I recently came across two links to mock Powerpoint Presentations.
http://home.nyc.rr.com/dradosh/ppaol.html&e=7620
http://www.norvig.com/Gettysburg/sld001.htm
Of course they mock powerpoint by showing how it could make great works common, even laughable.
Today in class, I had the opposite experience. The presentation of a man's pitiful (in the most literal sense) life made it hilarious. After spending 5 weeks teaching us his theory of the world of Linguistic Evolution, he had us read a dissenting opinion. Fair enough. And then in class, he described the clash of the minds he had personally had with the author.
Long story short: my prof said the author of the article had not really disagreed. In fact, the author came to my prof's aid when the author was also the editor of a journal my prof was submitting to. He switched slides, and we got a glimpse of this "defense." Snippets I can remember of this alleged defense, "though [my prof]'s tone is admittedly grating, he may be proved to be right in a few decades" and "I would push to allow [my prof] to resubmit this paper after fixing many widespread criticisms". This man was taking his personal correspondence and showing it to all of us, seeming unaware that his best ally was only praising with faint damn! Note to self: make sure to redact all mentions of phallus as "not intolerably small" in collected letters before dying.
In any case, many good htoughts. Look in the coming months on this blog for a short story written in .ppt (that's Powerpoint format, you technically illiterates).
Friday, April 29, 2005
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
Pissing in the Wind: Food Rainbow
I know that Dan & Dan will probably poo-poo the government's newly designed Food Rainbow, but let me be the first to say that I think this is the greatest idea ever. That's right, EVER. I mean, this makes Dewey Decimal look like a retard.
Consider the old system. You have different food "groups" like meats, vegetables, dairy, etc., with the most important group forming the bottom, or "base," of the pyramid. But here's the tricky part: the pyramid if full of words. Words spelled out with letters. Letters, for God's sake! Excuse me, Food & Drug Administration, but I didn't come hear to pass a reading test, I came her to eat, dammit!
Herein lies the genius of the new system. Drawing on the success of the Homeland Security threat system, the new food pyramid uses colors. Accessible, easy to understand, colors. Eating is no longer just for the English-speaking, literate Americans ( i.e. liberals and their activist/homosexual judges), it's for everyone. This is democracy at its finest.
Q: "But what if I'm blind and I can't see anything, how am I supposed to know what to eat?"
A: "You'll eat whatever the hell I put in your cage, dammit."
Some critics charge that the new system is more "confusing" or "difficult" than the old system. Some critics also have "shit for brains." But I digress. Under the old system, if you wanted to know what food group a food was in--for example, yogurt--you needed to think. You needed to think about whether yogurt came from a cow (dairy group), whether it had seeds (fruit group), or whether it was spore-based (meats & vegetable group). But with beautiful new (techni)color system, you need only associate a food with a color.
Take a look at the new rainbow pyramid. Orange stands for grains, Green stands for vegetables, Red for fruits, Yellow for oils, Light Blue/teal for dairy, and Indigo for meats & beans. So what color is yogurt? If it's plain yogurt, it's white. That color isn't in the food pyramid, so you shouldn't eat it. If it's flavored yogurt, say, blueberry, it's probably some sort of a bluish-purple. If it's more blue than purple, it's in the Dairy group, and if it's a darkish purple, it's in the Meats & Beans group. Then I want you to ask yourself: do you really want to eat a Meat & Beans yogurt? I didn't think so. Find a different colored yogurt and start again.
"Wow, the new rainbow pyramid is so easy to use, why didn't they think of that in the first place?"
Good question. When the original monochrome food pyramid was released in 1992, the world was a different place. Buffalos roamed free throughout the Midwest, presidents were free to engage in acts of extra-marital fellatio, and a little thing called "focus groups" had yet to be invented. As noted in the official Mypyramid.gov website:
In other words, pretty colors test well. Hence the updated and more scientific color pyramid.
"But wait? With the old food pyramid, I knew the group at the bottom was more important than the group up top. With the new system, how do I tell what group is most important? This rainbow has no bottom. For the love of God this rainbow has no bottom!"
First off, I'm not going to answer your question unless you put some pants on. Secondly, the new pyramid doesn't even need a bottom. The bigger the sliver of color, the more important. See the picture below for details:
Consider the old system. You have different food "groups" like meats, vegetables, dairy, etc., with the most important group forming the bottom, or "base," of the pyramid. But here's the tricky part: the pyramid if full of words. Words spelled out with letters. Letters, for God's sake! Excuse me, Food & Drug Administration, but I didn't come hear to pass a reading test, I came her to eat, dammit!
Herein lies the genius of the new system. Drawing on the success of the Homeland Security threat system, the new food pyramid uses colors. Accessible, easy to understand, colors. Eating is no longer just for the English-speaking, literate Americans ( i.e. liberals and their activist/homosexual judges), it's for everyone. This is democracy at its finest.
Q: "But what if I'm blind and I can't see anything, how am I supposed to know what to eat?"
A: "You'll eat whatever the hell I put in your cage, dammit."
