Another "laughable" post (to put it bluntly!) so I'm sure you'll all be cracking up by the time you've read to the end...
Now, I'm not going to moan a lot about how terrible modern mobile phones are, and how rude everyone who dares actually to use one is... Because that's simply not true - I actually rather like mobile phones, I think they're a good thing, I don't even mind people using them! And I'm also most impressed with how they have been improving lately - the advancements in mobile phone technology over the past few years are actually quite remarkable...
However, there is one thing which has been a major problem with mobile phones, for as long as I can remember... (And it's not the direct correlation between IQ level, and ringtone selection, which I still maintain exists!)
Despite the fact that I can now post to this Blog while I'm sitting in a layby on the A11 (aren't you glad?!) and update my Facebook status while I'm in a lift, I still have to suffer every audio device within three miles setting up a rumpus every time I use my phone!
Why is this? Why hasn't this cacophonous irritation been removed from our lives yet?
I think that all mobile phone companies need to put on hold all their development of new products, and all their research into new ideas, until they have figured out how people can receive text messages without their radio-alarm-clocks going buh-ba-duh! buh-ba-duh! buh-ba-duh! buh-ba-duh! the whole time!
Don't you?
Thursday, 30 September 2010
Tuesday, 28 September 2010
Using more words doesn't always make you smart
Here's something I've been wanting to talk about for a while, now...
All too often, people seem to think that the more words they use, when they speak, the greater will be their perceived intellect... Sadly, this is not always the case!
A common example of this is as follows... Somebody sees, for instance, a film (let's say, "Shrek 7") and they don't like it... "I was not impressed, in any way, shape or form," they say to me...
That expression - "in any way, shape or form" - is becoming increasingly common in everyday speech... Presumably the person saying it (in this case, our disgruntled cinema-goer) thinks "look at me, showing off my fulsome vocabulary, and extraordinarily impressive and varied grasp of the English language - I'm so clever!"
However, listening to him, I merely think "well done, you have used three incredibly simple words, when one would have done the job just fine - you pillock!"
Clearly, I only think that... I wouldn't say that to his face - that would just be rude! (Instead, I would just let him find this Blog post, and discover that I have been talking about him behind his back with you lovely internet people, and we've all been having a good ol' laugh at his expense... Much more sensitive and polite, don't you think?!)
Another example is seen a lot on television - particularly in interviews, factual programmes, and so on... Politicians do it a lot, actually! I am referring, of course, to the crass over-use of the word "absolutely", which lately, seems to have become a synonym for the word "yes"...
I'm not entirely sure when "absolutely" underwent this transformation, nor indeed what was involved, but now, when someone being interview on TV wishes to answer a question in the affirmative, they say "absolutely", instead of "yes"...
"So, Minister, is it true that you now plan to tax ferret ownership, for anyone earning above twelve thousand pounds a year?"
"Absolutely!"
"And do you think this is a policy which your voters will like?"
"Absolutely!"
"Are you, then, suggesting that the Ferret Tax will be beneficial to the majority of low-to-middle income families living in Britain today?"
"Absolutely!"
You see how inane it is?
So, for goodness' sake, please stop it!
Please only say what you need, and no more, and no less, and nothing unnecessary, and certainly not any more than is required!
All too often, people seem to think that the more words they use, when they speak, the greater will be their perceived intellect... Sadly, this is not always the case!
A common example of this is as follows... Somebody sees, for instance, a film (let's say, "Shrek 7") and they don't like it... "I was not impressed, in any way, shape or form," they say to me...
That expression - "in any way, shape or form" - is becoming increasingly common in everyday speech... Presumably the person saying it (in this case, our disgruntled cinema-goer) thinks "look at me, showing off my fulsome vocabulary, and extraordinarily impressive and varied grasp of the English language - I'm so clever!"
However, listening to him, I merely think "well done, you have used three incredibly simple words, when one would have done the job just fine - you pillock!"
Clearly, I only think that... I wouldn't say that to his face - that would just be rude! (Instead, I would just let him find this Blog post, and discover that I have been talking about him behind his back with you lovely internet people, and we've all been having a good ol' laugh at his expense... Much more sensitive and polite, don't you think?!)
Another example is seen a lot on television - particularly in interviews, factual programmes, and so on... Politicians do it a lot, actually! I am referring, of course, to the crass over-use of the word "absolutely", which lately, seems to have become a synonym for the word "yes"...
I'm not entirely sure when "absolutely" underwent this transformation, nor indeed what was involved, but now, when someone being interview on TV wishes to answer a question in the affirmative, they say "absolutely", instead of "yes"...
"So, Minister, is it true that you now plan to tax ferret ownership, for anyone earning above twelve thousand pounds a year?"
"Absolutely!"
"And do you think this is a policy which your voters will like?"
"Absolutely!"
"Are you, then, suggesting that the Ferret Tax will be beneficial to the majority of low-to-middle income families living in Britain today?"
"Absolutely!"
You see how inane it is?
