For quite some time now I have been receiving and, mostly, enjoying The Daily Brief from the Huffington Post. But in the past couple of weeks I have noticed that my "dailies" are arriving later and later...so late, in fact, that they haven't yet shown up my my mailbox when I decide to call it a day, and in fact arrive at some point late at night or in the wee hours of the following day.
When I began to note that I was reading a lot of Huffington posts on Digg.com which I hadn't yet seen in my mailbox, and would usually receive the following day, I dropped the Huffington folks a friendly, I thought, inquiry. Maybe there was an issue with their delivery service. Maybe there was an issue with my e-mail provider. Maybe they would like to know about it.
Maybe not.
I sent my query just over a week ago--Friday, January 16--and in short order received a message headed "Thanks for Contacting HuffPost."
And that's the last I've ever heard from them.
No, no--I wasn't expecting a reply. In fact, it says right in the "Thanks for Contacting HuffPost" message that I won't be getting one, and that's fine.
What I mean is, they've quit sending the Daily Brief.
Is that weird or what? I write to enquire as to the lateness of the Daily Brief, and the response is to terminate the subscription? No, it's weird, all right.
Dear Huffington Post People: Now the Daily Brief is even later than before!
Well, obviously, I can go back to their site and just subscribe again and see how it goes. But how strange.
So now on top of the mystery of the later-and-later Daily Briefs, there's the mystery of who decided to pull the plug on me, and why.
This is no way to make friends.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Whistleblower: Bush's NSA spied on EVERYONE
With video: Rampant spying, especially targeting of journalists. The NSA had access to ALL YOUR COMMUNICATIONS, regardless of who you were or whether or not you were communicating internationally.
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
1,000 Words
The moment we've all been waiting for. Well, most of us, anyway.
W has left the building. Thank you and good night.
W has left the building. Thank you and good night.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Countdown Ended!
I gotta tell you, there were days when I thought that "Official George W. Bush Days Left In Office Countdown" thingy over there in the right-hand column would never get to zero!
Saturday, January 10, 2009
50 Beautiful Examples Of Tilt-Shift Photography | Inspiration | Smashing Magazine
50 Beautiful Examples Of Tilt-Shift Photography | Inspiration | Smashing Magazine
Posted using ShareThis
Posted using ShareThis
Tilt-shift photography is a creative and unique type of photography in which the camera is manipulated so that a life-sized location or subject looks like a miniature-scale model. Below we present 50 beautiful examples of tilt-shift photography. All examples are linked to their sources. We strongly encourage you to explore other works of the photographers we’ve featured in this post.
To add good miniature effect to your photographs, shoot subjects from a high angle (especially from the air). It creates the illusion of looking down at a miniature model. A camera equipped with a tilt-shift lens, which simulates a shallow depth of field, is essentially all you need to start.
You may also want to take a look at the following related posts:
- Beautiful Examples Of High-Speed Photography
- 35 Fantastic HDR Pictures
- 45 Beautiful Motion Blur Photos
50 Amazing Examples of Tilt-Shift Photography
Tuesday, January 06, 2009
Some "Help"!
Lately a very intrusive "service" from Qwest has infected my computers. I've been able to "opt out," as they say, on my iMac, but not on the Dell laptop I sometimes use. The fact that I never "opted in" to this "service" in the first place seems to be neither here nor there.
The "service" in question--Qwest Web.Help redirection service--theoretically "helps" you find a URL when your browser isn't able to. In fact, it hijacks your browser.
Veteran web-users will remember a time when you absolutely had to enter the whole big long http-colon-slash-slash-dubya-dubya-dubya-whatever-dot-com in order to get anywhere. Then came whatever version of the wonderful old Netscape Navigator browser, whose authors decided that maybe, just maybe, a browser could be smart enough to decode the Domain Name Server information without your having to take it by the hand. You type in, say, "blogger," and presto! a few seconds later you arrive at http://www.blogger.com! Amazing!
Internet Exploder, of course, continued to insist on the whole string for quite some time, which was a big part of the reason I dumped IE--or, as I still think of it, Aieeee!--many years ago. Following the demise of Netscape Navigator, Firefox continued the smart tradition, and for that and many other reasons has long been my browser of choice.
Well, thanks to Qwest Web.Help, internet browsing has taken a giant step backward!
For now, typing "Zap2It" (my favorite TV listings service) into the URL field gives me this:
Charming, no? The worst part is, Qwest Web.Help can't find anything unless you type in the whole URL, or at least the name-dot-com part of it. Just like web surfing in the 1980s!
Or, perhaps more accurately, Qwest Web.Help won't find anything. And why? Well, look at the screenshot. All of those "helpful" results--only the third on the list being the actual website I want, incidentally--aren't there by accident. They're all "sponsored" links. "Sponsored" as in "paid advertising."
In short: Qwest's "help" involves their hijacking my web browser so they can make money on top of the fee I pay them every month for my DSL.
Gee, thanks, Qwest.
You will note, in small letters way off to the right-hand side of the screen, a link titled "Opt out of this service."
"Service." Right. He said with a sneer.
Well, not very easy. For one thing, to click the link does not, as you might expect, actually opt you out. Rather, it takes you to the following, eerily familiar page:
Yes, it's virtually the same page--got to keep those paid listings in front of your little eyeballs, you know--except that now you have a box telling you what the "service" that you never wanted does (it slows down your browsing experience so that you have to look at some ads along the way, that's what it does!), and then gives you another link to click on to, theoretically, "opt out."
But not so fast, buckaroo! First you have to look at this:
That's right, you're still not to the opt-out, um, option! Once again, they're telling you you can opt out "at any time"--instructions that must have been written by someone who never visited the Qwest Web.Help website. This is beginning to be a bit like Hotel California, no?
Okay, buried in the number-four position on the list is "Can I opt out of this service?" The answer would seem to be a resounding no, but I gamely click on it anyhow...and get yet another link for, supposedly, opting out!
This is truly and blatantly designed to prevent people from opting out of this idiotic imposition, and whoever at Qwest thought of this idea should have a special little corner of hell reserved for them.
Actually, I think there ought to be a law against this sort of thing, and I am seriously contemplating making such a suggestion to my congressional delegation (one of whom won't give a hoot, since he has over and over demonstrated himself to be in the hip pocket of "Business Interests," but the other two might at least give it some consideration).
Okay, having come this far one might as well play it out. I click on " opt out of this service" (again)...and...
Yep. No opting out going on quite yet! Instead here's yet another description of the "service" and yet another "opt out" link. What are we up to by now? I can't count that high!
Well, surely by now the "opt out" link must do something, no? So I click on it...and here comes this little gem:
Yes. We have at last reached the end of the trail, despite Qwest's best efforts. And what is our reward? Why, Qwest can't find the domain! Now, let's think for a moment. What is the domain that Qwest can't find? Well, the message says "Unable to determine IP address from host name for www.qwest.net."
Um...Qwest can't find its own address??
That's certainly how it appears. "Qwest DNS servers were not able to resolve the hostname presented in the URL," it says. "Check if the address is correct," it says.
The "hostname presented in the URL"? http://www.qwest.net/web.help/?confirm=1.
Qwest can't find its own address.
And they're the people who are going to "help" me with this wonderful "service" that I never asked for and which they won't let me opt out of.
Some "help"!
The "service" in question--Qwest Web.Help redirection service--theoretically "helps" you find a URL when your browser isn't able to. In fact, it hijacks your browser.
Veteran web-users will remember a time when you absolutely had to enter the whole big long http-colon-slash-slash-dubya-dubya-dubya-whatever-dot-com in order to get anywhere. Then came whatever version of the wonderful old Netscape Navigator browser, whose authors decided that maybe, just maybe, a browser could be smart enough to decode the Domain Name Server information without your having to take it by the hand. You type in, say, "blogger," and presto! a few seconds later you arrive at http://www.blogger.com! Amazing!
Internet Exploder, of course, continued to insist on the whole string for quite some time, which was a big part of the reason I dumped IE--or, as I still think of it, Aieeee!--many years ago. Following the demise of Netscape Navigator, Firefox continued the smart tradition, and for that and many other reasons has long been my browser of choice.
