I'd like to remind people that humans, for the most part, are generally fairly solid.
If you are walking along, particularly if you are pushing a pushchair or wheeling a bike, and someone is in front of you, or if you are opening a door that clearly has a person in front of it, you are very likely to collide with their mass.
I don't know if your day is fraught with will o' the wisps or you "see dead people" but for the most part you can assume the people you see are not ghosts or side effects of your mental illness. This being so you should probably formulate a plan to not walk directly into them as if you expected to pass right through them.
I'm not talking about the reasonably normal state where you turn and walk into someone by accident or didn't see them the other side of the door and so on, everyone does that, I'm talking specifically to those people who look right at you and still decide to just keep going, the same people who must be fighting the urges of the voices in their heads that tell them to "burn them all".
If you do ignore this advice could you at least try not to make matters worse by looking at the person you just walked into, the person you chose to collide with, as if they were a disgusting peon for insisting on existing. You did it. They were minding their own business.
I've seen people actually change the direction they were going in to make sure it intercepts someone else's path. To walk across a lane of pedestrians rather than with the stream, and still act like they didn't do anything and it's all your fault.
Wake up idiots! Everyone has the same rights when it comes to walking around town. You don't get to barge and slam into people or trip them with your crap just because you have an inflated ego.
Thursday, 17 January 2013
What the hell happened to queuing?
It's no secret that in Britain we like queuing, politely standing in line waiting for our turn to do whatever.
It's the adult, mature thing to do. It's fair and it limits the possibilities for conflict over perceived injustices. Anyone pushing in are roundly dealt with by tutting and displeased looks from the queue. Your peers have spoken, get in line. That is how it seems it has always been...at least until recently!
This morning on my commute to work the tram approached my stop, one of the busier stops on the tram system.
Trams are narrow so the walkway typically only has width for one person to stand in the aisle, it forces you to queue...which is good.
As I waited for the tram to arrive at my stop I realised there was a woman trying to squeeze herself down the queue between the people and the chairs and wall. She was trying to work her way to the front of a queue that was in a tight space with no room to maneuver. It was obvious that we were all trying to get off as these queues with everyone facing the door only form on the tram when people are getting off, it wasn't a flashmob art exhibition. I couldn't help wondering what she thought she was doing. Did she think they were going to run out of outside before she reached the door and she'd be forced to live on the tram? Why did she think her need to get off was more important than everyone else's?
I chose not to move and politely apologise like most of the people in the queue (apologising for being in the way of someone pushing in? We are a weird bunch in this country). She had to wait beside me in an uncomfortably small gap facing the side of the queue like a naughty child who'd been sent to the corner of the class...because that's how I roll with rude people.
After we were off the tram (there was plenty of outside left for everyone thankfully) I watched her nonchalantly stroll off.
Gone was all her urgency, there was no imminent appointment she was rushing to, no sign of a sudden case of diarrhea to explain her actions. She was just one of life's natural arseholes. People who have a burning need to put themselves first no matter if it's in any way necessary or not.
That would have been the end of things and you wouldn't be reading this post if the next event hadn't happened.
Within literally five minutes of getting off the tram I was in a bakery buying my breakfast (because I was so late waking up I'm lucky to be wearing clothes) when another woman had a similar flash of inspiration. The queue was a shorter one this time, but still apparently four people in a line is too much to ask of some.
A young woman who was fifth in the queue was suddenly stood next to me. Then with a couple of pigeon steps she was in front of me in what she must have thought was a second parallel queue that only contained her...and so obviously she was first in that one.
She knew what she was doing or she would have just boldly walked up to the counter and tried to pay. No, she crept in little steps when she thought no-one was looking, inching her way to the front. Again "Indignant man" (a lesser known superhero who wears skin under his clothes rather than Lycra) saved the day by cutting her queue off at the pass. Suddenly she was fifth in the queue again and noticeably miffed. Why was she annoyed? Well because she deserved special treatment of course, she was <insert what ever delusion was fueling this woman's actions here> don't you know?
