physicsgeek.new.mu.nu

February 25, 2005

Things To Do While Your Coworkers Are On Vacation

Received via email this morning(click extended entry):

Update: Welcome Delphi Forum readers! Stick around and visit some more; I love the company. more...

Posted by: Physics Geek at 05:59 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 40 words, total size 1 kb.

Don't screw with the pizza guy

As someone who delivered pizzas during my junior year in high school, I can relate to this story, where an intrepid reporter sat down to have a discussion with six pizza delivery men. Excerpt:

He knows more about you than you will ever know about him. There are the tangibles: your name, your address, your phone number. And there are the countless intangibles. If he has worked in the racket for a few years--and a decade's labor on the pizza road is not so unusual--he has glimpsed the insides of thousands of homes and apartments. He has borne witness to unimaginable squalor. He has breathed in the stink from your unemptied garbage and your beige urine-soaked carpets. He has gawked at the regal excess of your Lake of the Isles mansion. He has made countless numbing visits to your bleak, ill-lit shithole apartment. He has even caught the scent of the hydroponic marijuana you furtively cultivate under grow lights in the basement.
You should know this: If you stiff the pizza man, he will hate you. There are Nazis. There are baby rapists. And there is that vast class of indifferent, callous swine who stiff the pizza man. Same shit, different name. On the other hand, if you do him up right--prompt exchange, $5 tip--the pizza man will sing your praises to his fellow drivers. If you tip him extravagantly--say, $20 or more on a large order--he will personally arrange an audience with the pope to make the case for your beatification. To the pizza man, the tip is the thing.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 04:26 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 273 words, total size 2 kb.

February 24, 2005

How well do you know your money?

Can you select the correct image of a penny?

Posted by: Physics Geek at 08:59 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 23 words, total size 1 kb.

February 23, 2005

Text adventure games

Michele goes into the wayback machine and discusses Adventure(akaColossal Cave) and Zork. If you aren't familiar with plugh or xyzzy, then you've been missing out.

You see a fierce green dragon.

>Kill dragon

With what, your bare hands?

>Yes

Congratulations. You've just killed a fierce green dragon with your bare hands. Amazing, isn't it?

And by the way, that dwarf really pissed me off. A lot.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 08:57 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 72 words, total size 1 kb.

The dates are set

Do you know where you're going to be on September 29 through October 1? I know where I'm going to be. That is, if the chief gives me permission. My streak of six consecutive GABFs was interrupted by the birth of my second child last year; there will be no similar interruptions this year.

Three whole days of nothing but drinking beer, talking to other beer lovers, drinking beer, eating, drinking beer, releasing great gobs of methane into the atmosphere. It just doesn't get any better than that. Oh, and did I mention the drinking of beer?

Posted by: Physics Geek at 08:50 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 105 words, total size 1 kb.

An instant classic

From the supple mind of Tim Blair.

ROOOOVVVVVVVEEEEEE!!!!!!

Posted by: Physics Geek at 08:41 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 14 words, total size 1 kb.

Pleasure...

...or business? Could be both, perhaps. Mrs. du Toit has a post up that's piqued my interest. Maybe you'll be intrigued as well.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 02:27 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 25 words, total size 1 kb.

Two words that don't belong together

Squirrel hazing. 'Nuff said.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 02:18 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 16 words, total size 1 kb.

February 22, 2005

New to the blogroll

Dean links to an article at Whiteperil.com which, I believe, everyone should read. At least, everyone with an open mind in the debate. Just my opinion, of course. Anyway, a new site has been added to the blogroll.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 09:26 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 46 words, total size 1 kb.