Well, thanks to Qwest Web.Help, internet browsing has taken a giant step backward!
For now, typing "Zap2It" (my favorite TV listings service) into the URL field gives me this:
Charming, no? The worst part is, Qwest Web.Help can't find anything unless you type in the whole URL, or at least the name-dot-com part of it. Just like web surfing in the 1980s!
Or, perhaps more accurately, Qwest Web.Help won't find anything. And why? Well, look at the screenshot. All of those "helpful" results--only the third on the list being the actual website I want, incidentally--aren't there by accident. They're all "sponsored" links. "Sponsored" as in "paid advertising."
In short: Qwest's "help" involves their hijacking my web browser so they can make money on top of the fee I pay them every month for my DSL.
Gee, thanks, Qwest.
You will note, in small letters way off to the right-hand side of the screen, a link titled "Opt out of this service."
"Service." Right. He said with a sneer.
Well, not very easy. For one thing, to click the link does not, as you might expect, actually opt you out. Rather, it takes you to the following, eerily familiar page:
Yes, it's virtually the same page--got to keep those paid listings in front of your little eyeballs, you know--except that now you have a box telling you what the "service" that you never wanted does (it slows down your browsing experience so that you have to look at some ads along the way, that's what it does!), and then gives you another link to click on to, theoretically, "opt out."
But not so fast, buckaroo! First you have to look at this:
That's right, you're still not to the opt-out, um, option! Once again, they're telling you you can opt out "at any time"--instructions that must have been written by someone who never visited the Qwest Web.Help website. This is beginning to be a bit like Hotel California, no?
Okay, buried in the number-four position on the list is "Can I opt out of this service?" The answer would seem to be a resounding no, but I gamely click on it anyhow...and get yet another link for, supposedly, opting out!
This is truly and blatantly designed to prevent people from opting out of this idiotic imposition, and whoever at Qwest thought of this idea should have a special little corner of hell reserved for them.Actually, I think there ought to be a law against this sort of thing, and I am seriously contemplating making such a suggestion to my congressional delegation (one of whom won't give a hoot, since he has over and over demonstrated himself to be in the hip pocket of "Business Interests," but the other two might at least give it some consideration).
Okay, having come this far one might as well play it out. I click on " opt out of this service" (again)...and...
Yep. No opting out going on quite yet! Instead here's yet another description of the "service" and yet another "opt out" link. What are we up to by now? I can't count that high!
Well, surely by now the "opt out" link must do something, no? So I click on it...and here comes this little gem:
Yes. We have at last reached the end of the trail, despite Qwest's best efforts. And what is our reward? Why, Qwest can't find the domain! Now, let's think for a moment. What is the domain that Qwest can't find? Well, the message says "Unable to determine IP address from host name for www.qwest.net."
Um...Qwest can't find its own address??
That's certainly how it appears. "Qwest DNS servers were not able to resolve the hostname presented in the URL," it says. "Check if the address is correct," it says.
The "hostname presented in the URL"? http://www.qwest.net/web.help/?confirm=1.
Qwest can't find its own address.
And they're the people who are going to "help" me with this wonderful "service" that I never asked for and which they won't let me opt out of.
Some "help"!
Maybe the Economy Is Worse than I Thought
Last week I received word that Law Motors is now following my updates on Twitter.
Law Motors is a local used-car lot. Twitter is something I signed up for ages ago and never use. Frankly, I don't much see the point of it. So I'm afraid Law Motors is destined to be pretty bored.
Incidentally, I've never done any business with Law Motors, never set foot on the lot, not even sure where they're located, so I assume their people merely combed through Twitter and signed up to follow everyone whose profile indicates they're within, probably, a certain geographic zone.
Naturally, I deleted the message. What's it to me?
Now today comes word that "ActionNews (KSFYActionNews) is now following your updates on Twitter." KSFY is one of the local TV stations. Again, I'm afraid they're not going to observe much "action" by following me on Twitter, but that's their problem.
Oddly, as I visit KSFYActionNews' profile, I observe that they are "following"--you guessed it--Law Motors.
To be honest, I'm not sure what to make of this. But I am somehow reminded of Winnie the Pooh and Piglet going round and round a tree in the Hundred Acre Wood and becoming progressively more worried about the increasing number of footprints...
Law Motors is a local used-car lot. Twitter is something I signed up for ages ago and never use. Frankly, I don't much see the point of it. So I'm afraid Law Motors is destined to be pretty bored.
Incidentally, I've never done any business with Law Motors, never set foot on the lot, not even sure where they're located, so I assume their people merely combed through Twitter and signed up to follow everyone whose profile indicates they're within, probably, a certain geographic zone.
Naturally, I deleted the message. What's it to me?
Now today comes word that "ActionNews (KSFYActionNews) is now following your updates on Twitter." KSFY is one of the local TV stations. Again, I'm afraid they're not going to observe much "action" by following me on Twitter, but that's their problem.
Oddly, as I visit KSFYActionNews' profile, I observe that they are "following"--you guessed it--Law Motors.
To be honest, I'm not sure what to make of this. But I am somehow reminded of Winnie the Pooh and Piglet going round and round a tree in the Hundred Acre Wood and becoming progressively more worried about the increasing number of footprints...
Saturday, January 03, 2009
And We're Missing the Whole Point
My chum Jerry sends me this, from the Wall Street Journal:
I was being flip, of course, but it's true: churches as institutions have a nasty habit of coming to convince themselves that they--their traditions, their rules, their rituals, their clergy, their own continued survival--are more important than the mere people whom they purport to serve. I've seen it repeatedly in my own church, where sexual predators among the clergy are shuttled around and sheltered to avoid "scandal" and "protect the church." New flash: People are the church! And I've seen it in matters great and small in other churches as well.
And now this--the wonderful church boots out the homeless shelter because its people went ahead and fed the hungry first instead of forcing them to wait while the churchy folk preached to them. Perfect.
Without going back to look it up, I'm pretty sure Jesus' exhortation was to feed the hungry--not preach to them, then make them sing Christmas songs, then feed them.
And then so many of my priest and pastor friends scratch their heads in wonder because so many people eschew "organized" religion...
- U.S. NEWS - DECEMBER 29, 2008, 10:16 P.M. ET
Homeless Shelter Evicted After Prayer Debate
Associated Press
HACKENSACK, N.J. -- A Bergen County homeless shelter is homeless itself -- again.
The First Reformed Church of Hackensack dismissed the FAITH Foundation in a dispute over rules at its Christmas dinner for about 100 homeless people last week.
Church officials say they wanted a sermon and carols before dinner was fed. But shelter director Robin Reilly started serving food first, saying some patrons hadn't eaten for 24 hours.
Ms. Reilly says she'll try to find a new place to help the homeless. She's storing the group's supplies at another church for now.
It's not the first time the foundation has lost its home. Hackensack officials closed its previous building because it lacked permission to serve food there.
Copyright © 2008 Associated Press
I was being flip, of course, but it's true: churches as institutions have a nasty habit of coming to convince themselves that they--their traditions, their rules, their rituals, their clergy, their own continued survival--are more important than the mere people whom they purport to serve. I've seen it repeatedly in my own church, where sexual predators among the clergy are shuttled around and sheltered to avoid "scandal" and "protect the church." New flash: People are the church! And I've seen it in matters great and small in other churches as well.
And now this--the wonderful church boots out the homeless shelter because its people went ahead and fed the hungry first instead of forcing them to wait while the churchy folk preached to them. Perfect.
Without going back to look it up, I'm pretty sure Jesus' exhortation was to feed the hungry--not preach to them, then make them sing Christmas songs, then feed them.
And then so many of my priest and pastor friends scratch their heads in wonder because so many people eschew "organized" religion...
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Bet People Will Be as Stupid in the New Year!
This little gem appeared yesterday in the letters section of the local rag:
Ah, and here we go again...the majority of people who live in X are Christians, or profess to be (not, experience teaches, quite the same thing), therefore X is a "Christian" country/ state/county/neighborhood/fill in your favorite pointless geographic boundary.
