So you need to measure 1/3 of a cup of something and your run of the mill set of measuring cups doesn't have one. What do you do?
This isn't rocket science but a handy tip that I thought I'd share with you oh loyal readers who demand I get off my doofus and share with the world.
First of all be aware that the stackable type of measuring cups are meant for measuring solids and the ones that are or look like they should be made of glass, well those are intended for measuring liquids. I use them interchangeably but you may be measuring something more precise where the differences would matter. For my purposes they do not matter. The more butter I put in the better people like it.
Anyway back to the program. How do you get 1/3 cup when all you have is a 1 cup, 2/3 cup, 1/2 cup and 1/4 cup measuring cups? Like this:
Pour whatever it is you are measuring into the 1 cup container. I know, I know you only need 1/3 of a cup. We won't waste it, I promise. And you won't have to eat it without cooking it or whatever it is you are doing. Put the stuff in the 1 cup container and fill it up as though you were going to use 1 cup. Now, put your 2/3 cup measuring device over the bowl you are mixing in, or whatever container you are using. Now pour the 1 cup of said solid into the 2/3 cup said solid allowing the excess to fall into the mixing bowl.
You now have 2/3 of a cup in a measuring container ready to be put back into its original container and 1/3 of a cup of your measured solid in your mixing bowl.
See that, cooking can be fun.
This blog has nothing to do with slogans. What would the three word slogan be for that? No Slogan Blog.
Thursday, October 01, 2009
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
VerizonSucks.com ... who would you think would own that?
VerizonSucks.com is owned by verizon. Funny story. Well maybe not funny so much as infuriating.
But first, the link, because I'm not big media making you wait for "After the Jump"! the link to investigate it yourself.
There was a story on Slashdot (news for nerds or something like that) about how an update to internet explorer was doing some sort of NXDOMAIN hijack. (It doesn't matter what that means unless you want to google it) so I tested it out. Turns out I was hijacked by my new isp, verizon.
I guess it does matter what it means if you got this far. What it is all about is "what happens when you type a domain name that doesn't exist?" Typically your browser says something like "I can't find the domain at www.wtfThisShouldBeRealBecauseItsCoolAndHipAndTrendy.com." This particular form of hijacking intercepts the NXDOMAIN request and feeds you search results that are, more than likely, paid search results. So the offending party is making money on your bad spelling. Regardless, that's what it means.
After some searching I found I could opt out of verizon's DNS hijacking by changing the dns entry on every computer in my house. So I thought I'd call and voice my displeasure at this nonsensical way to do things. This should be done at the modem/router level so I can do it once and not have to worry about changing every device in my household. Anyway, the point being, I was on the phone with the automated system for some minutes while they determined that I wanted to speak english, talk about internet, not configure mail settings, etc, and I wanted an example domain to give them in the event that they did not know what NXDOMAIN was. What better example than verizonsucks.com? Well a million better examples but I was aggravated. Turns out that particular domain is in fact taken, not much to my surprise.
My surprise was that they own it. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised though. They are out to protect their brand name. That's a big part of a corporation. Keep the name brand worth as much as possible. What would Coke do, I wonder, if a batch they made caused many people to become sick. Would they try to cover it up if the FDA wasn't involved? Probably. It would damage the name.
Maybe I'm just getting angry at the kids on my lawn in my old age but it seems to me that corporations should allow free speech instead of just buying it out. Even wal mart doesn't outright buy out the mom and pop stores, they just keep the prices low enough that mom and pop don't get any business so they have to close down.
The times they are a'changing people. The customer is no longer always right. Especially if their misspellings can lead to paid ads and search results and "domains that might say bad things about us" can lead to somewhere we already own.
But first, the link, because I'm not big media making you wait for "After the Jump"! the link to investigate it yourself.
There was a story on Slashdot (news for nerds or something like that) about how an update to internet explorer was doing some sort of NXDOMAIN hijack. (It doesn't matter what that means unless you want to google it) so I tested it out. Turns out I was hijacked by my new isp, verizon.
