Unsigned Events & Occurrences [Archive] - Page 3

bonz

4 Feb 2009, 15:25

an ex-coworker is apparently having troubles with his wife. seeing as me and MY wife are friends with them he's asked to room with us while they do a trial separation thing.

this shouldn't be too much of a problem as we got along just fine and he works off-shore anyway, so he'll only be here for 10 days out of the month. it WILL, however, be an interesting experience.

I sincerely hope this situation doesn't go all crazy and stupid....
I hope one of them is not the co-worker with the scabies. :eek:

Akuryou13

4 Feb 2009, 16:30

I hope one of them is not the co-worker with the scabies. :eek:HA! no :p these are former coworkers.

bonz

4 Feb 2009, 20:41

HA! no :p these are former coworkers.
What did they contract then? Rabies? :D

Vader

4 Feb 2009, 21:10

coworkers

Every time I see this (twice now) I think it says cow orkers.

(o\|/ forever! Woooo!

Error404

5 Feb 2009, 03:34

What? At aku's work they contract babies!?:confused:

Akuryou13

5 Feb 2009, 04:05

What? At aku's work they contract babies!?:confused:YES! :eek:

Vader

5 Feb 2009, 21:50

At my work we expand babies. With hydrogen.

Star Worms

5 Feb 2009, 23:09

At my work we expand babies. With hydrogen.

And then light them?

Vader

6 Feb 2009, 01:49

We let them float around for a bit first but yes.

Error404

6 Feb 2009, 02:18

Funny as i always thought you used helium for that... :confused:

But i guess that would make their crying absolutely unbareable... with the high pitch and all that...

Vader

6 Feb 2009, 02:40

I meant on water. Probably. Yeah, let's go with that. Unless hydrogen does make babies float in the air, in which case I meant that.

Either way, there's much baby bursting goodness at my company :)

Pickleworm

6 Feb 2009, 09:48

Funny as i always thought you used helium for that... :confused:

But i guess that would make their crying absolutely unbareable... with the high pitch and all that...

Hydrogen would give them even higher-pitched voices, wouldn't it? Or am I not understanding the whole thing

bonz

6 Feb 2009, 11:17

Hydrogen would give them even higher-pitched voices, wouldn't it? Or am I not understanding the whole thing
Most likely, since hydrogen is two times less dense than helium.

But the crucial factor is that hydrogen is highly flammable, while the helium is inert.
So, if you want good and safe fun, you use helium.
If you want real, Lakehurst-style fun, you use hydrogen. :rolleyes:

Zero72

7 Feb 2009, 18:25

I nearly went out to attend a sort of partyish occasion for a friend of mine's 21st birthday, basically doing a bar-hopping sort of thing, but I'm now gonna end up sitting it out because I can't get a ride, would almost definitely get lost if I tried to drive myself and then wouldn't be able to drink, and most importantly, have suddenly taken to not feeling well, and threw up a little while ago. So now I'm staying home.

I'm a little relieved. I mean, I'd really like to see all of my friends outside of work for a change, but preferably not in a drunken stumbling far-away-from-home kind of way.

Vader

10 Feb 2009, 14:01

I am either supremely lazy or a genius:

1.) Put bread in toaster.
2.) Put lump of cheese in bowl.
3.) Toast bread. Meanwhile, melt cheese in microwave (mine is 700W and it takes 1m, stir, 30s - adjust for your oven/lump of cheese)
4.) When the toast pops, pour melted cheese on one slice.
5.) Add ham and the other slice to the top of the cheese.
6.) ...
7.) Profit.

Ham and cheese toastie in around 4 minutes with very little washing up.

AndrewTaylor

10 Feb 2009, 19:03

Does your toaster have a 'bagel' setting? My parents' does. It only does one side of each slice. I reckon that'd by good for your Toastie Schematic.

Vader

10 Feb 2009, 19:49

Unfortunately it doesn't, which is surprising for a £50 Dualit (well, we got it half price but still).

We used to have "toastie bags" which were teflon bags you'd put a sandwich in which would then go in the toaster. The problem was that the cheese would drool down to the bottom of the bag and it's come out all mingin'.

Star Worms

10 Feb 2009, 21:24

Does your toaster have a 'bagel' setting? My parents' does. It only does one side of each slice. I reckon that'd by good for your Toastie Schematic.My mum's has a bagel setting but it chooses to toast both sides regardless.

Vader

10 Feb 2009, 21:28

Just put half a slice in (the left half in the left slot, for example) and then stick the other half to it with butter once it's toasted.

Done.

MrBunsy

10 Feb 2009, 23:24

What's wrong with a grill?

Akuryou13

11 Feb 2009, 00:55

Pickleworm

11 Feb 2009, 06:31

what sin is there against having both sides of the bread be crispy, for that matter? is this some law I'm not familiar with? I mean, I would much prefer a slice of bread to be ALL crispy for that sort of thing. I would think it'd be odd to try to hold it otherwise.

I'm with you on this one. Toasting one side of things is for bagels and english muffins. You toast bread all over.

Vader

11 Feb 2009, 11:24

What's wrong with a grill?

It takes longer and requies more washing up afterwards.

I'm with you on this one. Toasting one side of things is for bagels and english muffins. You toast bread all over.

I think everyone agrees on that, don't they? Isn't that the point in having a bagel setting?

Akuryou13

11 Feb 2009, 11:26

I think everyone agrees on that, don't they? Isn't that the point in having a bagel setting?then what are you on about with the toastie bag or whatever? why the discussion about a bagel setting to only toast one side?

Vader

11 Feb 2009, 11:34

Generally a toastie is made by placing a sandwich into a toastie maker, melting the filling and toasting the outside of the sandwich. In this example only one side of the bread is toasted.

The toastie bag requires both sides of the slot's elements to be on as you insert the entire sandwich (in a bag) into the slot. Therefore, a similar effect to that of a toastie maker is achieved.

Under normal circumstances you'd use your bagel setting for bagels and stuff, not bread/toast, and not for toastie making in a bag, either.

Andrew suggested I use the bagel setting because I don't have a toasie bag. This would mean I can achieve the same effect as a toastie maker but in my toaster.

Nobody is saying toast is better half done. Keep up, old sock!

Akuryou13

11 Feb 2009, 11:50

ah. I think I understand what you guys were going for now.

bonz

11 Feb 2009, 13:01

I have a shell-like plate grill that allows simultaneous grilling from both sides or from one side.
It also has removeable, teflon-coated, dishwasher-suitable plates.

Something like this:
http://www.kochkg.de/bilder/westfalia/252957.jpg

AndrewTaylor

11 Feb 2009, 19:07

Well, I think this confirms my 'Everything Is Complicated On The Internet' theory.

MtlAngelus

13 Feb 2009, 21:45

bonz

13 Feb 2009, 21:59

http://www.speedtest.net/result/410499931.png

I have a 16Mbit connection, which supposedly was upgraded to 25Mbit since beginning of the February.
My upload speed was 960kbit/s before, so it seems the upgrade has already been applied.
But recently, I hardly reach any download speeds near the 10Mbit barrier. :(

Incidentally, my contract runs out on February 26th, so I might be able to exert some pressure on them if they don't want to lose a customer. :-/

MtlAngelus

13 Feb 2009, 22:08

I hate you.

thomasp

13 Feb 2009, 22:31

I'm going to miss my uni halls connection when I graduate :(

http://www.speedtest.net/result/410519088.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

Lagging a bit tonight - usually get 10Mbit up & down...

Star Worms

13 Feb 2009, 22:31

Just had my internet connection upgraded to a 2mbit connection.
Speed test results:
http://www.speedtest.net/result/410491544.png

The upload speed seems to have stayed about the same tho.

The downside to this is that we are going to cancel the other internet connection we had that was used by the rest of the family, and I'm gonna have to share with my family again. :PThat's quick for 2Mbit...

But then I think that's because it's legal for ISPs in the UK to scam advertise "up to xMbit". Therefore they make it so that 99% of the time it's only doing 1/4xMbit.

MtlAngelus

13 Feb 2009, 22:38

That's quick for 2Mbit...

But then I think that's because it's legal for ISPs in the UK to scam advertise "up to xMbit". Therefore they make it so that 99% of the time it's only doing 1/4xMbit.

I'm fairly sure that's legal here too. :p But this company seems to be nice. Much better than ****ty telmex and their ****ty service.