So, for goodness' sake, please stop it!
Please only say what you need, and no more, and no less, and nothing unnecessary, and certainly not any more than is required!
Monday, 6 September 2010
How to putt a parrot
Actually, I know very little about putting parrots, never having done it myself - I just thought it would be a nice way to follow on from the "how to cut a carrot" post...
So, yeah, there isn't much to say in this topic... So, instead, I'll give you a poorly-Photoshopped picture of what I imagine putting a parrot might look like...
And so, that concludes this nonsense...
So, yeah, there isn't much to say in this topic... So, instead, I'll give you a poorly-Photoshopped picture of what I imagine putting a parrot might look like...
And so, that concludes this nonsense...
Sunday, 5 September 2010
How to cut a carrot
It always surprises me how many people get this wrong - surely it's just plain common sense?!
Of course, you want all your slices of carrot to be roughly even, so that they all take the same time to cook... Everyone knows that larger slices will take longer to cook right the way through than smaller slices, so you have decide beforehand what size slices you want, and allow enough time for whatever size slices you've decided upon to cook properly...
However, there is a complication - and it's one which often gets overlooked... Slicing a carrot regularly, right from one end to t'other, may seem like the ideal - but in real life, this is fraught with difficulties! Because, you see, in the real world, very few carrots are of an even width, all the way along - they taper, dontcha know, they taper!
Observe these carrots -
(I must confess, I did not, actually, take this photograph of carrots myself - I stole it from the internet...)
But you can see, in the picture, how the carrots taper, can't you? So, if your slices are the same thickness all the way down your carrot, each slice will actually be a different volume of carrot, due to the varying width... And, when you take your carrots out of the pan to serve them, a few may be cooked nicely, but many will be overcooked and mushy, while many others will be still raw in the middle... Disaster!
So, here's what you do...
You start at the wide end of the carrot, slicing very thin slices... You then work your way down towards the thin end of thewedge carrot, gradually increasing the thickness of the slices you cut, to compensate for the ever-diminishing width of the carrot... This means that, although the slices may look less even than you have previously been used to, you are actually creating a more regular volume of carrot in each slice than ever before, and now, when you serve up your portions of carrots, each slice will have been cooked to perfection - no more, and no less!
Now, isn't that nice?
Of course, you want all your slices of carrot to be roughly even, so that they all take the same time to cook... Everyone knows that larger slices will take longer to cook right the way through than smaller slices, so you have decide beforehand what size slices you want, and allow enough time for whatever size slices you've decided upon to cook properly...
However, there is a complication - and it's one which often gets overlooked... Slicing a carrot regularly, right from one end to t'other, may seem like the ideal - but in real life, this is fraught with difficulties! Because, you see, in the real world, very few carrots are of an even width, all the way along - they taper, dontcha know, they taper!
Observe these carrots -
(I must confess, I did not, actually, take this photograph of carrots myself - I stole it from the internet...)
But you can see, in the picture, how the carrots taper, can't you? So, if your slices are the same thickness all the way down your carrot, each slice will actually be a different volume of carrot, due to the varying width... And, when you take your carrots out of the pan to serve them, a few may be cooked nicely, but many will be overcooked and mushy, while many others will be still raw in the middle... Disaster!
So, here's what you do...
You start at the wide end of the carrot, slicing very thin slices... You then work your way down towards the thin end of the
Now, isn't that nice?
Wednesday, 1 September 2010
Bad television
I am going to expand on some ideas I had on my Twitter recently, about bad television...
It was as I sat, watching daytime TV, before going out to a gig, one day... I saw trailers for programmes which seemed so bad, I couldn't believe anyone would really want to watch them!
But then I thought - with so many television channels, these days, surely almost all ideas for television series will, eventually, get commissioned...? How bad would an idea for a new TV show have to be, for one of these "new channels" to turn it down?!
Is the modern plethora of TV channels spoiling the "art" of television? Are the days of quality programming slipping away from us? It certainly seems, more and more, that good television - informative and challenging documentaries, gripping dramas with well-written exciting plots and well-written scripts, high-quality sports coverage, and laugh-out-loud comedy shows - is being usurped by the televisual equivalent of the tabloid press, and those repuslive "real life!" magazines about children with two noses who get bullied at school...
So I started coming up with a few of my own ideas for bad television, which might well end up being shown in the middle of the day on some trashy TV channel called "Really" or "Watch" or "Dave" or "BBC3" or whatever...
So, what do you think... Would you watch any of these?
- Celebrities Eating Rice
A brand new celebrity show!
Each week, three understandably minor celebrities see who can eat the most rice... Their bowls are refilled each time they finish their rice, until they can eat no more! The celebrity who has consumed the most bowls of rice is deemed the winner, and wins a meal for two in a Thai restaurant, and three month's free membership to Bannatyne's Health and Fitness Club... (The programme makers guarantee that you will only have heard of one out of the three celebrities featured each week!)
Hosted by a terrifying genetic fusion of Graham Norton and Bruce Forsyth
- Feet, LIVE!