1 ok...after reading what fluffybunny has had to say...i had to make a posting of my own...I am in an area that has been declared under eminent domain...so when you state that 'real estate is different from personal property'. I do not see the distinction. MY HOME IS MY PERSONAL PROERTY, AND VIEWED AS REAL ESTATE, THE CITY'S LIL MONEY MAKER. I would just like to post some information that i released to the press. As well as findings upon these (as you would have believe) innocent developers and city's that just want to do the right thing..... I am not sure where to begin, so I will just get down to brass tactics so to speakÂ…I am a new homeowner, my home is a 100 year old craftsman house. Which we purchased approx. 8 months ago, and started to restore to its original glory. To my horror on June 26th 2004 I was informed by the neighbor that the city plans to demolish the homes in the area, to continue their Â“Uptown Re-developmentÂ” project, they have already started demolishing homes behind us, and have taken out a number of homes a street over, they have not been sending notices out as they stated they were, they want to demolish 430 acres of homes affecting thousands of property owners to put in parking lots and commercial buildings, also this is not an isolated event, for instance currently in Riverside county the city of Murrieta also has a re-development project ongoing to consume a number of acreage also, as well as Norco stated by the press enterprise pertaining to re-zoning publishing date of 7-28-04, all cities officials state when asked what this means for the project areasÂ…..(in the san Bernardino area in particular) they state that this does not affect us, however of the 2 notices I personally received(after being informed by my neighbor) both notices blatantly state my street and to Â‘vacate the streetÂ’ they are stating that the area has Â‘non-specific symptoms of blightÂ’ when asked what they consider symptoms of blight, they will not answer, they took photos of the area to prove their point of a Â‘blighted areaÂ’ however some of the properties they took photos of to prove their point are city acquired properties! Non-project areas get street sweeping services, we have not had a street sweeper come down this street in the whole duration I have lived hereÂ….the city doesnÂ’t even clean the refuge from their own lotsÂ….which makes our neighborhood looks deplorable, we are tired of cleaning the cities lots for them. They have listed us on the Â‘CorteseÂ’ list of hazardous waste and substances for our drinking water, yet at the end of that same paragraph by their own admission they state there is nothing above drinking water standards. We believe that they are trying to do a Â‘takingÂ’ at this point, by zoning the area commercial zoning, and also reinstating eminent domain. They held the last public meeting on July 19th 2004, they have closed all other meetings from this point forward due to the turnout of concerned residents until they will reopen the meetings on august 16th,I get the distinct feeling they will render their final decision at that point, this project in the san Bernardino area has been ongoing since 1986 with eminent domain being instated and expiringÂ…they want to reinstate eminent domain for another 12 yearsÂ….in that time we can not sale our homes without legally disclosing that fact, who would buy a home that is going to be demolished? I know I wouldnÂ’t had we known. We are very fearful for our homes, they are not telling us the truth, they are being deceptive in their tactics, I can not believe that the tactics that they are employing are being accepted as a whole by the city, this is horrendous that in this day and age these tactics are still acceptable, they should not be tolerated in any fashion, our constitutional rights are being violated. We desperately need help, at this point I do not know where to turn anymoreÂ…I have personally printed up flyers which I walked around to most of the project area and handed out myself trying to bring awareness to the area of this situation, most did not have any knowledge of this just as I did not. I have alerted the local papers and news media, the local paper took the story. The news media has not yet returned my calls since I last spoke with them, I can not stress enough how much this needs to get out to the publicÂ…I also phoned the historical society, they stated they can not do anything, I phoned an eminent domain attorney, they want a large retainer we donÂ’t have, most of the community is Hispanic, we do not have much money, we just purchased our home, and put all of our money into restorations. I hope you will be able to help us in bringing public awareness to this issue that is an ongoing problem for the united states as a wholeÂ….this can happen to anyone at anytime, when they pass eminent domain (condemnation) to obtain properties, they have a 12 year time frame for their projectÂ…it expires then they reinstate it again? When does it end? Does it ever end? Should they be allowed to whittle away at a communities character, force of will and determination for 50+ years? And then the problem becomes the legacy/burden of the children?, this is a very large portion of the city of san Bernardino, ca. and a good portion of murietta that they want to uproot. So, when you state about the cities and governments general goodwill and intentions, i think we know all to well, from experience. So personally, until you have had your business or your property declared (a war zone essentially, since thats what it looks like around here now, thanx to them!)we/I, the victims in greedy plot to undermine the rights of property owners and the american dream, dont want to hear it.

Posted by: Carolyn at June 26, 2005 05:32 AM (qPSPg)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

What it all means

I'm watching Kelo vs. City of New London closely. The outcome of this case, should Ms. Kelo lose, will have negative and lasting repercussions, far beyond what a Kerry victory this past November would have brought. Professor Bainbridge puts it best:

After news of Napoleon's victory in the Battle of Austerlitz was conveyed to British Prime Minister William Pitt's, Pitt pointed to a map of Europe and said: "Roll up the map; it will not be wanted these ten years." If the Supreme Court sides with New London, we might just as well roll up the Bill of Rights, for we won't need it any longer.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 08:38 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 114 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Real estate has many failings when it comes to our collective belief in the free market. Are you in favor of externalities and market failures?