I guess it does matter what it means if you got this far. What it is all about is "what happens when you type a domain name that doesn't exist?" Typically your browser says something like "I can't find the domain at www.wtfThisShouldBeRealBecauseItsCoolAndHipAndTrendy.com." This particular form of hijacking intercepts the NXDOMAIN request and feeds you search results that are, more than likely, paid search results. So the offending party is making money on your bad spelling. Regardless, that's what it means.
After some searching I found I could opt out of verizon's DNS hijacking by changing the dns entry on every computer in my house. So I thought I'd call and voice my displeasure at this nonsensical way to do things. This should be done at the modem/router level so I can do it once and not have to worry about changing every device in my household. Anyway, the point being, I was on the phone with the automated system for some minutes while they determined that I wanted to speak english, talk about internet, not configure mail settings, etc, and I wanted an example domain to give them in the event that they did not know what NXDOMAIN was. What better example than verizonsucks.com? Well a million better examples but I was aggravated. Turns out that particular domain is in fact taken, not much to my surprise.
My surprise was that they own it. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised though. They are out to protect their brand name. That's a big part of a corporation. Keep the name brand worth as much as possible. What would Coke do, I wonder, if a batch they made caused many people to become sick. Would they try to cover it up if the FDA wasn't involved? Probably. It would damage the name.
Maybe I'm just getting angry at the kids on my lawn in my old age but it seems to me that corporations should allow free speech instead of just buying it out. Even wal mart doesn't outright buy out the mom and pop stores, they just keep the prices low enough that mom and pop don't get any business so they have to close down.
The times they are a'changing people. The customer is no longer always right. Especially if their misspellings can lead to paid ads and search results and "domains that might say bad things about us" can lead to somewhere we already own.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
The pros of Prose
The witch, which never won one thing, save for a rose, would chop wood.
She never saw a saw or did see the sea but she rose the rose.
Since she had won just one she didn't make any rows.
But with her hose and her hoes she crafted some rows such that if she won one more, which witch which was called a moor, she have room for one more rose.
Oftentime on the rose there would to be a bee.
The bee told a fanciful tale but never stung her with his tail. He'd say,
The witch walked carrying the rose and the bee kept his head pointed to see the sea. She believed his tale and so followed his tail and for four miles en route she would rest on the root of many a fallen tree. They saw ores made of lead on the route she was led and the hair of a hare and even once the bow of a beau.
At long last they arrived and it was here they would hear the merry thoughts of Mary, the witch which would chop wood, the witch which rose the rose.
--me.
and I guess the point is: never disparage someone learning English as a second language. It can be quite tricky.
She never saw a saw or did see the sea but she rose the rose.
Since she had won just one she didn't make any rows.
But with her hose and her hoes she crafted some rows such that if she won one more, which witch which was called a moor, she have room for one more rose.
Oftentime on the rose there would to be a bee.
The bee told a fanciful tale but never stung her with his tail. He'd say,
Oh witch, which would chop wood, there is something more too see. Believe my tale and follow my tail and I will take your eye to see the sea.Not knowing where or what to wear she asked the bee
If I am to be, to follow the bee, and I can see the sea, should I bring the rose which I rose? Will it know, or will it no?To be a bee is crafty indeed for it could travel the four miles atop the rose which this witch had rose. And off they set, this unlikely set, the witch, the bee, the rose.
The witch walked carrying the rose and the bee kept his head pointed to see the sea. She believed his tale and so followed his tail and for four miles en route she would rest on the root of many a fallen tree. They saw ores made of lead on the route she was led and the hair of a hare and even once the bow of a beau.
At long last they arrived and it was here they would hear the merry thoughts of Mary, the witch which would chop wood, the witch which rose the rose.
To be a bee! To see the sea! This site in my sight, the sea which I see! The whale does wail, his skin all blue, from his top he blew, the whole of the hole, seen by I with my eye! Buy this shore I am sure I am no more a moor than the sun is a son or the scythe is a sigh!
--me.
and I guess the point is: never disparage someone learning English as a second language. It can be quite tricky.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Counterwhistling, or the general propensity of people to derail the thought train
Counterwhistling, or the general propensity of people to derail the thought train
First, the main proof of my argument. Put one's self in a social situation with many people in a mostly quiet area. A public park works well. Begin whistling something when nobody else is whistling or creating any music. Someone will begin whistling something contrary. Even if you are whistling a universally known song the counterwhistler will whistle something completely contrary to what you whistle. It works. Like every time. It is real. But why?
