Bill Clinton's second inaugural address is my Hulu queue's Schindler's List; I should want to watch it, but instead it's been gathering dust in this virtual "To-Do" list for more than two years.
My Netflix queue isn't much better1: I have 130 TV shows/videos in my queue, including 35 videos that I apparently believe I'm going to watch again someday (I own some on DVD!), and 20 documentaries and PBS specials that will never see the whites of my eyes2. Over the last four months, I added items #94 through #130 to that list, during which time I haven't even had an active Netflix subscription!
What's my point?
I don't care enough about these movies and shows to pay for and watch them, but I panic at the thought of removing them from a list3. Somewhere, portions of my brain aren't speaking to each other.
This year, I resolved to remove unnecessary things from lists4. This meant video queues, To-Do lists at work, and my Google Reader feed. A mere two weeks into the year, I had already unsubscribed from a few blogs that I should care about (The Happiness Project, Political Calculations, Freakonomics), but that post so often that they cost more time than they're worth. And I winnowed down my work To-Do lists … by getting everything done.
My To-Do lists are shorter now. I still add a lot of things to them, but then I realize what I've done and fix it. It makes me feel more productive.
In the time I've spent writing this blog post, I could have watched that inaugural address. Hmmm. To make up for it, I think I'll add this blog post to my To-Do's, just so I can check it off.
1 But, hey, it doesn't include Schindler's List!
2 And if they could, I'd fire immediately, terrified at the thought of a TV show that is watching me.
3 I clearly need therapy, but I don't care enough to pay for that, either.
4 It was my only resolution this year. I hope I don't have to explain why.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Fishing for shares
Content sites are now fishing for shares. Not stock shares. Not market share. Social media "shares."
They are making their sites less interactive and less fun as a direct consequence1 of their efforts to boost social media "sharing" of their content. My interpretation of their new philosophy is: If you don't "share" it, you don't count.
Many sites previously allowed you to "Like" and "Dislike" posts, or vote on a scale of 1-5, and they kept a running tally of all user votes. Voting was fun and easy.
Now the trend is to remove voting (or making it harder to access) and only leave only the "Share" option, in hopes that you will want to do something to promote great posts, and so will share it and bring in more site traffic.
I'll make an example of Cheezburger's "Daily Squee".2 They have removed voting capabilities from both the main feed and the individual posts. You can only "vote" by sharing on Facebook, so if you don’t have a Facebook account, your vote doesn't matter. (Here, and here they announced the change from voting to Facebook sharing. Check out the user reaction thus far.) And if you really want to vote for a cute cat picture, you're instantly sharing it with your hundreds of friends, acquaintances, family members, and stalkers. You can still "Like" it, but that is also linked to your Facebook profile.2.5 Nothing like the anonymous "Like" button.
Let's also make an example of Google Reader. In its glory days, clicking "Like" was just a vote, and clicking "Share" shared it with your followers (I had 7). Now, clicking "Like" shares a post on your Google Plus (G+) wall for everyone3 to see, and clicking "Share" requires you to pick which G+ circles to share it with. Too many additional clicks, and some of my "followers" aren't also in my circles. This destroyed the social value of Reader for me. Yes, that's right, making it more social destroyed its social value. I don't want to spam my friends. People following me on Reader had self-selected into that.
What about the bottom line: are sites improving their traffic and making more money? It may be too soon for an answer. But I do know that good Cheezburger posts used to get hundreds or thousands of votes, and are now getting fewer than 30 Facebook shares. Run-of-the-mill posts receive fewer than ten. Something truly epic still garners a mere 72 Facebook shares (as of this post). In other words, site owners are actually choosing to make their sites less interactive! If they don't care about my input, I'll visit less.
I hate it, and the only thing I can do about it is deprive them of ad revenue. Ironically, that means using Google Reader4 to view Failbook and Daily Squee without the ads.
1 I think it's a conscious decision, rather than an unintended consequence. Unless these sites are managed by trained monkeys, they ran the numbers and chose the increased ad money from more social media "shares" over site interactivity. I also think they just wanted to change something, and ended up changing something that was working.
2 So, I like cute animals. What's it to ya? Don't give me that look. I'll fightcha.
2.5 You know they only value Shares, because they don't use the "Like" function for voting. (I didn't want to change the footnote order after the fact, so you get #2.5.)
3 If you post something on G+, and nobody is there to read it, did your personal worth just decrease?
4 There's nothing I can do to hurt Google except buy Apple products, and that would hurt my finances far, far more than it would hurt Google's.
They are making their sites less interactive and less fun as a direct consequence1 of their efforts to boost social media "sharing" of their content. My interpretation of their new philosophy is: If you don't "share" it, you don't count.
Many sites previously allowed you to "Like" and "Dislike" posts, or vote on a scale of 1-5, and they kept a running tally of all user votes. Voting was fun and easy.
Now the trend is to remove voting (or making it harder to access) and only leave only the "Share" option, in hopes that you will want to do something to promote great posts, and so will share it and bring in more site traffic.
I'll make an example of Cheezburger's "Daily Squee".2 They have removed voting capabilities from both the main feed and the individual posts. You can only "vote" by sharing on Facebook, so if you don’t have a Facebook account, your vote doesn't matter. (Here, and here they announced the change from voting to Facebook sharing. Check out the user reaction thus far.) And if you really want to vote for a cute cat picture, you're instantly sharing it with your hundreds of friends, acquaintances, family members, and stalkers. You can still "Like" it, but that is also linked to your Facebook profile.2.5 Nothing like the anonymous "Like" button.
Let's also make an example of Google Reader. In its glory days, clicking "Like" was just a vote, and clicking "Share" shared it with your followers (I had 7). Now, clicking "Like" shares a post on your Google Plus (G+) wall for everyone3 to see, and clicking "Share" requires you to pick which G+ circles to share it with. Too many additional clicks, and some of my "followers" aren't also in my circles. This destroyed the social value of Reader for me. Yes, that's right, making it more social destroyed its social value. I don't want to spam my friends. People following me on Reader had self-selected into that.
What about the bottom line: are sites improving their traffic and making more money? It may be too soon for an answer. But I do know that good Cheezburger posts used to get hundreds or thousands of votes, and are now getting fewer than 30 Facebook shares. Run-of-the-mill posts receive fewer than ten. Something truly epic still garners a mere 72 Facebook shares (as of this post). In other words, site owners are actually choosing to make their sites less interactive! If they don't care about my input, I'll visit less.