Posted by: Fluffy Bunny at February 22, 2005 10:10 PM (4m7UP)

2 I'm not certain that I understand your point. Please try and clarify.

Posted by: physics geek at February 23, 2005 02:19 AM (lFYIM)

3 Real estate is intrinsically different than personal property. Its value is dependent not only upon the materials that are present on the property, but also upon its location. What is the relevancy of location with respect to this discussion? The most obvious example is access. We want to be able to gain access to our property. We want to travel to other property. Thus, we have public roads. That's right, public roads. Public roads are antithetical to the free market, are they not? But I dare say that no one who has posted comments would say that we should get rid of public roads. In addition, location is not something that can is easily replaceable. If I need some steel, it doesnÂ’t matter from where or from whom I get the steel, it only matters that I get the steel. But if I need a 32 acre piece of land for a factory, it does matter where I get that 32 acres. 32 acres in the Outback of Australia ainÂ’t the same as 32 acres in New London, CT. The response may be, well if you pay enough money, the free market will provide you with the 32 acres. But that is obviously not true, is it, because New London is in the Supreme Court. Another intrinsic difference between real and personal property is that our uses of real property have lots of externalities. Both statutory and common law are replete with well-established property conditions/uses that are nuisances and thus impermissible. And uses/conditions that were not nuisances when they were first created can become nuisances because of other encroaching users. (i.e. a rooster breeder that has become surrounded by suburban homes, see also http://www.cortland.edu/polsci/boomer.html). Third, and finally, a healthy, vibrant, livable community requires different uses. You wouldn't want a community with only homes or just gas stations. Many people make the argument, that the free market will correct those uses. And to a certain degree, yes, the free market will work towards a balance. But not always. The free market makes mistakes, lots of mistakes. And mistakes made regarding real property are not easily corrected by the free market. For example, a shopping mall built in a location that cannot sustain it and is doomed to failure, will sit vacant, because it is too expensive to operate. And the owner, having sunk millions of dollars into it, will hold it for years if not decades waiting the best time to reopen it or sell it. Meanwhile, the community is left to suffer the effects of carcass that is the shopping center. In addition, some uses or improvements to real property are not mistakes at the time they are made, but there failure to be updated becomes a failure. For example, houses that were built in the 1930s, 40s, & 50s are completely different in design than houses constructed today. But those houses will not be renovated or demolished and rebuilt until the neighborhoods have become completely bombed out. So, what does this have to do with the Kelo case. Because of externalities and market failures, the Kelo's use of their property cannot be viewed in a vacuum, isolated from changes in the economy, surrounding land uses, building standards/construction. For society to effectively deal with externalities and the market failures of real property, eminent domain may have to be used when all other land use regulations (i.e. zoning, nuisance, etc.) have failed. Frankly, all of the issues that I've discussed are the underpinnings of zoning, nuisance, urban renewal/community redevelopment programs. If you accept the legality/necessity of eminent domain for those land use programs, making the leap to the economic development program put in place by New London is not that hard. I feel that much of the backlash against eminent domain comes from the failure to understand that real property is not like personal property. That doesnÂ’t mean I donÂ’t think that the KeloÂ’s arenÂ’t entitled to substantial compensation. I want to make clear, I'm not for government supported real estate, or tax subsidies, and I think governments are really bad being real estate developers. But I do think that governments are, in many instances, the only instruments that can correct market failures.

Posted by: Fluffy Bunny at February 23, 2005 03:03 AM (qHZfH)

4 "If you accept the legality/necessity of eminent domain for those land use programs, making the leap to the economic development program put in place by New London is not that hard." I believe that you've made a non sequitur here in that a) the area in question is not blighted or in need of demolition b) there is no public use in question here The fact that the local government can extract more tax dollars from a business than from property taxes does NOT constitute a public use. Also, but entirely beside the point, the private entity that desires the property has no concrete plans on its usage as yet. It merely believes that the land in question is a prime location; I don't even question that assertion because the case is wending through the courts. Public roads, highways, perhaps public schools: these would all constitute decent public reasons for the use of eminent domain. Taking property from one private entity and giving it to another private entity based solely on the possiblity of increased tax revenues from the second party does NOT constitute a valid public use. Essentially, if this case is decided in New London's favor, the concept of private ownership of real estate will have ceased to exist. Any government entity(local, state, federal) can almost always find another tenant that will provide it with more revenue. Eminent domain is not meant to apply in these cases.

