Sunday, February 1, 2009

I've been busy, so instead of posting real things...

I'm going to just post random Google Chat conversations I've had. With Mike. I do this because I think we're quite funny, and I feel it's a shame not to share our comedic genius with the world. For your viewing pleasure....

Today, I'll be posting from a conversation from November 10th, 2008. This is near the end of the conversation:

10:13 AM me: Eat my penis.
10:14 AM Michael: I will not.
10:17 AM I think I suffer from a type of synesthesia. Not synesthesia really by definition, but I find myself confusing certain numbers with certain letters a lot.
me: Are you being serious?
Michael: Like 2 = D in my brain for some reason.
And 9 = F.
me: Interesting.
10:18 AM Michael: More irritating than anything. Especially when trying to remember a hex code for more than B seconds.
10:19 AM me: rim shot.
Michael: I know. I liked that last part. Still true, though.
me: Indeed
well then. With that said...
I think I'm gonna run to the bank before I have to go get my oil changed.
10:20 AM Michael: Wuss.
me: I wonder if they have the wifis.... I have to sit in the waiting room because there's no place to go... so I'm toting the 'top
gonna work on the website a majigger.
Michael: Doubtful, but you could always rock the offline shit. Make up some web templates or what has you.
10:21 AM me: Indeed.
That's my plan...
I'm just keeping some hope alive for WiFis
they have it at the strangest places now.
Midas has it now, I think.
Michael: Weird.
me: Ineed.
deed
Michael: eed
me: fluffel
Michael: ed
d
10:22 AM me: Alright, my appointments at IR:EF, so I
should get running...
10:24 AM Michael: Don't make fun of my disability, ass.
Talk to you later.
me: Don't have a funny disability...
later.


While that's quite amusing, here also a median part of a conversation from December 11th, 2008:

10:20 AM
Michael: I've coughed up 8oz of snot today and spit out 6oz.
10:21 AM me: How are you measuring this?
Michael: In units.
10:22 AM me: With what method are you taking your measurements?
10:23 AM Michael: With a unitogramer.
me: That's not a word, or a thing that exists.
Michael: until I invented both.
10:24 AM me: You have not.
The word, perhaps, the item itself has not been invented.
You might say it was conceptualized, perhaps.
10:25 AM Michael: You don't know the things that I do.
me: I have a fair idea based on the evidence.
10:26 AM And historical data.


And of course here we have this treasure from January 8, 2009 :

9:33 AM me: Is Halo really that different than Opium and Absinthe?
I mean, really?
Michael: I would not equate Halo's multiplayer to an extremely potent, smokeable pain-killer, no.
9:34 AM me: Really?
I would.
9:35 AM I mean, both are methods of escape and involve transporting yourself into a new realm of reality...
Michael: Yeah, but you're disturbed.
9:36 AM A tiny, white, plastic baby Jesus appeared on my desk today.
9:37 AM me: Well, that's interesting.
9:38 AM Was there a note attached, or... did it talk to you at all?
Michael: Nope. It's about an inch and a half long. Unpainted, white plastic. No moving parts. No note attached.
me: It'd be great if that was actually how Mexicans fired you. *It is worth noting that Michael works for a company run almost entirely by Mexicans, so, this statement is less random, and racist, than it might seem on the surface.
Michael: I agree.
9:39 AM To be honest, I'm not sure it's Jesus. It's definitely a naked boy holding some type of cup or chalice, though.
me: Please sir, you must send me an image of this.
9:40 AM I need a visual reference.
Also, try to place it around where it was found...
But try not to touch it too much, forensic analysis might be necessary. (Within a few minutes, I received these images from Mike in an email entitled "Mini God" with body text of "For your consideration."






