Relationship Status: Doomed

David's Bridal did some sort of online survey and found out that 49 percent of brides or brides-to-be answered 'yes' to whether or not they would change their Facebook relationship status to "Married" during their wedding.  During the wedding was determined to be at some point before the reception.  So I guess I could take that to mean that some of those brides just whipped their cell phone right on out of their corset as soon as they heard "I now pronounce you husband and wife".  I have no proof of that, but the whole concept seems so ridiculously insane to me to begin with that I really can't imagine that it wouldn't happen. 

After learning that slightly disturbing little factoid, I decided to check and see what the divorce rate in this country is at these days.  It's hovering just a little bit below 50% overall when you combine the divorce statistics from all of the categories (eg first marriage, second marriage, third marriage, what age you were during which marriage, etc.).  Huh.  That's right around the same percentage of people who feel the need to change their Facebook status before their freaking wedding ordeal is even over.  I realize that the divorce rate has been around 50% long before Facebook came around.  I'm not holding out any hope that it's going to go down anytime soon. 

Can there really be anything good that's going to come out of updating your Facebook status right smack dab in the middle of what is supposed to be one of the most important days of your life?  I can't imagine that there is.  See, the thing that those people don't quite understand is that it isn't all that important to everyone else what in the hell your Facebook status is.  I don't give a crap what any of my Facebook friends relationship statuses are.  Why would I?  And why would anyone else?  What Facebook says about your relationship status is so much less important than at least a hundred other things.  I'm not sure what this says about people, but I don't think that it's anything good. 

I'm going to be interested to see how the divorce rates are effected by Facebook in the coming years.  That is, provided that something new and cooler than Facebook doesn't make it obsolete.  (Hello?  MySpace?)  Actually, what would be cool is if we could track all of those dimwits who took the survey and said that they'd change their Facebook status before their wedding was over.  I want to know what their marital status is in five years.  I would be interested in seeing if it would be over 50% for that group of people.  I've got five bucks that says those marriage are doomed.  Doomed!  The rest of us aren't going to fare much better either if we have to be subjected to folks like that.  Facebook - Getting folks to take themselves way too seriously since 2004.

Sphere: Related Content

I Don't Think She Really Won

I have figured out what the deal is with the Mega Millions "winner" that I discussed yesterday. Yes, after reading several articles about this situation, there is only one conclusion that I can come to. She's nuttier than a fruit bat.

I'll start with the obvious. This woman's name is Mirlande Wilson and she works at McDonald's. She has seven children and is not married. But for some reason, she goes by Sheila Paraison on Facebook. Other revelations from her Facebook include her working at "United Nations". (Yep. Plural!) Granted, there can be a rather diverse community converging upon the McDonald's from time to time, but I don't know that you can qualify that as being the "United Nations". Then again, considering that I'm pretty sure she's never worked there, I guess it doesn't matter what she calls it. She could have put that she worked in Narnia. The end result would be the same!


But my favorite revelation from her Facebook page? Her favorite TV shows are The Jerry Springer Show and Maury! I couldn't have made that up if I tried! So this is a woman who enjoys a program where the audience has been known to break out in raucous chants of "Mid-get Fight! Mid-get Fight!" All rightee, then. It's only going to get better from here. (And don't get me wrong. I have a few guilty pleasure TV shows that I enjoy with the lights off and all of the curtains drawn so as not to draw attention to the disaster that I am watching unfold on purpose. But you don't see me advertising it on Facebook!)

Despite all of this hooplah and pretending to win the lottery, she's managed to find some time to update her status. Sometime on Tuesday she wrote "All my true friend know im not greedy a person i don't want da money it made my life a living hell already im gonna give it all to rebuild haiti yall can chase all want my life and, my children it more important for money." Wow. OK. I guess I appreciate that she chose to throw in a random comma there at the end, so I guess I can't bitch about no punctuation. I'm not even really sure what that means considering that she doesn't have any of the money yet. And all of this "hell" she seems to have brought upon herself. Later, she changed her status to "It nutting to me yall calls the to my house my job why it supposed to be secret now I cannot laid in my bed in im gonna put in for donation we all lost" OK, I don't even know what half of that means. But I will say that if it was "supposed to be secret", perhaps someone should give her a little refresher course on how to keep secrets. (Step One: Do not tell the entire world about it. Step Two: Calling press conferences outside of your home are a no-no.)