MrBunsy

13 Feb 2009, 23:29

I wish there was a law forcing them to charge you for the speed you actually get rather than the max speed.

In other news, it appears adding a lump of real chocolate to hot chocolate doesn't work nearly as well as I'd hoped.

worMatty

13 Feb 2009, 23:36

In the UK you pay for a MaxDSL connection which is capable of speeds up to 8Mbps. Considering this is usually wholly affected by the quality of the line to your house and the tie pair BT Wholesale have allocated to the ISP, the only true variable for them is your contention ratio and their Acceptable Use Policy or any data transfer limits they impose. Considering the prices we used to pay for pay-per-minute subscription dial-up (yes, subscription charge and the cost of the call) I'm not complaining about the lack of variable pricing. ISPs will occasionally charge you less if your line is capable of a typical ADSL profile only, though.

http://www.samknows.com/broadband for information about your local exchange, including ADSL2+ upgrade schedules!

SupSuper

14 Feb 2009, 03:42

If the rate was variable, I'd be downloading from the slowest sites ever just to save money.

MrBunsy

14 Feb 2009, 10:14

Well, not the rate you get at any one time, but your actual maximum rate due to the quality of cable and equipment. They must surely know what it actually is, so why can't they charge for that?

worMatty

14 Feb 2009, 20:21

AndrewTaylor

14 Feb 2009, 21:09

BT Wholesale deals in quantity when it comes to tie pairs, not quality. Why should an ISP charge a customer less when it means a definite reduction in profit, when they can just generalise their pricing along with the rest of the industry, forcing everyone to pay more?

Generally, when you switch from fixed to variable pricing, the price of the best thing goes up. The total income ought remain constant, although obviously people will change their habits when the price changes.

Frankly, I'd be less than impressed if my bills went up because some whining nerd two streets away noticed I had a faster connection than him. I'd be happy to have a much slower connection than I have if I got to pay less but until that choice is available I don't see why my bills should be different to anyone else's. Then it's just a postcode lottery.

Okay, so we have that anyway because of connection speeds but... oh, who cares? It'd take longer to fix it than it will for everyone to get mobile broadband anyway, and that won't be affected by local cable quality.

bonz

14 Feb 2009, 21:25

As for me, I actually want to pay the money for a faster connection.
I'm aware that those speeds will hardly be reached and that it's a shared medium (cable) and it'll be slower at certain times when more users are online in my area.

What písses me off though, is when I can't even get the speeds of the next lower priced (and lower speed-limited) product for considerable amounts of time, especially the evening, which is the time I use the internet most.
What use is it to me that I can nearly reach the maximum past midnight, where I'm in bed?

SomePerson

14 Feb 2009, 21:26

UCLA kicks @$$ (I think i've posted this before)

http://www.speedtest.net/result/330605831.png

Although that has only happened once, I usually get a lot less :(

http://www.speedtest.net/result/411086754.png

Although frankly I don't get much use out of my connection. My roommate on the other hand seeds via torrent by the terrabyte.....

SomePerson

14 Feb 2009, 21:32

But actually what's really dumb is that at home we're on a 384kbps DSL line. We're on an old contract we've had to renew, so we pay an outrageous sum for this connection. The ISP claims we're now outside the service range, however that makes sense, and won't let us upgrade our contract, saying that we're essentially grandfathered into having DSL and that if we didn't already have it they wouldn't give it to us.

Which makes no sense at all.

Funny thing though is that if we were to upgrade, we could get twice the speed for less than half the price we pay now.

I keep telling my parents to whine to the company and threaten to switch to cable, but they're too passive and are fine to have the ISP walk all over them. :p

Star Worms

15 Feb 2009, 10:51

UCLA kicks @$$ (I think i've posted this before)

http://www.speedtest.net/result/330605831.png

I hate you :p

"Up to" 8Mbps:
http://www.speedtest.net/result/411431257.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
:(

Paul.Power

15 Feb 2009, 12:33

Bad news: http://a18.ogplanet.com/news.og?view=readevent&menu=event&num=1212
Good news: http://www.ntreev.net/News/AnnouncementsView.aspx?no=47

Best case scenario: Ntreev will successfully transfer all the user accounts from OGPlanet's servers to their own. Such a move would also probably hasten the arrival of Season 4.

Worst case scenario: Despite their efforts, Ntreev can't transfer all the user accounts, and we lose all the time and/or money spent building up our characters.

Fingers crossed, I guess.

Zero72

15 Feb 2009, 12:46

Wait. ...Wait. What. So they're shutting down the game, and some other guys are trying to keep it up?

...I had freaking better not lose everything I put into that damn game, real money inclusive.

SupSuper

15 Feb 2009, 17:18

Wait. ...Wait. What. So they're shutting down the game, and some other guys are trying to keep it up?

...I had freaking better not lose everything I put into that damn game, real money inclusive.Well from the looks of it, Ntreev (the original author of Pangya) actually has an american division now so they're taking the english version back into their hands, no longer needing OGPlanet to play "middle-man".

The good news is, we might actually get Season 4 now that it's all run by the same company. Plus double experience until OGPlanet shuts it down. :p

The bad news is, of course, if the transfer goes bad. And the new localization might take time getting used to.

FutureWorm

16 Feb 2009, 18:47

My roommate on the other hand seeds via torrent by the terrabyte.....

i'm surprised they don't throttle stuff like that

bandwidthchat: my family's going to be getting fiber optic sometime in march, so i'll have wicked fast internet when i go home for the summer. pretty pumped about that

Star Worms

26 Feb 2009, 17:57

AndrewTaylor

26 Feb 2009, 18:27

As I'm sure many of you know, Google Mail displays a little ad above the emails i your inbox along a single line. This is one that just appeared for me:

Discovery News Top Stories : Discovery Channel - Wolves (and Dogs) Poo in Prominent Places - 1 day ago

Err... what?!

That's not an ad. That's from one of its default RSS feeds. You can turn it off -- the settings call it 'web clips'. (Some things up there are ads, but that one's not.)

Vader

27 Feb 2009, 16:45

RSS = arses, except RSS is great and I'm not that big a fan of arses.

While my girlfriend co-ran a dog walking company, dogs would often poo in our lounge. That's quite prominent, right? I mean, you can see and smell it almost instantly. I mean, we've not found any poo hidden in obscure places where you might find cat feces.

Ah, well observed. I have nothing of value to add to this thread.

Akuryou13

5 Mar 2009, 15:08

...well, I just signed up for facebook....bleh....

stupid T17 and their updating on it :-/

worMatty

5 Mar 2009, 21:43

Add me! wormatty@gmail.com

Akuryou13

6 Mar 2009, 03:09

Add me! wormatty@gmail.comdone .

Xinos

7 Mar 2009, 15:58

...well, I just signed up for facebook....bleh....

I'm sorry to hear that.

Akuryou13

7 Mar 2009, 15:59

I'm sorry to hear that.well, at least it's better than when I signed up for myspace :p

FutureWorm

7 Mar 2009, 21:48

well, at least it's better than when I signed up for myspace :p
that was a hilarious meltdown

worMatty

7 Mar 2009, 21:49

well, at least it's better than when I signed up for myspace :p

You did WHAT? Ho... oh wait, didn't we cover this?

Vader

11 Mar 2009, 11:58

Does your toaster have a 'bagel' setting? My parents' does. It only does one side of each slice. I reckon that'd by good for your Toastie Schematic.

I just figured out the perfect workaround for those without a 'bagel' setting (me).

By putting two slices of toast in one slot, the inside of the sandwich stays untoasted. No wait, untoasted isn't a word. Raw? No, because it's bread, not dough.

Anyway... YUM.

thomasp

11 Mar 2009, 15:11

No wait, untoasted isn't a word. Raw?
Soggy?

Unless you're using stale bread. But why would you be doing that :p

Vader

11 Mar 2009, 15:14

Bread isn't usually soggy unless it's come into contact with liquid. Besides, wouldn't the toaster dry it out?

I guess if it was really soggy it could short the toaster. That wouldn't be good eating, no matter how much molten cheese was laid upon it.

bonz

11 Mar 2009, 16:03

Bread isn't usually soggy unless it's come into contact with liquid. Besides, wouldn't the toaster dry it out?
The liquid comes from the dough of the bread itself.
It will only dry out if it can evaporate to the air when toasting/heating.
Between two slices of toast stuffed into a toaster, there's hardly any space to evaporate, thus the steam makes the toast soggy.