I hate it, and the only thing I can do about it is deprive them of ad revenue. Ironically, that means using Google Reader4 to view Failbook and Daily Squee without the ads.
1 I think it's a conscious decision, rather than an unintended consequence. Unless these sites are managed by trained monkeys, they ran the numbers and chose the increased ad money from more social media "shares" over site interactivity. I also think they just wanted to change something, and ended up changing something that was working.
2 So, I like cute animals. What's it to ya? Don't give me that look. I'll fightcha.
2.5 You know they only value Shares, because they don't use the "Like" function for voting. (I didn't want to change the footnote order after the fact, so you get #2.5.)
3 If you post something on G+, and nobody is there to read it, did your personal worth just decrease?
4 There's nothing I can do to hurt Google except buy Apple products, and that would hurt my finances far, far more than it would hurt Google's.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Did you have your V8 today?
I did, and it hurt, but not where you'd expect.
Prices for 11.5 oz cans of V8 recently surged from $0.67 to $0.88 each. I know, I know, you're all up in arms about it too. It is, after all a Netflix-style 35% price increase (slightly less fanfare, yes, but equally diabolical).
This is going to hurt my wallet to the tune of $150 per year, so I made plans to cut back andweight wait until they realize that I was single-handedly drinking all of the Low Sodium V8 in north Austin.
Then I found a scientific study1 that says I'll go back to two-a-days, despite the expense. The people at V8 probablycommissioned falsified read that study, so my siege may not succeed.
Stupid science.
1 You mean you don't ready scientific studies before making rash decisions?
Prices for 11.5 oz cans of V8 recently surged from $0.67 to $0.88 each. I know, I know, you're all up in arms about it too. It is, after all a Netflix-style 35% price increase (slightly less fanfare, yes, but equally diabolical).
This is going to hurt my wallet to the tune of $150 per year, so I made plans to cut back and
Then I found a scientific study1 that says I'll go back to two-a-days, despite the expense. The people at V8 probably
Stupid science.
1 You mean you don't ready scientific studies before making rash decisions?
Sunday, October 2, 2011
Virtually useful
Today, I introduced my wife to a wonderful, nerdy waste of time: WinDirStat.
WinDirStat sorts your hard drive folders by file size, and then shows you a colorful, interactive chart of your hard drive usage (see a screen shot by following the above link). It also makes it easy to send unwanted files to the recycling bin (where they will continue to take up hard drive space, as the graph will show you), or to delete them permanently.
My wife was excited to see what was taking up all her space, but was a bit disappointed to realize the inevitable: her writing, which she loves, takes up significantly less space than even a single mp3.
I am always adding new files to my hard drive, so to prevent a loss in performance, I regularly use this program to help me prioritize the files to sort, delete, or move to an external hard drive.
I called this program a waste of time. There's no question in my mind that it's immensely useful. If your hard drive is full, Windows is going to do nothing to help you find the principal culprits efficiently. But after the 10 minutes it takes to run the program, find the 550MB Microsoft Office Enterprise 2010 installation file, and burn a backup CD or two; or move those ridiculously large home video files to an external hard drive, are you really going to stop there?
No, you're not, because freeing up hard drive space is more fun than most video games, and has a direct tangible (virtual?) benefit! So you're going to spend another hour looking at pictures, thinking about deleting them or saving them for posterity, and contemplating whether they make you look fat.1
Due to the advent of the digital camera, and because I've attended 3 family weddings and taken 2 vacations in the last year, there are thousands of unsorted pictures sitting on my hard drive, and at least 500 of them deserve to be deleted to make space for new ones.
Challenge accepted.
1 Maybe that's just me.
WinDirStat sorts your hard drive folders by file size, and then shows you a colorful, interactive chart of your hard drive usage (see a screen shot by following the above link). It also makes it easy to send unwanted files to the recycling bin (where they will continue to take up hard drive space, as the graph will show you), or to delete them permanently.
My wife was excited to see what was taking up all her space, but was a bit disappointed to realize the inevitable: her writing, which she loves, takes up significantly less space than even a single mp3.
I am always adding new files to my hard drive, so to prevent a loss in performance, I regularly use this program to help me prioritize the files to sort, delete, or move to an external hard drive.
I called this program a waste of time. There's no question in my mind that it's immensely useful. If your hard drive is full, Windows is going to do nothing to help you find the principal culprits efficiently. But after the 10 minutes it takes to run the program, find the 550MB Microsoft Office Enterprise 2010 installation file, and burn a backup CD or two; or move those ridiculously large home video files to an external hard drive, are you really going to stop there?
No, you're not, because freeing up hard drive space is more fun than most video games, and has a direct tangible (virtual?) benefit! So you're going to spend another hour looking at pictures, thinking about deleting them or saving them for posterity, and contemplating whether they make you look fat.1
Due to the advent of the digital camera, and because I've attended 3 family weddings and taken 2 vacations in the last year, there are thousands of unsorted pictures sitting on my hard drive, and at least 500 of them deserve to be deleted to make space for new ones.
Challenge accepted.
1 Maybe that's just me.
Friday, July 29, 2011
You're interventioning me?
My friend Jason sent me one of them newfangled Gmail intervention e-mails. It was hilarious. And yet, I'm sticking with Hotmail.
I told him so, and he asked what it is that makes me like Hotmail. I went a little overboard in my response:
What I prefer about Hotmail:
1) Junk e-mail: I get to approve or deny all my junk e-mail. I never miss a thing.
2) Keyboard shortcuts: Hotmail uses most of the keyboard shortcuts now that Outlook uses. I use Outlook for work, so it's an easy transition.
3) Folders: Gmail has labels and archiving, and that system is more robust in theory, but it's a different system, and it requires more clicks than the folder system. My brain knows how to store everything in folders on my computer, and it wants to do that for e-mails, too. Computers are always going to work with folders, so there's no reason to slow myself down by having to remember two different systems.
4) Legacy, (from an IT definition): I have all my contacts here, and more importantly, all my contacts have me here. (Yes, I know you can use POP3 settings with Gmail to receive and send e-mail from other addresses, but then I have to use the Gmail interface.)
5) Chat: It doesn't try to link me to a chat account. I hate chat programs.
6) Speed: Now that all Google sites are linked to Google+, it's actually slower than Hotmail. I'm removing Google.com as my home page for the same reason. Hello, blank page.
7) The interface: To me, Hotmail looks and feels the way an e-mail program should.
