone else ever gets them. Maybe it's something in my Outlook settings, like "show html messages as attachments" or something :shrug:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on April 26, 2010, 04:42:36 PM
Wow. It reminds me of a line from the old Stroustrup C++ book, something like "obscurity is enforced through data hiding" or something like that. Seems like Microsoft took that literally.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on April 26, 2010, 05:16:59 PM
We use Thunderbird, I think, at the shop, which is kind of an old-school and relatively low-BS email program of the Mozilla family.  We get emails from people with Outlook all the time that have an attachment that just has an exact duplicate of the body text.  What's annoying is that sometimes they don't show up as attachments (beats me) until or unless you reply or forward the note, and then if you're not paying attention you send the attachment as well.

We get a lot of email that's actually for the owner, and we forward it to him, and the attachment that's the original email again confuses him EVERY TIME.


Still, this is WAY down the list of annoyances behind:  People sending us emails in PDF format; people sending giant attachments; people sending 12 photos that are all 4 MB or more; people sending us MS Office spreadsheet lists of the books they want or want to sell.  Seriously, we no longer have any machines that have the full Office BS.  We're down to one machine that has Word.  Office is ridiculously expensive and full of programs we would never want to use except to easily read the files other people send us.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on April 26, 2010, 05:24:52 PM
I just found an article from 2003 (http://www.hal-pc.org/journal/2003/03_mar/email/email/email.html) that explains it. The email was created, as suspected, in Word in Rich Text Format and extra formatting codes are saved into the message that I assume Outlook can't read, so the entire message is saved as a separate attachment unless the sender chooses to send as Plain Text. It didn't offer a workaround though.

I guess I'll just add it to my list of favorite things, like when someone links their company logo in their signature from their server, and I have to grant permission to download the logo before I can view the message. The guy that sends every single email with the little high priority ! is one of those people.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on April 26, 2010, 05:25:59 PM
#include <obligatory_reference_to_openoffice.h>
#include <invective_directed_at_microsoft.h>
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on April 26, 2010, 05:36:42 PM
I always look askew at emails signed with a cursive font in a special color.  It's just email, man.  I know you didn't put a pen to the bottom of that.

:shrug:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: robin on May 03, 2010, 09:52:40 AM
"after I flush the old oil out do you want me to put new oil in your crank case?".  Just a little while ago at Pennzoil.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on May 03, 2010, 11:52:30 AM
"You're not going to save the old oil?"

Meh.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: eldiem on May 04, 2010, 10:00:32 PM
I'd be like, "No, it's okay. I can do it when I get home."
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on May 14, 2010, 07:35:44 PM
How come 95% of toolbags, despite being insanely expensive, don't have a flapover so if you happen to be outside and it happens to rain, the tools don't get wet?

A zillion briefcase bags and shoulderbags and backpack-satchel things and computer bags nowadays lack a flapover, too.  Or if they have one, it has a non-water-resistant pocket in the flap, which is also pretty damned stupid.

Meh.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mybabysmomma on May 14, 2010, 08:04:45 PM
I would guess for two reasons.  If you were working outside in the rain, wouldn't your tools be getting wet anyway?  A flap would get in the way of taking tools out and putting them back.  Do I win a prize?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on May 14, 2010, 08:32:57 PM
:lol:

No, the actual answer is because they don't think the people who are buying these things will perform a careful analysis of features and select a product accordingly.  They figure they'll pick a bag based on brand, color, marketing, flavor-of-the-month gadget, etc.  They figure that because they're usually right.

It's not about working outdoors, because, frankly, most work with tools does occur indoors, but a lot of people who use tools (professionally, especially) are, whaddaya call it, itinerant.  You're always going to and from the jobsite, and you've got to get your tools from the truck to the house or building and back.  The nicer toolbags are padded to protect your tools, but they don't do shit about rain. 

And your typical carpenter goes out to the jobsite with $500 in cordless tools, easy.  Rain's not good for them.  I have to take my tools to work at least once or twice a month to fix something or other, and even I often have close to $200 in tools in my bag, and it seems like half the time I have to walk three blocks in the rain.  I usually use military surplus bags instead of tool bags because they're more weather-resistant, but I often put the tools inside a bundled-over Hefty bag in there as insurance.

The same goes for a bag that has your computer or important papers.  I dunno.  Some have flapovers, but apparently it's just random whether they put a good one on there or not.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on May 20, 2010, 09:48:28 PM
I could make various guesses, but I'm curious which one would be correct:  A lot of first aid kits are marketed by size measured in a number of people.  For instance, I was just sent an ad for a "small business or restaurant" first aid kit that's "designed to serve 25 people".

Does that mean it's good for what you need if upto 25 people suffer minor injuries at the same time?  Or, on average, 25 minor injuries before you have to replace or restock it?  It's just kind of a mysterious metric.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on May 20, 2010, 10:09:33 PM
I will ask the wife and kids, they worked at the ARC for a while.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Hisey on June 11, 2010, 08:36:22 PM
Quote

j00 pix0rz a knotty knotty pics from j00 dics lool nad aploads. than, 4 a GRATE TIMEE EMALE TADS NEEDLAS@ YOOHOO DOT CUM LOOOOOOLLLLL just kidning :needles: open up iPorno and clack j00 images and upgrage you b34-v4rlool  :rollin: :love: ok ok just kidding

What's sad is.. I understand that.
Yes, I know. Old post. so??
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Hisey on June 11, 2010, 08:36:54 PM
I'm hoping this is more obscure than stupid:  Years ago, my brother and I saw like two episodes of a miniseries on BBC America, and he recently asked me if I could remember the title.

Umm . . . :hmm: . . . I can't.  I thought it was 'Fire House' or something like that, but I can't find it.

It was Empire, whether it was British or not -- might've been Australian or (more likely) New Zealish.  Been so long that I can't say.  It was basically a tense soap opera that had a lot of Wuthering Heights in it and also some hints of incestuous problems.  (But, then, Wuthering Heights is full of incest issues, too.)

The basic plot, from what we saw, is that there's this guy, who has a very nice wife.  But there's also this woman who he was best friends with while they were growing up, and they have some kind of too-too intense past history.  The guy clearly has an impulse to abandon his wife and have a mad go at his friend, and his wife is aware of it.  The friend, meanwhile, is a crazy self-destructive artist sort (I'm pretty sure), and there are skeletons bursting out of closets everywhere (child abuse? incest? etc?).

It was all set in foggy-rainy stone-walls small-town somewhere.  The acting and dialogue and all that were a notch above.  It was compelling, which is why we watched a couple of episodes, but it did not give the impression that it was going to have a happy ending.

I can't find a trace of it through IMDb or the googles.  My guess is that it was made between 1985 and 1995.  Anyone have any ideas or know what I'm talking about?  I told my brother I was sure I could find it, but no dice, and I hate that.


WHAT WAS THIS SHOW??
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Hisey on June 11, 2010, 08:44:10 PM
Quote
Office is ridiculously expensive and full of programs we would never want to use except to easily read the files other people send us.
google docs?
microsoft web office?
Open office?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on June 11, 2010, 08:56:01 PM
Quote
WHAT WAS THIS SHOW??

Do you know how stupid I am?  I didn't write it down.  I just assumed I would remember it.  It is a clear indication of how far my mind is gone that I constantly, constantly assume I will remember all kinds of things that I then promptly forget and don't even notice I've forgotten.  Seriously, I should not even use any kind of cooking apparatus that won't automatically turn itself off.

Hang on and I'll try to look it up again.  


edit:  Sparkhouse (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0324036/).  Described as a modernized Wuthering Heights with the genders reversed.  Found it by just googling "bbc miniseries based on wuthering heights". 
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on June 16, 2010, 11:42:33 PM
OK . . . as is usual with cell phones, I am so late to the party it's ridiculous, but I just saw one of those articles about using-cell-phone-while-driving that also talks about applying makeup while driving and uses the term 'farding'.

Who the hell resurrected that word for that specific use?  Anyone know?  I'm seriously fairly curious, and the googles aren't helping.  I think I'd only ever heard that word used by theater people who were being ironically fancy and foppish.  Of course, it's not like I hang around with cosmetologists or at beauty parlors, but I thought that word had gone out with zounds and gigman.

:shrug:


edit:  Weirdly, I just remembered that today at work I had a brief argument with a clerk over whether or not "fardle" was a real word.  We weren't near a computer, and she didn't believe me, and it didn't occur to me to check the damn unabridged OED that's up on top of a bookcase that was like 5' away at the time.  :eyeroll:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: First Post on June 17, 2010, 12:58:08 AM
A guess, but stuff that doesn't originate from /b/ often comes from right wing talk radio (http://freedomkeys.com/boortzisms.htm)...

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: feffer on June 17, 2010, 01:09:12 AM
There was a radio show in Chicago when I was young that made this joke.  Don Wade and Roma, maybe?  Must have been 20 years ago.  They're only saying "farding in your car is legal" because it's funny.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on June 17, 2010, 01:14:41 AM
:lol:  Boortz, who lost a personality contest to Glenn Beck a couple of years ago.  I've never actually heard him, that I know of, but I've seen one or two of his books.

Maybe farding has continuously been in use, but I've just missed it.  God knows it's possible.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on June 17, 2010, 04:58:17 AM
If I've ever heard the word used, I must have assumed they were saying "farting" and didn't get it.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on June 17, 2010, 09:42:18 AM
I'faith, gentle, you were pricked by that bodkin and kenned it not.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Hedaira on June 17, 2010, 09:58:17 AM
Sounds more like cleaning the shizz out of horse hooves.