Star Worms

11 Mar 2009, 18:53

I used to make toasties in the microwave: Put cheese in the middle of 2 toast slices and stick it in the microwave. The problem is that the bottom slice goes soggy.

AndrewTaylor

11 Mar 2009, 23:26

Bread isn't usually soggy unless it's come into contact with liquid.
Interesting.

PS. Posting in Unsigned Events, which is to say not married; not been dumped.

bloopy

12 Mar 2009, 04:42

No wait, untoasted isn't a word.

Yes it is.

Squirminator2k

12 Mar 2009, 05:25

I'm an immature fool who doesn't plan for his future. I make rash decisions and on the rare occasion I think something through from beginning to end, I don't stick to it.

And that's got to change.

bonz

12 Mar 2009, 22:53

I used to make toasties in the microwave: Put cheese in the middle of 2 toast slices and stick it in the microwave. The problem is that the bottom slice goes soggy.
Solution:
One of these tripod grids that normally get shipped with microwave ovens that have a built-in infra-red grill.
http://imagesa.ciao.com/ide/images/products/normal/774/product-1194774.jpg

Vader

13 Mar 2009, 15:40

The liquid comes from the dough of the bread itself.
It will only dry out if it can evaporate to the air when toasting/heating.
Between two slices of toast stuffed into a toaster, there's hardly any space to evaporate, thus the steam makes the toast soggy.

Ah, I see what he meant now. All I can say is that the method does work and the toastie isn't too soggy in the middle. :)

Paul.Power

14 Mar 2009, 14:13

So I've talked to my mentor and senior mentor at my current school, and they really think that I'd be better off if I was teaching in sixth form college or FE college, as opposed to a school. And to be honest, I agree with them. It suits my strengths (subject knowledge, an enthusiasm for more advanced maths topics, general friendliness) and weaknesses (classroom management, breaking down topics for teaching the less able pupils). And in terms of "dream job" ness, I would rather work in sixth form/FE. So my heart and head both say yes there.

There are a number of practical issues though:

1. I did show interesting in specialising in FE initially, but they said that the only college they had a partnership with was Gorseinon - which was where I did my A-Levels, and they don't want you training somewhere you used to be as a pupil/student. I guess all I can do is ask if a) they'll let me go there anyway or b) they can put me at another sixth form/FE college.

2. Well, obviously I'll have missed two or three weeks at the FE college, not to mention missed a lot of time with the uni's FE Professional Studies group.

3. There are fewer jobs in it, and the jobs pay less. To be honest I don't mind sacrificing that for a job that I'd know I could do and that I'd be happy in.

Anyway, I'm going to ask my tutor if I can switch when he visits on Tuesday. If I can't, I can continue with my current school. But my mentors reckon it might be a struggle.

Alien King

14 Mar 2009, 15:35

Doesn't the play fluctuate though? There are times when FE teachers earn more than school teachers, or is that not the case at all?

MtlAngelus

18 Mar 2009, 20:43

So my granparents were sued by their former cleaning lady.

Here's how it went: About a week or so ago she needed a money loan(they had loaned her money before, and she had always paid back in parts) and my aunt was asleep at that moment. She woke her up to ask for the money. Some time later, my aunt told my grandmother about this, and my grandma got furious and scolded the cleaning lady telling her that how dare she wake up her daughter, that she needed to sleep because she works early and then proceeded to tell her that they will never ever loan her money again.
The cleaning lady felt insulted by this(doh?), and left. And now she is suing them.

I honestly think both sides are wrong. Obviously my grandma's reaction was wrong, you shouldn't treat people like that, particularly for such a petty reason(nobody dies out of missing a bit of sleep). It's even worse in this case because the cleaning lady has been working there for years now, and they've never had any problems with her as far as I know.
On the other hand, pursuing this in court is stupid. She wasn't fired. She could get some sort of compensation for the years worked there, but my grandparents never even denied her one. The lawyers will cost her money too...
My grandparents are willing to give her some compensation, but it will be rather miserable(presumably a lot less than what she has been led to believe she deserves by whoever is helping her in this case), and they are only willing if she drops the case. Should she continue they will opt to fight back, which will most likely make this issue drag on for ages...

I'll never understand why people have that urge to make a huge deal out of stupid little events.

worMatty

18 Mar 2009, 21:58

Suing them why?

MtlAngelus

18 Mar 2009, 23:45

I'm not exactly sure about that. It also turns up she wants $30,000.00 Mexican Pesos, which would equate to around $2000 USD. Which is really ridiculous.

SupSuper

19 Mar 2009, 00:07

Yeah I don't get it either. Can you sue people for not loaning you money now?

bonz

19 Mar 2009, 00:18

But why?
Is she suing them because they didn't loan money?
They're not a bank. And even banks can deny credit as they please, AFAIK.

Why did she wake your aunt if she wanted to loan money from your grandparents?
Completely untactful if you want something from somebody and then get píssed because you're told off and sue.

If your grandparents haven't fired her, she surely hasn't any chance anyway I guess.
Let her hit concrete.

AndrewTaylor

19 Mar 2009, 00:29

No, because she felt insulted. People are always suing for that. She'll call it 'mental anguish'. I don't think it works half as often as the news implies.

Vader

19 Mar 2009, 09:34

No, because she felt insulted. People are always suing for that. She'll call it 'mental anguish'. I don't think it works half as often as the news implies.

Hey, I wonder if I can sue my old place of work for the same thing... do you think Claims "R" Us would handle that sort of case?

Pickleworm

8 Apr 2009, 02:48

I didn't get into the university I was hoping (University of Chicago), but I did get into three solid choices and I've become quite wooed by Boston University's physics program. They have a bonus combo deal major that combines physics classes with philosophy classes and it sounds positively lovely :D

FutureWorm

8 Apr 2009, 06:17

Paul.Power

8 Apr 2009, 16:00

I can't help but feel that the entire population of the Earth could sue someone for "mental anguish"...

Xinos

9 Apr 2009, 13:07

Everybody could sue their mothers for the traumatic experience of being born.

Vader

9 Apr 2009, 13:14

And every mother could counter-sue for the traumatic experience of childbirth.

thomasp

9 Apr 2009, 13:23

And then the fathers could sue the mother and child for being left out of this whole sueing nonsense and consequently feeling neglected.

Vader

9 Apr 2009, 13:27

Wait, who ends up better off, then? The father?

Bearing in mind that every father and mother is also a child of someone, though their parents may be dead, and not every child of someone is a mother or father.

GO GO GO GO!

thomasp

9 Apr 2009, 13:28

Wait, who ends up better off, then?

The lawyers :p

Vader

9 Apr 2009, 13:33

But they are also sons/daughters and potentially mothers/fathers, so they'd be getting sued a load, too.

Nobody would be safe!

Alien King

9 Apr 2009, 14:22

Wait, who ends up better off, then?

Patricides and matricides. They're fine.
So long as they don't have children that is.

AndrewTaylor

10 Apr 2009, 12:50

But they are also sons/daughters and potentially mothers/fathers, so they'd be getting sued a load, too.

Nobody would be safe!

I think the logical conclusion of this is that the best lawyer would end up with all of the money.

SupSuper

10 Apr 2009, 21:59

I think the logical conclusion of this is that the best lawyer would end up with all of the money.Don't they already?

KRD

11 Apr 2009, 03:52

I... that's not the way I saw it.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c7/Two-faceEckhart.jpg

FutureWorm

11 Apr 2009, 06:51

I... that's not the way I saw it.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c7/Two-faceEckhart.jpg
the cgi people did a good job of making his face horrific, but not too much

Vader

19 Apr 2009, 18:43

I have suggested a few zombie myths for the Mythbusters team to work on.
View the post (http://community.discovery.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9701967776/m/35419621101) and then reply to make it sound really popular so they make a Mythbusters Zombies Special. :cool:

edit: you have to register with their forum to post but not to read the post, by the way.

MtlAngelus

20 Apr 2009, 00:08

I don't think it would work out. There's are not many established concepts about zombies that could be entertaining enough to test, let alone be tested at all.