Next, she called a press conference outside of her home yesterday. She was late to show up and when she did show up, do you know what she told the throngs of reporters out there? According to the New York Daily News, she told them to go home. That's right. She called a news conference to tell the reporters to go home "...so she and her children can go back to a normal life". You know how I go about having a normal life? Well, I start by not calling news conferences in front of my own home! Then you know what I do? I don't claim that I have a winning lottery ticket when I most likely do not. That's how I go about a normal life.

Yeah, she still hasn't produced the "winning" ticket. I don't know if she's still sticking to her "some of the numbers looked familiar" story or what. And just because no other winner in Maryland has come forward, that doesn't mean anything. No one has come forward in the other two states either. The only real difference here is we have a crazy person in the mix. Oh, and get a load of what her lawyer said about this. He said, "I cannot say with any certainty this ticket exists." OK. Well, he's the lawyer. Shouldn't he ask to see it? According to him, "I have not seen the ticket, nor do I want to see the ticket," Wait. You don't...you don't want to?! You just want to continue to represent a crazy person? OK, then. So, he's nuts too, apparently. Interesting. They seem like a great match. Well, until he finds out that he's been had. But Fox News says that "Maryland State Lottery Director Stephen Martino announced a 2 p.m. press conference on Thursday at which officials said he would discuss the "status of the winning ticket," among other things." Ooh! I'm SO looking forward to the "among other things" that will be discussed. I just love these sorts of things. Makes my day is what it does!

Sphere: Related Content

Stop Something 2012

By now, I'm sure that you've had someone try and make you watch the Kony 2012 video. I guess that I'm all for awareness, but I don't like things like this because I worry that it gives people the feeling of false accomplishment. Oh, I watched a video! My knowledge of this subject is going to change the world because I'll tell everyone how bad it is and when everybody knows then things will be different. Yeah, no. You know what happens when you watch a video? Any video? You get to see whatever that video was about. That's it. Maybe you learn something. Maybe not. The point is that the world is going to be exactly the same after you've watched as it was before you'd watched.

But I digress. My point here is that while I think the whole Kony campaign awareness thing (I really don't know what to call it) is commendable in a way (that people just can't think of anything else to do other than post that link or that picture on their Facebook page), can't we all come together and try to rid the planet of another abomination that is taking over? It might not be as bad as the Joseph Kony guy kidnapping children to use as sex slaves and soldiers, but it's right up there. Behold!

See? The horror! This must end before any more children are subjected to this evil torture! Act now! Put it on your Facebook wall! Do whatever you must to spread the word! Because really, do you think your simply spreading the word about the Kony thing is going to help? In words that would be similar to those of the great Jay-Z, "If you posting 'bout Kony, I feel bad for you son. He took 99 kids and your status saved none."

Sphere: Related Content

I Am Unaware Of Your Status Meaning

Once again, the Facebook has angered me. And it has done so in the exact same way that it has angered me in the past. I don't understand how there can be a Facebook "trend" (or whatever you want to call it) that is supposed to "raise awareness", but at the same time with the goal of keeping certain people in the dark. That's right. It's time for the "breast-cancer-awareness-status-update-that-only-women-know-about." Idiots.

I knew something was up when one of my FB friends (someone who I knew in high school) posted her status as "3 weeks and craving bubble gum". OK, now while it wouldn't be totally impossible for this chick to be preggers, it would be a bit unusual. I was also unaware that someone could know that they were three weeks pregnant. Then again, I've never been pregnant (thank God), so maybe there have been developments. But I realized that something was up when I saw another one of my FB friends (again, someone from high school) post her status as "18 weeks and craving lollipops!" Again, would not be totally impossible for this chick to be knocked up (but in a "good" way), but two people of the same non-traditional child bearing age posting a similar status within days of each other? Yeah, this wasn't pregnancy. This was stupidity.