Farrier farding filthy fucking feet fortnightly.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on June 17, 2010, 10:28:46 AM
Those are some rightly purty hooves ya got there, young filly, and a right shapely fetlock, too.  Let me just sidle over and check them hooves for stones . . . .
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: stormneedle on June 17, 2010, 12:03:14 PM
:popcorn:
/turns page, wanting more
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on June 17, 2010, 12:51:07 PM
Never heard the word before this week.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mybabysmomma on June 17, 2010, 12:52:21 PM
Never heard the word before this week.

I hadn't either.  I looked it up because I thought it was a made up media word.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: flipper on June 17, 2010, 01:42:13 PM
Never heard the word before this week.

I hadn't either.  I looked it up because I thought it was a made up media word.

I was too lazy to look it up.  I figured I'd garner what is was eventually from you people.  YOU PEOPLE!
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 08, 2010, 07:36:51 AM
Stupid question, I would have no idea how to Google, and I'm not really even sure how to phrase it:

On my way to work I cross a river. At certain times of the year, the valley that the river lies in will be filled with like a fog. This fog, for lack of a better term, lies only over the water. It's like the fog rises off the river. I've wanted to take pictures of this for a long time, but I only cross the river on my way to work, so I don't have time for it when I see it. I'm trying to figure out weather factors that make this phenomenon occur so that on my days off I can go get pictures of it.

My best guess is that it occurs when the water is much warmer than the air above it, but it seems there must be other factors at play, like maybe the humidity needs to be low. There also has to be no wind. So I'm looking for something like this:

Temperature drop/rise of X degrees from previous day
Humidity above/below X%
Wind Speed 0
Barometer - relevant?
Dewpoint - relevant?

Anyone have a clue?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on October 08, 2010, 07:57:28 AM
When the water is warmer than the air, especially if the air is pretty still, you can definitely get funky water-hugging fog effects.  One thing you have to know about water is that water is always evaporating.  Even ice is always evaporating (slowly, and technically mostly it's sublimating), no matter how cold it is.  Water molecules don't hang onto each other super-tightly, which is why it's a liquid at room temperature. 

Water's always causing humidity, if you want to think about it that way.  And the colder the air is, the less moisture it can absorb.  The more humid the air already is, the less moisture it can absorb.  So if the air can't hold anymore water, and there's no wind, you can get fog sitting its ass on the water in weird ways.  I guess it might technically be mist rather than fog; I'm not sure about the rules there.

In Vermont, we had a lot of really cold mornings where there would be a zillion distinct little columns of mist rising up off the river, maybe two to five feet high.  The upper boundary was always a flat plane -- there was a ceiling beyond which the mist evaporated.  The columns are a little wavy and maybe a foot away from each other.  It's pretty trippy.  The river was very slow in the middle of the winter, with no thawing going on, and the effect was pretty phenomenal behind the dam, where the river was fat and especially lazy.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on October 08, 2010, 08:44:30 AM
This is a big thing in the winter, here, and can get pretty huge in the valleys. I think what's going on is the water vapor cools to the dew point (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dew_point) pretty fast as it rises off the water. It's got to be still (moving air will mix the air hanging in the depressions so you don't get those cold blops at the low points), etc.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 08, 2010, 02:03:38 PM
Working off that Wikipedia link, I think what I'm referring to is "Steam fog", and what you're referring to is "Tule fog". And from what I gathered, the conditions for each are pretty different. The steam fog is more related to temperature difference between water and air, and the Tule fog is more related to dewpoint, as you already said. It's a bit confusing for my tiny brain. Different terms are used on different sites, and I don't understand some of the basic fundamentals to begin with. Most of the stuff I'm finding is either too basic, or too advanced, like this:

Quote
Abstract

The characteristics of fogs resulting from the advection of cold air over warm water (steam fog and sea smoke) are investigated. They are found to occur with air temperatures between 5 and 40°C lower than the water temperature, in winds from calm to gale; they have liquid water contents in the range 0·01-0·5 gm−3, extend in height from 1 to 1,500 m and commonly exhibit either a columnar or banded structure. A study of their occurrence in Atlantic waters reveals a marked concentration in the western regions in the winter months because of the proximity of warm ocean and cold continent.

Through the use of equations for turbulent transfer it is shown that the occurrence of steaming is related to the well-known fact that two masses of unsaturated air at different temperatures when mixed together can yield a supersaturated or foggy mixture. In deriving the connexion the equality of transfer coefficients for heat and water vapour is assumed.

The circumstances in which steaming occurs are defined. the difference in the temperatures of the air and water must exceed a threshold which is dependent on the humidity of the air and the temperature and salinity of the water: its value, in the range 5·15°C, is a minimum when the air is moist and the water cold and fresh. the liquid water content and vertical extent of steaming increase as the thermal contrast increases. Close agreement is found between observations of the onset of steaming and the computed threshold values.

 :trance:

There's a PDF with that. I think I'll download it and try to rummage through it to see if I can figure it out.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 08, 2010, 02:05:29 PM
Bah. Have to be a member or pay for the damn PDF.  :angry:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/qj.49709038405/abstract
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: flipper on October 08, 2010, 02:07:18 PM
Tule fog is what we would get in Davis.  I remember driving up highway 113 hugging the right side of the road and counting the breaks in the white line to find my exit.  Road 25A, road 27, road 29, ah here it is.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: eldiem on October 08, 2010, 02:07:42 PM
I understood most of that, but it gives me some good grad school PTSD.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on October 08, 2010, 02:12:05 PM
Bah. Have to be a member or pay for the damn PDF.  :angry:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/qj.49709038405/abstract

Or, um, have an institutional subscription (http://www.icess.ucsb.edu/~norm/steamfog.pdf). :innocent:

oh frak who do I care, that article is fifty years old. :P
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 08, 2010, 02:13:48 PM
Hehe. I knew you would  ;)

thanks, dood.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: eldiem on October 08, 2010, 02:16:02 PM
I tried downloading it through my library's site but they were all like nooooooooo :(
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: First Post on October 08, 2010, 02:24:01 PM
It can also be caused by some stupid with a flare gun.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: feffer on October 08, 2010, 02:29:19 PM
On my drive to work I go down in elevation from mountainous foothills - smallish lake - slough - larger lake/island/lake - ocean.  It often goes foggy/clear/foggy/clear.  Sometimes it's rainy/sunny/rainy.  Usually it's a pretty and interesting drive.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 08, 2010, 02:35:51 PM
It can also be caused by some stupid with a flare gun.



 :lol:

duh duh duh
duh duh duh duh
duh duh duh
duh duh

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on October 08, 2010, 03:25:05 PM
:lol: at the joke a lot, although it took me a minute.


Quote
I understood most of that, but it gives me some good grad school PTSD.

I almost entirely CANNOT handle that kind of academic prose.  I mean, I totally understand that sometimes people have to use it because of the environment they're working in, but seriously one paragraph worth of "Through the use of equations for turbulent transfer it is shown that" and I'm ready to consign the human race to the earth and give the ants a try.


Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 08, 2010, 04:16:30 PM
(http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q124/mo_d_/STEAMFOGC.png)
Original

(http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q124/mo_d_/STEAMFOG.png)
Fahrenheit version

This doesn't sound right. If I'm interpreting that correctly, if the water temperature is 59 degrees, then the air temperature would have to be 18 degrees and the humidity like 93%. Ignoring the humidity, since he says it's measured near the water surface, it just seems like too large of a temperature difference.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on October 08, 2010, 04:36:01 PM
Yeah, chart's wrong?

I read for water temperature of ~15 degrees C, difference of ~5 degrees at 90%+RH so air would have to be 10C - that's 50F.

Oh duh. They translated "delta T" into "T" for the Y axis there. That's wrong.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: eldiem on October 08, 2010, 04:36:21 PM
That fahrenheit graph is converted wrongly on your y-axis there. It would be closer to 5 celsius degrees (not 5 degrees celsius, which IS 41F), which is what, 9 fahrenheit degrees?

KnowwhatImean?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 08, 2010, 07:58:09 PM
 :redface:

I made the second chart.  :lol:

I suspected I must have screwed something up in the conversion, and I checked it twice, never thinking about the context. duh.

Back to the drawing board...
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: eldiem on October 08, 2010, 08:00:12 PM
Oops! Yeah you gotta subtract 32 degrees from each of those fahrenheit numbers to get an accurate conversion. :)
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 08, 2010, 08:42:05 PM
(http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q124/mo_d_/STEAMFOG-1.png)

Alright, this makes more sense, and it becomes obvious the humidity is a more important variable looking at it like this, so now I'm curious about the difference in humidity "near the surface in the cold air", and the humidity I would see on the weather website. I would assume the humidity "near the surface in the cold air" would be higher, due to the "steam"... but that doesn't make sense, because the humidity would always be high on his readings. Why did he add that note?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: eldiem on October 08, 2010, 09:20:56 PM
A lot of that is just theoretical. Like if the temp of the water was 68 and the air temp was like 52, you'd need there to be a RH of > 80% in order to see the fog. I also don't know that he's talking about the RH right above the water, in the fog, just that it was measured at the surface near the site, and not aloft or something.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on October 09, 2010, 12:17:16 AM
See, you get a really dry morning at 0 F, and the river's just steaming.  Does look weird.

