Why do school computer networks need internet censoring programs? Do they really think kids are going to be looking up porn while sitting in the computer lab? Somehow I doubt that's going to happen. There really isn't any way to be discreet about that sort of thing. And I'm pretty sure that's all kinds of illegal anyway.
More importantly, these programs block sites on personal devices as well, meaning that if you're hooked up to a school Wi-Fi network, the thing is next to useless as far as internet goes. And isn't that kind of our own personal business? Shouldn't we be allowed to do whatever we want on our own phones/iPods/whatever the new shiny thing is this week?
Sure, it could be argued that since you're using THEIR network, you have to go by their rules. But that just brings us back to the question of what the point of having it at all. I mean, these blockers have been around far longer than personal devices that can use the internet, so what was originally the philosophy behind them. Hatred of fun, I imagine. Schools seem to have a thing for that.
"But wait," you shriek. "Couldn't somebody be using the internet for something else BESIDES porn?" Well apparently you know very little about the internet.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Three Year Bonus Part 2
Who exactly chose that the year that you become a legal adult should be eighteen? I mean, I realize that you can say that about pretty much anything in the world, but doesn't it seem really arbitrary to you? Like, why eighteen? Why not twenty? That's like, a rounder number, and it makes more sense.
Okay, so I see that they're hitting it from the "you're out of high school by that point" angle, but then shouldn't it be nineteen? Most people are still in high school when they turn eighteen. And that just ends up making it so that you have to come up with a whole bunch of loopholes and stuff like that to take rights away from eighteen-year-olds who are still in high school. Doesn't that seem unnecessarily complicate. Probably not. Well, it would if you were really easily distracted. Like a squirrel. Or a chipmunk. Sorry, I forgot where I was going with that.
Regardless, it seems like it's just another set of really weird standards. For example, who decided that you can get your permit when you're fifteen, but only after you've been fifteen for six months? Are those six months really going to make much of a difference. Somehow I doubt it. And the rules for how permits work in general are just insane. The way the limits are set up for whether or not you can drive non-family members and whether or not you have to have a parent in the car are pretty complicate. Or uncomplicated. I don't know, I was too distracted by the shiny objects.
Oh God, I know I'm going to have to explain this joke.
Okay, so I see that they're hitting it from the "you're out of high school by that point" angle, but then shouldn't it be nineteen? Most people are still in high school when they turn eighteen. And that just ends up making it so that you have to come up with a whole bunch of loopholes and stuff like that to take rights away from eighteen-year-olds who are still in high school. Doesn't that seem unnecessarily complicate. Probably not. Well, it would if you were really easily distracted. Like a squirrel. Or a chipmunk. Sorry, I forgot where I was going with that.
Regardless, it seems like it's just another set of really weird standards. For example, who decided that you can get your permit when you're fifteen, but only after you've been fifteen for six months? Are those six months really going to make much of a difference. Somehow I doubt it. And the rules for how permits work in general are just insane. The way the limits are set up for whether or not you can drive non-family members and whether or not you have to have a parent in the car are pretty complicate. Or uncomplicated. I don't know, I was too distracted by the shiny objects.
Oh God, I know I'm going to have to explain this joke.
Monday, October 18, 2010
First United Church of the Pretty Cool God
When I say "I should start my own religion.", I imagine I'll get some weird looks. After all, we've pretty much run out of plausible-sounding universe-origins and stuff at this point, so any new idea is almost guaranteed to involve some crazy bull about aliens and inner spirits and crap like that. But I think I'm onto something here. The First United Church of the Pretty Cool God.
You see, the idea here will be that we'll all believe in a higher power that isn't a vengeful dick. The Pretty Cool God (PCG) does not turn away anyone. Homosexuals? Of course! The PCG has even suggested he might be bicurious! Female? The PCG is cool with you preaching. He's a pretty cool guy. Race that isn't white? No subtle racist overtones here, no sir! The PCG accepts anybody who just wants to have a good time.
Of course, he has rules. The PCG would really appreciate you not being a massive douchebag, and his churches will all include douchebag rehabilitation centers where you can learn that wearing your pants anywhere near your knees makes you look like a tool. The PCG is against violence in general, but understands that sometimes it is necessary to lay the smackdown when things get a bit too "jackassy". And if you ever even think about starting a war over religion, the PCG will punish you somehow. Probably involving screwdrivers.
FUCPCG will have a neutral position on the Jesus debate. If you want to believe he's the Messiah, the PCG is cool with that, but if that's not your thing, he's all right with you waiting for the first coming if you want. However, you must agree that Jesus, was indeed, also pretty cool and still deserves respect for being so.
Oh yeah, and if you ever attempt to force the PCG's rules into the government, you will be kicked out of FUCPCG. No questions asked.