Some critics charge that the new system is more "confusing" or "difficult" than the old system. Some critics also have "shit for brains." But I digress. Under the old system, if you wanted to know what food group a food was in--for example, yogurt--you needed to think. You needed to think about whether yogurt came from a cow (dairy group), whether it had seeds (fruit group), or whether it was spore-based (meats & vegetable group). But with beautiful new (techni)color system, you need only associate a food with a color.
Take a look at the new rainbow pyramid. Orange stands for grains, Green stands for vegetables, Red for fruits, Yellow for oils, Light Blue/teal for dairy, and Indigo for meats & beans. So what color is yogurt? If it's plain yogurt, it's white. That color isn't in the food pyramid, so you shouldn't eat it. If it's flavored yogurt, say, blueberry, it's probably some sort of a bluish-purple. If it's more blue than purple, it's in the Dairy group, and if it's a darkish purple, it's in the Meats & Beans group. Then I want you to ask yourself: do you really want to eat a Meat & Beans yogurt? I didn't think so. Find a different colored yogurt and start again.
"Wow, the new rainbow pyramid is so easy to use, why didn't they think of that in the first place?"
Good question. When the original monochrome food pyramid was released in 1992, the world was a different place. Buffalos roamed free throughout the Midwest, presidents were free to engage in acts of extra-marital fellatio, and a little thing called "focus groups" had yet to be invented. As noted in the official Mypyramid.gov website:
As part of the design and development process, potential images and messages were tested with consumers to determine how well they communicated the intended content and how appealing they were to consumers. The results from the consumer research were used to revise and finalize the consumer materials so that consumers can more easily understand these messages and incorporate them into their lifestyle.
In other words, pretty colors test well. Hence the updated and more scientific color pyramid.
"But wait? With the old food pyramid, I knew the group at the bottom was more important than the group up top. With the new system, how do I tell what group is most important? This rainbow has no bottom. For the love of God this rainbow has no bottom!"
First off, I'm not going to answer your question unless you put some pants on. Secondly, the new pyramid doesn't even need a bottom. The bigger the sliver of color, the more important. See the picture below for details:
"OK, I see the Yellow group is the smallest, and the Indigo one looks a bit smaller than the Red. But I think the Green and teal are about the same size. Why not do some other design like a graph or pie chart?"
Another good question, but the good folks at MyPyramid are one step ahead of you. As they note, "Several designs were tested. Pyramid-shaped designs, Pyramid-like designs and non-Pyramid designs were all tested with consumers."
You see that part about "non-Pyramid designs," smart-ass. They tested it and it failed. Failed miserably, in fact. When the non-pyramid design was tested on the focus group, they were so confused they were eating 20 serving of cottage cheese a day, and drinking a glass of marinara sauce with each meal.
"OK, you've convinced me that the new color-based pyramid is more efficient than the old one, and it seems like even a Swede could understand the new version. But what about that man climbing the stairs in that picture? Is that supposed to symbolize something?"
Actually, no. He's just lost.
(Same post, different blog)
Another good question, but the good folks at MyPyramid are one step ahead of you. As they note, "Several designs were tested. Pyramid-shaped designs, Pyramid-like designs and non-Pyramid designs were all tested with consumers."
You see that part about "non-Pyramid designs," smart-ass. They tested it and it failed. Failed miserably, in fact. When the non-pyramid design was tested on the focus group, they were so confused they were eating 20 serving of cottage cheese a day, and drinking a glass of marinara sauce with each meal.
"OK, you've convinced me that the new color-based pyramid is more efficient than the old one, and it seems like even a Swede could understand the new version. But what about that man climbing the stairs in that picture? Is that supposed to symbolize something?"
Actually, no. He's just lost.
(Same post, different blog)
Tuesday, April 26, 2005
Pissing In The Wind: Shape of the Shapely
In the Beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth. Food was provided for you, heck! The mutton was right next to the... lion... meat. Where else could you turn one picked-clean rib into two sides of meat (with a nice rack). Take that Olive Garden, you're no restaurant compared to the Eden Garden! But that same piece of fruit that gave us the Original Sin of Knowledge gave us both Shame and Vanity. We've all seen the drawings of Eve covering herself with shrubbery when she realizes for the first time ever nudity's incorrectness. The part of the story they don't tell you is that the first thing she said after that was, "Does this fig leaf make me look fat?"
Soon afterwards, brothers became murderers, extra people conveniently popped up, so-and-so begat a-lot-of-effing-people, and hunters became gatherers. We ate whatever we could catch/steal from the hyenae. In the words of an NPR story about what we found in the dried-up shitters of Vikings, they ate "meat, beer, and more meet." Or maybe it was the other way around.
But during the 1950's, everything became standardized. Students across the country learned to be vaporized in the same under-desk crouch. Across the country you could get the same sub-standard beef (hopefully it's beef) at Kroc's McDonald's, and we could live in the same houses on identical cul-de-sacs as the Cookie Cutter made its first appearance as a tool of the architect. The food square showed us that we needed to get different types of food. Three-thousand calories from those delectable apple pie concoctions that have never been near either an apple nor a pie from the Golden Arches does not a balanced diet make.