Still nothing on the weird weather effects you get with real rapid changes, like the various whatsit windy fronts coming down out of the Rockies, but it's a more peaceable weirdness, which is a different kind of surreal.  A lot of Vermont mornings, with the sunrise behind a mountain, seemed to be sharply black and white, like a photo, with everything either dark and shadowed or covered in snow.  You could look at a bare tree with snow on its branches for five minutes straight, just marveling at the contrast.  Made you feel like your eyes had gotten 10x sharper all of a sudden.

Frickin' cold, though.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 09, 2010, 04:48:16 AM
Right now it's 54 degrees and the humidity is 91% :shock: I just don't know the water temp - NOAA monitors the water level very closely and offers all kinds of records about the level, but nothing on temperature that I could find. I suspect there should be some fog now though - I mean, I think the water would be at least 63 degrees. I think I'll ride down there this morning and throw a thermometer in the lake.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 09, 2010, 09:18:58 AM
(http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q124/mo_d_/boat.jpg)

(http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q124/mo_d_/geese.jpg)

 :D

Water was 69 degrees according to my meat thermometer  :P I should have asked that guy in the boat if he had a thermometer built into his depth finder. I'd be curious to know what the water temp was out in the deeper water.

What looks like clouds in those pictures is actually fog. This stuff is difficult to photograph, because you need a fast shutter speed or it's all just... well, fog - you can't see the rising bands. It's tough to guess at the focus, so it's best to use a small aperture, but it's also kind of dark out, so all those factors don't go together very well.

What I really wanted was pictures of the creek that is partially fed by this lake, but there was no fog there. I didn't think to take my thermometer with me down to the creek, so I don't know if the water was too cool or what. I guess conditions have to be more extreme for the creek to fog up.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 09, 2010, 09:23:21 AM
Another one after the sun came up.

(http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q124/mo_d_/fishing.jpg)
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on October 09, 2010, 10:17:15 AM
having growed up and such right next to the kanawha river in west fuckin by got dammit west virgina, i'm familiar with that sort of fog enigma. i do know that this time of year is the time when it used to get all interesting.

those pics are great, mo! more, more, more.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Hedaira on October 09, 2010, 11:00:11 AM
Nice!   :detta:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 09, 2010, 02:36:24 PM
Thanks, y'all. I took a bunch of pics this morning, and I should probably pick some out and upload them to flickr or something, but I'll probably never get around to it. They'll just sit there with the other 3000 pics I've taken, taking up space on my HD. I've got 6 Gigs worth now. It's a good thing I don't have a higher resolution camera. ...Well, not really. Anyway, it's kind of like "catch and release" fishing for me - I just like the accomplishment, and don't really do anything with them. It's a hassle to upload them and go through downsizing them for the web and all that, and there's plenty of pretty pictures out there already. This exercise was all about "science can be fun". I just wish there wasn't math involved  :P
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 09, 2010, 02:43:57 PM
Next stupid question. It was kinda chilly out there this morning, and I didn't think to take my "special" gloves with me. My special gloves are cloth gardening gloves with the little plasticky grip dots on them. I cut off the tip of the right forefinger and thumb so I can make camera adjustments. They work okay down to a certain temperature range, but it would be nice to have something better - gloves with better insulation, but still thin material, very pliable, capable of gripping, and something that I would be able to make adjustments (push tiny buttons, etc.) with, without having to cut off the tips.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: eldiem on October 09, 2010, 02:48:23 PM
Sooooo what's the question? :P

When I had to do little fiddly things up in the arctic, I wore just glove liners underneath a pair of gloves and a huge pair of mitts. The glove liners would let me do stuff like tighten screws without my skin sticking to them. They weren't warm at all, but the gloves and mitts I had weren't too much of a pain to get on and off.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 09, 2010, 03:03:16 PM
 :P

The question is, do any of you know of a type of glove that fits the bill? Maybe some kind of space-age product I'm not aware of...

And taking them off and putting them back on isn't practical for this.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on October 09, 2010, 03:08:58 PM
Police gloves come in a wide variety of warm / tough / dextrous.  Look for leather-esque evidence gloves, probably $15 to $30.  The standard test for those is how easily you can pick up a dime off a flat surface.  If you wear $4 silk glove liners underneath, they should be OK for reasonable dry exposure down to the upper freezing temps.



edit:  Meh.  Prices have gone up, and surplus seems to have gone down at the moment.

For what I can find right now, I guess I'd recommend Under Armour Stretch Gloves (http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=545625) (you may be able to find them cheaper than that) and, if they're not warm enough, this is the kind of glove liner (http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=40252) I meant.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 09, 2010, 03:27:12 PM
There's not a good sporting goods store around here, so that's part of my problem. And it's not something that I'm thinking about when I'm around a good sporting goods store. It seems like I've recently seen some kind of surplus store recently... but I can't remember where the hell that was. This isn't something I'd buy online - I'd want to try them out.

That's very helpful though - I was not aware of either of those products. I figured you people up north would know more about this kind of thing.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 16, 2010, 06:03:40 PM
Anybody have a  :thumbsup: or  :thumbsdn: for any of these movies?

City Island
Cemetery Junction
Leaves of Grass

These are some that I'm considering renting...
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on October 17, 2010, 06:46:35 AM
So I went with Cemetery Junction  :thumbsup:

Not a great movie, but enjoyable, and I occasionally lol'd. I love a good British movie, so that was part of the attraction. I had to turn on the closed captioning after a few minutes because some of the accents were so rich.

Here's a review (http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/ReviewComplete.asp?FID=136296) that's better than anything I could write.

Clip. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7V3-4DSm9MA)
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 22, 2010, 03:07:58 PM
American ex-pat emailed me to ask what three songs I would choose to represent America.  No explanation.  Um, well, OK, although I admit I wanted to ask what kind of "represent" was meant here.  I'd choose something different if the songs were representing us in the Giant Slalom in the next Winter Olympics.

Anyway, I spent about sixty seconds before I got bored with it and said:

    Springsteen  -  Born in the USA

    KBC Band  -  America

    Styx  -  Suite Madam Blue

Yeah, Styx, so what.  I don't know if it was in the rules, but I went with all rock / pop songs, no "America The Beautiful", yadda yadda.

There are better songs that are sort of about America but not really so much about America, like "America" by Simoning Garfunkel or "American Pie", and there's a pickup truck full of Cougar Mellencamp songs, etc.  I have this nagging impulse to choose something by Kansas or CCR, but nothing quite right occurred to me.  "Fortunate Son" is too specific.

I did tell her that if she asked other people and anyone said Lee Greenwood, flag them as spam.  But what should I have picked instead? 
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: hajen on November 22, 2010, 03:45:14 PM
I dunno, I would've probably said off the top of my head: Born in the USA, Fortunate Son, and Pink Houses -or- Small Town -or- Rain on the Scarecrow...  yeah JCM is sort of abundant there. Note the cynicism in all my immediate picks. Heh.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: feffer on November 22, 2010, 03:55:17 PM
Is "Small Town" cynical?  All the others, yes, especially "Rain on the Scarecrow".

I think it's funny how the first things that come to mind are songs about small town and rural living.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mybabysmomma on November 22, 2010, 04:18:46 PM
How about "Sweet Cherry Pie"?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 22, 2010, 04:40:59 PM
Quote
How about "Sweet Cherry Pie"?

:huh: :harumph:

I never entirely understood "Pink Houses".  What pink houses?  What part of the country is he talking about where they have lots and lots of pink houses?  Is it a metaphor?  Pink, really?  Beats me.

"Small Town" isn't bad, but it always makes me think of Springsteen's "My Hometown", which I like better.  The small town / rural thing is kind of funny, but it's the direction most songwriters go.  I mean, I'm not going to suggest "We Built This City" or The Standells' "Dirty Water".  :lol:

Someone suggested "We Didn't Start The Fire", but in this context it seems a little obscure and defensive.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on November 22, 2010, 04:42:07 PM
This Land Is Your Land

Willin'

Fairytale of New York
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Talix on November 22, 2010, 04:53:04 PM
Wow.  Tough.  Way to many extremes to cover.  Yes, Bruce or JCM, but I like the idea of including something that speaks to other experiences of the US.  Any song where a woman gets to talk about taking care of herself - Trisha Yearwood's "American Girl" comes to mind.  It's nowhere near my favorite of her stuff but it's got the killer couplet "Well, she's got her God and she's got good wine/Aretha Franklin and Patsy Cline."  And that reminds me of I think it's a Tim McGraw song about the contrast between Saturday night and Sunday morning.  No, I'm confusing his "Drugs or Jesus" with something else.

Then there's the whole "Strange Fruit" angle.  It hardly gets more USian than that.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 22, 2010, 04:56:43 PM
Quote
Fairytale of New York

:hmm:

Someone told me that instead we should do a list of top songs about America (meaning the US, yeah) written by foreign bands.  First song suggested was "Breakfast in America", which, OK, I like the song, but it's not hugely about America.  I guess it's not that hugely about anything, but it's more about the girlfriend than anything else, I guess.  They also suggested "American Woman" and "Calling America".

I'd put "Fairytale of New York" near the top of that list.