Why do people counterwhistle? Why do they derail a train that is already in motion, or attempt to? I do not believe it is a conscious act. I do believe some people counterwhistle more than others. Some people have shown me to be counterwhistlers at any given moment. Others seem to never engage in the act. What causes this? Is there a motivation within them to go against something other people have started and if so is it something they learned or is it something they were born with? My 8 year old son is a counterwhistler. I don't believe I taught him to be one but perhaps I did and I don't yet see it. I once worked with a guy that was the perennial counterwhistler. At any given note of whistling he would begin whistling his own tune. Does this also happen in nature? For example, when birds sing, is it a counterwhistle?
This does not have to be simply a whistling act to create the same effect. Having been a musician most of my life I see it in band situations as well. Nearly invariably when one person is tuning their instrument another is playing something that interferes with the tuning. If one member is showing another member a "lick" or otherwise teaching something, another member is actively playing something contrary. This, in effect, is counterwhistling. Another area I can attest to counterwhistling is while someone is engaged in thought. There are times I will personally be caught in a state of personal discourse with a subject matter. If someone is aware I am engaged in such an act and they are unable to contribute to the subject matter at hand they will begin to counterwhistle (or attempt to derail the thought train) by introducing completely unrelated subject matter to the thinker.
It seems to me that the more adverse a person is, the more they are likely to be argumentative for little or no reason, the more they are a counterwhistler. Is there a term for this, is it a known thing? I'm not a psychologist. I'm not a sociologist. I'm just a guy who wonders about such things. Why do we think and act the way we do? I sure don't know.
First, the main proof of my argument. Put one's self in a social situation with many people in a mostly quiet area. A public park works well. Begin whistling something when nobody else is whistling or creating any music. Someone will begin whistling something contrary. Even if you are whistling a universally known song the counterwhistler will whistle something completely contrary to what you whistle. It works. Like every time. It is real. But why?
Why do people counterwhistle? Why do they derail a train that is already in motion, or attempt to? I do not believe it is a conscious act. I do believe some people counterwhistle more than others. Some people have shown me to be counterwhistlers at any given moment. Others seem to never engage in the act. What causes this? Is there a motivation within them to go against something other people have started and if so is it something they learned or is it something they were born with? My 8 year old son is a counterwhistler. I don't believe I taught him to be one but perhaps I did and I don't yet see it. I once worked with a guy that was the perennial counterwhistler. At any given note of whistling he would begin whistling his own tune. Does this also happen in nature? For example, when birds sing, is it a counterwhistle?
This does not have to be simply a whistling act to create the same effect. Having been a musician most of my life I see it in band situations as well. Nearly invariably when one person is tuning their instrument another is playing something that interferes with the tuning. If one member is showing another member a "lick" or otherwise teaching something, another member is actively playing something contrary. This, in effect, is counterwhistling. Another area I can attest to counterwhistling is while someone is engaged in thought. There are times I will personally be caught in a state of personal discourse with a subject matter. If someone is aware I am engaged in such an act and they are unable to contribute to the subject matter at hand they will begin to counterwhistle (or attempt to derail the thought train) by introducing completely unrelated subject matter to the thinker.
It seems to me that the more adverse a person is, the more they are likely to be argumentative for little or no reason, the more they are a counterwhistler. Is there a term for this, is it a known thing? I'm not a psychologist. I'm not a sociologist. I'm just a guy who wonders about such things. Why do we think and act the way we do? I sure don't know.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Nice guys do finish last
I don't understand the motive behind it precisely but I have realized this much: Being offended is what people desire. It is what motivates them to act. Certainly there are other manners of creating a reaction but this one simple act is what drives our society.
Specific examples: PETA, Scientology, MTV, Jackass, Overly loud music, Racism, Hate, Speech in improper vernacular, Feats of decided stupidity, Commercials on the whole, Wars, Sexual discrimination.