This set me thinking. I recounted as many instances as I could of this sort of activity from recent memory. It then occurred to me that it was becoming a common experience. I could remember a number of times when people in shops, pubs, public transport, and so on, had just decided that queuing was for other people. It may not sound like much but it's indicative of a change in attitude. As far as I can see people are more commonly putting themselves first, even when it's not important to do so (there are other signs of this but today I'm talking queuing). If you were in a burning building it wouldn't be very noble to put yourself first but I'd understand it, self preservation and all that. But getting off first so you can quickly get on with strolling slowly down the street? Needing your sandwich about 45 seconds earlier than you were going to get it?
And this change must be endemic as there was far less dirty looks and tutting than I would have expected too. It's like the other people in the queue were begrudgingly giving these two permission to continue, even apologising for not letting them push in faster.
When it comes to shops I find the staff often rescue the situation by choosing to serve the people they knew were next, but not always, and far more rarely in pubs. What happened Britain? When and why did we decide to drop the manners?
I'm going to look into this growing selfishness and, who knows, you may even see more about it here.
It's the adult, mature thing to do. It's fair and it limits the possibilities for conflict over perceived injustices. Anyone pushing in are roundly dealt with by tutting and displeased looks from the queue. Your peers have spoken, get in line. That is how it seems it has always been...at least until recently!
This morning on my commute to work the tram approached my stop, one of the busier stops on the tram system.
Trams are narrow so the walkway typically only has width for one person to stand in the aisle, it forces you to queue...which is good.
As I waited for the tram to arrive at my stop I realised there was a woman trying to squeeze herself down the queue between the people and the chairs and wall. She was trying to work her way to the front of a queue that was in a tight space with no room to maneuver. It was obvious that we were all trying to get off as these queues with everyone facing the door only form on the tram when people are getting off, it wasn't a flashmob art exhibition. I couldn't help wondering what she thought she was doing. Did she think they were going to run out of outside before she reached the door and she'd be forced to live on the tram? Why did she think her need to get off was more important than everyone else's?
I chose not to move and politely apologise like most of the people in the queue (apologising for being in the way of someone pushing in? We are a weird bunch in this country). She had to wait beside me in an uncomfortably small gap facing the side of the queue like a naughty child who'd been sent to the corner of the class...because that's how I roll with rude people.
After we were off the tram (there was plenty of outside left for everyone thankfully) I watched her nonchalantly stroll off.
Gone was all her urgency, there was no imminent appointment she was rushing to, no sign of a sudden case of diarrhea to explain her actions. She was just one of life's natural arseholes. People who have a burning need to put themselves first no matter if it's in any way necessary or not.
That would have been the end of things and you wouldn't be reading this post if the next event hadn't happened.
Within literally five minutes of getting off the tram I was in a bakery buying my breakfast (because I was so late waking up I'm lucky to be wearing clothes) when another woman had a similar flash of inspiration. The queue was a shorter one this time, but still apparently four people in a line is too much to ask of some.
A young woman who was fifth in the queue was suddenly stood next to me. Then with a couple of pigeon steps she was in front of me in what she must have thought was a second parallel queue that only contained her...and so obviously she was first in that one.
She knew what she was doing or she would have just boldly walked up to the counter and tried to pay. No, she crept in little steps when she thought no-one was looking, inching her way to the front. Again "Indignant man" (a lesser known superhero who wears skin under his clothes rather than Lycra) saved the day by cutting her queue off at the pass. Suddenly she was fifth in the queue again and noticeably miffed. Why was she annoyed? Well because she deserved special treatment of course, she was <insert what ever delusion was fueling this woman's actions here> don't you know?
This set me thinking. I recounted as many instances as I could of this sort of activity from recent memory. It then occurred to me that it was becoming a common experience. I could remember a number of times when people in shops, pubs, public transport, and so on, had just decided that queuing was for other people. It may not sound like much but it's indicative of a change in attitude. As far as I can see people are more commonly putting themselves first, even when it's not important to do so (there are other signs of this but today I'm talking queuing). If you were in a burning building it wouldn't be very noble to put yourself first but I'd understand it, self preservation and all that. But getting off first so you can quickly get on with strolling slowly down the street? Needing your sandwich about 45 seconds earlier than you were going to get it?