Wikipedia tells me that the Venture Bros folks recorded a version in character as The Monarch and Dr Girlfriend a few years ago.  WAT / WANT.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Talix on November 22, 2010, 05:38:27 PM
Reading the lyrics reminds me of Tom Waits...."Christmas Card From a Hooker in Minneapolis" is one of the Welder's favorite songs.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on November 22, 2010, 05:38:35 PM
And Nat King Cole singing "The Christmas Song" - I know, I know, loathsome Xmas music, but he was awesome and makes the song something pretty cool rather than something plastic.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mrcookieface on November 22, 2010, 10:38:17 PM
I listened to Paul Simon's American Tune practically nonstop after Bush won his second term in 2004.

And I don't know a soul who's not been battered
I don't have a friend who feels at ease
I don't know a dream that's not been shattered
or driven to its knees
but it's all right, it's all right
for we lived so well so long
Still, when I think of the
road we're traveling on
I wonder what's gone wrong
I can't help it, I wonder what's gone wrong


Those lines resonated heavily with me.  Heck.  Come to think of it, I could fill up my top five solely with Paul Simon's work.  My Little Town is another gem.  And yeah, America, Homeward Bound, The Only Living Boy In New York, and Graceland aren't really about America, but they certainly draw cues from Americentrism.

Oh hey!  It just occurred to me.  You know what song really represents America well?  Gershwin's Rhapsody In Blue.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: stormneedle on November 22, 2010, 11:39:20 PM
Grofé's Grand Canyon Suite
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mrcookieface on November 23, 2010, 12:54:10 AM
Along those lines I could mention Aaron Copland's Fanfare For The Common Man or Rodeo (Beef: It's what's for dinner).

Those songs sound so American to me.  I'd also love to include some good jazz pieces that represent America since jazz itself is so uniquely American, but I'm drawing a blank right now.  Tal mentioned Strange Fruit, but does it represent this country as a whole, or just the particular incident of Smith's & Shipp's lynching in Redneck, Indiana?

As for pop songs about America written by foreign songwriters?  Hmmmm.... That's a good request.  The only thing that comes to mind at the moment is Bowie's I'm Afraid Of Americans.
 
:hmm:

Aha!  I've got it!  The late, great, Canadian, Hank Snow - I've Been Everywhere (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W47c6w46Cgc).
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: First Post on November 23, 2010, 01:12:43 AM
What, best song ever done by a foreigner about America? Done, I win (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyHSjv9gxlE).  ;)

(eta: also, best American song about America (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWS-FoXbjVI))

(I have all the Venture holiday songs too...here's the one in question: The Monarch and Dr. Mrs. The Monarch (http://www.zshare.net/audio/83031108da074367/))

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 23, 2010, 08:41:35 AM
Sweet!  I saw one season of Fry & Laurie on Bravo many years ago, and Netflix finally got the rest for Instant Play just recently.  So good.

I saw a bunch of lists that had the World Police theme song.  It's funny, but it can only go on certain people's lists.  A still catchy and bite-my-balls but more, uh, wordy version of the same idea can be found in the Damn Yankees song "Damn Yankees".  It's kind of like replacing Trey Parker with Ted Nugent.

A number of people recommended Green Day's "American Idiot".  That's one of those songs I know I've heard but that didn't make a big impression on me.


Cookieface, if you like Simon's "American Tune", I should mention that a couple of people nominated Sam Cooke's "A Change Is Gonna Come", which is a good bookend for it.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: vox8 on November 23, 2010, 09:17:03 AM
Those lines resonated heavily with me.  Heck.  Come to think of it, I could fill up my top five solely with Paul Simon's work.  My Little Town is another gem.  And yeah, America, Homeward Bound, The Only Living Boy In New York, and Graceland aren't really about America, but they certainly draw cues from Americentrism.

Paul Simon might be my all time favorite musician. I got to see the Rhythm of the Saints tour in St. Louis and Rog took me to see the S&G reunion tour here in Atlanta.

He is a genius and his music moves me like no other. America is heart-wrenching and Homeward Bound always makes me tear up.

"Kathy I'm lost, I said, though I knew she was sleeping. I'm empty and I'm aching and I don't know why. Counting the cars on the New Jersey Turnpike, they've all come to look for America."

Funny thing though, he wrote Homeward Bound while living and performing in England.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on November 23, 2010, 09:37:43 AM
Grofé's Grand Canyon Suite

OOOH, this.

Appalachian Spring (duh) ;)
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on November 23, 2010, 02:42:33 PM
ray charles, america the beatiful

or

canyonero (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4QgWRycd7I&feature=related)
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on November 23, 2010, 02:44:29 PM
canyonero (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4QgWRycd7I&feature=related)

YESSSSS!
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mrcookieface on November 23, 2010, 06:24:32 PM
A Change Is Gonna Come!  Can't believe I overlooked that one, axe.  I'm a huge Cooke fan too.

God, that song tugs at my heart like few others.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mrcookieface on November 24, 2010, 10:18:52 PM
My head is still loosely wrapped around this.

By chance, I sat down at the piano tonight and learned the chords to Neil Diamond's Shilo.  What fun!  There's only three chords to the entire song!  C F & G if you're interested, and that G is just to finish off the chorus.  You don't even need it for the verses.

It's quite a contrast from Paul Simon's American Tune.  Simon's songs sound deceptively easy, but he throws all kinds of crazy chords in his songs.  That's what makes him so great.  They're augmented, diminished, suspended.... Fuck that guy for making it so difficult.  You know, Johnny Marr of The Smiths pulls the same impossible tricks.  "Unnecessary notes" – like that scene in the movie Amadeus where Jeffrey Jones chastises Tom Hulce for playing too many notes for the royal ear.  But fuck Jeffrey Jones in the ear.  He's a pedophile.

Anyway, back to Neil Diamond.  America (http://soundcloud.com/lee-live/19-neil-diamond-america) from The Jazz Singer on Soundcloud, and available for download.  How perfect it was released in 1980, just as the Reagan years kicked in, huh?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 24, 2010, 11:47:14 PM
Hey, I like Jeffrey Jones . . . the questionable pedophilia thing aside (it really does change parts of Ferris Bueller, though) . . . and it's not like he was portraying himself in that movie.  But I know what you mean.

Dukakis used America as his campaign song when he ran for President, but they mostly just used the chorus.  When he lost, everyone on his team was all depressed, along with everybody who showed up to celebrate his win, if he'd won.  Al Franken was on the campaign team, and he was trying to figure out what to do to keep people from running outside and jumping into traffic when Dukakis conceded the election, and it occurred to him to run and put on the tape of the song.

He didn't actually know the song, though, and just rewound the tape to the beginning, and apparently most of the people there hadn't heard the extended intro and were just very WTF.  Franken was totally embarrassed.  :lol:

Personally, I find it impossible to dislike Neil Diamond, just like I can't dislike Tom Jones no matter how trendy it is.  There's the unmistakeable I'm Convinced That I'm Just Too Cool level of cheese, yes, but it's somehow completely inoffensive.  Plus, you know, I count his involvement with The Monkees in his favor.

Barry Manilow . . . a little too far over the line, but forgiveable.  Rod Stewart, WAY too far over that line.  With Neil, it probably helps that we grew up listening to his songs whether we liked it or not and just changed the lyrics (my brother's hit single, "The Reverend Blue Jeans") or sang them with dripping irony.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: First Post on November 25, 2010, 12:15:55 AM
Few people know that Neil is fueled creatively by his massive hatred of immigrants (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x692ix_neil-diamond-storytellers_fun)...haha, one of my favorite SNL bits ever.

I've heard reports of Paul Simon being sorta dickheadish in person, but when we talked to him he was really cool. This was at a venue where most people thought of him more as "Edie's husband" though.

(Tom Jones is awesome! What a vocal performance on this one (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TyOnCvVLm8), holy shit.)



Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mrcookieface on November 25, 2010, 12:23:21 AM
I totally agree with you there, axe.  Neil Diamond was part of the Brill building team that included Neil Sedaka, Carole King, my man Burt fuckin' Bacharach, Laura Nyro, Barry Mann, and even Paul Simon in his early days.

I had no inkling about the Dukakis/Franken story.  :lol:  That's awesome.  The Dukakis/Bush election happened to be the first election where I was old enough to vote.  I turned eighteen in 1988 but I didn't participate.  I mean, really, there were no winners there.

I grew up with Manilow, thanks to my mother's tastes.  That also included John Denver and the Carpenters.  Not to disparage her choices in any way.  I actually like the Carpenters, and my mom and I still share a love for Bobby Darin which my brother and sister can't understand.

But yeah, Rod Stewart.... She asked me to buy her that album of his from a few years back where he covered old standards.  I told her no way.  I can't remember exactly which critic said it, but he said it perfectly when he wrote, "never has an artist forsaken his voice, his music, or his audience as horribly as Rod Stewart did."

P.S.  Holy shit, Post.  You talked to Paul Simon?   :worship:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mybabysmomma on November 25, 2010, 06:49:51 AM
Karen Carpenter had one of those voices beyond good.  Like Alison Krauss, ungodly clean.

Tom Jones,,,LOVE
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mrcookieface on November 25, 2010, 07:08:16 AM
I can't hear Tom Jones' name without recalling the best meal I ever had (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iEDyTqubiM).

This slays me.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on November 25, 2010, 09:47:29 AM
foreign films about the american west have pretty killer scores. "once upon a time in the west" comes to mind.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mrcookieface on November 25, 2010, 04:22:47 PM
Ennio Morricone rules.  I think I read somewhere that he's done over 500 film scores.