AndrewTaylor

20 Apr 2009, 00:46

Why would there be a pain-relieving chemical in the brain? There are no pain receptors in the brain: brains cannot feel pain (except obviously for pain signals transmitted from parts of the body that can).

Vader

20 Apr 2009, 11:10

I don't think it would work out. There's are not many established concepts about zombies that could be entertaining enough to test, let alone be tested at all.

But... zombies are always entertaining.

Why would there be a pain-relieving chemical in the brain? There are no pain receptors in the brain: brains cannot feel pain (except obviously for pain signals transmitted from parts of the body that can).

Paracetamol cannot feel pain, yet it can relieve it. Also, the brain can release serotonin; perhaps zombies feed on that to make them feel less pain (it could, after all be physical or emotional pain which they feel).

Anyway it's all moot as it looks like my thread got deleted or something, which seems unlikely to me but also seems to be the case. :( :(

Xinos

20 Apr 2009, 14:12

Paracetamol cannot feel pain, yet it can relieve it. Also, the brain can release serotonin; perhaps zombies feed on that to make them feel less pain (it could, after all be physical or emotional pain which they feel).

Anyway it's all moot as it looks like my thread got deleted or something, which seems unlikely to me but also seems to be the case. :( :(

The brain produces other chemicals than just serotonin.. so the Zombies must somehow figure out exactly what part of the brain they need to chew on. Zombies are too dumb to pull that off, though maybe an ex brain surgeon zombie could. :p

Vader

20 Apr 2009, 14:23

The brain produces other chemicals than just serotonin..

I'm aware of that, though I felt using one example would be a better use of everyone's time than listing every chemical present in the brain.

so the Zombies must somehow figure out exactly what part of the brain they need to chew on. Zombies are too dumb to pull that off, though maybe an ex brain surgeon zombie could. :p

No, they just eat the whole thing or as much as is possible, at least.

Xinos

20 Apr 2009, 15:01

So what, they are immune to everything else?

Vader

20 Apr 2009, 17:37

You can only kill a zombie by destroying the brain, though that's not to say that can't be more or less effective than one another due to intake of vital... let's call them 'nutrients'.

Star Worms

20 Apr 2009, 19:12

Why don't zombies eat eachother?

SupSuper

20 Apr 2009, 19:59

I assume because their rotten flesh is past edible.

Vader

20 Apr 2009, 20:38

They do sometimes but fresh meat is always better!

bonz

20 Apr 2009, 21:04

Would completely draining a zombie's blood kill it?
Would flash freezing kill a zombie?
Would an encephalitis kill a zombie?
...

Alien King

20 Apr 2009, 22:07

Would completely draining a zombie's blood kill it?
Would flash freezing kill a zombie?
Would an encephalitis kill a zombie?
...

If "World War Z" is to be believed; no.

Xinos

21 Apr 2009, 09:05

How do you kill that which has no life?

Vader

21 Apr 2009, 11:12

How do you kill that which has no life?

You can't kill what's already dead. That much we know but what you've failed to realise is that if, say, you were to turn into a zombie you would first have to die. Xinos --> dead Xinos --> undead Xinos (not really Xinos at all).

I don't think there's a word more appropriate for destroying a zombie than "killing". That's probably why people wonder if you can kill the undead, in those words.

I like your thinking, bonz, however I know I can answer at least one of those using movie facts (let's face it, whilst zombie mythology is pretty consistent across all the media in which they appear, movie facts are about as close to 100% FACT we can get):

Would completely draining a zombie's blood kill it?

Realistically, zombies rarely bleed. Most of the splatter you'd see would be decomposing flesh, not blood. Upon death of a person the blood would likely pool at the lowest point of the body, forming a massive bruise which would later coagulate and eventually dry up completely.

Would flash freezing kill a zombie?

Many zombies have been seen in deep freeze of some sort, whether it's chemical 'pickling' or being hung in a walk-in freezer. Both come back to life.

Would an encephalitis kill a zombie?

I guess it depends, really. They need their brain as is evident from the fact that destroying it kills them, but whether they could die from the pressure caused by a swollen brain, I'm not sure. It would probably make headshots more explosive, though, due to the increased pressure in an enclosed space with a sudden release.

Just in case any of you wondered: I am obsessed.

Star Worms

21 Apr 2009, 17:34

Is a zombie's brain protected from necrosis?

Vader

21 Apr 2009, 18:03

I don't know enough about medical stuff to say for sure, but I think not. I think the reanimated cells of the undead are susceptible to redeath, as older, more decomposed zombies will eventually die from lack of sustenance.

Also, "redeath" might not be an accurate term. I just made it up, as far as I'm aware. I like it, though. :)

MtlAngelus

21 Apr 2009, 19:54

We found a stray kitten at work yesterday. Brought it home. That place is really not safe for kittens. :p

Xinos

21 Apr 2009, 20:45

We found a stay kitten at work yesterday. Brought it home. That place is really not safe for kittens. :p

How were you able to move it?

Alien King

21 Apr 2009, 22:56

Is a zombie's brain protected from necrosis?

Is a zombie's body immune to necrosis? If not, it's fairly harmless after a while.
And since death is defined to be the point where all brain activity ceases due to total necrosis of the neurons, the zombies wouldn't be dead if they were protected from necrosis.

Vader

21 Apr 2009, 23:05

Necrosis can only affect living tissue. The undead have already become braindead and are then reanimated. They are not living, their cells do not regenerate and therefore they cannot suffer from necrosis.

The person (or animal) who became the zombie could, but not the zombies themselves.

That's my reckoning, anyway.

MtlAngelus

21 Apr 2009, 23:07

How were you able to move it?

The kitten? Picked it up and brought it home.

Star Worms

22 Apr 2009, 10:26

And since death is defined to be the point where all brain activity ceases due to total necrosis of the neurons, the zombies wouldn't be dead if they were protected from necrosis.Well actually it's not defined as that :p

Alien King

22 Apr 2009, 18:01

Well actually it's not defined as that :p

Fine. :p It's a hazy definition at best.

Today, where a definition of the moment of death is required, doctors and coroners usually turn to "brain death" or "biological death"; people are considered dead when the electrical activity in their brain ceases.

Brain death is a legal definition of death that emerged in the 1960s, as the ability to resuscitate individuals and mechanically keep the heart and lungs functioning became prevalent. In simple terms, brain death is the irreversible end of all brain activity (including involuntary activity necessary to sustain life) due to total necrosis of the cerebral neurons following loss of blood flow and oxygenation.

Yay for mass Wikipedia quoting!

Necrosis can only affect living tissue. The undead have already become braindead and are then reanimated. They are not living, their cells do not regenerate and therefore they cannot suffer from necrosis.

If they operate with a necrotic brain, then how on earth could they be vulnerable to any form of damage? They clearly don't need any functioning body part if they're able to function with a body suffering from necrosis.

Xinos

22 Apr 2009, 18:41

The kitten? Picked it up and brought it home.

My joke doesn't work now that you fixed the spelling mistake :(

Vader

22 Apr 2009, 18:42

If they operate with a necrotic brain, then how on earth could they be vulnerable to any form of damage? They clearly don't need any functioning body part if they're able to function with a body suffering from necrosis.

Um... zombies don't actually exist. I think the reason for that is the impossibility behind the mechanics of undead beings. There's no way for me to explain that away; all I've tried to do so far is fill in some of the gaps in the mythology.

Actually, sod it, I'll give it a bash:

The reason the dead come back to life as zombies is never wholly explained across the board. Each case has an individual explanation, though many of them share properties with one another. Commonly the dead are revived due to some chemical or serum being introduced to the dead body in question, which suggests it is the chemical compound thereof which either sustains their life or kick starts the body into reanimation.

Now, we know from experience that zombies continue to decompose once they've been reanimated, so it's a fairly safe assumption to make that their cells are not regenerating. This probably also applies to the brain and that:
a) coincides with the fact that zombies die after a while of not feeding
b) conflicts with the fact of their brains being required

Having read up on necrosis very briefly on Wikipedia, the first thing it says is "necrosis is the name given to premature death of cells and living tissue". Technically speaking cells which die after the death of the entity which harboured them wouldn't be consider necrotic, since it's not a premature death of cells.

So, with that in mind I think it's within the logical realms of zombie mythology that their brains can't suffer from necrosis, though they can deteriorate over time. Let's face it, a zombie's brain isn't exactly fully functional; they shuffle about, murmuring nonesense, with no creativity or thoughts of their own, their only drive being to consume more brains.