What Gmail does better:
1) Grouping conversations (minimal value to me)
2) Attachments (Hotmail used to be awful, but recently improved to being only a step behind Gmail)
3) Searching
4) Saving drafts
5) Undo send (I'm pretty careful about what I send, so this has minimal value)
Where they're equal:
1) Storage. They both give me more storage than I'll ever use.
Why I'll probably never switch fully to Gmail:
1) Habit: I forget to check my Gmail account for months at a time.
2) My username: My Gmail username is much longer than my Hotmail username (all the good ones were taken), so logging in is a more annoying process.
3) Video chat and other features: Gmail offers lots of amazing features that I don’t care about at all, and will never use. So many of these are the "selling" features, and they don't sell me.
What do you think?
I told him so, and he asked what it is that makes me like Hotmail. I went a little overboard in my response:
What I prefer about Hotmail:
1) Junk e-mail: I get to approve or deny all my junk e-mail. I never miss a thing.
2) Keyboard shortcuts: Hotmail uses most of the keyboard shortcuts now that Outlook uses. I use Outlook for work, so it's an easy transition.
3) Folders: Gmail has labels and archiving, and that system is more robust in theory, but it's a different system, and it requires more clicks than the folder system. My brain knows how to store everything in folders on my computer, and it wants to do that for e-mails, too. Computers are always going to work with folders, so there's no reason to slow myself down by having to remember two different systems.
4) Legacy, (from an IT definition): I have all my contacts here, and more importantly, all my contacts have me here. (Yes, I know you can use POP3 settings with Gmail to receive and send e-mail from other addresses, but then I have to use the Gmail interface.)
5) Chat: It doesn't try to link me to a chat account. I hate chat programs.
6) Speed: Now that all Google sites are linked to Google+, it's actually slower than Hotmail. I'm removing Google.com as my home page for the same reason. Hello, blank page.
7) The interface: To me, Hotmail looks and feels the way an e-mail program should.
What Gmail does better:
1) Grouping conversations (minimal value to me)
2) Attachments (Hotmail used to be awful, but recently improved to being only a step behind Gmail)
3) Searching
4) Saving drafts
5) Undo send (I'm pretty careful about what I send, so this has minimal value)
Where they're equal:
1) Storage. They both give me more storage than I'll ever use.
Why I'll probably never switch fully to Gmail:
1) Habit: I forget to check my Gmail account for months at a time.
2) My username: My Gmail username is much longer than my Hotmail username (all the good ones were taken), so logging in is a more annoying process.
3) Video chat and other features: Gmail offers lots of amazing features that I don’t care about at all, and will never use. So many of these are the "selling" features, and they don't sell me.
What do you think?
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Size matters
It's all a lie! I can't believe such deceit would be perpetuated throughout the ages by and for both genders! Do you know what this has done to the children?!? Think of the children!!!
I'm upset. Allow me to explain.
Short story: Today I'm throwing away a too-small pair of pants and a worn-out belt. The pants lied to me, and the belt had no right to up and die. Why didn't it think about how that would make me feel?
Long story: When I was but a lad, my mom bought me a black leather belt. Everywhere I had to go that was dressy, that trusty belt was by (around?) my side. It lasted for six whole years. Since then, I've never found a replacement that lasted for more than a year, and half of them didn't even fit.
Soon after I began college, I became aware of my clothing sizes. My working hypothesis is that it's because I had to start buying my own clothes. I learned my waist and inseam sizes. I learned my suit coat size. I learned my sleeve size (a whopping 35 inches; I'm like a monkey!). I learned my neck size1, for cryin' out loud.
And yet, even with a graduate degree, I've never been able to figure out my belt size.
I did everything you'd expect. I went to stores that sell belts. I gained weight to try to fit in to the belts I'd already bought. I wore my dress slacks to the store and tried on belts until I found one that fit2. But no matter how I tried, I couldn't find a belt that still fit when I got home. Maybe they shrink in the wash, I don't know.
It's not that I'm a moron3, it's that belt sizes, pant sizes, and waist sizes are apparently completely unrelated!
Women are not surprised by this. You've been dealing with "vanity sizes" for years. I, however, trusted Old Navy and Dockers not to stretch the truth4. Nobody wants to wake up one day (hypothetically) and find out that their size 32 jeans that they've been drying in the dryer for seven years actually measure 34 inches5.
So that's the crux of it. Women know that a size two dress may actually be a size eight, but some are happier with a tag that says size two. Not so for me.
I'm never happy in a size two dress.
1 It's almost as large as my biceps.
2 Okay, I didn't actually do that one, per se, but it's sounding pretty darn reasonable from where I'm sitting in my elastic-waistband sweatpants.
3 No, it's not!
4 Get it? Stretch? Get it?
5 After all, they may have hypothetically cut off your circulation two weeks ago.
I'm upset. Allow me to explain.
Short story: Today I'm throwing away a too-small pair of pants and a worn-out belt. The pants lied to me, and the belt had no right to up and die. Why didn't it think about how that would make me feel?
Long story: When I was but a lad, my mom bought me a black leather belt. Everywhere I had to go that was dressy, that trusty belt was by (around?) my side. It lasted for six whole years. Since then, I've never found a replacement that lasted for more than a year, and half of them didn't even fit.
Soon after I began college, I became aware of my clothing sizes. My working hypothesis is that it's because I had to start buying my own clothes. I learned my waist and inseam sizes. I learned my suit coat size. I learned my sleeve size (a whopping 35 inches; I'm like a monkey!). I learned my neck size1, for cryin' out loud.
And yet, even with a graduate degree, I've never been able to figure out my belt size.
I did everything you'd expect. I went to stores that sell belts. I gained weight to try to fit in to the belts I'd already bought. I wore my dress slacks to the store and tried on belts until I found one that fit2. But no matter how I tried, I couldn't find a belt that still fit when I got home. Maybe they shrink in the wash, I don't know.
It's not that I'm a moron3, it's that belt sizes, pant sizes, and waist sizes are apparently completely unrelated!
Women are not surprised by this. You've been dealing with "vanity sizes" for years. I, however, trusted Old Navy and Dockers not to stretch the truth4. Nobody wants to wake up one day (hypothetically) and find out that their size 32 jeans that they've been drying in the dryer for seven years actually measure 34 inches5.
So that's the crux of it. Women know that a size two dress may actually be a size eight, but some are happier with a tag that says size two. Not so for me.
I'm never happy in a size two dress.
1 It's almost as large as my biceps.
2 Okay, I didn't actually do that one, per se, but it's sounding pretty darn reasonable from where I'm sitting in my elastic-waistband sweatpants.
