Sent to me by someone who lives there:
Akademia to be closed down by the SA government in 3…2…1…
Latest Posts
Sneaky Stuff
From Reader Steve S. via email:
“This is the next step with the ‘add a tip’ option on the kiosks & checkout pads. Shake Shack’s kiosk demonstrates what happens when you don’t have a printed menu, but instead the kiosk displays what the computer is programmed to do. It asks for a ‘tip’, and if you chose ‘zero’, it increases the price of every item ordered by $0.50. As he notes, the kiosk in this case put up a pop-up noting the ‘price adjustment’, but how many kiosks are programmed to do it in the background where you will only see the total?
“I note it is Shake Shack, but have to believe that other vendors will do the same thing as long as they feel they can get away with it.”
I know a basic response to this bullshit.
Pay cash instead of using a card.
This, by the way, will actually have two effects. Firstly, you won’t be caught up in this little bit of highway robbery. Secondly, paying cash — actual cash — will remind you just how expensive so-called “convenience” food has become, which may result in you visiting these places on fewer occasions.
Just another way that “convenience” + “technology” = “ripoff”.
Oh, and one last thing: for most retailers, the extended cost of handling cash is actually higher than paying the card transaction fee.
Yer welcome.
On a personal note, I have to say that I last bought a burger from Shake Shack about four years ago, and was thoroughly unimpressed. Never again.
Our local BBQ joint has a menu item called a “French Fries Plate”, which consists of a hearty portion of pulled pork, mixed with cheesy fries, for about $14. That may sound like a lot; but when I say the portion is “hearty”, I mean that it’s enough to feed both New Wife and me — and $7 each for a takeout meal is not all that bad. Plus, the food quality is excellent, something few people can say about takeout burgers, from any establishment.
Not Too Bad
Of a Saturday morning, New Wife and I lie in bed together while reading Teh Intarwebz — this website, various news outlets and, of course, C.W.’s site, which features many pics that catch his attention.
One such C.W. pic was this one:
At first, I was appalled, but the more I looked at the building, the more I came round somewhat. Yes, it does stand out (from what one can see) in a fairly conservatively-built neighborhood. And yet… if you were to ask me what to call it, I’d have to say “Modern Art Deco” because of that giant circular window frame, and — dare I say it? — all those stained-glass windows, which give the thing a little more of a classical style. It’s kinda 70s… and I grew up in the 1970s, lest we forget. But the kicker is that whatever you call it, it’s a huge improvement on the foul 60s-era style of its neighbor standing on the right.
New Wife — who agrees with me on most matters like this — really liked it. But then her inner chick came shining through on the next such pic:
…which she declared “cute”, even as I was reaching for a handy bedside barf bag. I think what causes my opposition is the stained-glass front door (“Adorable”, quoth she, because she loves stained-glass anything: doors, windows, Tiffany lamps, whatever).
Regardless, all that floral nonsense is still miles better than the ugly Po-Mo crap that’s foisted on us by the Le Corbusier School Of Ugliness.
But although the first edifice is still too modern for me, given a “must pick one” choice I think I’d take it over the Botanical Gardens thing. Some things are just too much to bear
Discuss.
Common Thread
Three separate places in the U.S. were rocked by mass shootings over the past few days:
In Kentucky, five people were shot, one fatally, when gunshots rang out in a park near a packed downtown bar district Saturday evening. At least 13 shots sent revelers running for cover. The shooting took place at roughly 6.45pm at Charles Young Park.
Next:
Meanwhile, a mass shooting was unfolding in Chicago, at around 7.15.pm. It left four injured, two critically, after a car pulled up beside a group walking along a sidewalk in the city’s Gresham neighborhood. The victims were all injured after multiple occupants fired shots out of the windows before driving off.
And lastly:
A 19-year-old suspect was arrested Saturday evening, though, for a shooting that occurred at Virginia State University outside Richmond early Saturday and injured five, including a student. Suspected gunman Camron Harris is not a student and is from Virginia, Chesterfield County Police said in a statement shortly after making the arrest. Neither were four of the people injured.
There’s one commonality that’s curiously been omitted from the press coverage of these admittedly-tragic events. Let’s just examine one particular circumstance of each.
The performing act in that concert at Charles Young Park in Lexington was a group called Benny J & Friends, who according to their website are a “funk, R&B and soul” band. Charles Young Park is located in a predominantly-Black neighborhood.
The drive-by shooting took place in Gresham, which is a working-class, predominantly-Black neighborhood on Chicago’s South Side.
