Wednesday, July 22, 2009

recipe fail

I would like to point out, for anyone interested, that THIS does not constitute a recipe. Here, I'll just copy-paste, for extra convenience:
CHOCOLATE CAKE WITH PEANUT BUTTER
FUDGE FROSTING

1 Duncan Hines devils food cake mix
1 can Pillsbury chocolate fudge frosting
3 tbsp. peanut butter

Bake cake according to package directions. Cool. Add 3 tablespoons peanut butter to frosting and mix well. Frost cake. Kids love it!

Now, dear recipe poster, kindly ask yourself the following question: IF I HAD CAKE MIX AND STORE-BOUGHT FROSTING, WHY WOULD I BE LOOKING FOR A RECIPE, YOU DUMBFUCK?!

Ahem. I got off work early, so I am making cake. It seemed the logical thing to do.

That is all.

Thursday, July 9, 2009

I'm living for the weekend. Really.

So, I'm really glad I've got a job and all. It's nice to have income. And beggars certainly can't be choosers. But I can't say I'm sorry it's just for the summer. Working in a warehouse is not an enjoyable activity. Mostly what I do is picking, which means I get a list of pairs of shoes and where they are, go find them, and put them on a cart to be packed. It's really monotous, but you have to pay attention to a whole bunch of numbers at once (location, how many of each pair you need, which spot in your cart they go), so you can't even let your mind wander to more interesting topics. And I'm not even good at it — we get incentive pay if we pick over a certain percentage (I'm not sure of what, exactly), and the percentage I'm supposed to be at is something like 70 or 80 right now (I'd have to check to make sure; it goes up the longer you've been doing it), and I'm consistently making the high 50s or maybe low 60s. And I'm going as fast as I can. I really don't understand how people get 100% and more; my cart would be a wreck if I tried to go that fast, and I'd spend all my time running mispicks, erasing any time I might've gained.

On the other hand, this week, they've started having me do other things, which is nice. I'm not sure if it's because they have too many pickers, or not enough people doing other things, or because I just royally fail at picking, or perhaps some combination of these things. Either way, I'm not complaining. Sunday night I did ticketing for a while, where you put price stickers on boxes for the stores you're shipping them to, and it was way easy; I'd do that anytime. And then a little bit Monday night and almost all of Tuesday night I did DTS (direct to ship), throwing boxes on conveyor belts. It's kind of tiring, especially if you do it for a long time (even the little, light boxes get irksome once you've picked up a couple thousand of 'em), and Wednesday morning especially, I was one giant ache. But it's the kind of ache that will eventually go away, once those muscles get used to being used. And the cool part is, my numbers Tuesday night doing DTS were 126%. Yeah. That happened. So I really hope they let me do that more often, 'cause I could make some serious cash doing that.

Okay, going to bed now. Night, all — er, morning, that is...

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

radio free Andi

So, now and again, when my vast music collection starts to bore me (as it occasionally does), I hop online and listen to Pandora, which, for those of you who don't know, is a particularly wonderful internet radio website. You tell them a song or artist you like, and it finds other songs and artists like it, and plays them to you. You can also create multiple stations, for when you want to listen to different kinds of music — for example, I've got some stations with names like "Sunny Day," "Sleepy Time," and "Rainy Afternoon," plus a whole station dedicated to Spanish pop-rock. It's a good deal, and it's all free. Or at least, it was.

Being that I like Pandora and have some interest in the things it does, I became a fan of it on Facebook, and yesterday, the Pandora Facebook page published a note saying, among other things, that they are going to start limiting free listening to 40 hours per month, and then charging $.99 for unlimited listening after that. (This of course doesn't affect paid subscribers, who already paid, so they get unlimited listening as well as no ads.) The reasoning behind this is that apparently, the music industry people (I don't know who, as I haven't been following this issue much) want to get royalties for when their songs get played on the radio. It then goes on to make this comment:
The system as it stands today remains fundamentally unfair both to Internet radio services like Pandora, which pay higher royalties than other forms of radio, and to musical artists, who receive no compensation at all when their music is played on AM/FM radio.
Now wait. I thought the point of radio was that you want them to play your songs, so that people hear them and think, "Oh, hey, that's a cool song, I should learn more about that artist/buy that song/buy that album." I should think that would be true with Pandora especially, because you seed it with stuff you like, and then it plays other stuff like that, and sometimes it's really off-the-wall, obscure stuff, that you otherwise would probably have never heard of (I get a lot of that, anyway). And since it shares important qualities with music that you've told it you like, there's a very good chance you'll like this other stuff too, even though you've never heard of it. And, with radio (in principal) being free for the end user, it seems bizarre that people should feel entitled to money for things being played on it.