You see, the idea here will be that we'll all believe in a higher power that isn't a vengeful dick. The Pretty Cool God (PCG) does not turn away anyone. Homosexuals? Of course! The PCG has even suggested he might be bicurious! Female? The PCG is cool with you preaching. He's a pretty cool guy. Race that isn't white? No subtle racist overtones here, no sir! The PCG accepts anybody who just wants to have a good time.
Of course, he has rules. The PCG would really appreciate you not being a massive douchebag, and his churches will all include douchebag rehabilitation centers where you can learn that wearing your pants anywhere near your knees makes you look like a tool. The PCG is against violence in general, but understands that sometimes it is necessary to lay the smackdown when things get a bit too "jackassy". And if you ever even think about starting a war over religion, the PCG will punish you somehow. Probably involving screwdrivers.
FUCPCG will have a neutral position on the Jesus debate. If you want to believe he's the Messiah, the PCG is cool with that, but if that's not your thing, he's all right with you waiting for the first coming if you want. However, you must agree that Jesus, was indeed, also pretty cool and still deserves respect for being so.
Oh yeah, and if you ever attempt to force the PCG's rules into the government, you will be kicked out of FUCPCG. No questions asked.
Friday, October 15, 2010
The Fourth Sense
Have you ever wondered what it would be like to be blind? No, I don't mean like that time where you decided to see if you could go a whole day with your eyes closed and ended up in the hospital with a tea kettle on your head and third-degree burns. I'm talking about what it would be like to have no concept of what sight is at all.
Did you ever think about that? Do you realize that people who are blind from birth HAVE to think only in words, because they have no idea what anything looks like? Nothing at all. Think about how difficult it would be to explain sight to someone who had no clue what it was? It would be impossible. As a fun way to see how hard this would be, find someone colorblind and try to explain how colors work. They'll think you're insane or something. Probably. I'm not colorblind.
And what about deaf people? Wouldn't that just be insane? How the hell do you explain*sound to a deaf person. Sound is confusing enough already. How exactly ears work is still incredibly baffling to me. So how would a deaf person be able to figure it out. That would probably make their heads explode.
Or what about explaining any one of the five senses to someone who was born without it, and never knew that everyone else didn't have the same problem. I have a feeling someday this is going to happen to me. Like, there's a sixth sense that everybody decided not to tell me about. I guess it lets you, I dunno, detect pancakes or something. That would be awesome.
*In this scenario, we are assuming that you are writing down your explanations on a piece of paper or something.
Did you ever think about that? Do you realize that people who are blind from birth HAVE to think only in words, because they have no idea what anything looks like? Nothing at all. Think about how difficult it would be to explain sight to someone who had no clue what it was? It would be impossible. As a fun way to see how hard this would be, find someone colorblind and try to explain how colors work. They'll think you're insane or something. Probably. I'm not colorblind.
And what about deaf people? Wouldn't that just be insane? How the hell do you explain*sound to a deaf person. Sound is confusing enough already. How exactly ears work is still incredibly baffling to me. So how would a deaf person be able to figure it out. That would probably make their heads explode.
Or what about explaining any one of the five senses to someone who was born without it, and never knew that everyone else didn't have the same problem. I have a feeling someday this is going to happen to me. Like, there's a sixth sense that everybody decided not to tell me about. I guess it lets you, I dunno, detect pancakes or something. That would be awesome.
*In this scenario, we are assuming that you are writing down your explanations on a piece of paper or something.
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Regulated Part 3
Have you ever realized how incredibly ass-backwards it is that cigarettes and alcohol are perfectly legal, but marijuana isn't? That seems pretty messed up to me.
Now, I'm not advocating for the legalization of marijuana. Weed is (in most cases, it has been known to be a powerful brain stimulant in extremely rare cases) bad for you, no questions asked. However, cigarettes? Cigarettes are awful for you. Smoking cigarettes is like standing in a burning house filled with rat poison, cleaning solvents, and cat urine. And what about alcohol? Yeah, weed can mess you up, and getting into a car while stoned is a terrible idea, but it is at least as bad as alcohol, and alcohol can be much worse, especially when you get into hard liquor. And they serve it in restaurants! Maybe they should start serving weed in restaurants.
So once again, this is going to boil down into the "how about they just let us do whatever the hell we want?" argument. If they're going to let us stick a controlled chemical fire into our mouths, why stop there? It's just another stupid thing we can do. Hell, if we're going completely downhill, let's bring back over-the-counter cocaine. Wouldn't THAT be terrifying.
Feel free to point out that when they tried Prohibition before, it didn't work. I know that. I'm just pointing out a conflict of interest. Get out of my house.
Now, I'm not advocating for the legalization of marijuana. Weed is (in most cases, it has been known to be a powerful brain stimulant in extremely rare cases) bad for you, no questions asked. However, cigarettes? Cigarettes are awful for you. Smoking cigarettes is like standing in a burning house filled with rat poison, cleaning solvents, and cat urine. And what about alcohol? Yeah, weed can mess you up, and getting into a car while stoned is a terrible idea, but it is at least as bad as alcohol, and alcohol can be much worse, especially when you get into hard liquor. And they serve it in restaurants! Maybe they should start serving weed in restaurants.