Ms. Ryden is of course half-right: South Dakota is not a "Jewish state." I have the feeling that I could have every Jew in the state over for lunch and we would fit comfortably in my backyard. (Not at the moment, when the backyard is snow-covered and the temperature is a brisk 7 degrees, but you get my point.) But she is also half-wrong, for neither is South Dakota a "Christian state." It's a "state," that's all, and under the Constitution of the United States (remember that old thing? We haven't seen much of it these past eight years) that makes it a secular entity.
Side Point One: Don't tell me you've read the Constitution and don't find "separation of church and state" in there anywhere. The phrase is not there, but the concept is. Don't be disingenuous.
Side Point Two: Observe how Ms. Ryden on the one hand insists that South Dakota is a "Christian" state but then subsequently complains that the governor "has violated the separation of church and state" by his lighting of a menorah. Well, which is is? If this is a "Christian" state--and by extensions I suppose she must mean that every state that has a majority of self-proclaiming Christians as residents must perforce also be "Christian" states--then "separation of church and state" has no meaning, and it thus would be impossible for the governor, or anyone else, to violate it.
Although I am unsurprised that such bigoted ignorance exists (I live in South Dakota, mind, and encounter such staggering stupidity and shallowness nearly every day of the week) I am a little surprised that someone would be so colossally ignorant as to put such an opinion to paper. And then mail it, or e-mail it, to the local rag. But I suppose the Cloak of Righteousness means you can say any stupid, shallow, prejudiced thing you like and be confident that (A) Jesus agrees with you and (B) anyone who disagrees with you must by definition not be a "real Christian" since, after all (C), Jesus agrees with you.
Although it is folly to try to make sense out of such ignorant ranting, one can't help but wonder how the governor's lighting a menorah signifies an attempt to "Judaize the rest of us." Is it that my laying eyes on a menorah would somehow compel me to convert to Judaism? If so, our churches should fair be bursting at the seams, since you can't turn around without seeing a cross hanging from someone's neck, or an ichthys on the back end of a car. Why, if symbols are all it takes to "-ize" people, there should be no non-Christians anywhere, so ubiquitous is Christian, or "Christian," symbolism!
I especially love the second-to-last line (by which point I imagine Ms. Ryden figuratively foaming at the corners of her mouth, as her tirade makes less and less sense and sounds more and more strident): "You won't find any symbols or rituals of Christianity on Jewish turf." So, so true. Nor will you find much in the way of Jewish symbols or rituals on "Christian turf" (one does occasionally encounter a Star of David in the Christian context). But again, she seems to be confusing the steps of the South Dakota capitol building with "Christian turf," when it isn't. It is, by law, custom, and common sense, "secular turf." Indeed, one could--and some probably will--argue that, because it's secular, there should be no religious symbolism at all there, but I consider such arguments to be silly. Put up a Christmas tree in the rotunda, light a menorah on the steps, who cares?
Well, lots of people, obviously. Which causes me to wonder why?
I mean, is the faith of Ms. Ryden and her ilk (that whole "war on Christmas" bunch that O'Reilly keeps bleating about) really so fragile, so shallow, so meaningless that the idea of the existence of a different faith is threatening? Are their beliefs so shaky that hearing "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings" undermines their Christmas convictions? Is their brand of "religion" really so second-rate that they can advance it only by burying someone else's? Are they and their God really that small?
Personally, I find it hard to imagine Jesus getting too worked up over the lighting of a menorah, on the steps of the South Dakota capitol or anywhere else. It seems pretty likely to me that he himself may have lighted one or two, back in the day. Likewise, I doubt that he thinks that someone slapping a fish symbol on the back of his or her car makes him or her a Christian.
I'm almost certain there's more to it than that.
- S.D. is a Christian state
Carole V. Ryden • Sioux Falls • December 30, 2008
I read that Gov. Mike Rounds lighted Menorah candles on the Capitol step during Hanukkah. The Menorah has been the symbol of the Jewish religion for 3,000 years. South Dakota is a Christian state - not a Jewish state. It is inappropriate for government officials to do this lighting ritual. To what purpose is Judaism being singled out? I suspect this ritual is designed to show that South Dakotans stand in support of the Jewish religion. Why? Don't South Dakotans stand for all those who choose to worship God in their own way? I do. However, I object to Gov. Rounds going along with a minority group which seeks to Judaize the rest of us, such as insisting that we now say "Happy Holidays" instead of Merry Christmas. This is especially repugnant to me in light of the fact that Jews reject the divinity of Christ. I don't. You won't find any symbols or rituals of Christianity on Jewish turf. Gov. Rounds has violated the separation of church and state and turned his back on the Christian traditions of South Dakota.
Ah, and here we go again...the majority of people who live in X are Christians, or profess to be (not, experience teaches, quite the same thing), therefore X is a "Christian" country/ state/county/neighborhood/fill in your favorite pointless geographic boundary.
Ms. Ryden is of course half-right: South Dakota is not a "Jewish state." I have the feeling that I could have every Jew in the state over for lunch and we would fit comfortably in my backyard. (Not at the moment, when the backyard is snow-covered and the temperature is a brisk 7 degrees, but you get my point.) But she is also half-wrong, for neither is South Dakota a "Christian state." It's a "state," that's all, and under the Constitution of the United States (remember that old thing? We haven't seen much of it these past eight years) that makes it a secular entity.
Side Point One: Don't tell me you've read the Constitution and don't find "separation of church and state" in there anywhere. The phrase is not there, but the concept is. Don't be disingenuous.
Side Point Two: Observe how Ms. Ryden on the one hand insists that South Dakota is a "Christian" state but then subsequently complains that the governor "has violated the separation of church and state" by his lighting of a menorah. Well, which is is? If this is a "Christian" state--and by extensions I suppose she must mean that every state that has a majority of self-proclaiming Christians as residents must perforce also be "Christian" states--then "separation of church and state" has no meaning, and it thus would be impossible for the governor, or anyone else, to violate it.
Although I am unsurprised that such bigoted ignorance exists (I live in South Dakota, mind, and encounter such staggering stupidity and shallowness nearly every day of the week) I am a little surprised that someone would be so colossally ignorant as to put such an opinion to paper. And then mail it, or e-mail it, to the local rag. But I suppose the Cloak of Righteousness means you can say any stupid, shallow, prejudiced thing you like and be confident that (A) Jesus agrees with you and (B) anyone who disagrees with you must by definition not be a "real Christian" since, after all (C), Jesus agrees with you.
Although it is folly to try to make sense out of such ignorant ranting, one can't help but wonder how the governor's lighting a menorah signifies an attempt to "Judaize the rest of us." Is it that my laying eyes on a menorah would somehow compel me to convert to Judaism? If so, our churches should fair be bursting at the seams, since you can't turn around without seeing a cross hanging from someone's neck, or an ichthys on the back end of a car. Why, if symbols are all it takes to "-ize" people, there should be no non-Christians anywhere, so ubiquitous is Christian, or "Christian," symbolism!
I especially love the second-to-last line (by which point I imagine Ms. Ryden figuratively foaming at the corners of her mouth, as her tirade makes less and less sense and sounds more and more strident): "You won't find any symbols or rituals of Christianity on Jewish turf." So, so true. Nor will you find much in the way of Jewish symbols or rituals on "Christian turf" (one does occasionally encounter a Star of David in the Christian context). But again, she seems to be confusing the steps of the South Dakota capitol building with "Christian turf," when it isn't. It is, by law, custom, and common sense, "secular turf." Indeed, one could--and some probably will--argue that, because it's secular, there should be no religious symbolism at all there, but I consider such arguments to be silly. Put up a Christmas tree in the rotunda, light a menorah on the steps, who cares?
Well, lots of people, obviously. Which causes me to wonder why?