3 No, it's not!
4 Get it? Stretch? Get it?
5 After all, they may have hypothetically cut off your circulation two weeks ago.
Sunday, April 24, 2011
Atlas Shuddered
Urgh.
Atlas Shrugged has the dialogue quality of The Phantom Menace, the special effects of the 1978 Incredible Hulk TV series, the casting of Waterworld, the directorial timing of a home video, and the cinematography of something that picks a lot of awkward camera angles. I needed a Big Mac to wash the movie's taste out of my mouth.
The movie was 97 minutes long. There was time available to improve the three things in which this version severely lacked:
1) Using Rand's arguments,
2) Introducing us to the characters as Rand wrote them, and
3) Preparing us for the climax.
Rand's Arguments
Atlas Shrugged is one of the best books ever written. It's complex. It's intelligent. It's a philosophical allegory, and it's convincing. Ayn Rand wrote it to make an argument, time and time again, from all angles, and she did so extremely well. I recognize that it takes talent to make a good movie, even from an extraordinary book. But it takes a special kind of failure to ruin Atlas Shrugged.
Rand's arguments made the book great, but really weren't part of the movie. When John Aglialoro1 actually included any of Rand's arguments, he threw in some of the good lines but removed the context, making the dialogue painfully choppy and illogical.
You ruin the argument, and you've ruined the movie.
Aglialoro even cut the almost unending stream of whiny entitled pleas. They came from any number of talentless characters (here's looking at you 20th Century Motor Company), demanding a handout because they "never had a chance" (i.e. got fired for incompetence). The unproductive looting from the productive is the whole point of the book, and was not adequately addressed by the light-on-exposition news headline montages.
Speaking of not adequately addressing things …
Character Development
… the entire character of James Taggart is written as whiny and desperate, but portrayed as self-confident and somewhat relatable.
Similarly misrepresented, Dagny Taggart is written as confident, brilliant, tough-as-nails, and successful, but portrayed as vacant, unassertive, and a little dazed. In one particular scene, she takes what is supposed to be a confident "I'm telling you how it is" stand against her brother, but looks everywhere but at him. Confidence looks you in the eye.
Finally, let's take a deeper look at Francisco d'Anconia. He was cast as a scruffy, moderately handsome man whose wardrobe was at home in a local night club. The real d'Anconia is dashing, clean-shaven, full of intrigue, and stands "as if he wore a cape waving behind him in the wind." His shirts cost more than your wardrobe. Imagine Dos Equis' "Most interesting man in the world", but 25 years younger, without a beard, and with millions upon millions of dollars.
The movie showed the kind of guy you pick up in a bar. Francisco is the kind of man with whom rich women have affairs.
Confidence leans back. He slouched forward.
Stage presence is noticeable. There was none to notice.
*shudder*
Ignoring the mistreatment of Rand's ideologies and characters …
Plot & Climax (***spoiler alert**)
… this movie did a poor job of leading up to its climax (or what I am led to believe was the climax because of the music).
In the book, people talked regularly about how horrible it would be if the bridge made out of Reardon metal collapsed. In the movie, Aglialoro talked about the metal being "untested", but stubbornly refused to connect the dots about the bridge. He only even mentioned the bridge once. Small wonder, then, that the audience is entirely unprepared to stand up and cheer when the bridge doesn't collapse.
…
At least it ended fittingly; with a bloodcurdling scream.
1 Executive-turned-screenwriter because his rights to Atlas Shrugged were about to lapse and his actual screenwriter bailed.
Saturday, March 19, 2011
I hate math
Chase just charged me a $12 "service fee," and I'll give you a buffalo nickel if you can tell me why.1
Here's my history with Chase: I fell in love with online banking because of Chase's user-friendly site. In five years I've never had a problem. Since the CARD Act, I've had 3 unexplained fees in 3 months, two of which were reversed when I called (one because it was completely and utterly bogus, the other because they felt so bad about the bogus charge), and one that I'll call about when they open (because it's 3:30 AM).
It may be petty, but I so desperately want to punish them by taking all my business elsewhere. It's not like I'm lacking options. Banks are, to use an expression that doesn't apply particularly well here, a dime a dozen.
Why don't I do it? In five years, I've earned $700 of cash rewards from my Chase credit card.
I hate math.
1 No, I won't.
Here's my history with Chase: I fell in love with online banking because of Chase's user-friendly site. In five years I've never had a problem. Since the CARD Act, I've had 3 unexplained fees in 3 months, two of which were reversed when I called (one because it was completely and utterly bogus, the other because they felt so bad about the bogus charge), and one that I'll call about when they open (because it's 3:30 AM).
It may be petty, but I so desperately want to punish them by taking all my business elsewhere. It's not like I'm lacking options. Banks are, to use an expression that doesn't apply particularly well here, a dime a dozen.
Why don't I do it? In five years, I've earned $700 of cash rewards from my Chase credit card.
I hate math.
1 No, I won't.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
The kindness of strangers
While I waited at a stoplight downtown, a car to my left honked. This was strange for two reasons: 1) nobody in Austin ever, ever honks1, even if you practically kill them2, and 2) there were no cars in front of said honker. She made the universal "please roll down your window" sign, and I complied.
"Can you tell me how to get to South Lamar?"
A fair request in any other city that has a South Lamar, but Austin was not built with ease of transportation in mind. Although I was a tad uncertain myself, it was my civic duty to help a damsel in distress, so I guessed.
"You have to turn right3 to get on Lamar southbound4. It should be two stoplights ahead. Lamar is an overpass, and we'll go under it."
Yeah, I know, that's a lot of detail to give someone if I'm just guessing. Call it an educated guess; after all, I have a college degree.
She thanked me for the directions, and for rolling down my window, and then the light turned green. She sped ahead, cut me off (it's okay, she signaled and I still had the parking brake on), and the winding roads of Austin proceeded to prove my educated guess entirely correct.
I drove away feeling very warm and fuzzy inside. I think I was happier about having helped a complete stranger find her destination5 , but I don't want to downplay the joy of guessing directions correctly.
MORAL: I'm always right.
1 Full disclosure: Stay out of my lane, guy on a cell phone, or I will honk until your grandmother removes you from her will.
2 Of course, when that drunk guy practically killed me, I didn't have time to honk because I was too busy trying to get control of my vehicle. And if he hadn't driven off, I would have honked. [nodding] Yeah, I would have.