10 minutes
9:51 AM me: Holy hell that thing is tiny.
What the shit?
I don't know about it being Jesus, though...
9:52 AM It's creepy for damn sure.
Michael: It could be an altar boy or something. Like the kid who hands out the wine during communion, but the nudity confounds me.
9:53 AM me: Everything about it is confounding.
Michael: Like why isn't it wearing a hat?
9:54 AM me: Not the first question that comes to mind, no...
9:55 AM Perhaps... what the holy fuck is a naked, cup holding, tiny plastic boy doing on your desk this morning?
9:56 AM Michael: A different point of view, sure.
I look at it as..."What luck! A naked, cup holding, tiny plastic boy is on my desk this morning!"
9:57 AM me: Where does luck enter into the equation?
9:58 AM Michael: Nobody else had a naked, cup holding, tiny plastic boy on their desks this morning.
me: Still not following the logic?
Michael: Those are 1:20 odds, sir.
Roughly.
me: 1:20?
Can you show your work on this one, sir?
9:59 AM Michael: I am the one. There are maybe a total of 20 desks in this office.
I haven't counted, but it's a rough estimate.
10:00 AM me: I don't think you're doing it right.
Michael: Ok...you obviously use a different system of math than I do, but I'll let it go.
me: That's based on the idea that there's a 100% chance that one desk will contain a naked plastic boy in the morning.
Michael: Correct.
10:01 AM Of all the people in the office (20), I was the (1) to receive the naked plastic toy.
10:02 AM The odds of it happening on any given morning to anyone are incalculable.
me: Right, however, the odds are significantly less when you consider that of all the days you've come into the work, this is the first time there's been such an item, and likely first time at all in the office.
Michael: Right.
But you could expand that even further, if you wish, to include all offices and all days throughout history.
Or at least throughout my history of being in an office.
not necessarily this one.
10:03 AM me: Right, but still... I think calling this happening a 1:20 event is a little silly.
Sure, if there was a 100% chance that there was going to be said item on a desk today, then it would be 1:20 give or take...
but you can't say for certainty that there was a 100% chance of it happening in the first place.
Michael: If you accept the reality that a plastic toy was going to mysteriously appear in this office on this day on one person's desk, my math is dead on.
10:04 AM me: Making your odds much greater.
Michael: Well, you can say that with a 100% certainty because it did in fact happen.
me: It's also not dead on until you've counted the desks.
Michael: Hypothetically, I mean.
me: You cannot say for 100%, how would you account for it being there.. what if it fell from a cleaning lady's pocket?
what are the odds of that happening in the first place?
10:05 AM and it landing on a desk?
Michael: Because it, in fact, did happen.
It's history at this point.
I'm not judging the odds of it happening tomorrow.
Although, I can make sure they're 1:1.
me: That's idiotic.
10:06 AM That's like saying someone who won the lottery had a 100% chance of doing so because of the numbers chosen.
Michael: No.
me: Yes.
Michael: My point is that you have to factor in it happening today to make calculating odds even possible.
me: It's history.
It happened.
Michael: You can take odds on a sporting event because it's scheduled.
10:07 AM You can't take odds on the San Diego Vaginas beating the West Hartford Cocksuckers in a world series because it's not a scheduled event.
10:08 AM me: That's not right at all...
you can do that, however, the odds are very very slim
Michael: They're zero because those teams don't exist. But they could in the future, but there's no way to calculate odds on that.
10:09 AM Not even broadly.
me: You'd need to factor the possibility that two teams would be formed, and those names chosen, and they being picked by the MLB and then winning their respective divisions.
It's less likely than everyone in the united states winning the lottery, even without buying tickets, but it's still a possible outcome.
10:10 AM Michael: No, because the lottery is a scheduled event. It happens. It's known to happen. It will happen in the future.
That's my point.
The event will happen.
My body is rejecting more eggs. I'll be back eventually.
10:11 AM me: Sure.
But you're wrong about calculating odds for unscheduled and unlikely events.
Jut because there are a lot of factors involved, and because the odds are long, it doesn't mean it's impossible.
10:12 AM This event is a perfect example, just because the baby appeared there doesn't mean that it would have appeared there no matter what, there have to be tons of factors that go into that.
10:15 AM Unless whoever left it there meant to put it your desk, then your 1:20 goes all to hell, it would be 1:1.