Posted by: physics geek at February 23, 2005 05:44 PM (Xvrs7)

5 Just for some perspective. I am an attorney in New York. I work with communities across the State on community redevelopment issues, and many of them are suffering severe economic distress. They are on the verge of financial collapse after decades of declining property values. (This leads into an ancillary discussion of whether property taxes are the best way to fund local governments, but that's a discussion for another day.) Also, in New York State, a local government could not do what New London did, because there is not statutory authority. "Economic condemnation" in New York is limited to urban renewal or community redevelopment programs that are carried out according to the statutorily defined procedures. In addition, the State's Municipal Redevelopment Law has some built in safegaurds to protect property owners. In addition, there are Industrial Development Authorities that have condemnation powers. Frankly, I think that IDAs are ineffective. As for the argument that this development was solely for increasing the tax revenue, I think the record is clear that this is not the sole purpose, or even the main purpose, but a recognized and welcomed benefit. From the CT Supreme court opinion, the development plan's "goals were to create a development that would complement the facility that Pfizer was planning to build, create jobs, increase tax and other revenues, encourage public access to and use of the city's waterfront, and eventually "build momentum" for the revitalization of the rest of the city, including its downtown area." New London's plan is quite extensive. It's not just speculative and with the goal of increasing tax revenue. How are New London's remedial actions different from zoning a barren strip of land? Or what if New London had rezoned the area of land in question? The Kelo's property would have been grandfathered in under the doctrine of vested rights, but over years or more likely decades, the properties would probably slowly be converted to the comply with the new zoning requirements. That's a very inefficient way of regulating land use. I'm not arguing that "economic condemnation" could not be abused. I'm sure that it can. I'm just not sure that it has been abused in this situation.

Posted by: Fluffy Bunny at February 23, 2005 07:04 PM (4m7UP)

6 What is a "market failure?" "Market failure" is whatever the person making the argument needs it to be. In reality, there is no such thing. One cannot justify an action due to "market failure", because it does not exist. "Market failure"="a result I am not happy with" and nothing else.

Posted by: Xiaoding at February 24, 2005 06:12 PM (sQKTc)

7 I'm not arguing that "economic condemnation" could not be abused. I'm sure that it can. I'm just not sure that it has been abused in this situation. No offense, but if you're not certain that this case constitutes abuse, then I don't know what'd you consider a case of abuse. Maybe if it were your house on the chopping block for a new Wal-Mart. Let me be clear: if the government can seize your private property and give it to another private owner solely because the 2nd owner will generate more tax revenue, then there will be no property rights in this country. None. The government will now recognize no restraint when it comes to the issue of eminent domain. Heck, maybe I should move into Wal-mart. They've got food, clothing, beds, toys. What more could I need? I doubt that the local government would declare eminent domain against such a large tax contributor. The bastards. Xiaoding: your last comment made me laugh. I ignored the term market failure because it's an oxymoron. The market doesn't fail. Rather people incorrectly anticipate what the market will do.

Posted by: physics geek at February 24, 2005 09:49 PM (Xvrs7)

