wow! never really thought about this before. i count the american way. after having to count piles of money multiple times as a supervisor at a chili restaurant, i really developed a style. i also have to have all my bills facing the same way, and if i fold the money in half, i make sure the smallest bill faces the outside, as to possibly avert someone's attention of how much money i really have.
i don't think it was insensitive, john. insensitive would be posting this and writing a connection between it and the shootings from the other day. you can't go around walking on egg shells, yunno. of course, my mom was murdered by my step-dad, who then killed himself, so i'm a little emotionally dry these days. but nonetheless, it was a great little short film and i quite enjoyed it! i didn't find it as predictable as others, of course, thinking back there was a lot of foreshadowing, what with all the mental-hospital flashbacks. oh well. good post!
aww pudifoot.. why you gotta target people like little ol' me (btw i'm only 22)? just because i don't pay for cable and am slightly agitated that i'm being forced to rid the top of my tv of it's characterizing rabbit ears doesn't mean i'm afraid of change. although agreed that some people will probably protest and whatnot, it's the principle of forcing us to change our viewing pleasure that annoys us.
but seriously, i don't have cable because it isn't a necessity. although it's great that this digital takeover will allow for more airspace, i really just think it's more of a marketing ploy for the electronics industry. how does having a digital picture make tv viewing more pleasurable? if you're watching a show, are you going to understand the plot, laugh, cry, and enjoy yourself MORE with a digital signal over analog? i don't think so. we're made to think that television is our only source of entertainment; that we all rely on it to get us through the day. what happened to reading a book? playing board games? GOING OUTSIDE?
another thing.. like i said before, it's great that there will be more airspace due to this switch. but this is where development really needs to be looked at. this is the step that the industry tends to childishly look the other way with their fingers in their ears, humming and saying "i can't hear you! i can't hear you!" by compressing the signal, yes there is more airspace. BUT- compressing the signal doesn't take away any of the already existing channels. with more available airspace, of course more networks will snatch them up and fill them up again. won't that cause some kind of overload decades from now? i already feel that there is an information overload these days, what with all of our technologies, but what about 10, 20, even 30-50 years from now? there will be so much information out there we won't know what to do with it (similar to how seniors feel today). we will turn to different forms of entertainment because we'll grow tired of all the crap on tv, the internet, our i-pods, cell phones, portable players, and GPS devices. we already have the i-phone, which encompasses all of that. what's next? what new gadget will take us into tomorrow? all i know is that a clear signal on my tv isn't going to motivate me to buy satellite or cable. only if jon stewart, the steves, and judd apatow created their own channel, cable just isn't worth $50 a month.
burritos may have been brought here by immigrants, but chipotle will make sure ameri-mexican cuisine continues to flourish, regardless of who's working the kitchen. sorry, dude with the sign. once america steals a good idea, it makes sure the idea stays.
i agree with acc: let's just hope that "race" isn't much of an issue by 2050. but the only way that could happen is to spread your knowledge that race doesn't matter to your children. we are smart people, and i truly believe that racism could be something of the past by the time our children are running this country.
once we adopt another holiday having a black vs. white connotation, rev. sharpton will start protests all around the country. let's not bring another reason to call us a bunch of bigots to the table. the slew of crappy holidays we already celebrate is enough, valentine's day included. corporate america has given us little to appreicate during the holidays because they've brought money into the picture. with nothing to look forward to except "that perfect gift" we have no reason to celebrate. it's really sad. celebrate a holiday because it brings family together, not because you expect gifts from them.
i find it fascinating that people truly find it in their hearts to a) kill a person, and b) have the intention of killing several people in a traditionally tame envorironment. what i find more fascinating is that when these incidents happen, institutions around the country tighten their security in hopes of preventing a similar situation. nobody is ever caught with intentions of shooting up their school and it's always too late once a couple people have lost their lives. not saying precautions shouldn't be taken, but i find it pointless to raise levels of fear and spend time and money on needless survaillance. crimes will happen. people will become disgruntled. people will kill people. it's a sad truth, but there's really only so much we can actually do to "prevent" these things from happening. my heart goes out to the victims of this senseless crime, and it's unfortunate that the kid who committed it found it necessary to bring utter depression to those families.