Virginia State University has a predominantly-Black student body, but as only one student was injured, that’s probably not important. What is important is that the shooter and four of the victims weren’t students.
Now before anyone of the Woke Generation gets onto me about this, let me say very firmly that what I’m commenting on is not the probable race (Black) of the events, victims or shooters.
What I am curious about is that not a single press report picked up on that commonality between the three mass shootings.
It took me about fifteen minutes to do that research myself, and to write this post.
But of course, the overall takeaway from the press reportage is how all these terrible mass shootings are so frequent an occurrence, and as KYGov Beshear was quick to pounce on, mere minutes after the shooting at Charles Young Park: “To stop mass shootings, we have got to elect Democrats that will actually do something about it.”
Pro tip: They’re not going to “do something about it” other than try to pass more stupid gun control laws that will not — ever — prevent mass shootings like the above from occurring. Nor will they — ever — try to improve the tragic set of circumstances that lead to Black kids killing each other, routinely and often.
What they will do is defund their police forces, refuse to prosecute violent criminals, make plea deals that result in less jail time, and release convicted violent criminals from jail prematurely: all of which will only exacerbate the problem.
But Trump / MAGA / Republicans are the evil ones.
Quote Of The Day
From Steven Miller:
“Data centers being built isn’t the problem, the data in those data centers is.”
It has always been my major concern about this whole business. It started way back, when I found out that Google was suppressing search results for my old Nation Of Rifleman website. Even keying in whole sentences or blocks of text from a specific post didn’t bring up the post, or even the website itself.
So now I’m supposed to trust artificial “intellgence”, when I have no idea what the search criteria are, or what sources were accessed to produce those “intelligent” results?
I don’t fucking think so, Simon.
Executive Advice
I had to laugh at the news that the WNBA is going to need “weeks and months” to decide (in essence) the definition of a “woman”, which will decide once and for all (or probably not, see below) who qualifies to play in their stupid little league.
Here’s the problem. Women are by nature accommodationist. They seek to make decisions based on consensus, something that takes all viewpoints and attitudes into account, and finally arrive at such decisions with the implicit (and sometimes explicit) understanding that the decisions may be altered at some point — even when the decision may be critical and a matter of foundation principle, as is the case here.
In this case, that approach is not only wrong, but completely wrong.
At the risk of sounding all mansplainy, allow me to offer some advice to the WNBA chicks.
- Whenever an executive decision is made, somebody’s going to get upset about it.
- The key to making the best decision is to decide whether that aggrieved person (or group) represents a significant obstacle or even threat to the future of your organization.
- If you are convinced that your decision is the right one for both the short-term and long-term viability of your organization, and that the opposition’s position isn’t, make sure you set up guardrails to ensure the decision’s permanency.
That’s the 200,000-ft perspective. Here’s the nitty gritty:
Decide that the definition of a woman is someone identified as such on their birth certificate. Period, end of statement, end of discussion.
Yes, I know there is a percentage of the population who were born female but turned out to be male, either by physiology or inclination — and vice versa. And yes, I know that it’s a tragic circumstance for them.
Here’s what I also know: decisions have to be made — especially in a corporate environment — that benefit both the organization and a significant majority of their employees.
Let me mansplain that further.
Allowing biological men to play in the WNBA will do two things, both fatal to the organization and to the game.
Whether you like it or not, a huge percentage of your already-tiny audience is going to react negatively to the spectacle of “cocks in frocks” taking over the game and rendering the contest meaningless. With the disappearance of spectators — live or on TV — this is going to mean reduced interest from your advertisers, and a concomitant loss of revenue for your already-cash-poor organization. That’s the corporate outcome.
As far as the sport is concerned, that dominance is going to subtract the entire essence of sport — of equals competing against each other. Thus, adding the aforesaid cocks in frocks is just going to end up with teams recruiting more and more of them, which is going to harm your (actual) female performers both physically and in terms of their competitiveness.
Yes, that means that the gender-confused will be forever denied a chance to play in your competition. It’s sad, but in real life, tiny minorities often get the short end of the stick. It’s just the way of the world, and has been so forever. All the good intentions aren’t going to change that, and most probably, such intentions are going to be very counterproductive to your corporate wellbeing.
So, if I may be permitted to use a very masculine term, the WNBA has to bite the bullet, and make the above — and correct — decision.
They won’t. And the WNBA will begin its slide into oblivion.
You read it here first.