So once again, this is going to boil down into the "how about they just let us do whatever the hell we want?" argument. If they're going to let us stick a controlled chemical fire into our mouths, why stop there? It's just another stupid thing we can do. Hell, if we're going completely downhill, let's bring back over-the-counter cocaine. Wouldn't THAT be terrifying.
Feel free to point out that when they tried Prohibition before, it didn't work. I know that. I'm just pointing out a conflict of interest. Get out of my house.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Regulated Part 2
Why are there helmet laws? Why should people be forced to be safe? If we want to do something completely inadvisable and dangerous, isn't it our God-given right to do so? I think it should be.
Like, how can skydiving be legal, but not riding a bike without a helmet? It's jumping out of a freaking airplane! That's like a thousand times more dangerous! And you could EASILY regulate something like that. You could easily stop people from doing that! Outlaw parachutes! Simple! But no you can't do that. Riding a bike without helmet is far more dangerous. Once you start doing that, it's just a slippery slope to anarchy! What's next? JAYWALKING?
Come to think of it, why do they make you wear a helmet when you go skydiving? I mean, I know Seinfeld has already done a whole routine on that, but seriously, what is the deal here? Is it the same thing as bike helmets? Do we HAVE to do this? Does anyone know if there's a law about it? That would be great if there was. Who's came up with that? How could you possibly get through an entire proposal about that without laughing about the great joke you're playing.
"Yeah, I think we should make everyone start wearing helmets while they skydive!"
"Um....why exactly?"
"THEY COULD GET HURT"
Careful when you jump out of that plane. It might hurt.
Like, how can skydiving be legal, but not riding a bike without a helmet? It's jumping out of a freaking airplane! That's like a thousand times more dangerous! And you could EASILY regulate something like that. You could easily stop people from doing that! Outlaw parachutes! Simple! But no you can't do that. Riding a bike without helmet is far more dangerous. Once you start doing that, it's just a slippery slope to anarchy! What's next? JAYWALKING?
Come to think of it, why do they make you wear a helmet when you go skydiving? I mean, I know Seinfeld has already done a whole routine on that, but seriously, what is the deal here? Is it the same thing as bike helmets? Do we HAVE to do this? Does anyone know if there's a law about it? That would be great if there was. Who's came up with that? How could you possibly get through an entire proposal about that without laughing about the great joke you're playing.
"Yeah, I think we should make everyone start wearing helmets while they skydive!"
"Um....why exactly?"
"THEY COULD GET HURT"
Careful when you jump out of that plane. It might hurt.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Pink Stands For Being Pretentious
Have you ever seen someone wearing one of those pink ribbons? And the first couple of times or so, because you couldn't remember what they were for, you asked them about it? And what did they say? "I support breast cancer!" Didn't you just want to punch them in the jaw?
No, you don't "support" breast cancer. If you did support breast cancer, you would be a massive tool. You support the treatment of breast cancer. You support finding the cure for breast cancer. You do not support breast cancer. That would be stupid. And what makes breast cancer so special anyway? There are a lot of different types of cancer. Why would you want to support just one? Wouldn't it be better to work towards a cure for all cancer? "I support funds for scientists to research a cure for cancer". That sounds much better than supporting breast cancer.
And how much supporting have you done, really? I'm not talking about the people who do bike rides and raise money and crap. Those people are actually being productive. I'm talking about the jackass who bought one ribbon and did absolutely nothing else. Sure, the funds from everyone's funds certainly adds up, but you? By yourself? Hell no. You haven't done jack. One dollar is not "support". One dollar might be enough for the doctors to pay for their parking. For like an hour.
You wanna say you support finding a cure? Either raise some money or get a damn medical degree. You don't deserve the smug satisfaction you're getting.
No, you don't "support" breast cancer. If you did support breast cancer, you would be a massive tool. You support the treatment of breast cancer. You support finding the cure for breast cancer. You do not support breast cancer. That would be stupid. And what makes breast cancer so special anyway? There are a lot of different types of cancer. Why would you want to support just one? Wouldn't it be better to work towards a cure for all cancer? "I support funds for scientists to research a cure for cancer". That sounds much better than supporting breast cancer.
And how much supporting have you done, really? I'm not talking about the people who do bike rides and raise money and crap. Those people are actually being productive. I'm talking about the jackass who bought one ribbon and did absolutely nothing else. Sure, the funds from everyone's funds certainly adds up, but you? By yourself? Hell no. You haven't done jack. One dollar is not "support". One dollar might be enough for the doctors to pay for their parking. For like an hour.
You wanna say you support finding a cure? Either raise some money or get a damn medical degree. You don't deserve the smug satisfaction you're getting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)