3 Right = North. Always.
4 South = Left. Sometimes, not always. It's very complex stop asking me questions.
5 I hope she wasn't a contract killer.
"Can you tell me how to get to South Lamar?"
A fair request in any other city that has a South Lamar, but Austin was not built with ease of transportation in mind. Although I was a tad uncertain myself, it was my civic duty to help a damsel in distress, so I guessed.
"You have to turn right3 to get on Lamar southbound4. It should be two stoplights ahead. Lamar is an overpass, and we'll go under it."
Yeah, I know, that's a lot of detail to give someone if I'm just guessing. Call it an educated guess; after all, I have a college degree.
She thanked me for the directions, and for rolling down my window, and then the light turned green. She sped ahead, cut me off (it's okay, she signaled and I still had the parking brake on), and the winding roads of Austin proceeded to prove my educated guess entirely correct.
I drove away feeling very warm and fuzzy inside. I think I was happier about having helped a complete stranger find her destination5 , but I don't want to downplay the joy of guessing directions correctly.
MORAL: I'm always right.
1 Full disclosure: Stay out of my lane, guy on a cell phone, or I will honk until your grandmother removes you from her will.
2 Of course, when that drunk guy practically killed me, I didn't have time to honk because I was too busy trying to get control of my vehicle. And if he hadn't driven off, I would have honked. [nodding] Yeah, I would have.
3 Right = North. Always.
4 South = Left. Sometimes, not always. It's very complex stop asking me questions.
5 I hope she wasn't a contract killer.
Saturday, February 19, 2011
You lose
I enjoy watching the Biggest Loser. It motivates me to be better at whatever I do. Like eating pizza.
Moses, a contestant from the current season, shattered Week 1 records by losing 41 pounds. In ONE WEEK! That's a lot of water weight. I'm a fair-weather fan (this applies to everything but the Cubs), so I've decided I like him.
Like many of the older male contestants, Moses has knee problems, so disproportionate amounts of his exercise come from shadow-boxing. This means punching nothing, so although it's a good cardio workout, it gets a little mentally fatiguing. His motivation to keep going is his family, and he shows it by saying a family member's name every time he punches. Kind of sweet.
And kind of disturbing.
Kaylee: "Hey Dad, can I borrow the …"
Moses: "Kaylee!" (punch ) "Kaylee! (punch) "Kaylee!" (punch)
Kaylee: "Yeeeeaaah. I'll just come back later."
Moses, a contestant from the current season, shattered Week 1 records by losing 41 pounds. In ONE WEEK! That's a lot of water weight. I'm a fair-weather fan (this applies to everything but the Cubs), so I've decided I like him.
Like many of the older male contestants, Moses has knee problems, so disproportionate amounts of his exercise come from shadow-boxing. This means punching nothing, so although it's a good cardio workout, it gets a little mentally fatiguing. His motivation to keep going is his family, and he shows it by saying a family member's name every time he punches. Kind of sweet.
And kind of disturbing.
Kaylee: "Hey Dad, can I borrow the …"
Moses: "Kaylee!" (punch ) "Kaylee! (punch) "Kaylee!" (punch)
Kaylee: "Yeeeeaaah. I'll just come back later."
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Relief
It's been such a long time since I was inspired to write. Not that I am now; I just have the time. FINALLY.
The last month and a half of my life has been so overwhelmingly consumed with work that I've somewhat forgotten how to relax. Having a laptop awake if I am has become part of my routine1, to the extent that I can't pull myself away long enough read an actual paper book. Or a digital one.
Even when I exercise, it's to an exercise video from Netflix (who has a halfway decent selection for someone who just wants to tone). Staring at bright screens is giving me regular headaches. Tylenol and I have become friends.
When I was a kid, using the computer was a privilege. Also, the Cubs didn't play every summer afternoon, so I had to come up with a lot of alternative entertainment (to be read "normal-person entertainment"). This included using my imagination, riding my bike, climbing a tree (I was like a monkey), playing catch, or throwing a tennis ball at the side of our house in the name of "pitching practice."
We were brought up to use our free time in good wholesome activities. Our family would take regular trips to the library, and we'd devour those books. We probably even went back three times in a week. My books of choice were Matt Christopher youth sports novels and riddle books. (Where else do you think I get my love of bad, bad puns? Oh yeah; my dad.)
Now that you're old and decrepit, how do you unplug?
1 Addiction, anyone?
The last month and a half of my life has been so overwhelmingly consumed with work that I've somewhat forgotten how to relax. Having a laptop awake if I am has become part of my routine1, to the extent that I can't pull myself away long enough read an actual paper book. Or a digital one.
Even when I exercise, it's to an exercise video from Netflix (who has a halfway decent selection for someone who just wants to tone). Staring at bright screens is giving me regular headaches. Tylenol and I have become friends.
When I was a kid, using the computer was a privilege. Also, the Cubs didn't play every summer afternoon, so I had to come up with a lot of alternative entertainment (to be read "normal-person entertainment"). This included using my imagination, riding my bike, climbing a tree (I was like a monkey), playing catch, or throwing a tennis ball at the side of our house in the name of "pitching practice."
We were brought up to use our free time in good wholesome activities. Our family would take regular trips to the library, and we'd devour those books. We probably even went back three times in a week. My books of choice were Matt Christopher youth sports novels and riddle books. (Where else do you think I get my love of bad, bad puns? Oh yeah; my dad.)
Now that you're old and decrepit, how do you unplug?
1 Addiction, anyone?
Sunday, August 8, 2010
Playing with playlists
I don’t love wedding receptions, but I do like running into my friends there.1 For less than the cost of dinner and a movie, you can essentially speed-date all of your favorite people.
At a recent reception, I ran into a friend whose blog I consider a Mecca of music-I’ve-never-heard-of. Her regular postings of her workout and other playlists have been instrumental in converting me to a small handful of bands that, somehow, neither Amazon nor Pandora has yet suggested.
I mentioned to her my recent initiative to work out to music, rather than the sound of my overworked lungs. She said that she’d be happy to make me a playlist … if I just told her what kind of music and bands I like in general.
For most of you, that would be a pretty easy question to answer.
I am not like most of you.
So over the last few weeks, I've thought about the kind of music that inspires me to perspire.
WARNING: If you think to yourself, “I know Kevin, he’s a decent guy, and he probably has good taste in music,” then I implore you to keep that wonderful illusion, and stop reading now!