I think it would be foolish to assume that just because the brain is required by a zombie it is fresh and alive. It sounds like you're confusing "undead" with "undone death", or rather that a zombie's not a reanimated corpse but someone who has died and come back to life as though they never died in the first place.

I'm quite glad I bothered now. I ****ing love talking about zombies.

Star Worms

22 Apr 2009, 20:03

Having read up on necrosis very briefly on Wikipedia, the first thing it says is "necrosis is the name given to premature death of cells and living tissue". Technically speaking cells which die after the death of the entity which harboured them wouldn't be consider necrotic, since it's not a premature death of cells.Necrosis is basically the death of anything living: be that a human, a tree branch etc. Cells which die after the death of the entity are still necrotic. For example, fungi are necrotrophic and feed on dead matter. The entity itself does not matter.

So, with that in mind I think it's within the logical realms of zombie mythology that their brains can't suffer from necrosis, though they can deteriorate over time. Let's face it, a zombie's brain isn't exactly fully functional; they shuffle about, murmuring nonesense, with no creativity or thoughts of their own, their only drive being to consume more brains.Why does their behaviour change in that case? Is this due to necrotic lesions in the brain, or some other effect?

Do zombies age? What is their life expectancy from the point when a person turns into a zombie, and does the original person's age make a difference?

I'm quite glad I bothered now. I ****ing love talking about zombies.Psychopath.

Vader

22 Apr 2009, 21:32

Necrosis is basically the death of anything living: be that a human, a tree branch etc. Cells which die after the death of the entity are still necrotic. For example, fungi are necrotrophic and feed on dead matter. The entity itself does not matter.

In that case I suppose zombies do suffer necrosis.

Why does their behaviour change in that case? Is this due to necrotic lesions in the brain, or some other effect?

I think their brains don't function on account of the tissue being reanimated but containing no soul.

Do zombies age? What is their life expectancy from the point when a person turns into a zombie, and does the original person's age make a difference?

They don't age, per sé, but they do decompose. The more fresh the zombie, the less impacting rigor mortis is, for example, I guess.

Psychopath.

Homo.

Paul.Power

23 Apr 2009, 09:54

Petition for thread title change to "Unsigned Events, Occurrences & Zombies"

bonz

23 Apr 2009, 12:30

Um... zombies don't actually exist.
Hmm.
In real life, aren't zombies made from living persons by Caribbean voodoo priestesses by the use of some secret drug potions, that put the victim in some sort of comatose and/or hypnotic state, where they will do everything the priestess tells them?

At least that's what some people claim. (Similar to alien abductors.)
And what GTA San Andreas tells us.

Vader

23 Apr 2009, 12:47

Yes, bonz, you're correct. The original definition of a zombie is a slave who is mind controlled through one form or another. Modern day zombies which stick to this definiton could be considered all those who believe everything they see on TV, those who have been institutionalised, and possibly those who have been hypnotised.

The definition we're discussing is the reanimated dead. Walking corpses, if you will. When there is no more room in Hell, the dead shall walk the earth. Those types of zombie don't exist, much to my dismay.

Petition for thread title change to "Unsigned Events, Occurrences & Zombies"

Motion for the thread title to change to "Undead Events & Occurrences". Or what Paul said. Either is cool :)

FutureWorm

25 Apr 2009, 18:23

The kitten? Picked it up and brought it home.

did you take pictures?

MtlAngelus

25 Apr 2009, 21:54

did you take pictures?

Nope, but the kitten is living on the backyard so I could still take pictures. I'll grab one next time I have my camera in hand.

FutureWorm

25 Apr 2009, 22:10

Nope, but the kitten is living on the backyard so I could still take pictures. I'll grab one next time I have my camera in hand.
huzzah :)

Vader

26 Apr 2009, 00:56

We might be getting a kitten in a few months...

Might.

KITTEN!

philby4000

27 Apr 2009, 20:08

We might be getting a kitten in a few months...

Might.

KITTEN!

I should be getting a kitten in a few weeks!

Which is cool because one of our cats decided it would have nothing more to do with us and moved into someone elses' house. He still turns up for food occasionally.:p

MtlAngelus

28 Apr 2009, 00:29

Swine flu epidemic in Mexico!

Now we all have to wear surgical masks for protection, classes have been suspended all over the country, and movie premiere's have been delayed. I still have to go to work tho, but at least I can look silly by having a surgical mask with a custom comical mouth drawn in it. :cool:

I haven't been paying much attention over how many cases have been found where and how many people have died, so my opinion is probably entirely wrong, but I think people are overreacting quite a bit.

worMatty

28 Apr 2009, 00:38

Swine flu? Was ist das?

MtlAngelus

28 Apr 2009, 06:05

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swine_flu

SomePerson

28 Apr 2009, 06:26

People are kinda freaking out about it over here due to our proximity to Mexico, but I'm not too worried myself. I think this will be like SARS and West Nile and a few people will get it but on the whole not much will happen.

Vader

28 Apr 2009, 10:46

I haven't been paying much attention over how many cases have been found where and how many people have died, so my opinion is probably entirely wrong, but I think people are overreacting quite a bit.

Seconded.

It all seems too sudden and overblown to be realistic.

bonz

28 Apr 2009, 11:36

AFAIK, there already died 150 people in Mexico, and over 2000 are in treatment.
There have been confirmed cases in Spain and Scotland, all of whom are in quarantine and are
responding well on the treatment.
In New York and Canada are some infected people too.
There are suspected cases in New Zealand and Norway, IIRC.

Fun thing:
On a Swiss train there was an incident when a container with the virus burst, seemingly because they hermetically packaged dry ice. :rolleyes:
It was a non-infective strain for research purposes though.

Also, the WHO have raised the pandemic threat level, which means that the virus is considered to be transmissible not only from pigs to humans, but also from human to human. :(

I wonder what will happen if the swine flu virus reaches Asia and has some babies with the bird flu virus. (Does it work that way? :))

Vader

28 Apr 2009, 11:49

I wonder what will happen if the swine flu virus reaches Asia and has some babies with the bird flu virus. (Does it work that way? :))

Flying pig flu?

Akuryou13

28 Apr 2009, 12:23

I know!

the 2 viruses will combine, but it will take some time for the combination to mature. in december of 2012, the super virus will ravage the world. and let it be known that the world shall end when pigs fly :p

Alien King

28 Apr 2009, 13:23

I wonder what will happen if the swine flu virus reaches Asia and has some babies with the bird flu virus. (Does it work that way? :))

If you're talking about virus sex, I think the two could possibly combine together during reproduction if they were occupying the same cell.
But I'm not a virologist. Hell, I'm not even a biologist, don't take my word for it.

Star Worms

28 Apr 2009, 18:14

If you're talking about virus sex, I think the two could possibly combine together during reproduction if they were occupying the same cell.
But I'm not a virologist. Hell, I'm not even a biologist, don't take my word for it.

Yes, when two come together, when the viruses bud off the cell they can take bits of eachother (influenza is comprised of several RNA strands)... known as antigenic shift.

However unlike bird flu, swine flu seems to be quite capable of infecting humans already, and it appears to be able to spread from human to human.

And please don't say 'virus sex' again, it makes my ears eyes bleed.

Vader

28 Apr 2009, 18:19

So if the bird flu virus humped the swine flu virus, could their babies be ineffective against humans or are humans too pitiful?

Hot virus on virus action, either way.

Also: philby, I think we most probably will be getting a kitten. If so, I challenge you to a battle of the cuteness: http://kittenwar.com/

Alien King

28 Apr 2009, 22:50

And please don't say 'virus sex' again, it makes my ears eyes bleed.

I do hope you weren't thinking I thought that viruses got it on with each other.
Perhaps "replication" would have been a better word than "reproduction"...

bloopy

29 Apr 2009, 01:00

with a custom comical mouth drawn in it. :cool:

Pics or it doesn't exist.

MtlAngelus

29 Apr 2009, 02:07

. _ .

I wore this all day at work. Puzzled some people at the bank too. :D

Akuryou13

29 Apr 2009, 02:25

haha, mtl, that is awesome! :D

GrimOswald

29 Apr 2009, 05:32

Swine flu?