I got on the Google and did a little looking around. Turns out, this is just another one of those status updates that only women are supposed to be posting and the men are supposed to just be completely boggled about. Can I just start by saying that I am so completely over this division between men and women where the women end up being the superior being and the men are just these clueless, blundering idiots? This trend seems to have started on American TV sitcoms and worked its way into the general thinking of the American public. (Maybe you people in other countries treat your men like dumbasses also. I don't know. But what I do know is that it goes on here far more than I'm comfortable with.)

Here's how it works: The part of your status with the number of weeks is supposed to represent the month that you were born. Now wait! Before you go getting all know-it-all on me and thinking that you know which numbers represent the month that you were born in, think again! The chart goes like this:

Jan - 1 week
Feb - 2 weeks
March- 3 weeks
April- 4 weeks
May - 6 weeks
June- 8 weeks
July- 10 weeks
August- 12 weeks
September-13 weeks
October -14 weeks
November-16 weeks
December -18 weeks

That's right. It starts off just fine and then becomes ridiculous. What happened to all of the odd numbers after the 3? I don't know either. And if you're wondering what this has to do with breast cancer or breast cancer awareness, keep wondering. It clearly has nothing to do with it. (Oh, and if you're wondering why the men are supposed to be clueless about what all of this means, keep wondering about that as well. No idea. And there's no rationale given anywhere.)

Then comes the next part; the part about what you're "craving". That item is represented by the date that you were born. Here's the asinine chart for that (and if you think that you're going to know what all of these things are, you would be wrong):

Skittles -1
Starburst -2
Kit Kat -3
M&M's - 4
Galaxy -5
Crunchie -6
Dairy Milk - 7
Lollipop - 8
Randoms -9
Malteasers-10
Twirl -11
Kinda Bueno-12
Boost-13
Dime- 14
Lion -15
Wispa - 16
Fudge-17
Freddo - 18
Milkyway -19
Milky bar -20
Creme egg - 21
Skittles - 22
Fruitellas - 23
Haribo -24
Fruit pastels - 25
Starburst -26
Mini eggs -27
Kit kat chunkie -28
Wines gums -29
Smarties - 30
Snickers -31

Congratulations if you know what some of these things are. Bonus points if you realize that "Chunky" (for 28) is spelled wrong. Also, if you wondered why they put "Wines gums" instead of "winegum" or the more realistic (and something that people have actually heard of) "Swedish Fish", then you and I are on the same page (provided that you realized this after looking up what in the hell "Wines gums" were in the first place). Also, it's KINDER Bueno, you dumbasses. (And while I've never heard of it, it does look fairly delicious. Good thing I wasn't going around looking for a Kinda Bueno or I never would have found one.)

HOW does this raise awareness about breast cancer? It doesn't! It's just one more thing that people do so that they can feel good about doing "something" when in reality, they aren't doing anything. You want to raise awareness about breast cancer? How about you post a status that says "It's breast cancer awareness month. Please be aware of breasts." or something like that? And if you REALLY want to raise awareness, what say you raise awareness of women AND men? Aside from the fact that men can get breast cancer as well, it's not like breast cancer has nothing to do with men. Do these dip s***s think that if a guy's wife/mother/sister/aunt/cousin/daughter/grandmother gets breast cancer that it has nothing to do with the guy? That the guy is totally unaffected? What the hell is THAT all about?

Man, this chaps my ass. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I don't think so. And just to be clear, I'm not "offended" by this. I'm annoyed by it. Again, it does nothing, but the people who are doing nothing have convinced themselves that they are doing something. And regardless as to what they think they are doing, nothing would ever get done if everything were tackled in this fashion. If you want to raise awareness about breast cancer, what say you just talk about it to women and men. Nothing raises my awareness about something faster than having someone talk to me about it. Shocking, I know.

Sphere: Related Content

It Was A Joke!

So, I made a crack on Facebook today about Amy Winehouse. I think it went something like: Congratulations to Amy Winehouse on 48 hours of sobriety! (Oh, and when I say that I think it went something like that, what I mean is that it was exactly like that.) And there was at least one friend who didn't take kindly to that comment. (There was also another friend who didn't get it in the slightest and felt the need to inform me that "she's been dead since Saturday - smh". And "smh" stands for "shaking my head". As if I'm the idiot.) And that friend opened it up for discussion on her Facebook page.



