|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 100 responses total. |
other
|
|
response 20 of 100:
| 
Nov 27 18:39 UTC 2002 |
<falls down laughing>
Twila, you're priceless!
|
remmers
|
|
response 21 of 100:
|
Nov 27 18:48 UTC 2002 |
In regards to the original topic of this item: The business world
does regularly contribute new words to the language, in the form
of product names. So I think that if books used lots and lots
of product names, especially of newer products, that would go a
long way towards alleviating the problem of just reusing the same
words over and over. As an added incentive, product manufacturers
might be willing to subsidize the practice if their own products
get sufficient mention. This would benefit both business and
the consumer.
A reasonable "product name density" might be, say, 10%. Assuming
that a book has about 400 words per page, this comes out to around 40
product mentions per page. I urge publishers to adopt this practice
on all of their new books. They should revise all older books as
well to incorporate the aforementioned 10% product name density.
|
other
|
|
response 22 of 100:
|
Nov 27 19:06 UTC 2002 |
bleah!
|
remmers
|
|
response 23 of 100:
|
Nov 28 13:50 UTC 2002 |
Hmph. Your outright rejection of my constructive idea has given me
an intense headache. Excuse me while I got take a Tylenol.
Oh by the way, I hope you OD on Pepto-Bismol.
|
mxyzptlk
|
|
response 24 of 100:
|
Nov 28 14:26 UTC 2002 |
the best... steal
the good... borrow
the crap... recycle
|
mary
|
|
response 25 of 100:
|
Nov 28 16:05 UTC 2002 |
I've been wondering some about vision and perspective
and glasses. Twenty years ago I could pick up a book
and read the text without a problem. Now I need glasses
to make the text appear larger. Which is my point.
The text really isn't larger, just my perspective on
the text.
If I were to take out a caliper and measure the height
of a letter z, it would be exactly the same no matter
glasses or not (assuming I could read the caliper
without glasses).
And who's to say my eyes were "right" back then? Maybe
they were just better at efffortlessly adjusting to
make text appear larger while I was getting the hang
of reading. Maybe my brain is saying you've read enough,
go out a see some good movies, experience other senses,
write your own experiences instead of reading about others'.
Maybe age is forcing me to change my perspective.
Yep, that's it.
Happy Thanksgiving, all.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 26 of 100:
|
Nov 28 18:57 UTC 2002 |
The only thing your eyes and/or your glasses do is permit the focusing of
the image on your retina. The only aspect of that that matters is the
distance from the effective plane of the lens to the retina. As far as I
know this distance in the eye does not change significantly with age. What
usually changes is the focal length of the lens as it becomes rigid and
unable to alter focus with distance of the object viewed. The only factor
that determines the size of the image you "see" is also the distance from
the lens effective plane to the retina. HENCE, if that distance does not
change, the size of the image does not change if you can focus the image
with or without glasses. However wearing glasses DOES change the effective
lens position, because the correction is in front of the original plane of
the eye's lens. Whether the change is negative or positive depends upon
the whether the lens correction is negative or positive diopters. If
positive, the effective lens plane is moved forward, and the image is
bigger. If negative, the effective lens plane is moved backward, and the
image is smaller.
|
mary
|
|
response 27 of 100:
|
Nov 28 19:46 UTC 2002 |
Now we need Sindi to come in with a tip on where to get
used glasses.
I love Grex.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 28 of 100:
|
Nov 28 20:23 UTC 2002 |
The Lions Club distributes used glasses. I don't know where they are in Ann
Arbor, but they are probably listed in the telephone book.
|
remmers
|
|
response 29 of 100:
|
Nov 28 20:24 UTC 2002 |
Re #26: It seem to me that in a response as long as that, you
could have come up with some words that have never been used before!
|
rcurl
|
|
response 30 of 100:
|
Nov 28 22:24 UTC 2002 |
Yes, it is amazing that I didn't misspell anything...
|
ea
|
|
response 31 of 100:
|
Nov 29 02:52 UTC 2002 |
Oh freddled gruntbuggly ...
|
md
|
|
response 32 of 100:
|
Nov 29 12:39 UTC 2002 |
Mary stole the "death anniversary" thing from me. I mentioned it here
(or on mnet?) a few months ago. But I stole it from a Pushkin poem, so
I can't complain. I'm just mentioning it. Like, just so you know.
|
mary
|
|
response 33 of 100:
|
Nov 29 12:58 UTC 2002 |
Having fantasies about original thought again, eh? I'm
sure when I thought of it, *years ago*, that someone else
had been there before. So there.
I suppose if I bring up the question of where do they grow
telephone pole trees you'll be right behind with a big yawn.
I'm on to you.
|
mary
|
|
response 34 of 100:
|
Nov 29 13:00 UTC 2002 |
New rule, for today only.
Only those who helped with the dishes last night
can respond to this item.
|
md
|
|
response 35 of 100:
|
Nov 29 13:23 UTC 2002 |
Does turning the dishwasher on count?
|
remmers
|
|
response 36 of 100:
|
Nov 29 14:17 UTC 2002 |
I did major dish-drying duty last night, so I can respond as
carstomancingly as I prepond, and if I knew the brand name of
the soap we were using I'd mention it.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 37 of 100:
|
Nov 30 00:33 UTC 2002 |
If you are going to break a rule, there are two things to remember:
Why the rule is there; what it is trying to accomplish
and
Break it good and hard
I know I put *something* in the dishwasher last night, e'en if we didn't need
to run it.
|
aruba
|
|
response 38 of 100:
|
Nov 30 03:52 UTC 2002 |
I did dishes yesterday afternoon and this morning - is that good enough?
|
mary
|
|
response 39 of 100:
|
Nov 30 14:02 UTC 2002 |
I never doubted you, Mark.
More from the "How to Make Life More Interesting" column: cars
with polished glass mirror finishes. Now, think gridlock.
|
remmers
|
|
response 40 of 100:
|
Nov 30 16:47 UTC 2002 |
<remmers reflects on this idea>
|
mary
|
|
response 41 of 100:
|
Nov 30 16:52 UTC 2002 |
***Refrigerator Poetry***
Enormous chocolate gods watch television.
Reclining, soft and warm,
Tongues heave happy bare breasts
Lick the moment.
|
other
|
|
response 42 of 100:
|
Dec 1 02:53 UTC 2002 |
Is this item linked to Enigma?
|
gelinas
|
|
response 43 of 100:
|
Dec 1 04:24 UTC 2002 |
That's a riddle.
|
mary
|
|
response 44 of 100:
|
Dec 1 13:34 UTC 2002 |
The poetry is compliments of Issa, a refrigerator poetry program
for the Mac.
Now, what would you have if you put Issa and Eliza together?
The sixties.
|