6 minutes
10:21 AM Michael: I made poop.
10:22 AM me: Hooray!
10:23 AM This calls for a celebration.
What size Lincoln bear and hat do you wear?
10:24 AM Michael: I don't know what those things are...
10:25 AM me: You know, a stovepipe hat and one of them chin beard things...
Michael: Oh. you wrote bear.
Not beard.
a 2.
10:26 AM me: Gotcha.
We'll have a hell of a time!
10:28 AM Oh, and we'll need some sort of sexy lingerie.
Michael: I'm starting to feel less comfortable with this plan.
10:29 AM me: Really?
Seems awesome.
10:33 AM We're also going to need some mineral oil.
10:34 AM And a box of q-tips
Michael: I'm back on board.
10:35 AM me: Hooray again!
So, what silly things do they have you working on today?
10:36 AM Michael: Building a rotating Flash banner for the cover page of e-counters.
Arnold asked me to do it starting yesterday and said. "So, how long on this one, 3 hours?"
I said, "To design it, about 4 hours."
10:37 AM "You have to design it?"
"Um.....yes."
me: lol
10:38 AM As if you just have to click a few keys and BLAM! Bannered!
Michael: Right.
10:39 AM I think most of these idiot programmers think that you're supposed to design shit within dreamweaver or flash. I use the entire fucking suite to design things, then put it all together in flash or dreamweaver.
10:40 AM me: Right.

5 minutes
10:45 AM me: Ever eaten Shark Penis?
10:46 AM Michael: Dead or living?
me: Either.
10:48 AM Michael: No.
10:49 AM me: I enjoy doing that too...
When someone asks me a question, and the answer is no, having them specify something, even though it doesn't change the result.
Did you put such and such away?
When, yesterday, or today?
Either.
No.
10:50 AM Michael: Well, it seems prudent to make sure that you understand exactly what's being asked, regardless if changing the details of the question will affect your answer.
me: Not really, but we'll run with it.
10:51 AM Michael: Yes-huh. There could be other factors.
10:52 AM For instance, if you meant dead shark penis, then that's a fairly unthreatening question.
If you meant living, you might have something nefarious planned.
me: And if I'd said San Jose Shark Penis?
10:53 AM Michael: Well, I'd just assume you meant living in that case. And the answer would have been, "I don't think so."
me: Is there really a chance that you might have, but your
10:54 AM you're not recalling it?
Michael: I mean that I don't ask for ID on every penis I eat.
me: How many penii have you eaten, sir?
Michael: And even if I did, I don't know the entire SJ Shark roster by heart.
None.
10:55 AM me: So, you have eaten no penises ever?
10:57 AM Michael: None that I'm aware of.
me: Because then your answer should have been no, and you should not have mentioned whether you id the people whose penises you eat....
Michael: All my statements were true.
10:58 AM "I don't think so" might not be the most appropriate answer, but it is true and valid.
me: In this case, it really would be better just to answer in the negative outright.
10:59 AM Michael: Perhaps.
But this conversation, or at least this portion of it, would have ended long ago. And mpr is kinda boring at the moment.
11:00 AM me: Ahh, well, there'd be other conversations to be had, I'm sure.
11:03 AM Michael: I wasn't prepared to take that chance.
me: I see.
Always playing the safe bet.
11:04 AM So, there's one thing I hate about Fallout 3... which is that I can't kill kids.
11:05 AM Michael: Hm.
See? That was my fear.
me: I mean, you could be a baddest dude in the world, but you cannot take down a child...
unless, in the future, children have magic forcefields.
And, what was your fear exactly.
11:07 AM Michael: That ending the previous thread of conversation would lead to you beginning a new one wherein you divulge some information about yourself that might horrify me and give me cause to keep you separate from my child.
11:08 AM me: Hmm, that seems like a rash decision.
I'm commenting on a gameplay mechanic in Fallout 3... not real world issues.
Besides, I know I could kill kids in the real world.
11:10 AM Michael: Perhaps rash, but when a perceived possibility is the early death of my only child, one that I've grown fond of, I'll again take the safe bet.
11:11 AM me: Following that logic, you two should be a in a sealed bunker, and she should be in a bubble of some type.
There are tons of threats to your child's life on a daily basis.
Michael: How'd you find out about my bubble-bunker?
11:13 AM me: Informed guessing.
Michael: Right, but again. I'm judging probabilities. And when someone expresses an interest in causing the death of children, I perceive that threat as a higher probability than say, ape mauling.
I think it's funny when people on a Live Chat sign off as if it were an e-mail.
11:14 AM me: I have no interest in killing children, real or otherwise, I'm just irritated that this game doesn't allow it.
Michael: "Casey Green: Thanks,
Casey Green: Casey Green
Casey Green: Lawrence KS"
11:16 AM Also, you didn't specify whether the children you weren't allowed to kill were in the game or in reality. Only that the game prevented you from doing so.
me: This is true, but more of a failing on your part to accurately infer an old friend's intentions
11:17 AM Michael: I do like the idea of Fallout 3 forbidding or preventing you from killing real, corporeal children.
11:18 AM me: Yeah, I suppose.
But what if those children are dicks that deserve death?
11:19 AM Like that kid from that movie that one time...
11:20 AM Michael: I didn't mean that I like that it does it. I meant that I like the idea of a video game somehow preventing you from doing something in reality. Also, those kids are dicks and do deserve whatever gruesome fate that have coming to them.