:trance:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on November 26, 2010, 10:55:42 PM
what would happen if i wore chain mail to flay?

i mean, "fly". that was an honest typo but i thought it was funny enough to leave it.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 26, 2010, 11:19:22 PM
Actually, they sell commercially made chain mail for butchers, from gauntlets to full-chest chain mail aprons.

One slip with a cleaver, and I guess you're glad you wear the stuff.  And raw meat can certainly get slippery.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on November 26, 2010, 11:28:12 PM
axe, do you think i don't have my own chain mail already? come on, man, how many years have you known me?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 26, 2010, 11:36:10 PM
I'm just saying that there's commercial chain mail specifically made for flaying.  So, to answer your question, I guess it would just be sort of industrial of you.

If you went through the airport security checkpoint wearing chain mail, I don't think you would be getting on the plane.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on November 27, 2010, 12:06:49 AM
on what grounds would i be denied boarding?

hell, i could get my hands on a full set of 14th century armor. i guess i couldn't wear the spurs or the pig helmet, but it's not a weapon.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 27, 2010, 12:30:40 AM
Quote
on what grounds would i be denied boarding?

Not being like everybody else.  Acting suspicious.

I agree that those should ultimately not be reasons to keep you from traveling.  But it's what would probably happen, and you can blame the policy but you can't entirely blame the specific people who would tell you no.

Look at it this way:  If you show up at security in armor, you're on camera, there are lots of witnesses.  What can happen?

- You get on the plane, and nothing goes wrong.  This doesn't do any special favors for the other passengers or the security people

- You get on the plane and something really bad happens.  Even if the bad thing had nothing to do with you, the security people who let you get on the plane are screwed.  ('That should have been a huge red flag right there!'  'Obviously they were letting anyone on the plane!')

- You don't get on the plane, and nothing goes wrong.  This is bad for you, assuming your intent was genuinely to travel and not to protest, and that you're not a crazy person, etc.  It's not likely to be bad for the security people.  You could sue, but probably not sue them personally, and their supervisors would almost certainly back them up.

- You don't get on the plane, and something goes wrong with the plane.  This (the fact you were prevented from boarding, I mean) is good for you and for the security people.

So there's no upside to them letting you get on the plane, but they have plenty of reasons to stop you.  And I'm sure they're taught that.  It's just basic cynical standard operating procedure.

It could be worse.  A tour bus company in Mexico got busted by the federales years ago because they instructed their drivers to try not to leave survivors in the case of an accident.  It was easier to settle lawsuits with relatives than with insurance companies, and insurance companies were more tenacious when the policy holder was still alive and needing medical care.  They got caught when a bus driver backed up and hit a car a second time.

You've got to wonder what the bus passengers thought was going on.  That can't have been a good day for anyone.  But my point is that things should be better but could be worse.  Our government puts up with a lot of backtalk from us, and while it should -- and we should make the most of that freedom -- it's not hard to see why so many governments prefer to pound down any nail that sticks up.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on November 27, 2010, 12:35:53 AM
well, i'm just playing devil's advocate.

i wonder if anyone has ever flown commercial wearing a full set of armor . . .
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on November 27, 2010, 12:39:43 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/s3Jum.jpg)
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 27, 2010, 12:46:15 AM
Quote
i wonder if anyone has ever flown commercial wearing a full set of armor . . .

Now that, I have no idea.

But I did find this (http://en.allexperts.com/q/Air-Travel-2709/TSA-security-question.htm).
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on November 27, 2010, 01:11:50 AM
interesting and maybe has some precedence, it is old, though.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: stormneedle on November 27, 2010, 04:32:06 PM
A lot of the chain maille folks have "permies". They're rarely made out of steel, so sometimes they won't set off metal detectors (the ones that use magnetic induction to sense metal). Most of the people I've read that have them are in other countries, though, so I don't know what problems USAian security would do with them, but being pulled aside is probably the worst of it. They did that for me when I was wearing my wrist brace (carpal tunnel flare + required travel != fun).
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: flipper on November 29, 2010, 02:45:44 PM
Three songs which represent amrrkkka.

Sorry I'm quite the cynic lately and with the Senate Judiciary committee going 19-0 for COICA (fuck you Diane Fienstein).

Corporate Deathburger by MDC
Electronic Plantation by Jello Biafra and the Guantanamo School of Medicine
Lying Sacks of Shit by Retching Red
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on December 16, 2010, 01:15:53 AM
what does the grinch do the rest of the year?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on December 16, 2010, 01:43:49 AM
He's a mildly pernicious supervillain, like a less theatrical and apocalyptic Dr Doom.  It's not stated explicitly, but it's pretty clear:

- Has his own Secret Crime Cave.

- Has superpowers -- eg, super-strength (note that he lifts the sleigh full of toys over his head), super-stealth, super-flexibility, and so on.

- Genius-level inventor (see the two Grinch sequel stories, both canonical).

- Pathological outsider, obsessed with monitoring and messing with the community.

- Really an antihero as much as a true villain.

- Featured in Marvel Comics.

- Was butchered in an effects-heavy but misguided live-action film.

It's all there.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mrcookieface on December 16, 2010, 01:51:50 AM
- Becomes vice president.  Shoots friend in the face.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Hedaira on December 16, 2010, 02:25:54 AM
- Becomes vice president.  Shoots friend in the face.

 :lol:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: flipper on December 16, 2010, 06:21:34 PM
- Becomes vice president.  Shoots friend in the face.

:clap:

I was remembering the two sequels.  One was Halloween-esque I think and the other is The Grinch Grinches the Cat In The Hat I think.  And damn you for bringing up that horrendous movie.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on December 16, 2010, 07:13:14 PM
Quote
- Becomes vice president.  Shoots friend in the face.

He doesn't really have friends.  But it made me think:  They say the Grinch's heart grew three artificial valves that day.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: flipper on December 17, 2010, 04:56:31 PM
:rollin:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mrcookieface on December 17, 2010, 05:16:57 PM
:lol:
 
:clap:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on January 13, 2011, 02:19:07 PM
Quote
Scheduled For Early Delivery On:
    Thursday, 01/13/2011, By End of Day
Originally Scheduled For Delivery On:
    Friday, 01/14/2011, By End of Day

Last Location:
    Departed - Secaucus, NJ, United States, Wednesday, 01/12/2011

What does this mean? I don't usually track UPS packages, just FedEx, so this "early delivery" business is new to me. I'm assuming this is a Ground package, so it should take two days from NJ. Is that their way of saying, "If you're super lucky, it may arrive on the 13th"?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on January 13, 2011, 02:24:51 PM
Maybe I'm just a cynic, but I think it means they think they've hit on a fantastic way to improve their on-time delivery statistics for marketing purposes. Namely, tell the customer it will arrive on a certain day, even though they know it won't take that long, then ... SURPRISE! ... let them know it'll arrive "early."
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on January 13, 2011, 03:09:45 PM
i get that all the time. when they first estimate delivery they go with a longer estimate. it usually arrives earlier than the first estimate. they just update the delivery date for your convenience.

always under promise and over deliver.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on January 13, 2011, 04:05:08 PM
(http://www.miconian.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/st-tng_relics.jpg)
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: hajen on January 13, 2011, 04:30:30 PM
What is the equivalent of "cameltoe" for a man?

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_DaRchahRCmU/TS6cq77Yb8I/AAAAAAAAACs/WowBXBQULy0/s1600/Eric-eschoolcraft%2540sbcglobal.net.jpg)
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on January 13, 2011, 04:55:54 PM
That looks painful. Also, what's up with his thumb?

always under promise and over deliver.

This is what I've found works best too, but my boss has just the opposite philosophy. Well actually his is more like over promise and over deliver.

Maybe I'm just a cynic, but I think it means they think they've hit on a fantastic way to improve their on-time delivery statistics for marketing purposes. Namely, tell the customer it will arrive on a certain day, even though they know it won't take that long, then ... SURPRISE! ... let them know it'll arrive "early."

No it's not that. There's no way it will deliver on the 13th, and no way it could have via Ground service. It would have to be in the same state to get it the next day. And it is Ground service - I looked a little closer.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Talix on January 13, 2011, 05:03:32 PM
What is the equivalent of "cameltoe" for a man?

Moose knuckle?

Oh, Andy, how I loved you!
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: hajen on January 13, 2011, 08:23:35 PM
Yeah, I asked in chat, "moose knuckle" appeared to be the consensus.
Here's hmof's contribution:

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_OwKerY2HJfc/TSCRvSYWcEI/AAAAAAAABm0/LH_hqFul8s4/s1600/Bon%2BScott.jpg)
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Hedaira on January 14, 2011, 12:01:52 AM
 :lol: :lol:

That's a stuffed sock that shifted on him there. Looks silly.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on January 14, 2011, 04:48:55 PM
Quote
In Transit: On Time :lol:

Scheduled Delivery: Friday, 01/14/2011, By End of Day
Last Location: Arrived - Hodgkins, IL, United States, Friday, 01/14/2011

Shipment Progress

Hodgkins, IL, United States 01/14/2011 12:27 P.M. Arrival Scan
Secaucus, NJ, United States 01/12/2011 10:11 P.M. Departure Scan

Mr. McKittrick, after very careful consideration, sir, I've come to the conclusion that your tracking system sucks.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on January 15, 2011, 04:34:27 PM
Quote
Weather conditions might delay delivery of this shipment. This is the most current information available. Please track again later for status updates.

 :nonplused:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 03, 2011, 10:08:31 PM
OK, so . . . trying to find a short video, or at least information about it, and I'm failing.