Madagascar, here I come!

bonz

29 Apr 2009, 07:54

I wore this all day at work. Puzzled some people at the bank too. :D
Does that one have a metal clamp to seal it up above the nose?
If not, I suggest you get one.

Paul.Power

29 Apr 2009, 09:21

Swine flu?

Madagascar, here I come!

Hold on... New Zealand's more isolated than Madagascar...

(and as I understand it, your border immigration's pretty paranoid when it comes to diseases)

Star Worms

29 Apr 2009, 10:23

. _ .

I wore this all day at work. Puzzled some people at the bank too. :DDon't forget to change it for a new one when it gets moist...

Hold on... New Zealand's more isolated than Madagascar...

(and as I understand it, your border immigration's pretty paranoid when it comes to diseases)Well swine flu has already reached New Zealand.

Vader

29 Apr 2009, 12:23

I was watching Malcolm in the Middle last night (season 6, episode 1, aired November 2004, I believe) and in that, right at the end, Dewey says something about Jamie having swine flu.

So, if it's existed for so long how come it's not been addressed to this extent before?

Seems like a convenient distraction from the recession if you ask me. I mean, given the news reports, those who've died with swine flu might have died at the same time as having swine flu (but not because of it) or been really old (in which case a common cold could have killed them).

I dunno...

Xinos

29 Apr 2009, 13:48

Can't be the first time a a flu virus from a pig has evolved to affect humans.
Pig anatomy is quite close to human anatomy; We can transplant hearts from pigs into humans. So it must have happened before.

There just probably hasn't been such a lethal strain before.

We already have good flu medicines, the world is pretty well equipped for a flu epidemic. The bird flu panic a few years ago made most countries stock up on medicine like Tamiflu. Apparently a vaccine against this virus will take six months to make though.. In Sweden we have enough Tamiflu to cover for a third of our population.

Paul.Power

29 Apr 2009, 15:25

I think the difference with this batch of swine flu is that it's got mixed together with some bird flu, which has made it a lot more virulant.

Vader

29 Apr 2009, 15:26

Are you sure you're not just thinking of this (http://forum.team17.co.uk/showpost.php?p=692516&postcount=641)?

bonz

29 Apr 2009, 15:27

AFAIK, here in Austria we have enough Tamiflu to cover everyone until enough vaccine has been produced.

Also, we have a huge stockpile of surgical masks for pretty much all of our over 8 million citizens.
There was quite some fuzz about how this was a wasted investment after the bird flu outbreak some years ago. :)

Alien King

29 Apr 2009, 17:31

I was watching Malcolm in the Middle last night (season 6, episode 1, aired November 2004, I believe) and in that, right at the end, Dewey says something about Jamie having swine flu.

So, if it's existed for so long how come it's not been addressed to this extent before?

Swine flu refers to any influenza virus that occurs in swine (pigs). Avian flu is the same, but for birds.
It only becomes a concern when it is particularly virulent and has the potential to cross over to humans (the last Bird Flu thing) or has already made that transfer and can pass human to human (the current Swine Flu scare).

At least, that's what I gathered.

Star Worms

29 Apr 2009, 18:24

So, if it's existed for so long how come it's not been addressed to this extent before?It only recently appears to have acquired the ability to infect humans. Given the number of cases in Mexico it's probably been around for a while. Then of course, the cases would have to be identified as being something worse than normal flu, and then analysed further to find the strain.

We're overdue for a flu pandemic, which is why bird flu (and now swine flu) has been in the news so much.

Vader

29 Apr 2009, 20:47

There's already a cure. It's call oinkment.

*runs*

Alien King

29 Apr 2009, 21:14

On an unrelated note, I've made my uni choices (Warwick with Bath as insurance. Declined Durham and Bristol).

Although swine flu is much more interesting.

Given the number of cases in Mexico it's probably been around for a while.

How spread out were those cases? If they were quite close together, then not necessarily.

Star Worms

29 Apr 2009, 22:38

On an unrelated note, I've made my uni choices (Warwick with Bath as insurance. Declined Durham and Bristol).

Although swine flu is much more interesting.

How spread out were those cases? If they were quite close together, then not necessarily.Apparently it's mainly centred on Mexico City, but then you'd expect that given its population. Anyway, it turns out that in early March the Mexican government became aware of an unusually high occurrence of flu: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8021547.stm

The alert has since been raised to level five: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8025931.stm

And a confirmed case in Spain who hasn't been to Mexico.

thomasp

29 Apr 2009, 22:55

On an unrelated note, I've made my uni choices (Warwick with Bath as insurance. Declined Durham and Bristol).
What course(s) have you applied to do?

Alien King

29 Apr 2009, 23:16

What course(s) have you applied to do?

Maths and Physics joint honours - 4 years.
Might see about changing to 4 year MMath though after or possibly during the 1st year, if I get fed up with Physics.

Apparently it's mainly centred on Mexico City, but then you'd expect that given its population. Anyway, it turns out that in early March the Mexican government became aware of an unusually high occurrence of flu: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8021547.stm

The alert has since been raised to level five: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8025931.stm

And a confirmed case in Spain who hasn't been to Mexico.

Not sure what the implications of that are.
Ah well, I don't think anyone outside of Mexico has died yet (apart from that one in the US).

MrBunsy

29 Apr 2009, 23:53

Maths and Physics joint honours - 4 years.

I know someone doing that at Warwick. They seem to like it.

MtlAngelus

30 Apr 2009, 00:10

Not sure what the implications of that are.
Ah well, I don't think anyone outside of Mexico has died yet (apart from that one in the US).
Ah, so as long as only people in mexico die, it's all fine and dandy? :mad:

:rolleyes::p

thomasp

30 Apr 2009, 00:14

Ah, so as long as only people in mexico die, it's all fine and dandy? :mad:

:rolleyes::p
Well, the person who died in the USA was a Mexican...

And congrats to Mr Bunsy for getting the 666th post, and to Mtl for the 666th reply :p Vader will be so annoyed with you!

Vader

30 Apr 2009, 07:46

Maths and Physics joint honours - 4 years.

Man, I'd love to go back in time and take those courses instead of what I did.

Good luck to you, dude.

MrBunsy

30 Apr 2009, 13:17

And congrats to Mr Bunsy for getting the 666th post, and to Mtl for the 666th reply :p Vader will be so annoyed with you!

Blimey, didn't realise this thread had got that long already.

Vader

30 Apr 2009, 18:09

Raaaaoooooorrrrrr!!!!

bloopy

30 Apr 2009, 23:05

Hold on... New Zealand's more isolated than Madagascar...

Depends what you mean by isolated. In terms of human contact with Mexicans, Madagascar is probably more isolated.

MtlAngelus

30 Apr 2009, 23:06

All this talk of infected keeps reminding me of Left 4 Dead. Maybe the swine flu is a viral campaign for L4D?

:p

FutureWorm

1 May 2009, 07:26

. _ .

I wore this all day at work. Puzzled some people at the bank too. :D
wanna see a picture of that on your face

Squirminator2k

1 May 2009, 08:06

160 deaths caused by Swine Flu? Oh no! Some 36,000 deaths caused by regular flu this year alone? ...Oh, that's nothing. Carry about your business.

I went to RiteAid last night to by some handywipes, and they were sold out. Remarkable.

Star Worms

1 May 2009, 10:23

160 deaths caused by Swine Flu? Oh no! Some 36,000 deaths caused by regular flu this year alone? ...Oh, that's nothing. Carry about your business.That's probably what they thought about the Spanish flu in 1918:rolleyes:. An epidemic might be 36,000 in one country. A pandemic might be 1000000 across the world. You might say 160* deaths now, but if the virus continues to spread it would increase exponentially.

*It's actually more like 10 deaths (that have been confirmed), although most of the deaths in Mexico were previously reported as an unknown flu.

MtlAngelus

1 May 2009, 23:11

Stupidest thing. I bought a second hand version of Halo 2 to play trough the campaign(on my 360), since I've wanted to play it for a long time, and while all the text in the game is in english (even the subtitles) the audio is all in spanish. And it sucks big time. And apparently there is no option to change it to english. I have been told that changing my console language to english would do the trick, but it's already set as english so... yeah.

MtlAngelus

2 May 2009, 00:09

wanna see a picture of that on your face
I bet you do.