I mean, is the faith of Ms. Ryden and her ilk (that whole "war on Christmas" bunch that O'Reilly keeps bleating about) really so fragile, so shallow, so meaningless that the idea of the existence of a different faith is threatening? Are their beliefs so shaky that hearing "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings" undermines their Christmas convictions? Is their brand of "religion" really so second-rate that they can advance it only by burying someone else's? Are they and their God really that small?
Personally, I find it hard to imagine Jesus getting too worked up over the lighting of a menorah, on the steps of the South Dakota capitol or anywhere else. It seems pretty likely to me that he himself may have lighted one or two, back in the day. Likewise, I doubt that he thinks that someone slapping a fish symbol on the back of his or her car makes him or her a Christian.
I'm almost certain there's more to it than that.
Slow Day for News
This, in its entirety, is my "Today's Headlines & Columnists" from the Washington Post:
Wow. I never thought I'd see the day when there is no news to report! It's really something! By telling me that "none of the modules you selected have content today," the Post is telling me that nothing worth reporting happened in any of these categories (my "modules"):
Well, of course, it stands to reason that TODAY'S HIGHLIGHTS would be blank, given that nothing happened today (or, I suppose, yesterday). But the others? Didn't the governor of Illinois appoint someone to Barack Obama's Senate seat, and the Democratic Party have fits? Isn't there some kind of hubbub associated with the Wall Street bailout (like, where's the money)? Isn't there a war or something in Israel? And certainly the Bush Administration has been up to something!
So I'm thinking "We are experiencing technical difficulties" would be more accurate than "none of the modules you selected have content today," yes?
Wow. I never thought I'd see the day when there is no news to report! It's really something! By telling me that "none of the modules you selected have content today," the Post is telling me that nothing worth reporting happened in any of these categories (my "modules"):
- TODAY'S HIGHLIGHTS
POLITICS
BUSH ADMINISTRATION
NATION
WORLD
Well, of course, it stands to reason that TODAY'S HIGHLIGHTS would be blank, given that nothing happened today (or, I suppose, yesterday). But the others? Didn't the governor of Illinois appoint someone to Barack Obama's Senate seat, and the Democratic Party have fits? Isn't there some kind of hubbub associated with the Wall Street bailout (like, where's the money)? Isn't there a war or something in Israel? And certainly the Bush Administration has been up to something!
So I'm thinking "We are experiencing technical difficulties" would be more accurate than "none of the modules you selected have content today," yes?
Saturday, December 27, 2008
What Passes for News
Friday, December 26, 2008
No Editorializing, Please!
I had occasion las night to look up the word apostate in the dictionary...more correctly, dictionary.com. It gave me the definition, all right (I always have to look it up to remember if I'm an apostate or merely a heretic), but it also gave the "sponsored link" circled below:
In case you can't read it, it says "View 1000s of Picture & Videos of Beautiful LDS Singles. Join Free! www.LDSPlanet.com."
Yes, that's right--you look up apostate and you get an ad for a singles service for Mormons!
I have no particular opinion on the subject. But if I were the advertiser, I think I'd be seeking a refund.
In case you can't read it, it says "View 1000s of Picture & Videos of Beautiful LDS Singles. Join Free! www.LDSPlanet.com."
Yes, that's right--you look up apostate and you get an ad for a singles service for Mormons!
I have no particular opinion on the subject. But if I were the advertiser, I think I'd be seeking a refund.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Mysterious Ways, Indeed!
I am amused by the letters section of the current Newsweek magazine (the print edition, although it appears that the letters to which I refer, and more, are also online). It is much as I expected. The previous issue featured a cover story by Lisa Miller, "Our Mutual Joy," which attempts to explore what the Bible really has to say about homosexuality and, in particular, the prospect of gay marriage. I found the article interesting enough, though hardly profound. But I knew what was to follow, and I was not disappointed: Specifically, bunches of letters from readers both outraged and disappointed because Miller Got it Wrong.
Well, of course, you see it all the time. If someone's interpretation of the Bible matches my own, then he's right and righteous and walking in the light of the Lord. If not, well, he is at worst a devil and at best horribly, horribly misguided...because, after all, my interpretation is the correct one!
So, clearly, your reaching a different conclusion must evince an lamentable intellectual shortcoming on your part. So sad. Luckily, you have me to point out your incredible wrongness.
One sees a variation in group settings, too: If the actions of the council, board, Sanhedrin, whatever goes against my wishes, then obviously we're witnessing corruption, bamboozling, politicking, railroading, steamrollering, and worse. If the actions should happen to coincide with my wishes, though, well, then, it's because the Holy Spirit descended upon them and made sure everything turned out right.
Indeed, it's astonishing how often God agrees with me! I must really be something!
Well, of course, you see it all the time. If someone's interpretation of the Bible matches my own, then he's right and righteous and walking in the light of the Lord. If not, well, he is at worst a devil and at best horribly, horribly misguided...because, after all, my interpretation is the correct one!
So, clearly, your reaching a different conclusion must evince an lamentable intellectual shortcoming on your part. So sad. Luckily, you have me to point out your incredible wrongness.
One sees a variation in group settings, too: If the actions of the council, board, Sanhedrin, whatever goes against my wishes, then obviously we're witnessing corruption, bamboozling, politicking, railroading, steamrollering, and worse. If the actions should happen to coincide with my wishes, though, well, then, it's because the Holy Spirit descended upon them and made sure everything turned out right.
Indeed, it's astonishing how often God agrees with me! I must really be something!
Friday, December 19, 2008
What Were They Saying?
A few quotations that have been cluttering up the landscape. As is typical, they are culled from A Word a Day, and are oftentimes at least as interesting as the word of the day itself:
Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear. -Harry S. Truman, 33rd US president (1884-1972)
The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking of morality by religion. -Arthur C. Clarke, science fiction writer (1917-2008)
We have in fact, two kinds of morality, side by side: one which we preach, but do not practice, and another which we practice, but seldom preach. -Bertrand Russell, philosopher, mathematician, author, Nobel laureate (1872-1970)
My kind of loyalty was loyalty to one's country, not to its institutions or its officeholders. -Mark Twain, author and humorist (1835-1910)
So long as men worship the Caesars and Napoleons, Caesars and Napoleons will duly rise and make them miserable. -Aldous Huxley, novelist (1894-1963)
God made everything out of nothing, but the nothingness shows through. -Paul Valery, poet and philosopher (1871-1945)
Truth never damages a cause that is just. -Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (1869-1948)
Like a lawyer, the human brain wants victory, not truth; and, like a lawyer, it is sometimes more admirable for skill than virtue. -Robert Wright, author and journalist (b. 1957)
How can a society that exists on instant mashed potatoes, packaged cake mixes, frozen dinners, and instant cameras teach patience to its young? -Paul Sweeney
Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth. -Henry David Thoreau, naturalist and author (1817-1862)
Though force can protect in emergency, only justice, fairness, consideration and cooperation can finally lead men to the dawn of eternal peace. -Dwight D. Eisenhower, U.S. general and 34th president (1890-1969)
You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you. -John Wooden, sports coach (b. 1910)
A business that makes nothing but money is a poor business. -Henry Ford, industrialist (1863-1947)
Silent gratitude isn't much use to anyone. -Gladys Browyn Stern, writer (1890-1973)
They were so strong in their beliefs that there came a time when it hardly mattered what exactly those beliefs were; they all fused into a single stubbornness. -Louise Erdrich, author (b. 1954)
It's not the genius who is 100 years ahead of his time but average man who is 100 years behind it. -Robert Musil, novelist (1880-1942)
The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking of morality by religion. -Arthur C. Clarke, science fiction writer (1917-2008)
We have in fact, two kinds of morality, side by side: one which we preach, but do not practice, and another which we practice, but seldom preach. -Bertrand Russell, philosopher, mathematician, author, Nobel laureate (1872-1970)
My kind of loyalty was loyalty to one's country, not to its institutions or its officeholders. -Mark Twain, author and humorist (1835-1910)
So long as men worship the Caesars and Napoleons, Caesars and Napoleons will duly rise and make them miserable. -Aldous Huxley, novelist (1894-1963)
God made everything out of nothing, but the nothingness shows through. -Paul Valery, poet and philosopher (1871-1945)
Truth never damages a cause that is just. -Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (1869-1948)
Like a lawyer, the human brain wants victory, not truth; and, like a lawyer, it is sometimes more admirable for skill than virtue. -Robert Wright, author and journalist (b. 1957)
How can a society that exists on instant mashed potatoes, packaged cake mixes, frozen dinners, and instant cameras teach patience to its young? -Paul Sweeney
Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth. -Henry David Thoreau, naturalist and author (1817-1862)
Though force can protect in emergency, only justice, fairness, consideration and cooperation can finally lead men to the dawn of eternal peace. -Dwight D. Eisenhower, U.S. general and 34th president (1890-1969)
You can't live a perfect day without doing something for someone who will never be able to repay you. -John Wooden, sports coach (b. 1910)
A business that makes nothing but money is a poor business. -Henry Ford, industrialist (1863-1947)
Silent gratitude isn't much use to anyone. -Gladys Browyn Stern, writer (1890-1973)
They were so strong in their beliefs that there came a time when it hardly mattered what exactly those beliefs were; they all fused into a single stubbornness. -Louise Erdrich, author (b. 1954)
It's not the genius who is 100 years ahead of his time but average man who is 100 years behind it. -Robert Musil, novelist (1880-1942)
Um, Okay. Wait--What?