why does it have to be just men to ban together and get rid of valentine's day? i'm a girl and i HATE valentines day. i have a loving boyfriend of two years and we didn't celebrate it. he actually told me to tell his mom that he got me a card if she asked because she would give him a bunch of grief if i told the truth... i don't know, i've always hated valentines day, except back in the day when everybody was forced to drop a dumb little card in everybody else's decorated shoe-box. but i basically enjoyed it because i liked decorating the box...
i find it interesting that noone has mentioned that "mr. perfect" is a fabrication of societal standards. who says girls have to get married and have babies? who says women have to be with men at all? who says women WANT to get married? we girls have been raised to think that we're supposed to find a man, get married, settle down, have children, and grow old toghether. most little girls have been planning their wedding day since they were 5 years old. why? why this immediacy to "find" love? why this perpetuation of false hope and 'this is how it is'? and when a woman "steps out of line" she is ridiculed as being lonely for the rest of her life. why are you all of a sudden "lonely" when you aren't married? lots of people (men and women alike) are perfectly happy without marriage. i mean, i'd give more credit to those who don't fall into these "standards" because it's hard to go out of the 'norm' for most. good post.
i like how everyone here is shitting on this guy, regardless of his efforts and imporovements made at a lacking school. arguing about whether he is Isreali or not... irrelevant. arguing about where the hell Soho is... irrelevant.
kudos to the guy for making a difference in so many peoples' lives and turning an entire school around just by being a good person. great find, alex!
ok ok. i get gingerbread houses, snowman faces, using popcorn for garland on the xmas tree, and various other small food contributions to art. but sometimes it's just a waste of food!
but seriously, i don't have cable because it isn't a necessity. although it's great that this digital takeover will allow for more airspace, i really just think it's more of a marketing ploy for the electronics industry. how does having a digital picture make tv viewing more pleasurable? if you're watching a show, are you going to understand the plot, laugh, cry, and enjoy yourself MORE with a digital signal over analog? i don't think so. we're made to think that television is our only source of entertainment; that we all rely on it to get us through the day. what happened to reading a book? playing board games? GOING OUTSIDE?
another thing.. like i said before, it's great that there will be more airspace due to this switch. but this is where development really needs to be looked at. this is the step that the industry tends to childishly look the other way with their fingers in their ears, humming and saying "i can't hear you! i can't hear you!" by compressing the signal, yes there is more airspace. BUT- compressing the signal doesn't take away any of the already existing channels. with more available airspace, of course more networks will snatch them up and fill them up again. won't that cause some kind of overload decades from now? i already feel that there is an information overload these days, what with all of our technologies, but what about 10, 20, even 30-50 years from now? there will be so much information out there we won't know what to do with it (similar to how seniors feel today). we will turn to different forms of entertainment because we'll grow tired of all the crap on tv, the internet, our i-pods, cell phones, portable players, and GPS devices. we already have the i-phone, which encompasses all of that. what's next? what new gadget will take us into tomorrow? all i know is that a clear signal on my tv isn't going to motivate me to buy satellite or cable. only if jon stewart, the steves, and judd apatow created their own channel, cable just isn't worth $50 a month.
"sorry, world, for bringing about corporate injustices! our bad!"
i agree with acc: let's just hope that "race" isn't much of an issue by 2050. but the only way that could happen is to spread your knowledge that race doesn't matter to your children. we are smart people, and i truly believe that racism could be something of the past by the time our children are running this country.
kudos to the guy for making a difference in so many peoples' lives and turning an entire school around just by being a good person. great find, alex!