Now, I'm OK with that. I enjoy a healthy discussion. And I'm not saying that my comment was in good taste. It most certainly was not. That's what made it funny. One person who commented felt the need to attempt to read into my life, going as far as to call me a schmuck that had such a miserable life that I needed to make fun of others in order to feel better about myself. That sort of a philosophy might have worked on someone in grade school, but it was completely not applicable to this situation. (It also didn't help her theory that I was on a semi-fantastic vacation at the time that I wrote it and had just spent a week seeing my most awesome friends. Yeah, I'm far from miserable. Angry about a lot of things? Absolutely! But miserable? Hardly.)




But then there was the chick who said that my comment was "mean". And I'm not saying that it wasn't. It kind of was. But you know what else I think is "mean"? I think that it's "mean" for someone to allow themselves to get so wrapped up in drugs and alcohol that they end up killing themselves at 27 and their parents have to go to their daughter's funeral. I find that to be "mean". I'm not a big fan of people squandering opportunity.




But I think that even if, a day or two before she died, you asked Amy Winehouse if she wanted to be clean and sober that she would have told you no. That's what she wanted to do. She was doing that before she became known for her lone hit. (Is it too soon to call her a "One Hit Wonder"? Or is that mean? And while I don't necessarily consider her death to be a loss, I do consider it to be a waste. She was talented, but going out this early in the game, hasn't she just automatically put herself in the classification of acts such as Dexys Midnight Runners and Lipps, Inc.? (Yes, yes. I KNOW they sang Funkytown! And as wonderful as that is, it's still just ONE hit!)

I don't have a lot of sympathy for people who so blatantly waste their life. Not to sound all Pollyanna or anything here (God forbid), but there are so many people out there who are fighting SO hard to stick around. There are people out there who are fighting SO hard to go about their everyday lives in spite of their struggles. And I'm supposed to be reverent towards someone who could have had everything and instead chose to drink and/or drug herself to death? I don't think so.

Sphere: Related Content

All Encompassing Government Waste

Yesterday, President Barry had a little sit down with the Internet on Facebook. I call it a "sit down". You may call it a "town hall". Whatever you call it, I'm still not really sure what the point was. I'm sure that people wanted to think that he was trying to reach out to the young and hip crowd that uses Facebook and has actually taken the time to "Like" him on Facebook. Granted, of the 19 million-plus people that "Like" him on Facebook, only about 23% are 25 and under. About that same percentage of people who "Like" him on Facebook are 45 and older. You know what that means, right? It means that people all across the age spectrum "Like" President Barry. (Translation: It doesn't make a fat rat's ass worth of difference.) Big whoop.

And look, I didn't expect any revelations to come out of this thing. But I at least thought (or maybe I just hoped) that perhaps he could have gotten past the first question before tossing out a bunch of BS, not unlike a monkey throwing his feces its a cage. I thought and/or hoped wrong. Here's how it went: The first question he was asked (and I'm paraphrasing here) was to the effect of "What cuts would you make to help out our country financially?" It's a reasonable question. So why in the hell couldn't he give a reasonable answer? I don't know either, but he didn't. Instead, he just skirted the question and went on with something else. Do you want to know what he said? Seriously? His answer to "What would you cut?" was "Government waste."

::: blink ::: ::: blink :::

Government waste? Um, was I the only one who heard that and thought, "No s***, Sherlock."? Government waste? That's the best he can come up with? He can't get ANY more specific than that? Government waste? Well, I should hope to hell that he wants to cut government waste? Who doesn't?! But that's the best answer he can give? With NO specifics? Does he mean government waste like the entire Department of Energy? Does he mean government waste like the Department of Education? (Oh, come on! Doesn't it seem a bit redundant when you consider that there are Departments of Education at the federal, state, city and county level? How many freaking departments do we need? And why do we need a federal one? For funding? Fine. Let them fund. I'm fairly certain that it doesn't need to be as gigantic as it is to just dole out funds.) Who knows?! He just said "government waste".

We're so screwed. And we're so doomed. The problem is that whenever a program or a department gets started in this country, it never goes away. The spending never stops. It doesn't matter how useless or outdated or duplicitous that it is, it will never go away. I don't know why that is. All I know is that we're scroomed.

Sphere: Related Content

Don't Name Your Kid That!