This was in one of the inboxes that I manage for my employer, a religious organization (so you see why I was duped into opening it. Not that I wouldn't have anyhow). The sender was listed as metaethics@jaros.sk, which I must say was a red flag. But still:
- From: "Tena Bertran"
To: |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date: Unknown date
Girls will drop underwear foor you!
More information HERE
Be thou happy. If this brahmana be desirous of personified,
and the other that i was afraid that may do to them by tossing
them too much. 1569. Would not have people think that i
was insensible late editor has done well to combine them.
even.
Who'd'a Thunk It?
This from ChattahBox.com:
Al Franken Projected Senate Winner
December 19, 2008
The projected results came after the canvassing board began sifting through the ballots that had been contested by Republican Senator Norm Coleman, and according to the internal count, Franken is already ahead 2 votes, making his win seem more and more likely.
Further details are expected in the next few days, as the originally rejected absentee ballots are counted, after a ruling by the Supreme Court that stated absentee votes mean as much as those from within state, much to the disappointment to Coleman, who originally rejected the ballots.
The chickens have not quite hatched, of course, but still...who'd' thunk it?Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Thanks for all the Info!
I just want to thank all of my e-mail correspondents for your helpful, informative, educational messages over the past year! I am totally screwed up now and have little chance of recovery!
I no longer open a public bathroom door without using a paper towel. Nor can I enjoy a lemon slice in my ice water without worrying about the bacteria on the lemon peel.
I can't use the remote in a hotel room because I don't know what the last person was doing while flipping through the adult movie channels.
I can't sit down on the hotel bedspread because I can only imagine what h as happened on it since it was last washed.
I have trouble shaking hands with someone who has been driving because the number one pastime while driving alone is picking one's nose (although cell phone usage may be taking the number one spot).
Eating a little snack sends me on a guilt trip because I can only imagine how many gallons of trans fats I have consumed over the years.
I can't touch any woman's purse for fear she has placed it on the floor of a public bathroom.
I MUST SEND MY SPECIAL THANKS
to whoever sent me the one about poop in the glue on envelopes because I now have to use a wet sponge on every envelope that needs sealing.
ALSO,
I now have to scrub the top of every can I open for the same reason.
I no longer have any savings because I gave it to a sick girl (Penny Brown) who is about to die in the hospital for the 1,387,258th time.
I no longer have any money at all,but that will change once I receive the $15,000 that Bill Gates/Microsoft and AOL are sending me for participating in their special e-mail program.
I no longer worry about my soul because I have 363,214 angels looking out for me, and St. Theresa's Novena has granted my every wish.
I no longer eat KFC because their chickens are actually horrible mutant freaks with no eyes or feathers.
I no longer use cancer-causing deodorants even though I smell like a water buffalo on a hot day.
THANKS TO YOU I have learned that my prayers only get answered if I forward an e-mail to seven of my friends and make a wish within five minutes.
BECAUSE OF YOUR CONCERN I no longer drink Coca Cola because it can remove toilet stains.
I no longer can buy gasoline without taking someone along to watch the car so a serial killer won't crawl in my back seat when I'm pumping gas.
I no longer drink Pepsi or Dr. Pepper since the people who make these products are atheists who refuse to put "Under God" on their cans.
I no longer use Saran Wrapin the microwave because it causes cancer.
AND THANKS FOR LETTING ME KNOW I can't boil a cup of water in the microwave anymore because it will blow up in my face, disfiguring me for life.
I no longer check the coin return on pay phones because I could be pricked with a needle infected with AIDS.
I no longer receive packages from UPS or FedEx since they are actually Al Qaeda in disguise.
I no longer shop at Target since they are French and don't support our American troops or the Salvation Army.
I no longer answer the phone because someone will ask me to dial a number for which I will get a phone bill with calls to Jamaica, Uganda, Singapore, and Uzbekistan.
I no longer buy expensive cookies from Neiman Marcus since I now have their recipe.
THANKS TO YOU
I can't use anyone's toilet but mine because a big brown African spider is lurking under the seat to cause me instant death when it bites my butt.
AND THANKS TO YOUR GREAT ADVICE
I can't ever pick up $5.00 dropped in the parking lot because it probably was placed there by a sex molester waiting underneath my car to grab my leg.
I can no longer drive my car because I can't buy gas from certain gas companies!
I can't do any gardening because I'm afraid I'll get bitten by a brown recluse and my hand will fall off.
hu
If you don't send this e-mail to at least 144,000 people in the next 70 minutes, a large dove with diarrhea will land on your head at 5:00 p.m. tomorrow afternoon and the fleas from 12 camels will infest your back, causing you to grow a hairy hump. I know this will occur because it actually happened to a friend of my next door neighbor's ex-mother-in-law's second husband's cousin's beautician...
[Sent to me by a cousin. There are several similar versions in circulation. I edited this one because it's the sort of thing I do.]
Opportunity Knocks! Again!
A couple of subject lines from this morning's inbox:
What the hell does that mean??
Then there's this:
Wow--an profitable place! Apparently in some country where they don't pronounce "p"--an profitable, an puppy, an poster-boy for sloppily written spam. And where they use a sort of "parallel English" for communication, as evinced by the message's content:
"Attentiveness and chance"...I must say, that part is intriguing!
But I have to wonder about JonesDaniel4nn's research, given that the very next message in my spam list has this to say:
One wonders why I would be the least bit interested in "upgrading" the weekly profits of people in my neighborhood. I spend a fair amount of time avoiding them, truth be told. But anyway. I suppose it could be possible that 81% of the people in my fair city are not satisfied with the weekly earnings, and that 91% of the people in my neighborhood are unhappy with their weekly profits, so it may be comparing apples and pomegranates. Oh, but wait--here's the guts of the e-mail:
What th-- I think 5LiamWalkerz924 ripped this message off from JonesDaniel4nn!! Granted, it's a better offer (5LiamWalkerz924 is going to pay me 532 Australian dollars for 2-3 hours' work, while JonesDaniel4nn expects up to four hours' work for the same pay!), but I see that 5LiamWalkerz92 has only 76 vacancies in my "neighborhod," whatever that may be, compared to JonesDaniel4nn's 78 vacancies in my "locality," whatever that may be. (Actually, he says "we have 78 vacancies in your locality so far"(emphasis added), so I find myself wondering about turnover.)
It does occur to me that I could accept both offers, putting in 3 to 7 hours a week for AUD $1064. Currently the exchange rate is about 67¢ per US dollar, so that would be about $712.88, which is about $37,000 a year, which is way more than what I'm currently making for way more hours per week!
And, I mean, "attentiveness and chance" and "attentiveness and proposal"--this is hard to resist!