I mean, with most things, it's the other way around — advertisers, for example, pay the radio station to play their stuff. And it used to be that way even for music (though not necessarily legally so).

At any rate, it's no huge deal for me, personally — I doubt I listen to Pandora for 40 hours in a month anyway, and even if I somehow manage to hit the limit, I still have my own vast collection of music to sustain me. And really, a dollar is hardly a terrible expense for those that want more Pandora. My problem really isn't the outcome of the issue; it's more the fact that the issue exists in the first place. It's a bizarre change in attitude from the way radio used to work.

Wednesday, June 3, 2009

sideswiping arguments

I just wanna say, I'm really tired of the whole gay marriage "debate." Both sides think they're right, and they've got their arguments that they absolutely will not give up, and the stupid talking heads keep parroting the same soundbites and nobody's saying anything new.

The fundamental problem here is that the two sides aren't arguing the same points. The pro side says that not recognizing gay marriage is discriminatory because it's taking away a fundamental right by not letting gays marry, and the anti side says they're not denying anything because, definitionally speaking, a same-sex couple cannot "marry"—that is, to them, based on their own personal and/or religious beliefs, a marriage is only what happens between a man and a woman; anything else cannot be called a "marriage."

Now, break that down to its simplest version, and here's what you've got (and please note, I'm using "liberal" and "conservative" as blanket terms for the purposes of easy generalization here; I realize not all liberals and conservatives think these things):

LIBERAL: Gay people must have the same rights as straight people.
CONSERVATIVE: A same-sex partnership cannot be called a marriage, because that is not what marriage means.

Now, compare those two statements, and you may notice something significant—they have nothing to do with each other. You can't argue against a point by making a point of your own that is completely unrelated to the original point. Now, the ridiculousness of this argument is revealed when somebody tries to actually properly argue against one of these points. An example would go somthing like this:

LIBERAL: Gay people must have the same rights as straight people.
CONSERVATIVE: They do! A gay man can marry a lesbian just like any other man can marry any other woman. It's perfectly legal.

Or, conversely;

CONSERVATIVE: A same-sex partnership cannot be called a marriage, because that is not what marriage means.
LIBERAL: So call it something else?

Now, you may notice, this shit is kind of ridiculous. My own personal opinion is that the government shouldn't be in the business of "marriage" at all if it's going to cause so much fuss. Clearly, the mad right-wingers cannot understand the difference between civil marriage and religious marriage; therefore, eliminate the word "marriage" for legal and government purposes and give all couples, gay and straight, the same rights across the board, and call them "civil unions" or something of that ilk. If people demand to be "married," they can go to the church of their choice and get a religious "marriage;" meanwhile, everybody else can have a civil union, which would entail the full legal rights and status of what we now refer to as "marriage" in the legal sense, and then everybody's happy. Really, it's not that difficult.

So...yeah. This is what happens when I go home; everybody's in bed at like, 10 PM, leaving me alone in the middle of nowhere with nothing but network TV, so I end up compulsively refreshing Facebook and watching Charlie Rose. *sigh* It's gonna be a long summer.

Saturday, May 30, 2009

distraction

So, for my final paper for Young Adult Lit, I chose to write about The Perks of Being a Wallflower. Now that I sit here, trying to actually write the paper, it occurs to me that I should have picked any other book for my topic, because I like this one waaaay too much, and so when I go to look for something in it, I get distracted and start reading it again. And then I've wasted huge amounts of time reading when I'm supposed to be working.

I hate finals.

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Poe's law

Okay, so it's actually satire. I was unsure for awhile there. But it's still the funniest damn thing I've seen in quite some time. Oh, fundamentalism.

Thursday, May 14, 2009

adventures in sleep deprivation

It's 5 AM, and I'm up finishing homework. This is my own fault, and I readily accept that, and I'm not particularly mad about it, just amused at what my sleep-deprived brain does at this point. For example, I'm typing a reading response for my Young Adult Lit class, and I'm literally falling asleep as I write. It's a problem. A moment ago, I realized I'd typed the following: "One of the most significant conflicts in this book is Steve’s internal conflict over his (getter gooze, or." Full stop.

*stretches* Three more sentences and I can stop. Just keep swimming, just keep swimming...