I'm very happy for the folks in Egypt that their revolution was successful in getting their dictator to step down. Congratulations! Go out and celebrate, Egyptians! But don't get all carried away and start naming your newborn children wacky names after social networking sites may have played a pivotal role in all of the revolutionizing, OK? Dude that named his daughter Facebook, I'm talking to you.

That's right. According to the Daily Mail, some Egyptian man named his new daughter Facebook. Her full name is Facebook Jamal Ibrahim. Yeah, that's pretty. Um, but seriously now. Facebook? That's not a name! That's a thing! And even if it was going to be a person's name (and it is not), it certainly wouldn't be a little girl's name. That's an asinine boy's name if I've ever heard of one.

But apparently the thinking of the little girl's father was not along the same lines as my own thinking. Shocking, I know. See, "He is said to have called her Facebook because he was so happy with the role played by the site in organising protests in Tahrir Square and other cities throughout Egypt." OK, then. Couldn't he have commemorated the events by naming her Tahrir? That's kind of a cool name, actually. I wouldn't mind being named Tahrir and then being able to tell people about why I was named that. I would absolutely mind being named Facebook and then having everyone look at me funny when they first heard my name. Hey, wait a minute! Why is the father the only one who I am hearing about being the one to name her? Wasn't there a woman attached to the uterus that this child popped out of? Doesn't she have a say in any of this? What's that? Oh. Right. They're not quite like that. Dictator or not. Bummer. Sorry, little Facebook.

But I guess it could have been worse. She could have ended up being Facebook Twitter Yahoo! News Ibrahim.

Sphere: Related Content

Coming To A Relationship Status Near You

You politically correct types are going to be the end of me. I swear. I know you're going win in the end, but I'm going to try and fight it as long as I can. And while I've got a lot of fight left in me, this sort of stuff really tires my ass out.

According to a Huffington Post article, Facebook is branching out and giving you more, yes, more choices for how to describe whatever your relationship status might currently be! How enlightened of them! Apparently, "Facebook has added two new relationship status options users can include in their online profiles: "in a civil union" and "in a domestic partnership." OK. So, why does this bother me? Well, you know I'm going to tell you, so what say you just calm down a minute there, Sparky? (Sorry. I'm a little cranky. Stuff like this just gives me a full head of steam.)

Before all of the enlightening, the choices were "limited" to: Single, In a relationship, Engaged, Married, It's complicated, In an open relationship, Widowed, Separated, and Divorced. OK. That's all fine and good. Are you seeing my problem with including "in a civil union" and in a domestic partnership", yet? The answer is: It seems unnecessary to me.

And it's not just the new ones that I have a problem with. How is "In an open relationship" any different from "It's complicated"? What the what is "It's complicated" supposed to mean anyway? Is it like, "I'm going to break up with him, but I'm waiting until after my birthday to see what he gets me"? Or is it "I haven't found anyone else to sleep with without emotional attachment, so I'm waiting for that first"? Or is it simply "I'm cheating on him and he doesn't know it yet"? (Did you like how in that example I made the woman the cheater instead of the man? See? I can be progressive, too!)

But back to the new options. Isn't "In a relationship" good enough? You'd think (back when the whole gay marriage debate was going on in California) that the civil union and the domestic partnership options would have been frowned upon by gay marriage proponents. Good Lord, that's all we heard about was how nothing less than a marriage would do! I mean, I guess if folks who it applies to are OK with it and everything, then I suppose it's fine. Maybe I'm just irritated that I never know what's fine and what's not with these things! It's always changing! And it's NEVER the same. Folks were absolutely militant in California about civil unions and domestic partnerships being soooo not good enough. Second-class compared to being married is what I heard a lot of. (I also heard a lot of the opposite of that. "What's next? People marrying dogs?") Which one is it?!

How come "polygamist" isn't an option? Is it because it's illegal and, therefore, doesn't have a legal status? (I'm still waiting for a reasonable explanation as to why polygamy is illegal, by the way. Two consenting adults? Seems like that's their business. I wouldn't do it, but if they're not hurting anyone and I'm not supporting their lifestyle in any sort of financial way, then why would I care? Why would anyone care?) What about "swinger"? That's a choice without a legal status, just like "In an open relationship" is a choice without legal status, right? How come "swinger" isn't on there?