Subject:
blaming for LOW salary/wages? with our Dip1oma/Degree/MasteerMBA, You
Will get good offer xmdgwe p8
blaming for LOW salary/wages? with our Dip1oma/Degree/MasteerMBA, You
Will get good offer xmdgwe p8
What the hell does that mean??
Then there's this:
Subject: I offer you an profitable place in our company...
Wow--an profitable place! Apparently in some country where they don't pronounce "p"--an profitable, an puppy, an poster-boy for sloppily written spam. And where they use a sort of "parallel English" for communication, as evinced by the message's content:
Good day,
Our surveys show that 81% of people of your city are not satisfied with
their weekly earnings and wish to make more.
That is why I would like to offer you an opportunity of part-time work.
To earn 532 AUD a week you have to spend 1-4 hours a week.
You need a phone preferably a mobile a computer and email.
If you are reading these lines, you need to start working.
The chance lasts till the end of the month; we have 78 vacancies in
your locality so far.
You will have to assist our clients. It is a simple working, which
requires attentiveness and chance.
we provide training and everything you need for the 78.
locality will be glad to assist you with any additional information.
To speed up our message , please send me an email to:JonesDaniel4nn@gmail.com
working
Our surveys show that 81% of people of your city are not satisfied with
their weekly earnings and wish to make more.
That is why I would like to offer you an opportunity of part-time work.
To earn 532 AUD a week you have to spend 1-4 hours a week.
You need a phone preferably a mobile a computer and email.
If you are reading these lines, you need to start working.
The chance lasts till the end of the month; we have 78 vacancies in
your locality so far.
You will have to assist our clients. It is a simple working, which
requires attentiveness and chance.
we provide training and everything you need for the 78.
locality will be glad to assist you with any additional information.
To speed up our message , please send me an email to:JonesDaniel4nn@gmail.com
working
"Attentiveness and chance"...I must say, that part is intriguing!
But I have to wonder about JonesDaniel4nn's research, given that the very next message in my spam list has this to say:
Subject: 91% of people in your neighborhood, are not satisfied with their weekly
profits. You can upgrade it.
profits. You can upgrade it.
One wonders why I would be the least bit interested in "upgrading" the weekly profits of people in my neighborhood. I spend a fair amount of time avoiding them, truth be told. But anyway. I suppose it could be possible that 81% of the people in my fair city are not satisfied with the weekly earnings, and that 91% of the people in my neighborhood are unhappy with their weekly profits, so it may be comparing apples and pomegranates. Oh, but wait--here's the guts of the e-mail:
Hello, how are you
Our surveys show that 81% of people of your local are not satisfied with their monthly earnings and wish to make more.
That is why we would like to offer you an opportunity of part-time work. To earn 532
AU$ a week you have to spend 2-3 hours a week.
You need a phone preferably a mobile a computer and email.
If you are reading these lines, it means you have {_mac11_0} you need to start working.
The proposal lasts till the end of the month; we have 76 vacancies in your neighborhod so
far.
You will have to help our clients. It is a simple working, which requires attentiveness and proposal.
we provide training and everything you need for the 76. neighborhod will be happy to help you with any additional information.
To speed up our response , please send me an email to:5LiamWalkerz924@gmail.com
working
Our surveys show that 81% of people of your local are not satisfied with their monthly earnings and wish to make more.
That is why we would like to offer you an opportunity of part-time work. To earn 532
AU$ a week you have to spend 2-3 hours a week.
You need a phone preferably a mobile a computer and email.
If you are reading these lines, it means you have {_mac11_0} you need to start working.
The proposal lasts till the end of the month; we have 76 vacancies in your neighborhod so
far.
You will have to help our clients. It is a simple working, which requires attentiveness and proposal.
we provide training and everything you need for the 76. neighborhod will be happy to help you with any additional information.
To speed up our response , please send me an email to:5LiamWalkerz924@gmail.com
working
What th-- I think 5LiamWalkerz924 ripped this message off from JonesDaniel4nn!! Granted, it's a better offer (5LiamWalkerz924 is going to pay me 532 Australian dollars for 2-3 hours' work, while JonesDaniel4nn expects up to four hours' work for the same pay!), but I see that 5LiamWalkerz92 has only 76 vacancies in my "neighborhod," whatever that may be, compared to JonesDaniel4nn's 78 vacancies in my "locality," whatever that may be. (Actually, he says "we have 78 vacancies in your locality so far"(emphasis added), so I find myself wondering about turnover.)
It does occur to me that I could accept both offers, putting in 3 to 7 hours a week for AUD $1064. Currently the exchange rate is about 67¢ per US dollar, so that would be about $712.88, which is about $37,000 a year, which is way more than what I'm currently making for way more hours per week!
And, I mean, "attentiveness and chance" and "attentiveness and proposal"--this is hard to resist!
Monday, December 15, 2008
Calvin Trillin Muses on a Lame Duck
Far-flung Correspondent Jerry sent a link to the following bit of poetry by Calvin Trillin in The Nation, with a note that "The last two lines should appear on a plaque in the Bush Presidential Library":
Bush Labor Department Hurries to Change Toxic Substance Rules Before Obama Takes Office
Calvin Trillin is The Nation's "deadline poet." He has been a staff writer for The New Yorker since 1963 and has written the syndicated weekly column "Uncivil Liberties" since 1986. He has authored many, many books, including Tepper's Not Going Out and Deadline Poet: My Life as a Doggerelist. more...
Bush Labor Department Hurries to Change Toxic Substance Rules Before Obama Takes Office
Deadline Poet
By Calvin Trillin
This article appeared in the December 22, 2008 edition of The Nation.
For industry they're rushing through some rules
To ease restraints on using toxic goop
And dumping tops of mountains into streams.
In every hole, they seek a larger loop.
The ornithologists can tell us that
Such actions have a simple explanation:
A lame duck, though incapable of flight,
Is fully capable of defecation.
Calvin Trillin is The Nation's "deadline poet." He has been a staff writer for The New Yorker since 1963 and has written the syndicated weekly column "Uncivil Liberties" since 1986. He has authored many, many books, including Tepper's Not Going Out and Deadline Poet: My Life as a Doggerelist. more...
Well, I'd've Done it Differently...
...but since I didn't do it at all, no complaints!
I posted a lament last week ("I See Now that this Will Never End") to the effect that, despite my best (past) efforts, certain well-meaning people keep perpetuating out rumors, hoaxes, and outright falsehoods with which other well-meaning people clutter their inboxes, and that I have grown tired (temporarily so, I imagine) of always being the one with the bucket of ice water. So I let the latest one go ("REMEMBER: Cell Phone Numbers Go Public next month. REMINDER.... all cell phone numbers are being released to telemarketing Companies and you will start to receive sale calls") and hope that maybe someone else would be the spoilsport for once.
Someone stepped up to the plate, and a correcting message was in the inbox this ante meridiem. Here it is, in its entirety:
Well, that certainly hits the nail on the head. But I would have been inclined to be a little less, um, brusque. You know, sort of soften the blow a bit (the originator of the false message, after all, is a woman of A Certain Age, and obviously thinks she's being helpful). And I doubt that I would have hit the Reply All button, preferring to keep my corrective advice private and then leave it to the misguided party to notify his or her recipients. But that's me.
No denying this gets the job done, I guess.
But if I were still a betting man, I would put money on the expectation that the correspondent in question will, before the New Year is very far along, be sending out another "helpful" message to friends and acquaintances both hither and yon.
I posted a lament last week ("I See Now that this Will Never End") to the effect that, despite my best (past) efforts, certain well-meaning people keep perpetuating out rumors, hoaxes, and outright falsehoods with which other well-meaning people clutter their inboxes, and that I have grown tired (temporarily so, I imagine) of always being the one with the bucket of ice water. So I let the latest one go ("REMEMBER: Cell Phone Numbers Go Public next month. REMINDER.... all cell phone numbers are being released to telemarketing Companies and you will start to receive sale calls") and hope that maybe someone else would be the spoilsport for once.