PETA gets attention by shocking people. They seem to know of no other way to further their cause. They exist on the absolute fringe of reality. Scientology seems to bring people in by shutting people out. They do not allow any speech of their religion anywhere and therefore it gains more notice than seemingly any other religion. MTV exists only to shock people into continued viewing, or at least it did the last time I turned it on. Jackass. wow. They realized in creating this show and the many copycat shows, that people laugh when others get hurt. The guy driving down main street with his radio so loud you can't hear your own music. Do you think it is in any way comfortable sitting in his vehicle? I would doubt it. Many racists spout their views at any given opportunity. I hate snakes. But I don't make or join clubs around this point. Many people create tension by speaking in the wrong voice. By this I mean they purposefully talk down to people by utilizing a type of speech that is not native to the listener. Easy examples are tech support assholes who utilize so much jargon the end user has no idea what they are trying to convey. On the other end of the spectrum are people that use words, phrases, or pronunciations that have long fallen out of usage in general everyday speech. "Ort" for "Ought", "Chimbley" for "Chimney", "I'll be John Brown" for "Imagine my surprise" and the like. Feats of stupidity have been a marketing tool for as long as people have been alive. High wire crossings to promote a new store. Climbing vertical buildings for sometimes no other reason than to prove how "badass" one can be. Commercials of almost any type serve to offend. Television uses sex. Radio uses harsh words. Political ads use hate. Religious ads use fear. War. wow. Wars just say, "Hey, I'm going to kill a bunch of you so you'll see my point." Talk about overstating the obvious. Homophobia exists, I think, only to prove that the speaker isn't a "homo." I don't give a shit if you suck cock or not, I simply don't want to see it or hear about it.
I suppose we should have seen this coming. Did we? I don't think so but that could simply be my naïveté. Did you see it coming? Were you warned of it, or did you postulate this on your own? Have you read this far, or have I not offended enough to build that buzz? Is there a solution? Is there a common desire for a solution? I don't think there is the desire for the solution to be quite honest. Prove me wrong. Please. Nice guys do finish last.
Specific examples: PETA, Scientology, MTV, Jackass, Overly loud music, Racism, Hate, Speech in improper vernacular, Feats of decided stupidity, Commercials on the whole, Wars, Sexual discrimination.
PETA gets attention by shocking people. They seem to know of no other way to further their cause. They exist on the absolute fringe of reality. Scientology seems to bring people in by shutting people out. They do not allow any speech of their religion anywhere and therefore it gains more notice than seemingly any other religion. MTV exists only to shock people into continued viewing, or at least it did the last time I turned it on. Jackass. wow. They realized in creating this show and the many copycat shows, that people laugh when others get hurt. The guy driving down main street with his radio so loud you can't hear your own music. Do you think it is in any way comfortable sitting in his vehicle? I would doubt it. Many racists spout their views at any given opportunity. I hate snakes. But I don't make or join clubs around this point. Many people create tension by speaking in the wrong voice. By this I mean they purposefully talk down to people by utilizing a type of speech that is not native to the listener. Easy examples are tech support assholes who utilize so much jargon the end user has no idea what they are trying to convey. On the other end of the spectrum are people that use words, phrases, or pronunciations that have long fallen out of usage in general everyday speech. "Ort" for "Ought", "Chimbley" for "Chimney", "I'll be John Brown" for "Imagine my surprise" and the like. Feats of stupidity have been a marketing tool for as long as people have been alive. High wire crossings to promote a new store. Climbing vertical buildings for sometimes no other reason than to prove how "badass" one can be. Commercials of almost any type serve to offend. Television uses sex. Radio uses harsh words. Political ads use hate. Religious ads use fear. War. wow. Wars just say, "Hey, I'm going to kill a bunch of you so you'll see my point." Talk about overstating the obvious. Homophobia exists, I think, only to prove that the speaker isn't a "homo." I don't give a shit if you suck cock or not, I simply don't want to see it or hear about it.
I suppose we should have seen this coming. Did we? I don't think so but that could simply be my naïveté. Did you see it coming? Were you warned of it, or did you postulate this on your own? Have you read this far, or have I not offended enough to build that buzz? Is there a solution? Is there a common desire for a solution? I don't think there is the desire for the solution to be quite honest. Prove me wrong. Please. Nice guys do finish last.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