AndrewTaylor

2 May 2009, 11:50

That's probably what they thought about the Spanish flu in 1918:rolleyes:. An epidemic might be 36,000 in one country. A pandemic might be 1000000 across the world. You might say 160* deaths now, but if the virus continues to spread it would increase exponentially.

*It's actually more like 10 deaths (that have been confirmed), although most of the deaths in Mexico were previously reported as an unknown flu.

The thing is, right now it's not a pandemic. Right now it's a small outbreak of disease, and panicking about it and wearing facemasks on the tube is idiotic.

At the same time, nobody should dismiss it out of hand because it very well might become pandemic (although even then you will almost certainly not get it and if you do you will almost certainly be fine).

FutureWorm

4 May 2009, 14:40

I bet you do.
:cool: .

Squirminator2k

22 May 2009, 01:33

The worst time to tell someone that you've been in love with someone for a very long time is when that person has just broken up with their previous partner.

I had absolutely no idea how to respond to her. Obviously it's nice to hear that someone loves you, but... now's not an ideal time.

Vader

22 May 2009, 11:18

it's nice to hear that someone loves you

/me takes a note of this.

Good advice, that.

worMatty

22 May 2009, 21:11

Love, my ar.se. She just wants some ginger action.

Vader

22 May 2009, 21:14

Love, my ar.se.

I do, mate. I do.

worMatty

22 May 2009, 21:45

Why Stef, I never knew.

MrBunsy

26 May 2009, 19:16

1 exam down, 5 to go. First year is nearly over!

Akuryou13

28 May 2009, 14:27

I was informed last night by my wife (ex-wife in making I guess?) that I need a girlfriend.......little odd to be told this, as you can imagine.

neither bad nor good odd, just odd.

Vader

28 May 2009, 14:31

Does she know she's your wife? If so, does she know a wife is a girlfriend (with more legal binds)? :p

Akuryou13

28 May 2009, 14:32

Does she know she's your wife? If so, does she know a wife is a girlfriend (with more legal binds)? :plol well we've basically split up at this point so she's not really my wife anymore. so she has all rights to SAY I need a girlfriend, it's just slightly more than odd to have her say so this soon after.

Vader

28 May 2009, 14:33

Does she have a sister? ;)

Akuryou13

28 May 2009, 14:56

Does she have a sister? ;)lol, no, but SHE'S up for grabs :p

bonz

28 May 2009, 18:18

So, you're gonna get divorced?

worMatty

28 May 2009, 20:33

Congratulations I guess?

Blinx

28 May 2009, 21:55

lol well we've basically split up at this point so she's not really my wife anymore. so she has all rights to SAY I need a girlfriend, it's just slightly more than odd to have her say so this soon after.
She wants you to get a girlfriend so that she feels less guilty when she/already has another guy.

worMatty

28 May 2009, 22:29

Or wants to frame you and nick all your money!

bonz

29 May 2009, 12:51

She wants you to get a girlfriend so that she feels less guilty when she/already has another guy.
Or wants to frame you and nick all your money!
Or both, because her new guy is a divorce lawyer and told her to do that.

Akuryou13

29 May 2009, 13:58

3 best posts EVER.

I seriously doubt she'd have another guy already. not because it's too soon or anything I just can't see any reason she wouldn't mention it.

if anything I'd say it's cause she's seriously considering going out with someone or some such (I can't think of who, but whatever) and doesn't want to feel guilty of that. granted, I doubt even this one's true, but it'd be the most likely reason.

edit: forgot to mention. the friend I'd mentioned a couple times in my story about the situation between me and ashley (my no longer wife)? well apparently she may very well be moving off to australia for 4 years with her dad who's job is offering him nice money there. I'm not sure how to feel about this. on the one hand she's been a great friend for a number of years and I've developed feelings for her. on the other hand I really think it'd be good for her (and it'd probably do me good to have time away from her as well) to really get away from things. it'd also be good for my cousin who is childishly obsessed with her. but damn it, it sucks. I'm gunna miss her. she's my best friend :-/

Paul.Power

4 Jun 2009, 11:00

Ahhh hell, do I vote Labour or Green?

On the one hand, the Greens have a chance to do well, which would be nice to see, and, voter pragmatism aside, they're the party I agree with the most.

On the other hand, it's unlikely in Wales. There are only four seats. Plaid Cymru's going to get one. Labour's going to get one. The Tories are going to get one. That leaves one seat, which will probably be contested between Labour and the Tories, with the Greens not getting much of a look-in. I'm also concerned that voting away from Labour gives UKIP or the BNP a chance to spring a nasty surprise.

Trouble is that every time I make my decision, something else comes along and makes me go "Hang on..."

bonz

4 Jun 2009, 11:01

Ahhh hell, do I vote Labour or Green?
Green .

Paul.Power

4 Jun 2009, 11:16

Green .

See added situational stuff.

This'd be easier if I lived in England, oddly enough. More seats per region (barring the North East), no Plaid Cymru taking up seats, and a less competent Labour party.

Alien King

4 Jun 2009, 11:51

I'm also concerned that voting away from Labour gives UKIP or the BNP a chance to spring a nasty surprise.

Surely the populace isn't that stupid?
Or do I give them too much credit?

Paul.Power

4 Jun 2009, 12:06

Voted. For whom, I'm not saying.

Vader

4 Jun 2009, 13:01

Quite honestly I didn't know there was a vote going on today. I have no idea why. I don't even know where I'd go to vote in this town. I definitely won't be voting for the reds or the blues. I doubt I'll vote at all at this rate. :(

Xinos

4 Jun 2009, 16:51

Vader

4 Jun 2009, 16:57

I think it only counts as true democracy if everyone votes.

You'd only get a small proportion of the population voting on every tiny decision and to be fair we need a PM. If we didn't have one then global politics would have nobody to address. Plus the masses aren't as well educated on the matters at hand. The fact that our current PM is a total joke aside, MPs and the PM do their job because that's what they're trained to do.

I get what you're saying, though. I'm probably wrong.

Alien King

4 Jun 2009, 17:11

KRD

4 Jun 2009, 17:37

The fact that our current PM is a total joke aside, MPs and the PM do their job because that's what they're trained to do.

They're not really, though. They're trained to get elected.

I like Gordon Brown. :eek:

MtlAngelus

13 Jun 2009, 02:59

AndrewTaylor

13 Jun 2009, 12:08

Why do we have to vote for people or groups to make decisions for us?
I think everybody should get to vote on every issue through internet forms.
It can't be hard to do and it would be the truest form of democracy. Just give everybody one of those encryption keypad devices that you use to log onto your internet bank account with and you're set.

Now I have to settle for the party that has the least ammount of opinions that I disagree with.
That is a dreadful idea.

It sounds appealing, but if you think about it it would be a disaster. The average person has neither the time nor the inclination to get to grips with most issues, whereas for an MP that's their entire job: to understand the issue, decide what to do, and communicate this effectively to the public. If the public still disagree with the MP then fair enough, but you can't put policy decisions directly in the hands of the uninformed dullards who make up the electorate. They won't bother to do any research and will vote with their gut instincts -- by which I mean that we'd essentially be governed by tabloid editors.

The current system, or at least a fixed version thereof, is a far better idea.

Edit:

I think Gordon Brown gets a raw deal: he's trying to lead us through pretty rubbish times, but he's a really bad speaker so he always seems very flustered. I'm not convinced this reflects at all on his ability to make important decisions, but it has a huge effect on public confidence. Meanwhile his party are all trying to win the next, unannounced election in their own ways, without apparently bothering to discuss plans first.

Star Worms

13 Jun 2009, 15:05

Frankly I don't see any way that Labour can win the next election. I think it's the only reason stopping a leadership challenge as it would be political suicide for whoever took over. Might as well wait for Brown to take the bullet.

Thank god Hazel Blears and Ruth Kelly have gone though.

I think the whole system is a farce anyway: Conservatives screw up, people vote Labour; Labour screw up, people vote Conservative. Either way the public gets screwed over. Yay for democracy?

My vote doesn't really count anyway as the Conservatives get in whatever happens in my constituency. It's a farce that it's all down to the votes of a few people in certain places that determine who becomes PM (not to say that Brown was voted in or anything).