Someone stepped up to the plate, and a correcting message was in the inbox this ante meridiem. Here it is, in its entirety:
- This rumor is false. Go to http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/cell411.asp for more information.
Well, that certainly hits the nail on the head. But I would have been inclined to be a little less, um, brusque. You know, sort of soften the blow a bit (the originator of the false message, after all, is a woman of A Certain Age, and obviously thinks she's being helpful). And I doubt that I would have hit the Reply All button, preferring to keep my corrective advice private and then leave it to the misguided party to notify his or her recipients. But that's me.
No denying this gets the job done, I guess.
But if I were still a betting man, I would put money on the expectation that the correspondent in question will, before the New Year is very far along, be sending out another "helpful" message to friends and acquaintances both hither and yon.
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Now THIS Is More Like It!
I have in the past lamented the lack of creativity and attentiveness in the phishing e-mail that I've received of late, so you can imagine how pleased I was to come across this in my Yahoo Mail account today:
It would have been better had the images referred to in the e-mail (NSB seal, and so on) had actually appeared, and the English is a little sketchy (sketchier even than a bureaucrat's familiarity with the language), but at least the creators put a little bit of effort into their illicit endeavors, which I'm afraid is more than can be said about so much of what I receive in my spam folders these days. Good work, guys!
Sure hope my money arrives soon, though--you know, Christmas and everything!
IMPORTANT ALERT - FBI
Sunday, December 14, 2008 3:08 PM
From:"Federal Bureau of Investigation"
To:undisclosed-recipients
Anti-Terrorist And Monetory Crimes Division
FBI Headquarters In Washington, D.C.
Federal Bureau Of Investigation
J. Edgar Hoover Building
935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20535-0001
Website: www.fbi.gov
Telephone Number : (206) 973-2572
Attn: Beneficiary,
This is to Officially inform you that it has come to our notice and we have thoroughly completed an Investigation with the help of our Intelligence Monitoring Network System that you legally won the sum of $800,000.00 USD from a Lottery Company outside the United States of America. During our investigation we discovered that your e-mail won the money from an Online Balloting System and we have authorized this winning to be paid to you via a Certified Cashier's Check.
Normally, it will take up to 10 business days for an International Check to be cashed by your local bank. We have successfully notified this company on your behalf that funds are to be drawn from a registered bank within the United States Of America so as to enable you cash the check instantly without any delay, henceforth the stated amount of $800,000.00 USD has been deposited with Bank Of America.
We have completed this investigation and you are hereby approved to receive the winning prize as we have verified the entire transaction to be Safe and 100% risk free, due to the fact that the funds have been deposited at Bank Of America you will be required to settle the following bills directly to the Lottery Agent in-charge of this transaction whom is located in Lagos, Nigeria. According to our discoveries, you were required to pay for the following -
(1) Deposit Fee's ( Fee's paid by the company for the deposit into an American Bank which is - Bank Of America )
(2) Cashier's Check Conversion Fee ( Fee for converting the Wire Transfer payment into a Certified Cashier's Check )
(3) Shipping Fee's ( This is the charge for shipping the Cashier's Check to your home address and this fee includes Insurance )
The total amount for everything is $1000 (One Thousand -US Dollars). We have tried our possible best to indicate that this $1000 should be deducted from your winning prize but we found out that the funds have already been deposited at Bank Of America and cannot be accessed by anyone apart from you the winner, therefore you will be required to pay the required fee's to the Agent in-charge of this transaction via Western Union Money Transfer Or Money Gram.
In order to proceed with this transaction, you will be required to contact the agent in-charge ( Mr. Benson Edward) via e-mail. Kindly look below to find appropriate contact information:
CONTACT AGENT NAME: MR. BENSON EDWARD
E-MAIL ADDRESS: bensonedward097@gmail.com
Telephone Number : +234-808-208-4580
You will be required to e-mail him with the following information:
FULL NAME:
ADDRESS:
CITY:
STATE:
ZIP CODE:
DIRECT CONTACT NUMBER:
You will also be required to request Western Union or Money Gram details on how to send the required $1000 in order to immediately ship your prize of $800,000.00 USD via Certified Cashier's Check drawn from Bank Of America, also include the following transaction code in order for him to immediately identify this transaction : EA2948-910.
This letter will serve as proof that the Federal Bureau Of Investigation is authorizing you to pay the required $1000 ONLY to Mr. Benson Edward via information in which he shall send to you, if you do not receive your winning prize of $800,000.00 we shall be held responsible for the loss and this shall invite a penalty of $3,000 which will be made PAYABLE ONLY to you (The Winner).
Mr. Bill Nicholson
Special Agent.
Washington DC FBI.
Room, 7367
J. Edgar Hoover Building
935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20535-0001
Please find below an authorized signature which has been signed by the FBI Director- Robert Mueller, also below is the FBI NSB (National Security Branch Seal)
Authorized Signature
NSB SEAL ABOVE
NOTE: In order to ensure your check gets delivered to you ASAP, you are advised to immediately contact Mr. Benson Edward via contact information provided above and make the required payment of $1000 to information in which he shall provide to you
It would have been better had the images referred to in the e-mail (NSB seal, and so on) had actually appeared, and the English is a little sketchy (sketchier even than a bureaucrat's familiarity with the language), but at least the creators put a little bit of effort into their illicit endeavors, which I'm afraid is more than can be said about so much of what I receive in my spam folders these days. Good work, guys!
Sure hope my money arrives soon, though--you know, Christmas and everything!
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
I See Now that this Will Never End
For a brief time I thought I had made some headway, but as usual I was wrong. This showed up this morning in my office e-mail:
REMEMBER: Cell Phone Numbers Go Public next month.
REMINDER.... all cell phone numbers are being released to telemarketing
Companies and you will start to receive sale calls.
... YOU WILL BE CHARGED FOR THESE CALLS
To prevent this, call the following number from your cell phone:
888-382-1222.
It is the National DO NOT CALL list. It will only take a minute of your
Time. It blocks your number for five (5) years. You must call from the
Cell phone number you want to have blocked. You cannot call from a
Different phone number.
HELP OTHERS BY PASSING THIS ON TO ALL YOUR FRIENDS... It takes about 20 Seconds.
The nice woman who sent this to me also, of course, sent it to a long list of other recipients. Thus perpetuating the falsehood. Innocently, sure, but nevertheless perpetuating a falsehood. (See "Celling Your Soul" at the Urban Legends Reference Pages.)
This is far from the first such alarm that this well-meaning correspondent has sent, but it's the first in quite awhile to come to me. Which is why I had lulled myself into thinking that I had, well, wised her up a little. For in the past when she's sent these little bits of blarney, I have--gently, in a spirit of helpfulness--instructed her that hotels cannot get your credit-card information from your room key card; you cannot unlock your car by pressing certain buttons on your cell phone; a certain soap company is not in league with the devil; an dnobody is going to start charging you for e-mail in order to subsidize the post office.
Since I hadn't heard from her in awhile, I thought I had gotten through. Now I suspect she just quit sending me things because she was tired of my being a spoilsport.
Anyhow, I am faced with the usual dilemma:
A. Do I try to be helpful and (once again) point out to this woman that not everything that someone forwards to her is to be believed, and in fact a great deal of it should be dismissed out of hand (i.e., do I be a spoilsport)?
B. Do I sigh, and shrug, and lament the gullibility of certain of my fellow travelers, and let her have the pleasure of thinking she is performing a public service by eternalizing these canards and hoaxes) i.e., do I be an enabler)?
I'm leaning toward B, if only because I'm in the second week of a cold and very tired ...
REMEMBER: Cell Phone Numbers Go Public next month.
REMINDER.... all cell phone numbers are being released to telemarketing
Companies and you will start to receive sale calls.
... YOU WILL BE CHARGED FOR THESE CALLS
To prevent this, call the following number from your cell phone:
888-382-1222.
It is the National DO NOT CALL list. It will only take a minute of your
Time. It blocks your number for five (5) years. You must call from the
Cell phone number you want to have blocked. You cannot call from a
Different phone number.