8 physics geek, I believe that your statement that the purpose of the condemnation was "solely because the 2nd owner will generate more tax revenue" is inaccurate. While increased tax revenue was one of the justifications for the project, it was only one. As I noted in my previous post the trial court found that the project's "goals were to create a development that would complement the facility that Pfizer was planning to build, create jobs, increase tax and other revenues, encourage public access to and use of the city's waterfront, and eventually 'build momentum' for the revitalization of the rest of the city, including its downtown area." The list contains several public purposes: 1) rectifying incompatible land uses (one of the justifications of both zoning and urban renewal/municipal redevelopment laws) 2) job creation, and 3) to give the public access to the waterfront. All three of those justifications have a long history of being recognized as a public purpose. Just today, I met today with a group of property owners in a struggling downtown. Their biggest problems are 1) adjecent properties that have buildings that are sitting vacant because the structures are outmoded and there is no demand for outmoded buildings or 2) incompatible adjacent property uses or 3) current business models require higher quality commercial space that cannot be created without assembling smaller parcels of property. In their current condition, the private sector is rejecting these properties and going elsewhere. Meanwhile, the properties continue to deteriorate, along with the municipal infrastructure. And mind you, I wasn't meeting with municipal officials, I was meeting with SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS who are having to struggle to survive because of the negative impacts the adjacent properties are having on their business. There problem is that they can't get the local city officials to act. I've heard a lot of individuals argue that urban redevelopment to remedy blight is o.k., but what New London is doing is not. And I guess the reasoning there is that once a location gets really run-down, and looks like Dresden at the end of WWII, well then it is o.k. for the municipaltiy to go in and condemn the properties, but not until it is a wasteland. Until that happens, 5, 10, 20 years from now, the community will just have to suffer. Let me pose another question, let's say that New London isn't allowed to condemn the Kelo's property and subsequently becomes so economically run-down, that to support the water, sewer, and roadway infrastructure, to provide for fire and police protection, to pay for the basic operations of the municipality, the City has to raise property taxes 7,000 percent, which the Kelos then could not pay. New London then levies a tax lien on the property and forecloses. Would that be o.k.? Because, I can tell you, that is exactly what is happening in many communities across this country. As for local government's having no restraint, I don't think that there is a basis for that statement. This project was not undertaken willy-nilly and without jumping through considerable procedureal hoops. I admit I am not a professional economist, but DUDES, your defintion of market failure would not earn you a very good grade in economics 101. A generally accepted definition of market failure is a case in which a market fails to efficiently provide or allocate goods and services (in this instance, real estate). The two main reasons that markets fail are (1) sub-optimal market structures and (2) the lack of internalization of costs or benefits in prices and thus into microeconomic decision-making in markets. Although you may not think so, I am a BIG fan of property rights, but I'm not in favor of externalities, are you?

Posted by: Fluffy Bunny at February 25, 2005 03:04 AM (qHZfH)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Geeky post of the day

Found this article via Peeve Farm about a guy who built his own self-balancing, two-wheeled scooter. Essentially, it's a homemade Segway™ , without the fancy price tag, the fancy design, or the fancy safety features. Still, it's a pretty ingenious contraption. Check it out.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 08:24 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 54 words, total size 1 kb.

Ways to destroy the Earth

Ignoring the Kyoto Protocol is not mentioned

Not goin' anywhere for a while? Then drop that Snickers and head over here to read something just a bit different. Link found via Cold Fury.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 07:39 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 43 words, total size 1 kb.

Bring out yer dead!

You might want to make sure that they're actually dead, though. Just an FYI. Autopsies are notoriously difficult to survive.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 05:03 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 28 words, total size 1 kb.

Whatever happened to good old hanging?

From Fox News comes this little tidbit: a US citizen conspired to kill President Bush. Excerpt:

The federal indictment said that in 2002 and 2003 Abu Ali and an unidentified co-conspirator discussed plans for Abu Ali to assassinate Bush. They discussed two scenarios, the indictment said, one in which Abu Ali "would get close enough to the president to shoot him on the street" and, alternatively, "an operation in which Abu Ali would detonate a car bomb."

According to the indictment, Abu Ali obtained a religious blessing from another unidentified co-conspirator to assassinate the president.

More than 100 supporters of Abu Ali crowded the courtroom and laughed when the charge was read aloud alleging that he conspired to assassinate Bush.
...
Abu Ali is charged with six counts and would face a maximum of 80 years in prison if convicted.

Conspiring to assassinate a US President gives you only 80 years in prison? I've got a better idea: how about an unlimited number of years underground? Unlike the wingnuts the frequent the DU(probably some of the people laughing in court), I'd support the death penalty for someone who conspired to kill a Democrat president. I don't have the stomach to wade through the fever swamps today, but I'll guarantee you that there will be lots of cheering and "atta boys" from a certain segment of the ultra-leftists in this country. I take that back: they'll probably be pissed off that Abu Ali failed in his assignment.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 04:08 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 258 words, total size 2 kb.

Presidential hangman

I did pretty well at this game. One that I did miss, though, was John Kennedy. I don't know why.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 04:00 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 24 words, total size 1 kb.

Words fail me

Saw the following over at the Corner. The last line must be seen to be believed. Even then, it's a stretch.

Comedy Central's "The Daily Show" on "'Fact' Obsessed Bloggers" (4 1/2 minute multimedia clip with a required ad to view first, works poorly on dial up connections). Partial transcript:

Stephen Colbert, Senior Media Correspondent: "I draw the line with these 'attack bloggers.' Just someone with a computer who gathers, collates and publishes accurate information that is then read by the general public. They have no credibility. All they have is facts. Spare me."