And this change must be endemic as there was far less dirty looks and tutting than I would have expected too. It's like the other people in the queue were begrudgingly giving these two permission to continue, even apologising for not letting them push in faster.
When it comes to shops I find the staff often rescue the situation by choosing to serve the people they knew were next, but not always, and far more rarely in pubs. What happened Britain? When and why did we decide to drop the manners?
I'm going to look into this growing selfishness and, who knows, you may even see more about it here.
Saturday, 28 January 2012
Expensive water
I'm tired of buying expensive water. I'm not talking about water rates or spending way over the odds on bottled water. One's an unfortunate necessity the other a choice. I'm talking about the water that I don't have a choice about paying way over the odds for. I love bacon. Every time a cook a delicious slice of the stuff I'm dismayed with how much actual bacon is left in the pan when it's done. A ridiculous amount of snotty water escapes leaving the rashers half their original size. All that water costs me the same as the bacon since the bacon is sold by weight.
Now I know meat has a natural amount of water in it but the fast curing process used for producing bacon adds a load more unnecessary expensive water that I end up paying for as if it were bacon.
This article has some interesting fact about that water: water in bacon...
I remember proper slices of bacon (this makes me sound old) that would shrink only slightly when cooked and had proper bite to them. Apparently natural pork is about 30% water, a fair amount of this is removed is you actually cure the bacon leaving you paying for mostly bacon and a dryer pan. "Modern processes" involve injecting a buttload of brine into bacon so greedy manufacturers can sell you less bacon for more cash faster than actually curing it.
A modern slice of bacon can be up to 50% water. So when I fry a a couple of rashers and have to literally spoon snotty water out of the pan so I don't end up poaching my bacon I'm pouring water away that has the same monetary value as the bacon left behind...apparently. I doubt I could bottle it and sell it by weight for the same price.
Now that link I posted suggests that there is something being done about this. Currently the brine injection process can add 10% more water whilst leaving all the original natural water in place too. This will hopefully be cut to 5%. This still leaves at least 35% water in a rasher and means it hasn't been properly cured but it's a step in the right direction.
What we seem to have forgotten in the UK is that the consumers have the ultimate power. If you are tired of damp snotty shrinking bacon, mostly-bread sausages, cardboard with a vinegary sauce slopped over it in the frozen section masquerading as one of any number of apparently different recipes despite all tasting the same, we could all stop buying it. They wont make it if you don't pay for it. Buy your bacon from a proper butcher that cures the product, puts meat in the sausages, maybe even cook a little more often yourself rather than heating up a plastic tray of slop. We could all get back to enjoying proper nutritious food again and above all bacon would return to how it used to be. I shouldn't have to scrap white stuff off my rashers before plopping them down on a couple of slices of buttered bread (yes butter not margarine...margarine is just whipped up cooking oil, you wouldn't pour it on your bread wet would you? so stopped spreading it on there) with a dash of ketchup or brown sauce. Perfect!
(p.s. brown sauce is made from a number of ingredients, including tomatoes, but has been marketed and commonly known as brown sauce...so that's fine. Tomato sauce/ketchup on the other hand is made chiefly of tomatoes and has always been known as tomato sauce...so why the hell have people started calling it "red sauce"? Have people en masse forgotten the word tomato? stop it! Call it tomato sauce or I'll assume you are an illiterate dumbass).
Now I know meat has a natural amount of water in it but the fast curing process used for producing bacon adds a load more unnecessary expensive water that I end up paying for as if it were bacon.
This article has some interesting fact about that water: water in bacon...
I remember proper slices of bacon (this makes me sound old) that would shrink only slightly when cooked and had proper bite to them. Apparently natural pork is about 30% water, a fair amount of this is removed is you actually cure the bacon leaving you paying for mostly bacon and a dryer pan. "Modern processes" involve injecting a buttload of brine into bacon so greedy manufacturers can sell you less bacon for more cash faster than actually curing it.
A modern slice of bacon can be up to 50% water. So when I fry a a couple of rashers and have to literally spoon snotty water out of the pan so I don't end up poaching my bacon I'm pouring water away that has the same monetary value as the bacon left behind...apparently. I doubt I could bottle it and sell it by weight for the same price.