HELP OTHERS BY PASSING THIS ON TO ALL YOUR FRIENDS... It takes about 20 Seconds.
The nice woman who sent this to me also, of course, sent it to a long list of other recipients. Thus perpetuating the falsehood. Innocently, sure, but nevertheless perpetuating a falsehood. (See "Celling Your Soul" at the Urban Legends Reference Pages.)
This is far from the first such alarm that this well-meaning correspondent has sent, but it's the first in quite awhile to come to me. Which is why I had lulled myself into thinking that I had, well, wised her up a little. For in the past when she's sent these little bits of blarney, I have--gently, in a spirit of helpfulness--instructed her that hotels cannot get your credit-card information from your room key card; you cannot unlock your car by pressing certain buttons on your cell phone; a certain soap company is not in league with the devil; an dnobody is going to start charging you for e-mail in order to subsidize the post office.
Since I hadn't heard from her in awhile, I thought I had gotten through. Now I suspect she just quit sending me things because she was tired of my being a spoilsport.
Anyhow, I am faced with the usual dilemma:
A. Do I try to be helpful and (once again) point out to this woman that not everything that someone forwards to her is to be believed, and in fact a great deal of it should be dismissed out of hand (i.e., do I be a spoilsport)?
B. Do I sigh, and shrug, and lament the gullibility of certain of my fellow travelers, and let her have the pleasure of thinking she is performing a public service by eternalizing these canards and hoaxes) i.e., do I be an enabler)?
I'm leaning toward B, if only because I'm in the second week of a cold and very tired ...
Yeah, This Makes Me Want to Shop Your Sale
The salutation: "Hi null, Additional 30% off plus $1 shipping!*"
Geez. I'm touched.
Monday, December 08, 2008
Mr. Nice Guy? Who's He?
Here’s a little oddity that showed up in my Mac mail inbox this morning:
This is not the first time I have received misdirected e-mail from someone in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Evidently there is some high official in the LDS organization who shares my name, and there are other folks in the Mormon fold who have somehow turned up my mac.com address and have convinced themselves that I am he. Or he is I. Or however it goes. And without a second thought, apparently, or even a first thought, they sling their message to my mailbox and go skipping on about their own business.
I refer you now to my post of September 16, 2008, “No More Mr. Nice Guy!” In it, you may or may not recall, or care, I groused about receiving fairly frequent e-mail intended for a Mary Ann Reynolds (both she and her friends seem to have trouble rendering her e-mail address, the result being that a distressing amount of it ends up in my Yahoo inbox), and my failed attempts to get her and her friends to change their ways and adjust their address books. I found, over a period of a couple of years, that businesses were quick to reply to my correction, and to apologize—although that wasn’t the point: I was actually trying to be a nice guy (as the title implied)—but that none of the “real people” whom I helpfully responded to could be bothered to acknowledge my e-mail, let alone thank me for taking the time to point out that they had the wrong address. Finally I reached the point where I added these senders to my block list, and gave up on them. They can spend eternity wondering why Mary Ann never responds to their e-mail.
Well, I am at about that same point with the Mormons. Every time I have received a misdirected message intended for the “other” William Reynolds, I have promptly and pleasantly responded to it and encouraged the sender to make the necessary correction in order to ensure that his or her messages get to the proper party in a timely fashion. I have never had the courtesy of a reply for my trouble (again, not the point), and the misdirects just keep on coming (and that is the point!). In fairness, this is the first I’ve received from this particular sender...but far from the first I’ve received from his “stake.”
So I’m afraid I’ve reached the same conclusion with these guys as I did with Mary Ann and her pals, viz., no more Mr. Nice Guy. I’m inclined to agree with Thunderbird that this message is junk, and to let the senders and the intended recipient sort it all out on their end.
Maybe that’s the only way they’ll learn.
Maybe they’ll never learn.
That certainly seems to be the case so far.
This is not the first time I have received misdirected e-mail from someone in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Evidently there is some high official in the LDS organization who shares my name, and there are other folks in the Mormon fold who have somehow turned up my mac.com address and have convinced themselves that I am he. Or he is I. Or however it goes. And without a second thought, apparently, or even a first thought, they sling their message to my mailbox and go skipping on about their own business.
I refer you now to my post of September 16, 2008, “No More Mr. Nice Guy!” In it, you may or may not recall, or care, I groused about receiving fairly frequent e-mail intended for a Mary Ann Reynolds (both she and her friends seem to have trouble rendering her e-mail address, the result being that a distressing amount of it ends up in my Yahoo inbox), and my failed attempts to get her and her friends to change their ways and adjust their address books. I found, over a period of a couple of years, that businesses were quick to reply to my correction, and to apologize—although that wasn’t the point: I was actually trying to be a nice guy (as the title implied)—but that none of the “real people” whom I helpfully responded to could be bothered to acknowledge my e-mail, let alone thank me for taking the time to point out that they had the wrong address. Finally I reached the point where I added these senders to my block list, and gave up on them. They can spend eternity wondering why Mary Ann never responds to their e-mail.
Well, I am at about that same point with the Mormons. Every time I have received a misdirected message intended for the “other” William Reynolds, I have promptly and pleasantly responded to it and encouraged the sender to make the necessary correction in order to ensure that his or her messages get to the proper party in a timely fashion. I have never had the courtesy of a reply for my trouble (again, not the point), and the misdirects just keep on coming (and that is the point!). In fairness, this is the first I’ve received from this particular sender...but far from the first I’ve received from his “stake.”
So I’m afraid I’ve reached the same conclusion with these guys as I did with Mary Ann and her pals, viz., no more Mr. Nice Guy. I’m inclined to agree with Thunderbird that this message is junk, and to let the senders and the intended recipient sort it all out on their end.
Maybe that’s the only way they’ll learn.
Maybe they’ll never learn.
That certainly seems to be the case so far.
Saturday, December 06, 2008
Some Time in New York City
We spent the week of Thanksgiving in New York City, there to bask in the glow of the Sioux Falls Lincoln High School Patriot Marching Band's lead position in the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade. It was a great week, with perfect weather (the one day it rained, we were scheduled to be at the Metropolitan Museum and on a bus tour anyhow, so it inconvenienced us not) and no mishaps worth mentioning.
I came home with 1,381 digital pictures. Many of them were duplicates--I like to shoot in burst mode on the theory that usually at least one of the two, three, five shots I squeeze off will be a keeper--so I pared that number down to 700 for the iPhoto album. And from that number I further whittled down to about 500 to share with family and friends. If you're interested, they start here: http://faculty.augie.edu/~reynolds/nyc/nyc.html.
Meanwhile, here's a small sampler:
The band approaches!
Three-fourths of the family at the Statue of Liberty (Will was off with the band, of course).
Ellis Island as seen from Liberty Island.
The Statue of Liberty in the morning sun.
Meredith waits for the parade to start.
Poinsettia-festooned trees on the lower level, Rockefeller Center.
Atop the Empire State Building.
Sunset at the World Financial Center.
Christmas Tree in the lobby of the World Financial Center.
At the Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Radio City Music Hall decorated for Christmas.
St. Patrick's Cathedral.
Near Rockefeller Center.
I came home with 1,381 digital pictures. Many of them were duplicates--I like to shoot in burst mode on the theory that usually at least one of the two, three, five shots I squeeze off will be a keeper--so I pared that number down to 700 for the iPhoto album. And from that number I further whittled down to about 500 to share with family and friends. If you're interested, they start here: http://faculty.augie.edu/~reynolds/nyc/nyc.html.
Meanwhile, here's a small sampler:
The band approaches!Three-fourths of the family at the Statue of Liberty (Will was off with the band, of course).Ellis Island as seen from Liberty Island.The Statue of Liberty in the morning sun.Meredith waits for the parade to start.Poinsettia-festooned trees on the lower level, Rockefeller Center.Atop the Empire State Building.Sunset at the World Financial Center.Christmas Tree in the lobby of the World Financial Center.At the Metropolitan Museum of Art.Radio City Music Hall decorated for Christmas.St. Patrick's Cathedral.Near Rockefeller Center.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)