5 minutes
11:25 AM me: Well, I'll be back...

43 minutes
12:08 PM me: So, I was thinking about murdering children in the shower...
Michael: As a good serial killer would.
12:09 PM me: and I was realizing that I've still only got a single digit record.
I'm thinking I really need to step things up.
You know what I mean?
Michael: Absolutely.
Let the carnage rain down.
12:11 PM me: So, it then occurred to me that I'll have a whole slew of little ones very nearby this weekend.
It's like providence.
12:12 PM Of course, that goes against all the ways that I've strived for years to not be caught.
Half of them haven't even been reported missing I'm so good.
Michael: Half of one?
12:13 PM That's disconcerting.
Oh, wait. Single digit.
Not single victim.
me: Right.
Thatis a funny imagine though...
12:14 PM image
half a corpse.
no cops.
everything is fine.
12:15 PM Still, to keep from having half of them reported missing, can you imagine building a fake school and hiring a huge staff to convince parents that the kids are still there, through letters and other things.
Then, after doing this for a while, torch the school and 'oops accident'.
Michael: I can, but will not.
12:16 PM me: why not.
this could work..
let's do it.
oh.
the hardest part is cutting out the damn images.
12:19 PM And it was all that difficult at all, which is what I'm trying to illustrate here.
Michael: um......okay?
12:20 PM You took kind of a hard right there.
me: What, stepping away from child serial killer to two|TWENTYTHREE?
Michael: yes
12:21 PM me: Well, that was being silly, this is not... as much .
I apologize, I didn't realize that thread of conversation had you so riveted and intrigued.
We can go back, if you'd like.
12:22 PM Michael: Have you been recently checked for symptoms of mental retardation?
me: No. Why would you ask?
Michael: Just a routine check.
12:23 PM
me: Ahh, I see.
12:25 PM Alright, well, I'm off to work.
Michael: Enjoy
me: I will not.
I will however speak with you I deem it convenient.
12:26 PM Michael: Enjoy
me: No, you enjoy!

Monday, January 5, 2009

Låt den rätte komma in - A Review

There's been a lot happening over the last couple weeks, things that I just haven't had time to talk about. I saw Valkyrie, and of course, Christmas and New Years both came and went. All of these things would normally result in a post on this blog, but I've been too busy. The time has come, however, to update my little corner of the internet, as this blog won't write itself.

Last night, I saw Låt den rätte komma in (Let the Right One in) at the historic Riverview Theater in South Minneapolis. If you're one of the few regular readers of this blog, you might recall when I mentioned it before. I had actually been hoping to see it in Novemeber, but the stars did not align for me, and I was not able to catch it then.

After waiting this long, I was half expecting the build up in my mind for this flick would be crushed when it couldn't live up to my high standards. I can gladly say I was wrong, this was an incredibly good movie.

Let the Right One in tells the story of Oskar, a 12 year boy growing up in a working class suburb of Stockholm in Sweden during the 1980's. He's timid and frail, and very brutally bullied by classmates. All that begins to change for him when he meets Eli, a 12 year girl that moves in next door. They begin in unusual friendship, and become close. There's a twist, however, as it turns out that Eli is actually a vampire. Her companion, we guess could be her 'father' sets to work in their new home trying to provide her with the blood she needs to survive, but manages to fail miserably at each attempt. I don't really want to give away any more than that.

There are numerous elements to this movie that make it so great for me. First, it has all the charm and appeal of a 'low budget indy film', however, it packs a great deal of budget into some solid special effects. Second, the cinematography is amazing, you can always tell the difference between film as an art form and film as a means of drawing box office numbers. The characters are well written, and considering the age of the talent, the two main characters seem to really pull off their roles well. There's just enough blood and disturbing imagery to get under your skin, but not to detract from the story, which is my final point.