Years and years ago, my brother and I taped some anthology of animated shorts off TV.  I'm pretty sure it was post-Liquid Television, but my brother thinks it was on either MTV or VH1.  I can't remember what other shorts were part of the program.  I'm guessing this was around 1995, though.

The short in question:  It's stop-motion, a surreal and slightly dark, slightly lyrical story about a father and daughter, the daughter possibly too young to speak.  I have this vague idea that they're anthropomorphic bears, but my brother's not sure. 

The father is telling the daughter a bedtime story while taking her to her room to put her to bed.  This journey wanders in and out of impossible landscapes and situations, such as them passing through a doorway and then being in a car, or them turning into puppets and the camera panning upward to show that the father is operating the puppets.

The story he tells the girl is about a little girl who has a mouse (a wind-up mouse?).  In this story, the girl tells the mouse that someday they'll go to Mars.  Then she grows up, gets married, is disaffected, etc.  Eventually, the grown-up girl in the bedtime story abandons her family and finds the mouse, who says, "Weren't we going to go to Mars?"  And the grown-up girl says, "Oh.  Yes.  I'd forgotten."

At this point, they have finally reached the real girl's bedroom, and the father tucks her into bed, or something like that, and the short ends.  It's maybe seven or eight minutes long, and it was astonishingly creative.

Last year I discovered that it didn't seem to be on any of the VHS tapes I have.  For some reason, it occurred to me tonight to go googling it, but . . . no luck.

Any ideas?  It really was a tremendous little piece, and I'd love to have a copy of it, or even just find it on YouTube if it's out there.  But if it is, I sure can't find it.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 03, 2011, 10:38:31 PM
Jesus Christ, I actually found it.  Weird how often that happens just after I finally give up and ask for help.  Not 100% sure what the moral is, there . . . .

Anyway.  1995, bang on the dot, it's Hilary (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379312/combined), by Anthony Hodgson, who it turns out also worked on the Shreks, Madagascar, and Megamind

They're not bears.  It's apparently not on YouTube except in very brief teaser form as part of an ad for "The Animation Show of Shows", a boxed set of shorts that includes it.  In fact, it's on the cover of the first DVD box set (http://www.filmporium.com/product_info.php?cPath=18&products_id=158), which unfortunately costs $30.  (If I had the money, it would totally be worth it.)

However . . . it's on Vimeo (https://www.google.com/url?url=http://vimeo.com/3514404&rct=j&sa=U&ei=aV2zTu-EOoPG2wXNgqzNDQ&ved=0CBYQtwIwAA&q=hilary+anthony+hodgson&usg=AFQjCNGLgrha3vFrTwWsW3nW-0WJIDD3Lg).  [Squee!]

Although it's been cacheing for twelve minutes now, and it's just over halfway done, for a nine-minute program.  I have no right to complain, for free content, but it's the implication of instant gratification that makes the wait interminable.  It's like standing in front of the microwave.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on December 28, 2011, 05:20:12 PM
Could Habanero peppers be used to heat up Red Thai curry without negatively affecting the flavor?

I'm using red bell peppers for flavoring, but need something to spice it up a bit, and the local selection of peppers is primarily Mexican type peppers.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on December 28, 2011, 05:21:49 PM
yes, but caution is advised.

 
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on December 28, 2011, 05:50:10 PM
You mean caution about putting in to many because it will be too hot, or because too many will affect the flavor?

I don't think of a Habanero as having any flavor - just heat. But I don't know, I've never tasted one on its own.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on December 28, 2011, 06:30:51 PM
habaneros are not called habaneros in all parts of the world, just the mexican part.  ;)

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on December 28, 2011, 10:07:13 PM
You mean caution about putting in to many because it will be too hot, or because too many will affect the flavor?

I don't think of a Habanero as having any flavor - just heat. But I don't know, I've never tasted one on its own.

caution about handling them and/or putting too many in. i think habaneros have a great fruity flavor. but they are pretty hot. watch out for airborne capsaicin during the cooking process: you can protesterize yerself.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Hedaira on December 29, 2011, 01:02:01 AM
Yeh. And for the love of Beezus - wear gloves when handling them. Wash with dish soap when you get home from picking them up at the store. I know that sounds like a bit much, but all it takes is one itch of an eye or a nose and if any of those things in the pile had a broken skin ... this is when the curling up into a ball and sobbing starts.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on December 29, 2011, 08:26:21 AM
all it takes is one itch of an eye or a nose and if any of those things in the pile had a broken skin ... this is when the curling up into a ball and sobbing starts.

or... say, if you have to go take a leak. it's frowned upon.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on December 29, 2011, 09:38:32 AM
Whoa. I didn't know they were that strong. I will wear a hazmat suit.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on December 29, 2011, 10:42:28 AM
if you are only looking for "a bit" of heat, you might try serrano peppers instead of habaneros.

scoville scale...  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scoville_scale)

but i'd still use caution. wash your hands several times before handling any eyeballs or other assorted sensitive parts.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on December 29, 2011, 01:16:53 PM
Yeah, I think they had serrano peppers. They don't have a distinctive flavor like jalapenos?

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on December 29, 2011, 02:12:36 PM
actually, i like the flavor of serranos a little better than that of jalapenos, but they are comprable. i can't imagine they would adversely affect the flavor of a curry, but that's a matter of personal taste i suppose. i'd use em.

you could try adding some whole dried hot peppers and then remove them post-cooking. i've never actually tried that.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on December 29, 2011, 03:20:01 PM
they sell serranos in my indian market. they're a common ingredient in asian cooking.

like i said, these peppers are all over the world, they just go by different names and they're easier to find in mexican grocery stores in the US.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on December 29, 2011, 05:29:18 PM
Yeah, I know what you're saying. According to Wikipedia, all peppers originated in Central and South America. But looking at the Thai Pepper, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_pepper) I don't see an alternate name that I've seen in normal grocery stores before.

I wouldn't even consider using jalapenos. That sounds gross to me. Curry ain't cheap - I don't want to screw it up.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on December 29, 2011, 05:38:16 PM
i wouldn't use canned jalapenos. maybe that's what you are thinking of? you can enliven jalapenos a bit by roasting them (put a little olive oil on them and put them in the oven on a cookie sheet or some such thing till they are kind of blackened, then remove the skins if you want).

but still, jalapenos have a nice kind of peppery flavor, i think. i eat them raw all the time. heat levels vary a LOT (these days for some reason more than in the past), so you should taste your pepper (heh heh ehehe  why does that sound knotty) before using in cooking.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on December 29, 2011, 05:39:23 PM
also, i dig thai chiles. :detta: . good stuff.

i'd use any of these as heater-uppers.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on December 29, 2011, 05:44:49 PM
i wouldn't use canned jalapenos. maybe that's what you are thinking of?

Well... yeah, I guess. I only just yesterday noticed how cheap they are to buy in the vegetable section instead of the canned ones. I always assumed the ones at Mexican restaurants were fresh, but now I'm wondering if they were canned too...  :hmm:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on December 29, 2011, 05:52:22 PM
here's a pic of some hunan pork belly i had about a week ago. it has serranos in it. all they did was add a little peppery flavor and heat.

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/392644_2620741011155_1634079799_2442227_19025081_n.jpg)

yes, commence the droolage.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on December 29, 2011, 06:19:36 PM
yeah one fresh jalapeno is like 16 cents. that's cheap. real cheap... RAxe kind of cheap! ;)

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on December 29, 2011, 06:53:42 PM
:lol: 

Yeah, but I'd sooner eat a AAA battery than a jalapeno.  :shrug:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on December 29, 2011, 10:11:47 PM
let's take a pole. get it? LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

no seriously. why so negative?




LOOOOOOOOO
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on December 29, 2011, 10:17:15 PM
:lol:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Talix on December 30, 2011, 10:54:54 AM
The Landscaper wiped his eyes after cutting habeneros once.

Once.

He was sad.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on December 30, 2011, 11:03:19 AM
:uncertain:

wait. it's just a vegetable product mang.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Talix on December 30, 2011, 11:05:25 AM
Exactly.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: feffer on December 30, 2011, 12:42:46 PM
I have TWICE accidentally put a contact solution containing hydrogen peroxide in my eye.  The first time, I didn't realize it was different and just used my normal lens case.  THAT was a nasty surprise.  I was crying and thought I was going to throw up.  Then just the other day I accidentally rinsed a contact with it, then thought it would be okay if I washed it real good with saline solution.  That did not work, but at least I was ready for it and got it out of my eye as soon as I could.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on December 30, 2011, 04:50:07 PM
Oh, yeah -- I did that a number of times, back in the day.  Stupid Aosept system.

For me, at least, the all-in-one contact stuff is brilliant.  And the Meijer generic is like $4 a bottle.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on December 30, 2011, 05:48:41 PM
I wear contacts a lot more now that I'm using the daily disposables. Those are kind of awesome.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on December 30, 2011, 05:50:25 PM
do not get pepper oil in your contacts.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Hedaira on December 31, 2011, 03:31:24 PM
 :shock:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on January 17, 2012, 11:03:03 AM
The serrano peppers were yummy  :thumbsup: I haven't tried them in the curry yet, but I think they'll work fine. I've eaten them raw and added them to chili and some kind of oriental noodle dish.

 
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on January 17, 2012, 11:10:23 AM
The teflon on my 12" Calphalon skillet has started to flake off  :angry: I'm sure I've probably voided the warranty somehow.