It was a difficult process. You see, first, I had to go through all the music I already own. Because I’m an auditor. And that’s what we do. This process prompted some deep thoughts:
Ultimately, I realized that bands like Bush, the Cranberries, Garbage and even Kris Kross didn’t make me want to jump. But I did manage to find some gems. Thank you, Three Days Grace, Breaking Benjamin, 2 Unlimited (think the Mortal Kombat soundtrack), and some sweet, sweet 90’s techno.
In the future, I’m going to follow these simple rules about making a workout playlist:
I’m still going to see what my music guru friend comes up with. Until then, I have a pretty good 50-song playlist. Which will last me for a month. Without repetition. Because I don’t work out very often. Or for very long. Because exercising is hard. And I’m out of shape. And lazy. (In case you didn’t figure that out before this sentence fragment.)
_________________________
1 That means if I’m attending your wedding reception, you may not be the reason I came.
At a recent reception, I ran into a friend whose blog I consider a Mecca of music-I’ve-never-heard-of. Her regular postings of her workout and other playlists have been instrumental in converting me to a small handful of bands that, somehow, neither Amazon nor Pandora has yet suggested.
I mentioned to her my recent initiative to work out to music, rather than the sound of my overworked lungs. She said that she’d be happy to make me a playlist … if I just told her what kind of music and bands I like in general.
For most of you, that would be a pretty easy question to answer.
I am not like most of you.
So over the last few weeks, I've thought about the kind of music that inspires me to perspire.
WARNING: If you think to yourself, “I know Kevin, he’s a decent guy, and he probably has good taste in music,” then I implore you to keep that wonderful illusion, and stop reading now!
It was a difficult process. You see, first, I had to go through all the music I already own. Because I’m an auditor. And that’s what we do. This process prompted some deep thoughts:
- If I’m struggling to breathe while working that treadmill, will listening to Air Supply help?
- Is Will Smith rapping still cool?
- Can the guy curling the two 45 lb hand weights tell that I’m listening to the Backstreet Boys on the elliptical?
- What about the girl curling the two 45 lb hand weights? She clearly has superpowers.
Ultimately, I realized that bands like Bush, the Cranberries, Garbage and even Kris Kross didn’t make me want to jump. But I did manage to find some gems. Thank you, Three Days Grace, Breaking Benjamin, 2 Unlimited (think the Mortal Kombat soundtrack), and some sweet, sweet 90’s techno.
In the future, I’m going to follow these simple rules about making a workout playlist:
- If it makes me want to sing aloud, it’s not allowed.
- If it makes my hand tired in Guitar Hero, it’s a good idea.
- Angry lyrics mean happy time.
- Minor keys are majorly important.
I’m still going to see what my music guru friend comes up with. Until then, I have a pretty good 50-song playlist. Which will last me for a month. Without repetition. Because I don’t work out very often. Or for very long. Because exercising is hard. And I’m out of shape. And lazy. (In case you didn’t figure that out before this sentence fragment.)
_________________________
1 That means if I’m attending your wedding reception, you may not be the reason I came.
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Divine Comedy
Sometimes, people say funny things at church. That's not the reason I attend, but it certainly doesn't hurt.
Today was Mother's Day, a day that is extremely important to me as a religious man, because of the particularly high risk that nobody will say anything that I care about.
They'll care about it, no doubt. They may even cry while telling a story that they themselves selected to share publicly in front of hundreds of people. (I'll be taking your man-card now, thank you very much.)
But I digress.
Here are some things that I heard (or thought I heard) today at church:
"I'd like to recognize my mother for all the help she's given me on this special Mother's Day."
"There are many ways to leave this life, but only one way to enter it, and we all have our mothers to thank for that."1
"There are mothers in this congregation who have lost children to disease or abstinence."2
"I think you should make children feel stupid when they give the right answer. It encourages them to try harder."3
I sort of wasn't listening during Sunday School, or I'm quite certain I'd have more ammunition.
Love you, Mom!
1 Thank you, Mom, for thinking of so many ways to forcibly remove me from this life.
2 Turns out he said "accidents." Now there's a cluster of churchgoing Christians who think I'm a bad person for laughing about children dying.
3 I kind of wish I could take credit for this one myself. Kind of a lot.
Today was Mother's Day, a day that is extremely important to me as a religious man, because of the particularly high risk that nobody will say anything that I care about.
They'll care about it, no doubt. They may even cry while telling a story that they themselves selected to share publicly in front of hundreds of people. (I'll be taking your man-card now, thank you very much.)
But I digress.
Here are some things that I heard (or thought I heard) today at church:
"I'd like to recognize my mother for all the help she's given me on this special Mother's Day."
"There are many ways to leave this life, but only one way to enter it, and we all have our mothers to thank for that."1
"There are mothers in this congregation who have lost children to disease or abstinence."2
"I think you should make children feel stupid when they give the right answer. It encourages them to try harder."3
I sort of wasn't listening during Sunday School, or I'm quite certain I'd have more ammunition.
Love you, Mom!
1 Thank you, Mom, for thinking of so many ways to forcibly remove me from this life.
2 Turns out he said "accidents." Now there's a cluster of churchgoing Christians who think I'm a bad person for laughing about children dying.
3 I kind of wish I could take credit for this one myself. Kind of a lot.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Riddle me this
I'm visually unrealistic, scientifically impossible, technologically improbable, romantically unbelievable, financially untenable, and generally unwatchable; but still better than you expected.
What movie am I?
What movie am I?
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Carmageddon
Drivers everywhere are stupid1. Drivers at 4:45 AM are a special kind of stupid.
Also at that time, regular driving rules don’t apply. Here are some things I learned this morning on my way to (4:45 AM) and from (5:15 AM) the airport:
- Speed limits only apply for the amount of time it takes the Police SUV that’s going 75 in a 50 to pass you.
- To merge, you don’t actually need to find space between cars in the next lane. They’ll move … or wish they had.
- Nobody actually passes in the passing lane (except the aforementioned Police SUV). You get into the passing lane to let drunk tailgaters pass you, rather than continue to let them ride their brakes 8 feet from your rear bumper.
- You don’t have to pay attention to the speed limit, only to the speed other cars are going. When someone tries to pass you, speed up significantly. When they give up an get behind you, slow down significantly. They like that.
(Titles I didn't use:
Driving Miss Dangerous
Driving with crazies
"On your right!")
1 I'm looking at you, Boston and Utah.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Fixed in my Mind with a Determined Resolution
This post is brought to you by a killer headache and sore throat, Classic Sinatra: 1953-1960, and Alma 47:6.