Found via the Corner.

And yes, I probably it's probably tongue-in-cheek, at least on the Daily Show. However, it sounds far too similar to what I'm hearing from some of the MSM types.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 02:15 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 133 words, total size 1 kb.

Words you don't hear every day

A city wastewater utility worker recovered the penis from a toilet down which the woman had flushed it.

No mention of whether or not the Lorena Bobbit shrine had candles burning in it at the time.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 02:01 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 48 words, total size 1 kb.

Just because I haven't pissed off enough people today

I've carried the following list around for more than a decade since I first saw in on an old BBS, maybe alt. humor. Probably been around longer than that. Anyhoo, here goes:
===============================================

45 Reasons Why Coffee Is Better Than Women
1. You don't have to put cream in your coffee to make it taste good.
2. Coffee doesn't complain when you've put whipped cream in it.
3. Coffee looks better in the morning.
4. You won't fall asleep after a cup of coffee.
5. You can always warm coffee up.
6. Coffee comes with endless refills.
7. Coffee is cheaper.
8. You won't get arrested for ordering coffee at 3 AM.
9. Coffee never runs out.
10. Coffee is out of your system by tomorrow morning.
11. You can take black coffee home to meet your parents.
12. You can make coffee as sweet as you want.
13. You can smoke while drinking coffee.
14. You can put out a cigarette in a cup of coffee.
15. Coffee smells and tastes good.
16. You don't have to put vinegar in your coffee.
17. If your coffee pot leaks, you can use a regular paper towel.
18. You can always get fresh coffee.
19. You can turn the pot on, leave the room, and it will be hot when you
get back.
20. They sell coffee at police stations.
21. You can always ditch a bad cup of coffee.
22. Coffee goes down easier.
23. If you put chocolate in your coffee, it doesn't put on weight.
24. No matter how ugly you are, you can always get a cup of coffee.
25. A big cup or a small cup? It doesn't matter.
26. Your coffee doesn't talk to you.
27. Coffee smells good in the morning.
28. Coffee smells good when it's cold too.
29. Coffee stains are easier to remove.
30. Coffee doesn't care when you dunk things in it.
31. Coffee doesn't care what kind of mood you're in.
32. Coffee doesn't shed.
33. Coffee is ready in 15 minutes or less.
34. You can't get a cup of coffee pregnant by putting cream in it.
35. Coffee doesn't mind being ground.
36. No matter how bad coffee is, you can always make it better.
37. Coffee doesn't have a time of the month...it's good all the time.
38. When coffee gets old, you can throw it away.
39. When you have a coffee, you don't end up with a pube in the back of
your throat.
40. Coffee doesn't take up half of your bed.
41. Coffee doesn't mind if you wake up at 3 AM and decide to have a cup.
42. INSTANT COFFEE!!
43. You can have an intelligent conversation with coffee.
44. It takes up to 2 weeks for coffee to grow mold.
45. Your coffee won't be jealous of a larger cup.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 03:39 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 498 words, total size 3 kb.

February 18, 2005

Psst! Free nude pictures!

Now that I have your attention, Conservative Cat has assembled an all-purpose Carnival page, complete with fill in the blank submission form. He even lists the due dates and times for every Carnival. Now you're out of excuses. Submit. SUBMIT!!!

Thank Harvey for the link.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 05:38 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 53 words, total size 1 kb.

Clarity of thought

Stumbled across this old speech by Michael Crichton this moring(with a little help from Neal Boortz) and thought that I'd post a few excerpts:

Now go read it all.

Update: I'm taking down the excerpts until/unless I receive permission to post them. I failed to notice the note at the bottom of the speech. While some might argue the Fair Use doctrine, and be entirely correct in their assertion, I have neither the time nor money to fight a copyright infringement lawsuit. I have submitted a request to post excerpts on this site.

Posted by: Physics Geek at 01:45 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 99 words, total size 1 kb.

73kb generated in CPU 0.0264, elapsed 0.1387 seconds.
98 queries taking 0.122 seconds, 298 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy

Monthly Traffic

Pages: 153392
Files: 592
Bytes: 708.5M
CPU Time: 118:49
Queries: 11139559

Content

Posts: 2682
Comments: 2688

Feeds

February 25, 2005

February 24, 2005

February 23, 2005

February 22, 2005

February 18, 2005

Search Thingy

Recent Comments

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

Monthly Traffic

Content

Feeds