An observational scientific documentary - cameras installed at ground-level on Oxford Street in London show a live feed of the feet of passers-by...
Live commentary on the feet by Murray Walker
- Ross Kemp - in a Mini
Every week, Ross tries to see how many of a certain item he can fit into an old-school British Mini Cooper motor car... Each programme starts with a camera close-up on Ross' face, and the phrase "hi, I'm Ross Kemp, and tonight, I'm going to see how many *things* I can fit into this Mini!" The schedule for the "things" as a follows -
Week One - poppadums
Week Two - goose eggs
Week Three - second-edition copies of "Lady Chatterley's Lover", by D.H. Lawrence
Week Four - six-week-old Burmese kittens
Week Five - paper dinner plates
Week Six - Seiko radio/alarm clocks
Week Seven - Volvic natural mineral water (750ml bottles, with sports caps)
Week Eight - Liberal Democrat activists
- Survival
Twelve random members of the public are kept under constant surveillance, until one of them dies... They could all be involved in freak accidents mere weeks after filming starts, meaning the programme will be over very quickly - then again, the series could last upwards of fifty years, if any of the "life-mates" live on until they die of natural causes...
Presented by Davina McCall, and whichever one of Ant and Dec can win a thumb war
- Yeastenders
Gritty, real-life drama about life in a busy London bakery...
Starring Natalie Cassidy, and that knob from "Skins" with the tattoos
So, what do you reckon? Any of those good enough actually to be made into real television shows?
Ps -
If any television executives or channel bosses are reading this, you should know that I watch a lot of TV, and if I see any of these shows actually being broadcast, I will sue you! However, if you wish to contact me about buying the rights to any of these ideas, I certainly shall be open to offers...!
It was as I sat, watching daytime TV, before going out to a gig, one day... I saw trailers for programmes which seemed so bad, I couldn't believe anyone would really want to watch them!
But then I thought - with so many television channels, these days, surely almost all ideas for television series will, eventually, get commissioned...? How bad would an idea for a new TV show have to be, for one of these "new channels" to turn it down?!
Is the modern plethora of TV channels spoiling the "art" of television? Are the days of quality programming slipping away from us? It certainly seems, more and more, that good television - informative and challenging documentaries, gripping dramas with well-written exciting plots and well-written scripts, high-quality sports coverage, and laugh-out-loud comedy shows - is being usurped by the televisual equivalent of the tabloid press, and those repuslive "real life!" magazines about children with two noses who get bullied at school...
So I started coming up with a few of my own ideas for bad television, which might well end up being shown in the middle of the day on some trashy TV channel called "Really" or "Watch" or "Dave" or "BBC3" or whatever...
So, what do you think... Would you watch any of these?
- Celebrities Eating Rice
A brand new celebrity show!
Each week, three understandably minor celebrities see who can eat the most rice... Their bowls are refilled each time they finish their rice, until they can eat no more! The celebrity who has consumed the most bowls of rice is deemed the winner, and wins a meal for two in a Thai restaurant, and three month's free membership to Bannatyne's Health and Fitness Club... (The programme makers guarantee that you will only have heard of one out of the three celebrities featured each week!)
Hosted by a terrifying genetic fusion of Graham Norton and Bruce Forsyth
- Feet, LIVE!
An observational scientific documentary - cameras installed at ground-level on Oxford Street in London show a live feed of the feet of passers-by...
Live commentary on the feet by Murray Walker
- Ross Kemp - in a Mini
Every week, Ross tries to see how many of a certain item he can fit into an old-school British Mini Cooper motor car... Each programme starts with a camera close-up on Ross' face, and the phrase "hi, I'm Ross Kemp, and tonight, I'm going to see how many *things* I can fit into this Mini!" The schedule for the "things" as a follows -
Week One - poppadums
Week Two - goose eggs
Week Three - second-edition copies of "Lady Chatterley's Lover", by D.H. Lawrence
Week Four - six-week-old Burmese kittens
Week Five - paper dinner plates
Week Six - Seiko radio/alarm clocks
Week Seven - Volvic natural mineral water (750ml bottles, with sports caps)
Week Eight - Liberal Democrat activists
- Survival
Twelve random members of the public are kept under constant surveillance, until one of them dies... They could all be involved in freak accidents mere weeks after filming starts, meaning the programme will be over very quickly - then again, the series could last upwards of fifty years, if any of the "life-mates" live on until they die of natural causes...
Presented by Davina McCall, and whichever one of Ant and Dec can win a thumb war
- Yeastenders
Gritty, real-life drama about life in a busy London bakery...
Starring Natalie Cassidy, and that knob from "Skins" with the tattoos
So, what do you reckon? Any of those good enough actually to be made into real television shows?
Ps -
If any television executives or channel bosses are reading this, you should know that I watch a lot of TV, and if I see any of these shows actually being broadcast, I will sue you! However, if you wish to contact me about buying the rights to any of these ideas, I certainly shall be open to offers...!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)