Vader

13 Jun 2009, 15:23

So today there was this drunken guy lying on the sidewalk in my street, in front of my house. Had two bottles of mezcal with him, his pants were down(he had underwear tho) and his shirt was open and he was wearing two mismatching socks... Had to call the cops to take him away. It was kinda fun to watch. :p

I may have mentioned this before (but probably not) but a couple of months ago I was lying in bed and I heard our front gate go. It's very loud and distinctive so I went to see who'd be coming to knock on my door at 2am. Turned out not to be someone coming to knock on my door. In fact it was some drunken girl urinating on my doorstep. I told her to f*ck off and she got offended and called a bunch of burly, surly men over. By the time I'd fetched a weapon they'd gone so no harm done OTHER THAN THE STENCH OF P*SS ON MY DOORSTEP THE NEXT DAY.

In other, more up-to-date news, I may have caught swine flu. Oh no. Etc. :rolleyes:

bonz

13 Jun 2009, 15:44

In other, more up-to-date news, I may have caught swine flu. Oh no. Etc. :rolleyes:
Wear a surgical mask and go to bed.

Vader

13 Jun 2009, 15:46

Sod that. I can handle any virus. I have an unholy immune system fuelled by the lies of children and demonic blood offerings.

If I die you can have my Starscream.

Star Worms

13 Jun 2009, 22:42

Akuryou13

13 Jun 2009, 22:44

FutureWorm

14 Jun 2009, 01:49

It sounds appealing, but if you think about it it would be a disaster. The average person has neither the time nor the inclination to get to grips with most issues, whereas for an MP that's their entire job: to understand the issue, decide what to do, and communicate this effectively to the public.

false, the job of an mp (or at least a senator/representative here in the us) is to meet with special interest groups and find out who could donate the most money to their re-election campaign

Star Worms

14 Jun 2009, 03:36

false, the job of an mp (or at least a senator/representative here in the us) is to meet with special interest groups and find out who could donate the most money to their re-election campaign
Ah, well the public already kicked up a fuss about that.

Anyway the job of an MP is to answer questions in such a way that you think they answered the question, but upon reflection 10 minutes later you realise they completely avoided it.

AndrewTaylor

14 Jun 2009, 12:50

false, the job of an mp (or at least a senator/representative here in the us) is to meet with special interest groups and find out who could donate the most money to their re-election campaign

No, that's just what they do. Their job is more like what I said.

Normally people lose their jobs if what they actually do is something else, but apparently you can basically buy votes in America. (Whereas here you have to win them properly by transparently pandering to insipid tabloid agendas.)

FutureWorm

14 Jun 2009, 16:50

Normally people lose their jobs if what they actually do is something else, but apparently you can basically buy votes in America. (Whereas here you have to win them properly by transparently pandering to insipid tabloid agendas.)

how fortunate for you

bonz

14 Jun 2009, 20:21

A couple of days ago I got a really weird sensation. I was just walking to the shop as usual wearing a t-shirt (nothing heavy) and all of a sudden I could feel the weight of my t-shirt on the hairs on my body. It was quite painful. It felt like I was being stabbed with thousands of needles all over.
Probably just piloerection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piloerection) with the hair stuck in the fabric of your shirt.

Star Worms

14 Jun 2009, 22:15

Probably just piloerection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piloerection) with the hair stuck in the fabric of your shirt.
No, I know what that feels like as I get a bit of a shiver when that happens. My hairs didn't even stand on end when it happened.

Xinos

15 Jun 2009, 22:04

Some days when I wake up my toes and fingers can be really weak so they hurt when I press them against something. It's really odd.

Having a body is so much fun!

AndrewTaylor

15 Jun 2009, 23:16

Having a body is so much fun!

That explains why you play with it so much.

Sorry.

Zero72

16 Jun 2009, 08:47

I keep saying that being made of meat is so inconvenient. That's why I'd rather be a robot. If something ached, you could just get it replaced. :(

Paul.Power

16 Jun 2009, 11:29

I keep saying that being made of meat is so inconvenient. That's why I'd rather be a robot. If something ached, you could just get it replaced. :(

Well, unless you're Marvin, in which case nothing ever solves the pain in all the diodes down your left side.

thomasp

16 Jun 2009, 11:39

Well, unless you're Marvin, in which case nothing ever solves the pain in all the diodes down your left side.
Damn you Paul, i was going to post that!! :mad:

Xinos

16 Jun 2009, 17:31

That explains why you play with it so much.

Sorry.

Yeah well I walked right into that. :p

Vader

16 Jun 2009, 18:49

That's why I'd rather be a robot.

I'm working on it but it's kind of a side project.

Akuryou13

18 Jun 2009, 14:29

my coworker quit last night.

he was completely incompetent so it's no real loss, but it DOES make lunch breaks slightly awkward. not that I'm not used to the sorts of half-breaks I'll be taking, but it's still a minor annoyance. the up side, though, is that I'll be making more money now since I'll have all the tips to myself.

Muzer

18 Jun 2009, 21:48

Just visit the forum during lunch breaks!

Or make art, I know you're good at that :p

Akuryou13

19 Jun 2009, 01:28

Just visit the forum during lunch breaks!

Or make art, I know you're good at that :pyou suggest I attempt to do more screwing around on lunch breaks now that I don't have anyone replacing me and cannot actually go on a decent lunch break? do you have the brain worms?!

bloopy

19 Jun 2009, 01:29

A couple of days ago I got a really weird sensation. I was just walking to the shop as usual wearing a t-shirt (nothing heavy) and all of a sudden I could feel the weight of my t-shirt on the hairs on my body. It was quite painful. It felt like I was being stabbed with thousands of needles all over.

I've had a similar feeling in my fingers, like the usual "pins and needles", except it took a lot longer to go away.

Pick your poison: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paresthesia#Other_known_causes

Star Worms

19 Jun 2009, 03:10

I've had a similar feeling in my fingers, like the usual "pins and needles", except it took a lot longer to go away.

Pick your poison: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paresthesia#Other_known_causes

Must be the menopause :(

BetongÅsna

19 Jun 2009, 03:28

Menopause always sounds strange to me. It seems to imply it's just taking a break, and it'll be back before long.

MtlAngelus

23 Jun 2009, 20:39

Meet the Boner Remote (http://cubeme.com/blog/2008/12/26/strange-panasonic-gel-remote-by-panasonic/).

O_o

FutureWorm

23 Jun 2009, 21:03

Meet the Boner Remote (http://cubeme.com/blog/2008/12/26/strange-panasonic-gel-remote-by-panasonic/).

O_o
ahahahaha.

SupSuper

23 Jun 2009, 23:17

That is brilliant.

BetongÅsna

24 Jun 2009, 08:09

Any videos of it in action?

Melon

24 Jun 2009, 10:48

Any videos of it in action?
I'd get banned if I started linking to videos of that. Think of the children.

worMatty

24 Jun 2009, 20:04

Doooooo it!

FutureWorm

24 Jun 2009, 22:20

matty you should really get a new 'tar. you have been a melon impersonator quite long enough

Alien King

24 Jun 2009, 22:22

matty you should really get a new 'tar. you have been a melon impersonator quite long enough

I concur.

Although only because I still get confused... not sure how.

Melon

24 Jun 2009, 22:36

worMatty tries hard to copy my good looks but I keep telling him that it comes naturally and he's doomed to ugliness no matter how hard he tries.

Slick

24 Jun 2009, 23:52

worMatty

25 Jun 2009, 00:19

I have a 3.2MP camera sensor on my SonyEricsson C510, which is a mid-priced phone. Hah!

I live in the shadow of Kieran and his beauty.

FutureWorm

25 Jun 2009, 03:58

I have a 3.2MP camera sensor on my SonyEricsson C510, which is a mid-priced phone. Hah!

I live in the shadow of Kieran and his beauty.
actually your avatar sucks and is annoying

worMatty

25 Jun 2009, 19:47

Mocking my beliefs will only make me cling to them more stronglier, Joshua!

Vader

25 Jun 2009, 22:51

Bought an LG Envy3 Phone. And I don't have the money to do such a thing. :D
Phone is awesome. Not being able to eat later isn't.

BUT THE CAMERA IS GEWD! 3 Megapixels... boya. I had the LgEnvy2 for only like... 3 months. lol.
Ah well.. EBAY.

I have a 3 Megapixel camera in my phone. It's pretty cool and has some nice functions. I've got some really nice photos with it (and a lot of crap ones) and it's one of the reasons I like my phone so much. That and my bespoke Mega Man X theme. Hot.