I posted this on Twitter, but I swear the anti-McDonalds crowd would actually PREFER them to use bacteria-ridden meat so that it disintegrates faster!
Here's a shocker: when you irradiate meat to remove the preservatives, then cook it well-done because the health department is always on your ass, it lasts a long time. Duh.
It's not news (and even if it was, it'd been covered to death). It's not interesting. I'm sick of seeing it.
I'm glad you have posters here who engage their brain and recognize this pointless fear-mongoring for what it is. Kudos to Michelle, Minnesotastan, gryt and Agricola. We need more critical thinkers in the world, and less "artists."
Look, nobody's going to argue that Chernobyl was a disaster.
But Three Mile Island leaked less radiation than a typical x-ray machine. the US Navy has been running nuclear reactors, tiny portable ones, hundreds of them, for 50 years without incident. France has been running an entire network of nuclear power plants without incident.
Moreover, the realistic alternatives to nuclear for generating base-load are either a radiation-emitting, miner-killing coal plant, or the limited-availability natural gas plant. We can't build dams anymore. "Green" power sources, while I agree we should be building as much as possible, can't provide the base load needed to keep the grid operating.
If you say "deservedly", you're already under the thrall of Greenpeace's ridiculous propaganda.
BTW, the problem isn't just that it's old (and it is), but that it made *all* the blogosphere back when it came out, so we've all seen it 50 times already. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if Neatorama already posted it-- pretty much everybody else did.
You see this same article every 5 years or so, with the name of the company being changed to the most "trendy" at the moment. For example, I clearly remember seeing a claim about 10 years ago that the "why are manhole covers round?" question was used to screen Microsoft employees. When I interviewed for my current job about 5 years ago, I was asked an estimating question, similar to the window washing one.
This is just lazy journalism. The fact of the matter is that almost any company of decent size has at least one manager who likes to ask questions like this.
The question that needs answered is, "is asking questions like this company policy or not?" My guess: no. This is just lazy, space-filling, journalism.
"I don't believe X" is just a figure of speech, though. It has nothing to do with actual belief-- obviously the lady in the middle believes that they've never gone to the cafe before, otherwise she's just deluding herself.
I think the people who don't "get" the comic are the people who understand that "I don't believe X" is a figure of speech. People who are taking that phrase literally apparently are seeing the humor here.
Either way, I'd call a comic that half of the population doesn't even get not very good.
Or is it really a gushing "Athiests are awesome and everybody would love Athiesm if they tried it?!" piece of propaganda? I assume there's more to it than that... right?
Rob F: that's true, but those aren't science fiction stories, those are actual computer science talks. You could also cite Apple's Hypercard, as an example.
That said, I find the case for the web pretty week... 1989 is seriously the best that's available? There *has* to be a mention of hypertext in sci-fi before then.
(The movie Starship Troopers has one, but I'm guessing that wasn't part of the source book?)
Here's a shocker: when you irradiate meat to remove the preservatives, then cook it well-done because the health department is always on your ass, it lasts a long time. Duh.
It's not news (and even if it was, it'd been covered to death). It's not interesting. I'm sick of seeing it.
I'm glad you have posters here who engage their brain and recognize this pointless fear-mongoring for what it is. Kudos to Michelle, Minnesotastan, gryt and Agricola. We need more critical thinkers in the world, and less "artists."
Look, nobody's going to argue that Chernobyl was a disaster.
But Three Mile Island leaked less radiation than a typical x-ray machine. the US Navy has been running nuclear reactors, tiny portable ones, hundreds of them, for 50 years without incident. France has been running an entire network of nuclear power plants without incident.
Moreover, the realistic alternatives to nuclear for generating base-load are either a radiation-emitting, miner-killing coal plant, or the limited-availability natural gas plant. We can't build dams anymore. "Green" power sources, while I agree we should be building as much as possible, can't provide the base load needed to keep the grid operating.
If you say "deservedly", you're already under the thrall of Greenpeace's ridiculous propaganda.
Cool.
BTW, the problem isn't just that it's old (and it is), but that it made *all* the blogosphere back when it came out, so we've all seen it 50 times already. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if Neatorama already posted it-- pretty much everybody else did.
This is just lazy journalism. The fact of the matter is that almost any company of decent size has at least one manager who likes to ask questions like this.
The question that needs answered is, "is asking questions like this company policy or not?" My guess: no. This is just lazy, space-filling, journalism.
I think the people who don't "get" the comic are the people who understand that "I don't believe X" is a figure of speech. People who are taking that phrase literally apparently are seeing the humor here.
Either way, I'd call a comic that half of the population doesn't even get not very good.
Or is it really a gushing "Athiests are awesome and everybody would love Athiesm if they tried it?!" piece of propaganda? I assume there's more to it than that... right?
That said, I find the case for the web pretty week... 1989 is seriously the best that's available? There *has* to be a mention of hypertext in sci-fi before then.
(The movie Starship Troopers has one, but I'm guessing that wasn't part of the source book?)