Maybe they should be more specific with some of these. "Engaged to an inmate". "Looking for love". "Will screw for food." I really don't know. If you're perfectly OK with a civil union or a domestic partnership tag, well grand. I just don't know that they were needed. And I've just re-read this entire thing and it's entirely possible that I'm either overreacting (not a shocker) or wrong (not a shocker, either). But it does kind of bother me for the reasons stated and probably for a couple more that I'm not quite sure about just yet. When I figure those out, I'll let you know. Just don't hold your breath. I don't plan on devoting a whole lot of time to thinking about this ridiculousness.

Sphere: Related Content

Lil World Record

For about a week, the delicious cookie which brings black and white together, the beloved Oreo, has been promoting a stunt on their Facebook page. See, Oreo wants to set a world record for the most Facebook likes in 24 hours. That's a noble gesture. Not as noble perhaps as, say, making those Oreos dipped in white chocolate available all year long, but noble in its own special way.

The world record attempt was supposed to start yesterday. And it got off to a rousing start! After just six hours, they had 61,595 Likes. That's something. I don't know what exactly, but definitely something. But wait! There's more! Every story needs an antagonist and this tale of liking Oreos is no exception. It's a rather unexpected antagonist, however. Enter Lil Wayne.

That's right. Lil Wayne. Now, this Wayne fellow, just how lil is he? I mean, are we talking like could fit in the palm of my hand or just fairly short statured? Whichever it is, he appears to be some sort of a gangster thug criminal convicted felon rapper. He apparently also goes by Weezy, which I thought was reserved strictly for George Jefferson's wife, but perhaps I was mistaken. I don't recall Small Wayne being married to George Jefferson, nor do I recall Mr. Jefferson swinging that way. He had Lionel, didn't he? Wow, I certainly do digress at times. Where was I? Oh, right! Diminuitive Wayne.

Tiny Wayne decided that setting a world record and having to do absolutely nothing to get said world record sounded like a good idea. Thus, he posted the following on his Facebook page: "everyone, please "Like" this post. I'm trying to break the Guinness World Record for most "Likes" on a post in 24 hours. Let's get it!!!" And what do you think happened? That's right. Plenty of people who favor Miniature Wayne and thought that it would actually mean something to him if they individually "Liked" his post. And thus, the "Liking" began. To the tune of about 20-80 folks per every few seconds. And while it's great to see folks banding together for a common cause, couldn't it have been something not quite as ridiculous as liking a man whose first name is Lil?

After almost an hour, Pocket-Sized Wayne had approximately 305,366 "Likes". (As of the publication of this post, it's just over 450,000 "Likes".) He didn't even promote his little stunt. Oreo was all over their idea for at least a week. And not only did Micro Wayne get that many likes in an hour, over 10,000 dimwits felt the need to comment as well. What were they commenting on? Not much, that's for sure. Let's see...we have "this has got to be a record", "good luck with record", "Lets make it hapoen for Weezy" (I don't know what 'hapoen' means. Maybe it's rapper talk.), "will do anything for wezzy f baby fo s" (I wonder if that "anything" that she will do would include not spelling his name "wezzy"?), and my favorite "iit's good to comment alot, then Lill Wayne maybe see's it, and sends you a privet messege, that woudnt be wrong, or would it ;D".

Yes, wouldn't that be a red-letter day if he maybe see's it. And a privet messege? Wow! What would I do? (For those who really can't surmise the answer, I'd kill myself if I got anything privet from Teensy Wayne.) Reading a lot of the comments really drained me of my WTL (Will To Live). We're so doomed. And so is any chance of Oreo setting the world record for the most "Likes" in a 24-hour period.

Sphere: Related Content

Where Is The Logic?

There seems to be some ridiculous rumor going around about Facebook. No, no, it's not the usual crap about how they're going to change their page layout or anything like that. No, it's completely idiotic and I cannot believe that it has gained ANY traction at all, let alone enough traction to make it the top search over yonder at Google Trends yesterday. (That's right. The top search. A Congresswoman gets gunned down, a bunch of other people get shot, a bunch of other people get killed, and all people want to search for is G-D Facebook. We're so doomed.) So what is it that had people all a-flutter over the Innerwebs yesterday? Someone started a rumor that Facebook was permanently shutting down on July 15, 2011. Wait. What?