The story is amazing. I can't say it's flawless, but it seems to unfold in a way that you're drawn along with it. It's a brilliantly executed tale that so much less about a 'vampire' as it is about two people finding each other. It's tender and touching, there's a clear bond between the two main characters that makes you want them to succeed, no matter how everything works out.

It's not often that I watch a movie only to have it end and leave me with the urge to watch it again.

I've decided to seek out the English translation of the book (the author of which also wrote this screenplay), because the only thing I didn't like about this movie were a few elements that I feel were missing from the story, things that I'm almost certain would have to be in the book.

And still I'm eager for another viewing.

Friday, December 19, 2008

Mightier


Mightier from Ratloop on Vimeo.


I'm always interested in new and different ways of doing things if they work. I enjoy the idea of a level editor for a game, and I have to admit that the concept of drawing on a piece of paper certainly brings a new flavor to the world of gaming, even if it is a bit limited in capacity.

Mightier is a game I would very much love to try. I'm not sure if I will ever try it, because the idea of actually printing something out and then trying to 'scan' it with a webcam seems pretty, well, time consuming, but I'd definitely love to give it a try.

Being an experiment, I'm really curious as to whether or not they'll ever do something with this technology, if it might be refined and go somewhere with it. I imagine that it could be adapted for use with consoles like the PS3 and Xbox 360, which both have webcam accessories. Maybe. The game does make concessions to those without a printer and webcam, but I imagine that the fun of the game has to come from solving the pencil and paper puzzles, even if they appear to be a little simplistic.

The other piece to this is the fact that you can draw your character, and give him some detail, although it looks like the system decides things like depth on it's own, it would be great if artists with a little more skill with a pencil could make some truly intricate character art for use with their game. Much like Spore and Little Big Planet, the ability to share these with others would also be a great feature.

I can also imagine future games using this concept could be fun. There have been other games where you can design basic enemies and characters, but this certainly presents a whole new dimension to user interaction. I have to give credit to Lucas Pope and Keiko Ishizaka for their creation.

From what I've seen, it looks like a good proof of concept, and if I ever get around to playing it, I'll tell you how well it actually works. In the mean time, I enjoyed the video, and find the idea compelling, so, that's something, yes?

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Majel Barrett- Roddenberry

It's a sad day for nerds... Majel Barrett-Roddenberry has died of leukemia at 76. Normally when a celebrity of any sort dies, I don't feel terribly sad, except at the loss of a human being. In this case, I'm actually saddened because she's been part of the Star Trek series for 4 decades, more than my entire life, which, incidentally, has been spent enjoying Star Trek.

Rest is peace Majel, Nurse Chapel, Luwaxana, Computer. Rest in peace.

(Please note, I had to fight hard not to make a transporter "beam up" joke, as well as 'Boldly Go', and several others. My apologies for not trying to be funny about this one...)

Lenovo Presents: The Most Ridiculous Laptop Ever



I was blown away when Lenovo started putting Wacom Tablets on the palm rests of their laptops. It seems like a great idea and wonderful answer to those wanting a pressure sensitive tablet that's bigger than 12 inches, and offers more levels of pressure than Wacom enabled tablet screens, which don't have near the density and capability of a Cintiq.

Apparently someone at Lenovo has started looking at all the things that graphic professionals want in a computer. They looked at the tablet, and then noticed the dual monitor set-ups and thought, hey, why don't we take everything and cram it into a laptop.

Welcome to the new W700 series.

Overkill? Oh yes. By a long shot.

Quad core processors, nVidia Quattro video cards with a gigabyte of memory, 4GB of system RAM, a 17" screen at 1920 x 1200 resolution, and a second 10.6" at 768 x 1280 resolution.... and...

Alright, here's the thing. It's got all the cutting edge capabilities you could ever want in a laptop, and then it goes and adds more!

The thing is, I'm not sure what is worse, the fact that this thing is so completely overpowered and impractical for almost every setting, or the fact that I get it, and want one desperately.

I don't even want to guess at how much the top of the line configuration of this thing will run... well, actually I do want to guess, and I'm guessing at least $6500 for all the bells and whistles.