I’ve never before kept a New Year’s resolution for longer than a few months. To be fair to me (which I have half a mind to do), that’s because I was reaching for the stars (write a best-selling novel, read my scriptures for 15 minutes daily, be nice to my sister, etc.).
This past year, I wanted a successful resolution to hang my hat on, so I resolved to create one. As a result, my two New Year’s Resolutions for 2009 were simple:
1) No hamburgers at all, and
2) Soft drinks only every other week.
I’m proud to announce that I haven’t had a hamburger all year! I didn’t even eat one when my sister picked me up from the airport with a Sonic burger with my name on it. It may have been rude of me to refuse, but then again, that particular resolution never stuck.
I’m also proud, though slightly less so (see “Caveats and Addendums” below), to announce that I kept to my soft drink reduction resolution so well that I forgot for months at a time that I was allowed to drink it.
Bottom line: Victory is mine!1
Caveats and Addendums: I ate at Taco Bell2 a good amount at the beginning of the year to make up for the lack of processed beef in my diet3. I understand if you think that means I was cheating. However, I haven’t had any since September. Now, that’s change you can believe in.
I occasionally binged on soda. Like the week where I drank three 2-liter bottles of ginger ale (no regrets!), or the week where I finished off three six-packs of off-brand fruit-flavored sodas. But those were only two belly-bursting, acid-reflux-inducing weeks, and they fit quite conveniently into the letter of my law.
Also, I may or may not have cooked up eight strips of bacon all for myself on two separate occasions. Within the same month.
Conclusion: If you’re going to make New Year’s Resolutions, make sure to include a “gimme”. Like being nice to your sister.6
Appendix
1 Dang it, YouTube! Where are your 3 second clips of Stewie claiming victory?!?
2 Mmmmmmm. Cheesy double beef burrito. A wholeartery meal for 99 cents!
3 Why outlaw hamburgers and not Taco Bell, you ask? Well, first of all, I wanted to live through the year, not kill myself out of frustration mid-March. Second, at The Border, I can more easily control my portions with their scrumptious value menu. Hamburgers, on the other hand, come with fries and a soft drink. At many places (Red Robin, Whataburger, Mighty Fine, etc.) those burgers are too big all by themselves, and at Red Robin (I love you dearly!), you get unlimited fries. Unlimited. Fries. I always eat myself into a Royal Red Robin Burger coma. So, the true evil is in hamburgers, not in my complete lack of self-control.
4 Yes, Jason Crandall, you inspired my hamburger resolution.
5 Looking for the notation for footnote 4 in the blog? Yeah, it’s not there.
6 If you’re an only child.
I’ve never before kept a New Year’s resolution for longer than a few months. To be fair to me (which I have half a mind to do), that’s because I was reaching for the stars (write a best-selling novel, read my scriptures for 15 minutes daily, be nice to my sister, etc.).
This past year, I wanted a successful resolution to hang my hat on, so I resolved to create one. As a result, my two New Year’s Resolutions for 2009 were simple:
1) No hamburgers at all, and2) Soft drinks only every other week.
I’m proud to announce that I haven’t had a hamburger all year! I didn’t even eat one when my sister picked me up from the airport with a Sonic burger with my name on it. It may have been rude of me to refuse, but then again, that particular resolution never stuck.
I’m also proud, though slightly less so (see “Caveats and Addendums” below), to announce that I kept to my soft drink reduction resolution so well that I forgot for months at a time that I was allowed to drink it.
Bottom line: Victory is mine!1
Caveats and Addendums: I ate at Taco Bell2 a good amount at the beginning of the year to make up for the lack of processed beef in my diet3. I understand if you think that means I was cheating. However, I haven’t had any since September. Now, that’s change you can believe in.
I occasionally binged on soda. Like the week where I drank three 2-liter bottles of ginger ale (no regrets!), or the week where I finished off three six-packs of off-brand fruit-flavored sodas. But those were only two belly-bursting, acid-reflux-inducing weeks, and they fit quite conveniently into the letter of my law.
Also, I may or may not have cooked up eight strips of bacon all for myself on two separate occasions. Within the same month.
Conclusion: If you’re going to make New Year’s Resolutions, make sure to include a “gimme”. Like being nice to your sister.6
Appendix
1 Dang it, YouTube! Where are your 3 second clips of Stewie claiming victory?!?
2 Mmmmmmm. Cheesy double beef burrito. A whole
3 Why outlaw hamburgers and not Taco Bell, you ask? Well, first of all, I wanted to live through the year, not kill myself out of frustration mid-March. Second, at The Border, I can more easily control my portions with their scrumptious value menu. Hamburgers, on the other hand, come with fries and a soft drink. At many places (Red Robin, Whataburger, Mighty Fine, etc.) those burgers are too big all by themselves, and at Red Robin (I love you dearly!), you get unlimited fries. Unlimited. Fries. I always eat myself into a Royal Red Robin Burger coma. So, the true evil is in hamburgers, not in my complete lack of self-control.
4 Yes, Jason Crandall, you inspired my hamburger resolution.
5 Looking for the notation for footnote 4 in the blog? Yeah, it’s not there.
6 If you’re an only child.
Saturday, December 26, 2009
A new player in town
A new player in town
Comcast consistently has some of the worst customer service ratings of any company anywhere (and isn’t available at my home). Time Warner is just kind of annoying. A new internet provider in town would be welcome.
Is CLEAR’s mobile WiMAX network up to the challenge?
A legitimate mobile internet option?
CLEAR puts its best foot forward with this innovative technology. Anywhere CLEAR provides coverage, you get connectivity for your laptop or desktop. Anywhere.
It makes me drool a little.
The coverage (for all services) is pretty limited for now, but includes lots of locations in Texas (very good for me), and I expect it to expand to more major cities (and hopefully to all airports) in the near future.
Once you get the $50 USB WiMAX device, or select the new WiMAX option when buying a supported computer, you can connect. You can also provide internet for up to 8 Wi-Fi enabled devices (including other computers), but it’s not cheap. You need to buy the $140 CLEAR Spot device, and need to have the main machine and its WiMAX enabled device turned on. CLEAR Spot has a 2-3 hour battery life, and it can also work while plugged in directly ($20 wall adapter, $20 car adapter). Its Lithium-Ion battery will, of course, eventually wear out ($30 for a new rechargeable battery).
So, again, it’s not cheap, but ohmygosh it’s cool.
Now I just need to buy a computer with a battery life longer than 3 minutes.