Now that link I posted suggests that there is something being done about this. Currently the brine injection process can add 10% more water whilst leaving all the original natural water in place too. This will hopefully be cut to 5%. This still leaves at least 35% water in a rasher and means it hasn't been properly cured but it's a step in the right direction.
What we seem to have forgotten in the UK is that the consumers have the ultimate power. If you are tired of damp snotty shrinking bacon, mostly-bread sausages, cardboard with a vinegary sauce slopped over it in the frozen section masquerading as one of any number of apparently different recipes despite all tasting the same, we could all stop buying it. They wont make it if you don't pay for it. Buy your bacon from a proper butcher that cures the product, puts meat in the sausages, maybe even cook a little more often yourself rather than heating up a plastic tray of slop. We could all get back to enjoying proper nutritious food again and above all bacon would return to how it used to be. I shouldn't have to scrap white stuff off my rashers before plopping them down on a couple of slices of buttered bread (yes butter not margarine...margarine is just whipped up cooking oil, you wouldn't pour it on your bread wet would you? so stopped spreading it on there) with a dash of ketchup or brown sauce. Perfect!
(p.s. brown sauce is made from a number of ingredients, including tomatoes, but has been marketed and commonly known as brown sauce...so that's fine. Tomato sauce/ketchup on the other hand is made chiefly of tomatoes and has always been known as tomato sauce...so why the hell have people started calling it "red sauce"? Have people en masse forgotten the word tomato? stop it! Call it tomato sauce or I'll assume you are an illiterate dumbass).
Thursday, 26 January 2012
Is living longer irresponsible?
Having seen this article: how nanotechnology is prolonging life... it occurred to me that repeatedly over the last few years there have been little breakthroughs covered in the media about living longer. It's always reported as a good thing as if we should just take it for granted that the human race as a whole wants and needs to live longer.
Now admittedly I understand the wish for a long life on the personal level and I bet I will be wishing for just a bit more life when my day finally comes but really is it a good idea for us to spend time and resources trying to ensure every human on the planet lives as long as possible (or at least the wealthy few that can afford some of these treatments)?
Shouldn't we be focussing on ensuring the quality of life of all humans instead? Or at least first?
There are many reasons why ensuring we have an increasing aging population is not a good idea, a glaringly obvious one is the fact that we don't have enough resources now for all the people alive to live an equal quality of life with the same prospects so how is it an improvement to ensure there are more resource users (even contributing ones, I'm not arguing that the elderly are just a burden) with more medical needs?
I'm not talking about use by dates for life but if you want to avoid munching on soylent green just a sensible approach to the natural process of life. Don't spend so many resources on making sure that absolutely every last human on the planet lives for as long as possible when you are doing nothing about the rate of production of new humans or the quality of life of those already here.
I don't get the general obsession with prolonging life. The personal one yes, but the scientific/medical communities who could be making progress in artifical limbs, brain repair, even less necessary things like faster learning processes, augmented senses...heck anything but making sure there are plenty more bog standard resource chugging humans for no particular reason other than because we can.
Get creative science! Make the Star Trek lifestyle that little bit closer and we can all live normal length fulfilling lives rather than dragging out crappy ones.
Short answer: yes, don't waste resources on living longer if you are going to waste that extra life just existing. Many people did many great things back when life expectancies were a lot lower than they are today. Maybe the sense of urgency drove them on, maybe they just didn't have time to mulch their minds while being fed plastic.
Now admittedly I understand the wish for a long life on the personal level and I bet I will be wishing for just a bit more life when my day finally comes but really is it a good idea for us to spend time and resources trying to ensure every human on the planet lives as long as possible (or at least the wealthy few that can afford some of these treatments)?
Shouldn't we be focussing on ensuring the quality of life of all humans instead? Or at least first?
There are many reasons why ensuring we have an increasing aging population is not a good idea, a glaringly obvious one is the fact that we don't have enough resources now for all the people alive to live an equal quality of life with the same prospects so how is it an improvement to ensure there are more resource users (even contributing ones, I'm not arguing that the elderly are just a burden) with more medical needs?