All so you can have a watered down version of a more powerful, bigger, and better desktop that you can carry with you.

Walmart + iPhone = ???

So, there's been a rumor running around for a while that Walmart will be selling iPhones, possibly on the cheap. There have been plenty of suggestions about pricing and capacity. The going rumor was that they'd be offering a 4GB model for $99.

Apparently Engadget now has what they feel is an authentic scan of an internal memo outlining what's really going down.

They'll be offering the 8GB and 16GB models at a mere $2 discount ($197 and $297 respectively) and AT&T will still require the same 2 year contract to get things done.

There are a lot of things that still seem suspect about this, as it is apparently written by an employee at one location. It would seem a little more legitimate if written as a corporate memo, something with a more global tone.

If true, I feel this is mostly good news for the elitist Apple enthusiasts. I imagine that the average iPhone owner feels a certain sense of elitism from owning such a product. The fact that Walmart is going to be selling them alone is probably enough to make their skin crawl, but, I would guess that Walmart selling a $99 model would be enough to shatter the fragile psyche of all the Apple-tards that get that sense of superiority and satisfaction for paying their precious Apple-tax.

So, it's good, I suppose, that Walmart won't have a lock on the Jesusphone's counterpart, the MereMortalphone.

Post 350 - Customers are stupid

Everyone else writes about their crappy jobs... why shouldn't I?

During the day, I'm in retail management. I don't do it because I really love it, I do it because I'm paid pretty well to do something I'm pretty good at. However, working retail would be much better if it weren't for all the pesky customers. I do mean pesky, because most customers aren't a problem, it's the handful of idiots and self centered fools that sometimes makes it intolerable.

For some reason I don't often write about this stuff, but I figure now is as good a time as any...

Here's a couple from today.

Customer A -

Covering my cashier's break is usually not a big deal. I get parked at the front for a while and spend most of the time directing traffic, and rigning through customers. It's fun to be an extremely overpaid cashier from time to time.

But today a customer walks in and sets a book down on the counter in front me. She doesn't say anything.

Time out, I should really inform you that I've taken a hard stance on basic communication. I no longer respond to people waving things in my face, or saying single words as though they are a question (Customer, "Ink?" Me, "Are we playing some sort of word association game?")

So, here I am, a customer and a book in front of me. I've said hello. A few moments pass by and it's obvious the customer has no plans on making her intentions known verbally. So, I decide I should probably verify the situation and say, "Were you looking to return this?"

She replies with an obvious tone of annoyance, "Yes!"

Great. So, I pick up the book, from which a receipt is sticking out. A quick glance at the receipt shows that it is dated for the first part of March, 2008. Yes, 9 months ago. The most forgiving retailers offer 90 days, or 3 months for return on most items. We offer 30 days, and technically, we would classify this as media / software, and therefore it falls under a 14 day return policy.

I say, "I'm sorry, but I can't return this item, it's well past our return policy."

She grunts and says, "I called the store and they said it would be fine." You see, the receipt was for another location, which she says that she'd called.

I reply with, "Well, I'm not sure who you spoke with, but unfortunately I won't be able to return this item, you've had it for over 9 months."

She rolls her eyes, "This is ridiculous. I don't do this job anymore, I found it in my cabinet and I don't need it!"

Finally, frustrated, I reply, still calm as I always am, "Well, if you'd found it 8 months ago and brought it back to us, we'd have been glad to return it, but we won't be able to return it now."

She said something about my being an awful human being (I honestly don't remember what she said, and really don't care at all). I thanked her as she left.

I don't understand people. I really don't. I mean, I get that the economy sucks and that people are looking to do what they can, but still, this is beyond silly. It's a book. It's a book that she's had laying around for months, and now she doesn't want it and thinks that I we should just take it back for her.


Customer B -

The second customer after Customer A was a man who, after our transaction and general chit chat, said, "Thanks. It's not often you get great customer service from someone who is polite and efficient (yes he used the word efficient). Keep up the good work."

Now, this man was not around at the same time as Customer A. Amazing that I can get such a wide array of comments about my service.

Customer C -

It's later in the day, and one of my cashiers pages me to the front for assistance with a return. She says, "Customer will be waiting at Register 11". This tells me that I'm not coming up to turn a key, or provide a quick solution. No, this is foreboding. I'm coming up to 'deal' with a customer.