Anyway, anyone have any experience/opinions about ceramic cookware? I'm considering replacing the skillet with a ceramic coated one.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on January 17, 2012, 11:20:25 AM
stainless steel might be better ... certainly better than teflon.

/imho
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on January 17, 2012, 11:23:37 AM
I've had a big stainless skillet for years, but never use it  :hmm: Maybe I'll pull it out and try it next time. I just assumed it would be a pain in the ass to clean.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mybabysmomma on January 17, 2012, 11:30:54 AM
I use soap and a little scrubber brush on mines, but if you want to use your ass I might try some non-scratch cleaner with.   :P
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on January 17, 2012, 11:35:38 AM
I've got a 12" Scotch-Brite pad that I sit on pans with. As I watch my soaps, I just wiggle my ass to clean my pans.

 :P
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on January 17, 2012, 12:18:23 PM
i just bought a 14" carbon steel wok. it was 7.99. took me about an hour to season it and it's incredibly non-stick now. i found it at an international market. i really recommend them. you can find them online, too.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: TFJ on January 17, 2012, 01:01:38 PM
I've got a 12" Scotch-Brite pad that I sit on pans with. As I watch my soaps, I just wiggle my ass to clean my pans.

 :P

this is an image i will cherish forever.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: flipper on January 17, 2012, 02:52:40 PM
LeCruesset enamel coated cast iron cookware is awesome.  I highly recommend.  It is expensive though.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on February 12, 2012, 12:24:26 AM
OK, weird writing / style question, which apparently I have never run into before, and which I can't seem to figure out how to search for in online style guides.  I need opinions.

Dialogue, one speaker addresses two different parties in two sentences in a row.  Normally, you wouldn't start a new paragraph for each sentence, since it's the same speaker and there's no break in the speech.  But it looks stupid to me.

Example:

    "You stay here," he told Adam.  "Do you want to come?" he asked Bob.


The only ways to fix this that I've come up with so far involve making the dialogue and/or writing less natural, and I hate them.

Example of forced exposition just to break it up:

    "You stay here," he told Adam.
    He turned his head.
    "Do you want to come?" he asked Bob.


Example of comic book dialogue:

    "You stay here, Adam.  Do you want to come, Bob?"


People actually rarely use each other's names that way in real speech (although it's kind of funny to talk that way . . . once in a great while), and usually it only happens to signal the reader who the hell someone's talking to or to remind them of the characters' names.  I don't like it, myself.

So WTF?  Now I'm at the point where it's not so much fixing it as that I want to know what people think is the right / standard / best way to deal with it.  Of course, maybe I'm the only one who thinks it looks weird in the first place.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on March 09, 2012, 12:37:25 PM
is this satire?

http://christwire.org/2012/01/how-the-muppets-stole-heterosexuality-and-morality-from-america/
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: feffer on March 09, 2012, 12:37:46 PM
Yes.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on March 09, 2012, 12:45:16 PM
see, stupid question

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Hisey on August 14, 2012, 09:21:39 PM
OK, weird writing / style question, which apparently I have never run into before, and which I can't seem to figure out how to search for in online style guides.  I need opinions.

Dialogue, one speaker addresses two different parties in two sentences in a row.  Normally, you wouldn't start a new paragraph for each sentence, since it's the same speaker and there's no break in the speech.  But it looks stupid to me.

Example:

    "You stay here," he told Adam.  "Do you want to come?" he asked Bob.


The only ways to fix this that I've come up with so far involve making the dialogue and/or writing less natural, and I hate them.

Example of forced exposition just to break it up:

    "You stay here," he told Adam.
    He turned his head.
    "Do you want to come?" he asked Bob.


Example of comic book dialogue:

    "You stay here, Adam.  Do you want to come, Bob?"


People actually rarely use each other's names that way in real speech (although it's kind of funny to talk that way . . . once in a great while), and usually it only happens to signal the reader who the hell someone's talking to or to remind them of the characters' names.  I don't like it, myself.

So WTF?  Now I'm at the point where it's not so much fixing it as that I want to know what people think is the right / standard / best way to deal with it.  Of course, maybe I'm the only one who thinks it looks weird in the first place.
*putting on English major hat*
One way is to replace the first pronoun with the proper noun and leave the second pronoun in place. That way it's clearer, but it looks fine to me.
But then again. My AP style guide has been gone for a lonnnnnnng time.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on August 15, 2012, 06:33:15 PM
:hmm:

You mean like:

    "Adam, you stay here.  Do you want to come, Bob?"


That's more natural, at least.  I can think of a few other minor variations, but I'm not sure what I prefer.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Hisey on August 15, 2012, 06:47:23 PM
That sounds fine if you're writing dialog.

I was thinking more like:

 "You stay here," George told Adam.  "Do you want to come?" he asked Bob. ( with George replacing the first pronoun.)
Hm. that sounded a lot better in my head.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on August 16, 2012, 03:57:27 PM
Yeah, it still looks like a paragraph break is missing.  But if you put the break in there, it's not clear that it's the same speaker.

:shrug:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on October 18, 2012, 03:04:22 PM
SO seems like 99% of people agree that old-school refrigerators, especially from the 50s and earlier, look great.  And it seems like around 80% of people (I did an informal poll) think all current refrigerators look terrible.

So WTF?  Get it together, idiot appliance manufacturers. 
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Hisey on October 18, 2012, 09:45:08 PM
After you're finished with your scooter, why don't you post-retrofit an old fridge with new guts?
Or a keg?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on October 18, 2012, 10:33:17 PM
Actually, for quite awhile I SUPER-wanted to build an icebox by taking the cooling components out of my fridge, buying old-timey icebox latch hardware (still commonly available from suppliers), and making an insulated multi-door oak cabinet.  Partly because it wouldn't be hard to make it more insulated than a typical modern fridge.

But it would take a whole bunch of time, money, and space that I don't have.  And I'm not 100% sure I could transfer the refrigeration parts without breaking them.

So then I thought about just applying thin oak plywood over my existing fridge and replacing the do-nothing door handles with old-timey ones.  But my fridge doesn't work well, so it would be smarter to replace it . . . .

I did manage to buy brakes and useable springs for my scooter project, but I still need handles for operating those brakes -- seriously, it is easier and cheaper to buy a crap bike at a yardsale and cannibalize it than to buy bicycle parts.  Ridiculous.  Anyway, the springs I seriously wanted to use are porch-swing springs, and they look awesome, but they're just too stiff and would have done nothing.  Trial and error, consisting of about 75% error.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on October 18, 2012, 10:34:51 PM
That said.  My parents, until recently (curses!) had a 1940s fridge that worked GREAT and was in really nice condition.  Thing was built like a tank.  It wasn't frost-free, which is a minor pain, but it honestly didn't use that much electricity.  But getting it here from MA would have been tough.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mybabysmomma on October 19, 2012, 07:40:18 AM
If you worked faster you could have used your scooter.

 :bolt:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on October 19, 2012, 08:14:11 AM
:lol:

That would require a somewhat more elaborate scooter.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: flipper on October 19, 2012, 06:10:57 PM
Or just very low friction wheels for the fridge.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on October 19, 2012, 07:09:04 PM
Arguably, but then I'd also, at the least, need better brakes.

And it would be a long trip.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on October 23, 2012, 01:30:15 AM
how can any woman vote for romney?

i honestly ask that non rhetorically. i'm hoping someone can give me reasons i can't think of, with me not being a woman.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Dr. Leonard HmofCoy on October 23, 2012, 07:29:22 AM
Everybody keeps discussing issues, policy, logic. That's not what this is about. It's all about tribe. Plenty of people will vote for Romney because he's in their tribe, not because of anything he says. What he says and does is increasingly irrelevant. It was no secret that George Bush (the little one) was a complete freaking idiot, didn't matter. People who actually consider issues when selecting their candidate are a thin veneer on the vaster part of the population who vote reflexively based on tribal affiliation. Like lots of other Third World countries.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mybabysmomma on October 23, 2012, 07:50:53 AM
A good number of the women I know are voting for him and it's effn beyond me why.  The only thing I can figure is that they have convinced themselves that if Obama wins we are all gonna die.  ALL GONNA DIE!

Cause you know if Romney wins we will all live forever and get to eat Unicorn farts for every meal.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: feffer on October 23, 2012, 01:57:39 PM
I saw this on facebook today.

(http://i.imgur.com/cI3V2.jpg)
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on October 23, 2012, 02:01:28 PM
Anyone who can't logically explain why they prefer a given candidate, yeah, is just a fan of their team.  Hated Dwight Howard when he was playing in Orlando, but now that he's in LA they love him, etc.  Mitt could be anyone, because he's their anyone.  Of course, he barely qualifies as being anyone, but the GOP seems to prefer these non-entities.  They loved W and Palin but gave Dole the boot.  That's not a good sign.

Anyway, loving your team, right or wrong, means not having to make a decision, not having to consider the issues, not having to think or worry about it.  It's a big relief.  Harlan Ellison, in one of his finer moments, called this the whimper of whipped dogs.  Once you give in and give up, you have so much less to worry about.