A home internet replacement option?
Clear vaunts itself as an alternative. You plug in their $70 modem to a power outlet, and they beam the internet to the modem, which you connect to your computer or router. There doesn’t appear to be anything indicating that it would not function the same way as existing wired internet options.
How much?
I like both the Home and Mobile, $45, 6.0 Mbps download, 1.0 Mbps upload, unlimited data options.
I don’t really consider the lighter Home options ($25, 1.0, 0.5 -&- $35, 3.0, 1.0), or the $35, 6.0 Mbps download, 1.0 Mbps upload, 2 GB / month options to be relevant.
They’re also offering lifetime rates, which means that you keep the same low locked-in rate for as long as you continuously keep the service. If you move to an area that doesn’t have CLEAR coverage, and you cancel the service, then you lose the rate for good.
What is CLEAR Voice?
VOIP service through Clear. In my mind, it’s irrelevant. Feel free to look around.
Security
I’ll leave this to the FAQ: “Your CLEAR connection is very secure. Unlike WiFi, CLEAR technology uses a licensed 2.5 Ghz frequency and OFDM transmission protocol for a very secure connection. The combination of licensed frequencies and OFDM technology provides a very secure connection.”
So, tell me, what’s important to you about your internet connection?
Comcast consistently has some of the worst customer service ratings of any company anywhere (and isn’t available at my home). Time Warner is just kind of annoying. A new internet provider in town would be welcome.
Is CLEAR’s mobile WiMAX network up to the challenge?
A legitimate mobile internet option?
CLEAR puts its best foot forward with this innovative technology. Anywhere CLEAR provides coverage, you get connectivity for your laptop or desktop. Anywhere.
It makes me drool a little.
The coverage (for all services) is pretty limited for now, but includes lots of locations in Texas (very good for me), and I expect it to expand to more major cities (and hopefully to all airports) in the near future.
Once you get the $50 USB WiMAX device, or select the new WiMAX option when buying a supported computer, you can connect. You can also provide internet for up to 8 Wi-Fi enabled devices (including other computers), but it’s not cheap. You need to buy the $140 CLEAR Spot device, and need to have the main machine and its WiMAX enabled device turned on. CLEAR Spot has a 2-3 hour battery life, and it can also work while plugged in directly ($20 wall adapter, $20 car adapter). Its Lithium-Ion battery will, of course, eventually wear out ($30 for a new rechargeable battery).
So, again, it’s not cheap, but ohmygosh it’s cool.
Now I just need to buy a computer with a battery life longer than 3 minutes.
A home internet replacement option?
Clear vaunts itself as an alternative. You plug in their $70 modem to a power outlet, and they beam the internet to the modem, which you connect to your computer or router. There doesn’t appear to be anything indicating that it would not function the same way as existing wired internet options.
How much?
I like both the Home and Mobile, $45, 6.0 Mbps download, 1.0 Mbps upload, unlimited data options.
I don’t really consider the lighter Home options ($25, 1.0, 0.5 -&- $35, 3.0, 1.0), or the $35, 6.0 Mbps download, 1.0 Mbps upload, 2 GB / month options to be relevant.
They’re also offering lifetime rates, which means that you keep the same low locked-in rate for as long as you continuously keep the service. If you move to an area that doesn’t have CLEAR coverage, and you cancel the service, then you lose the rate for good.
What is CLEAR Voice?
VOIP service through Clear. In my mind, it’s irrelevant. Feel free to look around.
Security
I’ll leave this to the FAQ: “Your CLEAR connection is very secure. Unlike WiFi, CLEAR technology uses a licensed 2.5 Ghz frequency and OFDM transmission protocol for a very secure connection. The combination of licensed frequencies and OFDM technology provides a very secure connection.”
So, tell me, what’s important to you about your internet connection?
Friday, December 25, 2009
A Christmas Message
We all know that it’s pretty funny when the drunk guy at the office party photocopies his butt (unless you are the person who has to clean it). It’s even funnier when he gets fired later.
It’s slightly less funny when a government official in a kid’s movie drops trou for a 2 second butt-scan, a la drunken photocopy. My niece’s exact reaction was “Eeeeeeeeeeeew!”, and not in a good way.
Thank you, Monsters vs. Aliens, you ruined Christmas.
It’s slightly less funny when a government official in a kid’s movie drops trou for a 2 second butt-scan, a la drunken photocopy. My niece’s exact reaction was “Eeeeeeeeeeeew!”, and not in a good way.
Thank you, Monsters vs. Aliens, you ruined Christmas.
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Not a creature was stirring
It's 10 PM, and in a house with four other adults and four children, I'm the only one who is still awake. 10 PM!
I suppose you could argue that when my nephew was just crying for the last 20 minutes, that he was awake. You would, however, be wrong. I know this because in the last two days, he's taken two afternoon naps, and cried through every minute of them. (It's okay, buddy, I used to have dreams about Windows Vista, too. Scared me to tears.)
I suppose you could argue that when my nephew was just crying for the last 20 minutes, that he was awake. You would, however, be wrong. I know this because in the last two days, he's taken two afternoon naps, and cried through every minute of them. (It's okay, buddy, I used to have dreams about Windows Vista, too. Scared me to tears.)
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Living Boring
Some people live green. Some live long and prosper (and it has nothing to do with length of life or actual prosperity). Some people Live Strong.
I, on the other hand, am living boring. No surprises. No pets. No extravagant expenditures. Unless you count getting married. And if you knew the thought process that is going into keeping those wedding-related expenditures from becoming extravagant, you wouldn't count it.
What this means is that I have almost nothing to write about.
I'm eating better, but that's only three words.
I'm exercising more, but I plan to publish my thoughts on the 30 days of self-mutilation (a.k.a. cardio and strength training) all at once.
At one point, I had lost 4 pounds, but I ate a lot in the last three days. A LOT.
You're bored now, aren't you?
Mission accomplished.
I, on the other hand, am living boring. No surprises. No pets. No extravagant expenditures. Unless you count getting married. And if you knew the thought process that is going into keeping those wedding-related expenditures from becoming extravagant, you wouldn't count it.
What this means is that I have almost nothing to write about.
I'm eating better, but that's only three words.
I'm exercising more, but I plan to publish my thoughts on the 30 days of self-mutilation (a.k.a. cardio and strength training) all at once.
At one point, I had lost 4 pounds, but I ate a lot in the last three days. A LOT.
You're bored now, aren't you?
Mission accomplished.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)