Here's the situation. The customer has a receipt from another location, which is dated in the last 3 weeks. On the receipt is two items, once is $24.99, and the other is $3.49. She used a special promotional coupon that is '$25 off a $25 purchase'. Her total came to $3.48 plus tax after said coupon.

She says, "I need you to do an adjustment because that item is $10 cheaper this week."

Immediately I see a fatal flaw, and I explain, "I can do that, but you'll end up owing us money, you got a much better deal with the coupon."

She stares at me for a moment, and then says, "No, you'd be giving me $10 back!"

Deep breath. "No, ma'am, you used a coupon that took $25 off a $25 purchase, if I take this item down by ten dollars, you're total purchase falls below $25, and your coupon no longer applies. You'd then owe me $15."

"No," she says, with a sharp tone, "I talked to such and such (at the location she bought the items from in the first place) and she told me it would be fine!"

Finally I says, "Alright, then you'll need to go to that location and speak with that person, I won't be able to do the adjustment without charging you another $15 since you won't qualify for the coupon anymore."

She snatches her receipt and takes a pen, turning over the receipt and very obviously scrutinizing my name badge. I shift it so it's easier for her to read, and she writes my name down after a moment of obvious surprise. She asks If I'm working tomorrow, and I reply, certainly, but I won't be able to do that adjustment tomorrow either, and I thank her as she leaves.

What I love about this is that she, much like Customer A, claims to have called the store before hand to verify the legitimacy of her transaction, and claims that she was told that everything would be alright. The problem is that there's a huge difference between, "I recently purchased an item and now it's $10 cheaper, can I come in and get a refund for the difference?" and "I purchased an item 3 weeks ago and now it's $10 dollars cheaper, however, I used a $25 off $25 purchase coupon, so I basically didn't pay for anything, and you'd actually just be paying me $10 for the privileged of having me as a customer." Similarly, I'm sure the average person can spot the difference between, "I have a book, and the receipt, am I able to return it?" and "I bought a book over 9 months ago and I just stumbled across it and now I want to return it, is that ok?"

Now, this is only a small sampling of what I deal with every day. In addition to these today, I had multiple geriatrics that apparently can't find anything on their own, even when right in front of them, or have enormous signs emblazoned specifically with what they want clearly visible from everywhere in the store. I had a customer ask me to help them find an accessory for a product, however they weren't able to tell me what it was, or the model of the product they needed it for, or even what type it was. And many more. Just today.

I don't understand how most of these people find their way out of their homes in the morning.

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

Asteroids Watch

Gaze upon another piece of nerd fashion hardware I want:



Apparently it works from a small accelerometer built into the watch. You twist your wrist, and move your ship, but it will also just play by itself the rest of the time.

Read about it at Boing Boing Gadgets.

Oh, it's the same guy that made the Pong Watch.

Update on the Disc Scritching...

er... Scratching.

So, Kotaku today link a story from Edge regarding the great Microsoft disc scratching epidemic of the 21st century.

Says a representative for Microsoft, "While we have had some users contact us with concerns about scratched discs, it is much less than 1 percent of the total Xbox 360 user base."

That's right, less than 1% according to Microsoft. Of course, 1% of millions is still tens of thousands, however, I have to side with Microsoft on this one (as I'm sure you guessed from the tone of my last post).

The representative goes on to say, "Xbox 360 is designed so that it will not damage a game disc as long as the console is not moved while the disc is spinning. Too much movement of any game console, not just Xbox 360, can cause scratches on a disc."

Now, I have say, as Kotaku pointed out at the end of their post, if a disc is scratched because you moved the console while the disc was spinning after being told not to, is it really Microsoft's fault?

Of course, this age we live in means that even explicit instructions can be ignored and still result in recompense, so I won't claim that there's no case against Microsoft, being stupid is, unfortunately, a reason for people to get paid (bearing in mind that Microsoft's policy is to replace the damaged discs).

Hooray for litigation.

Not only is MC Hammer doing something...

but people seem to care. Joystiq is running a story about MC Hammer because he's apparently involved in a project with Activision.

They cite his Twitter page:

First: "I got one day to recover, then it's LA to Activision to get a glance of a top secrete[sic] project."