That's right. There is a rumor going around that Facebook, the multi-gazillion person social networking platform which is poised to make a gazillion dollars more than the gazillion that it has already made, is going to permanently shut down. And I don't know if I can editorialize on this insanity any better than the fine, fine folks over there at Urlesque did when they went with the headline: "Facebook Is Not Shutting Down on March 15. That's Stupid and You Should Feel Stupid." Very stupid.

The instant panic that seems to sweep the Internets (that's right; all of them) whenever something is mentioned about Facebook is disconcerting to me. But what's really disconcerting to me is that so many people couldn't simply noodle through the many reasons why Facebook would not be shutting down...ever. People really couldn't figure out that it was a hoax or a rumor on their own? They had to double check online with The Google? Wow. With those sort of problem solving skills, I'm surprised that they could even figure out how to use The Google. This is what you people care about? We're so scroomed.

Sphere: Related Content

It's Not Her Fault

While people are still running around trying to "figure out" what caused the loser who went on a shooting rampage in Arizona to go on said rampage, I'm going to mention something to you that I really didn't think would ever come up in the conversation. I mean really. In fact, when I heard this particular aspect voiced, I was actually stunned. I was actually surprised at how dense some people actually are. Me. Surprised. At the stupidity of people! I know! It seems unimaginable! But yet, it happened.

It's pretty simple and I'm just going to put it out there the way that I read it. Over at ABC News, it actually says "Facebook executive Randi Zuckerberg bluntly asked, "Is Sarah Palin to blame?"

::: blink :::

::: blink :::

::: blink :::

::: blink :::

Um, what now? Sarah Palin? To blame? For shooting? She didn't shoot anyone! How is this Sarah Palin's fault? This Randi Zuckerberg needs a helmet. One of those industrial strength ones that I was talking about yesterday. Sarah Palin? Are you dry shaving me?! For cryin' out loud, what is wrong with you?!

I don't know what this whole Sarah Palin phenomenon is, but it needs to be studied by someone more capable than me. (Yes, I know. It's a tall order to fill. Moving on!) Let me say this in very simple terms. Sarah Palin is not responsible for the shootings in Arizona. Sarah Palin is not responsible for a lot of things. I am tired of hearing about Sarah Palin. I don't understand why she is either so beloved or so hated by so many. I really don't understand why she won't go away! She was barely a governor for half a term and an unsuccessful Vice Presidential candidate. Why does that give her so much attention after the fact?! Please. Let her go away. Fine, if her kid wants to dance in some TV dancing contest, that's one thing. But please let her go away.

Wow. If you hear about this sort of violent act taking place and your first thought is that it is somehow Sarah Palin's fault, there is something wrong with your thinking. There's also probably something wrong with you, but that's a whole different story. Also, if you are the sort of person that thinks that Sarah Palin is to blame for things like this (or for anything, really) please, for the love of God, please do not vote. Ever. (And don't "Rock the Vote", either. That was a bad idea from the get go.) Please just go about your daily business. You can even go about your daily business and continue to blame Sarah Palin for everything. That's fine. But for the love of God, please do not vote. Ever. And make sure you get a snug fitting helmet. You're going to need it.

Sphere: Related Content

Do Not Buy That On The Internet

Sometimes I read things and I just think to myself "Who are you people?" Then I immediately retract that thought because I really don't think that I want to know in most cases. That's what happened when I stumbled across this headline over at The Vancouver Sun: "Don't buy breast milk on the Web, doctors warn". Good Lord. What now?

Seriously? Is this a warning that needs to be out there? You don't already know that you shouldn't be buying some random fluid from some stranger on the Internet and feeding it to your baby? Really? What part of that is the toughest for you to noodle through? I'm guessing all of it is a pretty novel concept to certain folks, as the sub-headline reads: "Lack of medical information about donors can result in problems, Health Canada says". Huh. In what way?

