All aboard the internet bandwagon!
Listen people, I've said this in the past and I'll say it again here. Repeating the same tired jokes, and trashing people because it's currently fashionable to do so doesn't make you funny, witty, clever or original in any way. It makes you a giant cock.
The latest example of this is the inane comments about Scott Stapp's recent singing of the national anthem. Most of you probably know him as the lead singer of Creed or Alter Bridge. Yes, two of the bands the internet loves to bash the most, so you can probably see where this is headed.
Just read the comments in this blog post, and on the YouTube video itself. While it isn't the best rendition of the anthem I've heard, it's pretty fucking far from the worst. But don't take my word for it, watch for yourself!
He was in tune, he hit all the notes, and I'd say he did pretty well. Could have done without checking his ear piece 27 times, but whatever.
Aaaand I had a point I was going to make, but I got pulled away to do some work, and now I can't remember what I was going to say. Oh well.
Moral of the story: Think for yourself. Don't be a cock.
News without a clue
Perhaps my expectations are a little high, but I generally expect the people who deliver the news to have at least a bit of an idea what they're talking about. It seems lately though that they're either 100% clueless, or just making shit up. Take this latest article from WBTV in North Carolina.
It attempts to inform parents about some possible "code" their children might use in text messaging. That's fine. I don't particularly agree with spying on your children, but some people do. But what's not fine, is spreading information that is misleading, and often flat out wrong. Let's take a look at what we've got here.
According to a recent survey, 95% of parents don't recognize the lingo kids use to let people know that their parents are watching.
This should probably read "According to a recent survey, 95% of parents are fucking retarded". If you have a child that's old enough to have a cell phone today, you were a part of the 90s. There is no excuse for being oblivious to technology.
Since most texting is confined to 200 characters or less, text messages are heavily abbreviated and often written in what looks like a secret code. Computer geeks call it "Leetspeak" or "Leet" for short.
Wrong. Text shorthand is nothing close to l33tsp3@k. Th15 15 l33t5p3@k. We'll come back to this snippet later, where the author contradicts him/herself.
So, let's go through what the article suggests are 10 text messages to pay special attention to!
8 - Oral sex
And we start the list off with bullshit! You made this up, author. This is used absolutely nowhere as a code for oral sex. An acceptable answer would have been 69, even though that'd be wrong too.
PAW - Parents Watching
While this is a legitimate "code", it is generally used in instant messaging, and not texting. I'll give you a pass on this one, because it is plausible.
143 - I love you
182 - I hate you
I'm lumping these together, because just like the first example, these are complete bullshit. Stop making shit up, author.
KPC - Keeping Parents Clueless
I'm very skeptical about this one. First, I've never seen this used, ever. Second, kids don't talk like this.
LMIRL - Lets meet in real life
Again, this fits squarely into the online instant messaging area. If someone has your phone number, chances are you've met them already. If not, your kid has bigger issues than using text shorthand.
420 - Marijuana
This obscure "leetspeak code" has only been used since the early 80s. I can understand how the author thought it might be something parents might not know about!
ASL - Age/Sex/Location
Well what do you know, another online instant messaging abbreviation. Do your children often get text messages from people they've never met, or even know their sex, author? Oh, and that's what the S part means, their sex. Not if they want to have sex, and what location to have it in.
Banana - Penis
So not only is this completely made up, it's also a contradiction to the whole heavily abbreviated part.
I'm beginning to think that I'm in the wrong career field. I generally enjoy making up bullshit stories, but I never knew you could get paid for publishing them!
My worst nightmare is real
As someone who hates, and has been stung by countless jelly fish over my life time, this article and the images accompanying it will haunt my dreams forever.
Drink beer for bone health
Do you like your bones? Do you like having them not broken? Well then, according to a new study by Spanish scientists you should probably start downing a couple pints.
It is thought that the high level of silicon in beer slows down the thinning that leads to fractures and boosts the formation of new bone, the journal Nutrition reports.
Beer is also rich in phytoestrogens, plant versions of oestrogen, which keep bones healthy.
So drink up friends! Here's to not having broken hips when we're old and wrinkly!
Rupert Murdoch hates money
As if we needed another reason to not support the channels and sites you own, you give us another.
So, you're losing money from advertising revenue because people like me use AdBlock, or simply don't click links. I can understand you wanting to find a way to make up for this, but charging people for access to a news site is the most ass backwards way you could possibly go about doing it.
I get it. You're old. You have little, if any grasp of just how big the internet really is, and you're not likely to ever understand. So you just need to know this: Your sites aren't special, they aren't delivering anything original, and they offer no entertainment value at all. Just like mine. What makes you think people will actually pay to read your site, instead of going to one of the millions of other sites that contain the exact same stories and information?
Not to mention that this is, you know, the internet. There's this sweet little thing called copy and paste that people like to use to spread information. As soon as your "paid to read" stories are posted, they'll be copied and posted to news sites and blogs instantly. And again, this being the internet, theres not a damn thing you can do about it.
Add to that that fact that once you start charging for access, bloggers will no longer link to your site. You know, like I just did in this post? See that link up there, that goes to a site you don't own? Yea, you'll get none of that. And while one blog may seem insignificant, think of just how many of them are out there. Then when you're done thinking about that, think about news aggregator sites like Fark, Digg, StumbleUpon and Slashdot. They are enormous, and contribute a huge portion of your hits. Once you start charging, that will all be gone.
You're not dealing with newspapers here, grandpa. There is no monopoly on information on the interwebs. It's free, and readily available for all. Learn that fast, get with the times, or lose a metric fuckton of money.
Interesting article on the format wars
I've always believed early adopters of new technology are stupid, and it's been proven time and time again. The latest, obviously, was with those who rushed out to get their HD-DVD players and re-buy their entire library, only to have Bluray come out on top.
Or did it? According to this article Toshiba has licensed it's HD-DVD format to China, who is now producing it's own CBHD disks with the capacity of HD-DVD, and the price of normal DVDs. As the article explains, this could be the final nail in Sony's coffin when it comes to Bluray.
But, don't get too excited. Anyone who's been paying even the slightest amount of attention to the latest trends can see that all optical media is going the way of the dinosaur. So what's the next step then? Online streaming. It's already happening on dozens of sites like Hulu and Netflix.
But it too has some rather large obstacles. The largest being the US's pitiful broadband speeds, and bandwidth caps major ISP's are looking to impose.
Two retards scour desert for imaginary creature
Beware the Mongolian Death Worm!
It spits acid, shits lightning, and is said to live in the middle of the Gobi desert. Nobody has ever been able to prove this bigfoot of the desert actually exists, but two men are set to do just that. They'll make the trek through the desert, armed with cameras and explosives (obviously, the only way to kill the thing), hoping to stumble across this man-eater.