A day later: "Activision was fantastic ... action!"

So, from this, they've deduced the following: MC Hammer is still working professionally, and second, that he's involved in some sort of secret project (hopefully not a secreted project) with Activision.


I have to zero in on a completely different angle to this: MC Hammer is still somehow relevant. I'm not entirely sure how, being that I assumed he'd completely faded into obscurity over a decade ago. However, his 12,000+ followers seem interested in his activities. Moreover, Joystiq, a reputable news source to be sure, seems to be interested in reporting this gem.

Perhaps they, like me, have succumbed to morbid curiosity. What could Activision possibly want from the mostly defunct rap artist? Is this a glimpse at a new Guitar Hero? Guitar Hero: 80's Rap Edition?

Who knows. I suppose it's possible we'll find out eventually. When we do, you can be sure I more than likely spout off some opinion about it.

Tuesday, December 16, 2008

Panasonic Remote is Physical Entandre Embodied



First of all, I know that title doesn't really make sense.

I'm all about interesting and unique design. This item certainly qualifies, although in a really unusual manner.

Next Nature shows us a remote concept that is, well, creepy. Next Nature talks about things like 'human-product relationships' and 'A remote is the ideal meaphor for the disturbance electronic distration poses to life.'[sic].

Personally, I don't know about metaphors and relationships as they relate to rubber remote controls that become excited by your imminent touch. Still, I suppose it would be interesting to have.

Monday, December 15, 2008

The Xbox Disc Scandal!



First - Apparently there's some ways you can cause damage to Xbox 360 game discs while it's in your console. Back in 2005, Joystiq was annoyed about some problems with the Xbox 360 console. So annoyed they felt they should make a list, and the damage to the discs made that list in the number 8 spot.

Second - here's a report about a class action lawsuit due to damage to Xbox 360 game discs. Back in 2007, people were up in arms about the occasional damage to their video games.

Finally - Microsoft apparently knew about the the problem early on, and that means they are bad. Apparently they knew, and rather than spend millions to fix the problem, they chose to spend less on just adding information to the user manual that told customers not to do anything to move their console while in use, and then replace discs that were damaged in this manner.

Here's the problem, I've used electronics for many years. I've used optical disc drives in some capacity or another for most of those years. Without ever having read anything to lead me in this direction, I've always assumed that portable devices are meant to move around to some degree, while non-portable devices are not.

I understand that a majority of the problems seems to come from people shifting the orientation of their Xbox's while in use. To me, this seems like simple physics. Two thin layers of plastic sandwiching a thinner layer of pitted aluminum spinning at unnatural speeds should be left to its own.

I remember the sound it would make when I would jostle my old portable CD player, and the scratches that my discs would sustain during the process. I know the scratches that my CDs would sustain in the my car deck when I'd hit a particularly bad pothole or go over a speedbump a bit to quickly.

Why then, does this seem so unbelievable to people?

I understand being frustrated if the problem stems from someone running around too near to the console, but still, I can't say I'm remotely surprised. It seems like most of the people writing and talking about this are acting as though this is completely unacceptable, and you should be able to play hackey sack with the console while in operation and suffer no ill effects.

Statements like this are baffling:

"I regularly move my laptop while its hard disk and DVD drives are spinning, and no damage has occurred yet."


You can't compare the two, they're completely different animals. Besides the obvious differences in the design of the drive, I can't remember of time that I carried my laptop around while the drive was in motion that I wasn't careful throughout the process. Perhaps I'm alone in this, and most people burn DVD Movies while defragmenting their hard drives and using their laptops for a rousing game of four sqaure...

I've completely lost my train of thought.

Anyway, I've probably made my point. I don't really remember. I'm going to back to recovering from surgery.

Bush vs. Shoe - The Flash Game...

Alright, either the folks over at Enterprise are either very efficient in the ways of Flash-fu, or they are truly seers and prophets.

Less than 24 hours after the now infamous Iraq Press Conference Shoe Dodging Incident, they have created a Flash game about it. Bush's Boot Camp is a terrible game, but it gets points for speed.

I will say, I'm amazed that the guy was able to get not one, but two shoes off before anyone (but the president) reacted. I'm guessing the secret service's interest in the president's safety is directly tied to his approval rating. I will also say that I am also amazed by the President's reaction time.