I'm not talking about use by dates for life but if you want to avoid munching on soylent green just a sensible approach to the natural process of life. Don't spend so many resources on making sure that absolutely every last human on the planet lives for as long as possible when you are doing nothing about the rate of production of new humans or the quality of life of those already here.
I don't get the general obsession with prolonging life. The personal one yes, but the scientific/medical communities who could be making progress in artifical limbs, brain repair, even less necessary things like faster learning processes, augmented senses...heck anything but making sure there are plenty more bog standard resource chugging humans for no particular reason other than because we can.
Get creative science! Make the Star Trek lifestyle that little bit closer and we can all live normal length fulfilling lives rather than dragging out crappy ones.
Short answer: yes, don't waste resources on living longer if you are going to waste that extra life just existing. Many people did many great things back when life expectancies were a lot lower than they are today. Maybe the sense of urgency drove them on, maybe they just didn't have time to mulch their minds while being fed plastic.
Monday, 16 January 2012
Dammit eBay!
So here we are, the first post of my new blog. I wanted it to be something light and breezy...welcoming...but then I searched eBay for something and I just had to exorcise the rage.
I started a search for an iPhone 3GS. I need it in working order but onther than that I'm not bothered about scratches as it wont be my phone (it's for a project I'm working on). So I set filters. I chose all the filters bar "faulty" because I didn't want a faulty device.
I got a page of results...the first seven of which contained three faulty devices. The sellers had listed them as "used" then openly stated in the auction that they were in fact faulty. One had a cracked screen, another would only display a blank screen, the third had no backlight to the screen. So basically three unusable devices.
What do these turds think the "faulty" category exists for if they think it's ok to put a faulty device in used then cover their backsides by stating in the text of the auction that it's faulty?
Why doesn't eBay stop this? I don't expect them to read every auction but surely some validation could occur. If a description is added that contains the word "faulty" then surely they can check the category the item is being placed in and if it's not "faulty" show the seller a pop-up explaining that they are currently being a douche and if they then click ok and continue to post the same auction then set a flag for checking this one manually.
I'm sick of using filters to try to find what I want only to find they are barely worth while as people flatly ignore them when posting an auction.
If I search for a phone or a laptop you can guarantee that a large proportion of the results will actually be for phone/laptop accessories and upgrades and goodness knows what else despite the fact that there is a section specifically for those things.
I just want to find what I'm looking for not what other people want to show me even once I've set a filter TO NOT SEE THAT CRAP!
eBay get something sorted. The search results I'm getting are less and less relevant as people ignore the rules. Start enforcing them will you?
I started a search for an iPhone 3GS. I need it in working order but onther than that I'm not bothered about scratches as it wont be my phone (it's for a project I'm working on). So I set filters. I chose all the filters bar "faulty" because I didn't want a faulty device.
I got a page of results...the first seven of which contained three faulty devices. The sellers had listed them as "used" then openly stated in the auction that they were in fact faulty. One had a cracked screen, another would only display a blank screen, the third had no backlight to the screen. So basically three unusable devices.
What do these turds think the "faulty" category exists for if they think it's ok to put a faulty device in used then cover their backsides by stating in the text of the auction that it's faulty?
Why doesn't eBay stop this? I don't expect them to read every auction but surely some validation could occur. If a description is added that contains the word "faulty" then surely they can check the category the item is being placed in and if it's not "faulty" show the seller a pop-up explaining that they are currently being a douche and if they then click ok and continue to post the same auction then set a flag for checking this one manually.
I'm sick of using filters to try to find what I want only to find they are barely worth while as people flatly ignore them when posting an auction.
If I search for a phone or a laptop you can guarantee that a large proportion of the results will actually be for phone/laptop accessories and upgrades and goodness knows what else despite the fact that there is a section specifically for those things.
I just want to find what I'm looking for not what other people want to show me even once I've set a filter TO NOT SEE THAT CRAP!
eBay get something sorted. The search results I'm getting are less and less relevant as people ignore the rules. Start enforcing them will you?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)