Of course it can result in problems! What is wrong with you people?! Who can't figure that out?! Who is buying breast milk over the Internet and feeding it (presumably and kind of hopefully) to their infant? Well, apparently the kind of people who joined a "...breast milk sharing program launched by a Montreal woman on social networking website Facebook". Why does Facebook have to be involved with everything?! I'm sick of hearing about Facebook, for cryin' out loud!

Look, do I really have to delve very far into this entire concept before I can just get to the common sense part of it that would tell any normal person that buying breast milk over the Internet is a BAD idea? According to the statement (that is clearly for people who are not going to read it, comprehend it, nor care what it says) that was released along with the whole "Don't buy breast milk over the Internet" shpiel, "There is a potential risk that the milk may be contaminated with viruses such as HIV or bacteria, which can cause food poisoning".

Really? Are you the sort of person who is going to do something so reckless that it potentially puts your child at risk for contracting HIV? Or any other sort of disease? Really? Powdered or pre-made formula is sooooo terrible in your mind that it is a better option to risk your child contracting HIV than to feed them milk not directly from a breast? You should not have children. At the very least, you certainly shouldn't be allowed the feed the children that you do have.

I'm sure that this sounds harsh and judgmental. Good. It's supposed to. Remember, a word to the wise isn't necessary; it's the stupid ones who need advice. And here's the advice: Don't buy breast milk over the Internet to feed to your baby. If you're wondering if it could possibly be so simple, trust me. It is. Just don't do it and you'll be fine. And, probably to your surprise, your baby will be fine too. Lots of people weren't breast fed and they turned out just fine.

Sphere: Related Content

The Facebook Is Flawless

Do you know who Karl Lagerfeld is? Me neither. Well, I didn't until I read this little piece over at something called Styleite. That's where I learned that Mr. Lagerfeld is some sort of German fashion designer. It's also where I learned that he doesn't know squat about technology. I'm not saying that the guy needs to know about technology. After all, he designs fashion. Does he need to know about technology? I'm not saying that he does, but he might want to be aware of what certain aspects of technology are. You know. Just in case he's asked about it or something. At least then he won't sound like he's on the brink of dementia. (By the way, Mr. Lagerfeld is pictured below. Is he from the future?)

He gave an interview to The Luxury Channel. (In other news, there's a Luxury Channel.) He was "... asked to describe technology he finds "amazing". He gave a rather long and extremely odd response. He answered, "Facebook is a flawless object. It’s for me like a Brancusi. As I told you, I got one as a gift in gold — in white gold. And the BlackBerry too, and the iPod. I have all those from a gift, I wouldn’t buy it. But somebody gave me all those things in white gold. They are beautiful objects on the table — they are stunning. I don’t use them because I don’t have to use them." Wait a minute. What now?

That statement begs more questions than it answers. He finds Facebook to be "a flawless object"? Um, dude, I'm not so sure that I'd classify Facebook as an object. Maybe you're thinking of something else. In fact, I'm going to have to assume that you're thinking of something else, as I don't know how you would receive a Facebook in white gold. (By the way, in case you were wondering, Brancusi is an artist. Thus, "a Brancusi" would be one of his works. Yeah, I'm definitely thinking that this guy is confused.)

Next up, the BlackBerry and the iPod. I guess I didn't realize that you could get either one of those in white gold, but I guess that it doesn't surprise me. Anyone can make a case out of anything these days. The folks over at Engadget have some pictures of a BlackBerry 8700 encased in 18k white gold. Behold!

Yeah, I don't know if I'd consider that "stunning" the way that Mr. Lagerfeld does. It's a bit garish for my tastes. Maybe they've improved since the 8700, though. AllTechnoBlog reports on a white gold iPod 4G. It's definitely more slick than the BlackBerry, but it still seems like a mugging waiting to happen. Behold!

But I digress. Back to his statement. Sooooo...he doesn't actually use these things? They just sit around looking all pretty and sparkly to him? Look, if he's not going to actually USE stuff, I don't know that he should be asked his opinion on it. If someone wants to know about the aesthetic properties of a certain piece of technology, then I think he would be the perfect person to consult about that. But the guy thinks that Facebook is a tangible object. On top of that, he thinks it's flawless. Clearly, he's never used Facebook. And I'm guessing that, until someone explains it to him in a little more detail, he never will.

Sphere: Related Content