But that wasn't quite precise enough. And in the 90's we wanted to be exact. Title IX funding had to be even to a percent. Affirmative Action soared, and though school bussing firms went bankrupt, the formerly destitute specialists in impeaching presidents returned to the African American ("back in the black"). Thus the food pyramid. Everyone of the age 16-24 in this fine Republic learned it. For approximately 15 seconds. Before summarizing the information as, if society's is any indication, "Yes, I'd love you to supersize that."
All this was enough propaganda about common sense. But no. The pyramid was a familiar object, constructed of successively smaller blocks. Instead, let's instill in our children a fear of geometry by releasing this absurd assortment of amalgamated frightfully-Angled three-sided monstrosities. What? I mean, what? No, seriously, what the hell? Is this the only way that Americans under the Bush Administration can digest information? Can we not add? Were percent RDA's not enough? Commentators, tell me, what USA Today-worthy graphic describes your diet?
Soon afterwards, brothers became murderers, extra people conveniently popped up, so-and-so begat a-lot-of-effing-people, and hunters became gatherers. We ate whatever we could catch/steal from the hyenae. In the words of an NPR story about what we found in the dried-up shitters of Vikings, they ate "meat, beer, and more meet." Or maybe it was the other way around.
But during the 1950's, everything became standardized. Students across the country learned to be vaporized in the same under-desk crouch. Across the country you could get the same sub-standard beef (hopefully it's beef) at Kroc's McDonald's, and we could live in the same houses on identical cul-de-sacs as the Cookie Cutter made its first appearance as a tool of the architect. The food square showed us that we needed to get different types of food. Three-thousand calories from those delectable apple pie concoctions that have never been near either an apple nor a pie from the Golden Arches does not a balanced diet make.
But that wasn't quite precise enough. And in the 90's we wanted to be exact. Title IX funding had to be even to a percent. Affirmative Action soared, and though school bussing firms went bankrupt, the formerly destitute specialists in impeaching presidents returned to the African American ("back in the black"). Thus the food pyramid. Everyone of the age 16-24 in this fine Republic learned it. For approximately 15 seconds. Before summarizing the information as, if society's is any indication, "Yes, I'd love you to supersize that."
All this was enough propaganda about common sense. But no. The pyramid was a familiar object, constructed of successively smaller blocks. Instead, let's instill in our children a fear of geometry by releasing this absurd assortment of amalgamated frightfully-Angled three-sided monstrosities. What? I mean, what? No, seriously, what the hell? Is this the only way that Americans under the Bush Administration can digest information? Can we not add? Were percent RDA's not enough? Commentators, tell me, what USA Today-worthy graphic describes your diet?
Monday, April 25, 2005
Untimely Meditations
This morning, at 4:23 AM Greenwich Mean time, I was jolted awake from sleep; sticky with sweat, heart pounding, hands trembling and fixated...on that one eternally plaguing, endlessly nagging, infinitely mind-gnawing question:
Does Affleck regret every time he fucked her missionary?
...That we might all die wondering counts as proof that the Nihilists are right.
Does Affleck regret every time he fucked her missionary?
...That we might all die wondering counts as proof that the Nihilists are right.
Sunday, April 24, 2005
Lightning Strikes (Not Once But Twice)
Tragedy befalls all of us. But not evenly. Some of us live on Park Avenue (just adoring a penthouse view), some of us have those we love killed and maimed (possibly raped) (probably not in any of the orders I just described). Of course I grieve for those people, yadda yadda, showing reasonable human emotion.
This NYTimes article tells the story of a man who lost 2 wives/girlfriends. Wow. What a tragedy. What a story. What are the odds that two deaths close to him would each be ruled homicides? Wait a minute...
He's now been charged with the second murder (he remains the only viable suspect in the first). The English major in me, though, is conflicted. What was his tragic flaw? Was it hubris (I've gotten away with one murder, I can do another)? Greed (I don't need a third BabyMama)? Crimal Ineptitude(Cause bullets to the head leave so little forensical evidence)?
The point is, save your sick days. You only get so many free passes in life, whether it be missing a meeting at work or prematurely ending the life of a woman you once loved. So make sure this is really the day at school you dread the most or the chick whose voice gets on your nerves the most.
(P.S., the title is a reference to, among other things, a The Clash song off Sandinista, their tremendouly bizarre triple album.)
This NYTimes article tells the story of a man who lost 2 wives/girlfriends. Wow. What a tragedy. What a story. What are the odds that two deaths close to him would each be ruled homicides? Wait a minute...
He's now been charged with the second murder (he remains the only viable suspect in the first). The English major in me, though, is conflicted. What was his tragic flaw? Was it hubris (I've gotten away with one murder, I can do another)? Greed (I don't need a third BabyMama)? Crimal Ineptitude(Cause bullets to the head leave so little forensical evidence)?
The point is, save your sick days. You only get so many free passes in life, whether it be missing a meeting at work or prematurely ending the life of a woman you once loved. So make sure this is really the day at school you dread the most or the chick whose voice gets on your nerves the most.
(P.S., the title is a reference to, among other things, a The Clash song off Sandinista, their tremendouly bizarre triple album.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