The rationalization process is usually pretty easy.  With such crappy candidates (John Kerry, I'm sorry, was not a great candidate either), it can sometimes take some effort.  But they get there.  Obama was strong enough to pull a lot of weak Republicans, but he's run a curiously disinterested re-election campaign.  Maybe he's planning a powerhouse last week?  I know you don't want to peak too early, but even so.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: Hedaira on October 23, 2012, 02:01:38 PM
Post "citation needed."
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on October 23, 2012, 02:26:34 PM
I know -- after all the reports lately about the Dems historically being so much and so consistently better for the economy, the debt, the stock market, employment, etc, etc.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on May 18, 2013, 07:56:18 AM
So I heard this song on the radio, and I was like, "Oh yeah, I haven't heard this in a long time... the Spanish horns will kick in here in a minute..." and then they never did. And it's not an old song, it's new stuff. The name of the tune is Projektion by a band called Girls Names. Apparently it's not a cover tune, but the melody sounds exactly the same as some other song that I can't put my finger on. I thought it might be Moody Blues, but I dunno, it might be something from the 80's or 90's.

Does this sound familiar to anyone?

Youtube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RRAsvIhmu4)
or
Soundcloud (https://soundcloud.com/slumberland-records/09-projektion)
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on May 19, 2013, 02:48:37 AM
i'm not going to waste the bits to post a link, but how is kanye's snl performance considered music? at most it was a shouted poem. (and i'm sure his mother didn't pick cotton.)

am i just so clueless that i don't know what music is any more? am i that old?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on May 19, 2013, 07:24:22 AM
Dammit. I was hoping you were posting the answer. It's still bugging me. I'm pretty sure the song I'm thinking of has been used in the closing credits of a fairly recent movie - something I've seen in the past year or so.

I haven't watched an episode of SNL in years.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: First Post on May 20, 2013, 10:03:19 AM
While it would be easy to blame the Kardashians, I'd say white people are probably what's ruining Kanye's new music. The Marilyn Manson marching-jackboots beat on the first one, the sparse HudMo production on the second...bleh, dunno. I know he can't just do the sped-up old R&B tunes thing forever (esp. since so many producers immediately started biting that style afterward), but it's hard to decipher some of the lyrics when he's screaming ("you see a black man with a white woman at the top floor, they've come to kill King Kong"..."I keep it 300, like the Romans/300 bitches, where's the Trojans"). I'm told the new album might be called "Yeezus" though, which is amazing.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: flipper on May 20, 2013, 01:47:01 PM
I bought Jello Biafra and The Guantanamo School of Medicine's new album White People and the Damage Done.  I love that title.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: the other andrea on June 21, 2013, 01:41:24 AM
So I heard this song on the radio, and I was like, "Oh yeah, I haven't heard this in a long time... the Spanish horns will kick in here in a minute..." and then they never did. And it's not an old song, it's new stuff. The name of the tune is Projektion by a band called Girls Names. Apparently it's not a cover tune, but the melody sounds exactly the same as some other song that I can't put my finger on. I thought it might be Moody Blues, but I dunno, it might be something from the 80's or 90's.

Does this sound familiar to anyone?

Youtube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RRAsvIhmu4)
or
Soundcloud (https://soundcloud.com/slumberland-records/09-projektion)

Okay, don't know if this is it, but to me it sounded a bit like "Alone Again Or" -- originally done by Love (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNcXFy8QTC4) (in 1967), but the version I'm more familiar with is by The Damned (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYVDN27CrOo) (in 1987). :shrug:


Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on June 21, 2013, 05:19:47 AM
YES
YES
YES

THANK YOU
THANK YOU
THANK YOU

:nanaparty:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on June 21, 2013, 05:43:41 AM
Do you want to go for the bonus question of what movie was the song used for in the final credits?  :P

I thought it was a Wes Anderson movie, and apparently the Love version was used in his first movie Bottle Rocket, but I don't think I've ever seen that.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on June 28, 2013, 02:06:23 AM
i'm rewatching a bunch of star treks. i've notice a bunch of recurring things in all of them. one of them struck me tonight and i just thought, "what up with that?"

every time a shield is failing or they can't get a weapons lock or they can't get a transporter lock someone "boosts" the "field". why doesn't eh computer handle this automatically?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: flipper on June 28, 2013, 10:59:09 AM
Because adversity + conflict makes drama.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: stormneedle on June 28, 2013, 11:50:15 AM
They're stealing energy by turning off the air fans and the captain has to authorize it?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on June 28, 2013, 11:53:44 AM
Superhero problems -- the ship is too powerful.  The ship's systems have to fail because it's so much harder to plot a story if the ship's systems all function properly. 

You can get away with these things once in a while, but too much and it's the once-a-month-kryptonite problem.  Marvel went through a LONG phase of having the X-Men always fight really stupidly against an opponent, lose, get depressed, get a pep talk, remember that they don't suck, and then fight properly and easily win.  That went on for like twenty years.  Maybe it's still going on.

Better writers -- which sometimes just means writers who are better suited to superhero stories -- can often devise plots where the good guys are more consistently at the top of their game.  Whedon often hit it out of the park, for instance, and he hired other writers who were often especially good.  Alternatively, you can come up with novel ways to temporarily limit overwhelming good guy advantages, like when Ben Edlund had the magic muppets turn Angel into a muppet.

Genre fiction is actually hard to do well.  A good place to start, though, is to not make your superpowers TOO super . . . which is why comic book continuities often go through phases where they reboot and weaken most of their superheroes.  :lol:

Part of the concept of Enterprise was weakening the ship's capabilities from the outset, FWIW.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on June 28, 2013, 12:02:35 PM
have you seenthe avengers?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on June 28, 2013, 12:04:12 PM
Still not yet.  I'm still currently without the ability to watch streaming movies or, generally, DVDs.  But I hear it's good.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: pdrake on June 28, 2013, 12:13:46 PM
yes, it's good, but they don't get along and fight, get a pep talk, remember they don't suck, then defeat the enemy.

Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on April 11, 2015, 10:18:21 AM
There's a classic story that I'm trying to track down.  I read it in the mid-80s.  I had a vague idea it might be by H. G. Wells, but that isn't helping me find it.

It (probably) takes place in rural India.  There's only one man in the local community who has a rifle, and a tiger has been attacking people.  The guy with the rifle goes out to try to kill the tiger, but something goes wrong, and he ends up managing to kill the tiger with his machete.  Upon consideration, he shoots the tiger afterward to make it look like he killed it with the rifle, because he's got the only rifle in the area, whereas everyone has a machete.

Ring any bells?  The googles gave me all manner of things that had nothing to do with this story.  :shrug:
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on April 13, 2015, 09:09:53 AM
There's only one man in the local community who has a rifle, and a tiger has been attacking people.  The guy with the rifle goes out to try to kill the tiger, but something goes wrong...

 :hmm:

It sounds familiar up to that point, but that's all. Well, maybe the location too, but Thailand or Southeast Asia sounds more familiar. Maybe even a lion in Africa. I'm thinking foreign-made film, color, '50s-60's.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on April 13, 2015, 09:37:47 AM
It's possible it's been filmed, but definitely the point of the story is him pretending he killed the tiger with the rifle.

WAIT.  Google says it's "Tiger's Heart", by Jim Kjelgaard (who's better known for the dog novel Big Red). 

I found it by hypothesizing that it was by Kipling instead of Wells . . . and then putting each search term individually in quotes, because otherwise Google just searched for whatever it felt like instead of what I told it to look for.

Always the farking way.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: the other andrea on April 14, 2015, 02:22:45 PM
It sounded like it was a Kipling story, or someone's re-interpretation of, but I'm always late to these kinds of queries. Glad you found it.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on November 23, 2015, 07:21:09 PM
I don't understand the relationship between the words apologist and apologize.

For example, see this page (http://wikidiff.com/apologize/apologist) that is typical for describing the definitions of each.

What bothers me is that (based on the way I see it), you can be an apologist without making an apology, but the definition of apologist is one who makes an apology.

In the definition of apologist, the original definition of apology is used, but the definition of apology has come to mean something different. It originally meant to defend, but now the more common definition is to express regret. Two totally different things.

Am I seeing this wrong?
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 24, 2015, 11:17:38 AM
:confused:

It says an apologist makes an apology or a defense.  It says that to apologize is to make an apology or defense or excuse.  I'm not sure what the conflict is.

Apology has multiple possible meanings, but to be an apologist doesn't mean you have to cover all those bases.  That said, the ways I see "apologist" used commonly these days are derogatory and vague, and it probably ought to be avoided.

English is really bad with these concepts, anyway.  Often, if you say "I'm sorry," people think you're expressing a sense of guilt or fault, which has nothing to do with what the phrase means.  It means "I'm sad" or "I hurt", sharing a root with words like "sorrow" and "sore".  In common usage, "sorry" has come to mean "regretful", which is a really stupid conflation -- although even "regret" really means to lament and to retroactively wish something hadn't happened.  It doesn't necessarily connote fault.
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: mo on November 24, 2015, 12:57:17 PM
Your analogy of "I'm sorry" is very similar.

To apologize is to express regret. To be an apologist does not require expressing regret at all.

You say  :confused: but your reply sounds like you understand exactly what I'm getting at.

Quote
the ways I see "apologist" used commonly these days are derogatory and vague...

Exactly. I see it being used to imply that a person explaining (X) is actually expressing regret or acknowledging fault with (X).
Title: Re: Stupid Questions
Post by: random axe on November 24, 2015, 03:24:11 PM
Well, see, that's the thing.  To apologize can mean to express regret and can mean to acknowledge fault, but it doesn't have to mean either of those things.

It's bad enough, but "apologist" should just be avoided.  Unless you're being sneakily derogatory, and then it's fun to use because it's vague enough to be defended but just sounds negative.  :P