- Member for
- 8 years 8 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|12 hours 40 min ago||Bullshit I only see one.||
Bullshit I only see one.
|1 day 2 hours ago||I absolutely detest Kim||
I absolutely detest Kim Kardashian's trademark simpering little smile. I want to slap her fake puffy lips every time I see it.
The whole family could be wiped out of everyone's memory forever and nobody would miss anything. I will say, though: Kendall Jenner, mmmm.
|1 day 18 hours ago||Didn't say it couldn't be||
Didn't say it couldn't be helpful - in very limited circumstances, yes, but it could be helpful, in cases where something like PTSD comes into play. What I said was, it could also have a negative effect on the discussion by providing a spoiler for things that are actually intended to shock.
|1 day 20 hours ago||Green has always been a||
Green has always been a highly appropriate color for them.
|1 day 21 hours ago||It's hardly fair to hold that||
It's hardly fair to hold that against them, since the sport was only just invented that year.
|1 day 22 hours ago||Yes, exactly, and I do love||
Yes, exactly, and I do love the snowflake threads because it stops there being 20 different threads entitled "My Thoughts On The Game."
|1 day 22 hours ago||I can see the argument for||
I can see the argument for there being a few, very very specialized cases, where a "trigger warning" might be a considerate thing to do, if legitimate trauma is involved.
But consider this: those specialized cases are, by definition, pretty shocking. And they lose a whole lot of shock value - and therefore, value as a thought-provoker - if you warn people ahead of time. If you tell people there's a rape in Chapter 6, by Chapter 3 they'll have a pretty good idea of who the rapist and victim are. And the intent of studying a book like that is to provoke thought, which people will have much more of if it's a surprise. "Holy shit, that just happened" is much more likely to engender opinions and discussion than "well, there was that rape we were warned about."
|1 day 23 hours ago||No it can't. hashtag||
No it can't.
|1 day 23 hours ago||Most people just entering||
Most people just entering college have, up to that point in their life, used the internet mainly to post pictures and collect likes the way kids used to collect baseball cards. The fact that textbooks are very often displayed on iPads really doesn't do much for advancing debate, it's just a display medium. Not to mention that this is a generation that's grown up with parents who get arrested just for letting them walk back and forth to school by themselves, so they're used to the idea that they deserve a healthy blanket of overprotection.
|1 day 23 hours ago||That is one of the worst||
That is one of the worst posts in the history of MGoBlog.
Which experience do you think is more ruined? Wait, no. Which experience would a rational and considerate person think is more ruined? Someone who must sit and cheer instead of stand and cheer, but can see the game either way; or someone who paid money to see the game and can't see it?
If you have a ticket and you're a Michigan fan, you belong at a Michigan football game, and telling someone they don't belong because your precious experience is ruined by not being able to stand is fucked up beyond all recognition. Additionally, if your experience is in fact ruined by not being able to stand, you might consider re-examining your standards.
|2 days 3 hours ago||There's quite a difference||
There's quite a difference between a 10-minute walk and a three-hour standing session, no?
|2 days 4 hours ago||"I can't believe people are||
"I can't believe people are trying to make rules about how to watch a football game."
"They should make zones with rules about standing."
The cognitive dissonance is strong with this one.
|2 days 4 hours ago||Leaving aside for a second||
Leaving aside for a second that "hip" is a word used by people that aren't to describe things that they think are, they're also making a great point that Harbaugh has definitely brought a celebrity stature back to Michigan. The risk is that it's sort of like Oregon's uniforms - even when they're still brand new, they stop being fresh. Have to keep up the momentum by winning. A lot. Lucky for us, Harbaugh knows how to do that too.
|2 days 4 hours ago||Yes, if there's one thing in||
Yes, if there's one thing in this life that's true, it's that old people should not be allowed to participate in events.
|3 days 14 hours ago||Pretty sure you can get the||
Pretty sure you can get the park-assist feature on the '17 Escape for the easy-to-park department, and positive you can get the kick tailgate and AWD.
|3 days 14 hours ago||So I Ctrl-F'ed Woodson on||
So I Ctrl-F'ed Woodson on this page and got 65 hits. But yeah, Charles Woodson. Brian Griese was a yard away from Woodson registering a touchdown literally every conceivable way in one season - KR, PR, reception, run, INT, fumble....all he missed was the pass.
Vince Young was fricking incredible too. I still think the Texas-USC Rose Bowl was the greatest college football game maybe ever. And I know this is a pics-or-it-didn't-happen kind of claim, but when Young took the 4th-down play in for the winning touchdown, I knew that's what would happen before the play. That's how damn good he was.
|3 days 23 hours ago||It so happens I own a '14||
It so happens I own a '14 Escape Titanium but have also driven the '17. Had the chance to do so for about a week.
- The interior layout is vastly improved in the '17.
- The '17 has Sync 3, which is way better than previous infotainment versions.
- The steering wheel, somehow, felt even cheaper than in my car. I don't think most people care, but I think the leather they use feels cheap as hell. It's rough and grippy, not smooth like a lot of steering wheels.
- The start-stop function on the engine worked very well. I think that's a high-level option, but I'm not sure. The one I drove had it. I normally get about 22.5 mpg on my commute. I got about 25.5 with the start-stop and that was on a brand-new engine that wasn't broken in yet. (Car had about 400 miles on it.)
- I personally think the front and and back end are uglier on the '17. The taillights were chopped off supposedly to give the impression that the car is bigger. The only impression I get is that someone made a big styling mistake. But the nice part is you don't have to look at the taillights when you're driving it.
Otherwise, they're quite similar. The new model is a refreshing rather than a total overhaul. If you like the earlier model, you'll probably like the new one better.
|4 days 47 min ago||Ahead of its time is||
Ahead of its time is definitely true. If they'd waited to sell it til after the Nissan Cube came out, nobody would've said a peep about it being ugly.
|4 days 49 min ago||Takata should've taken the||
Takata should've taken the Tesla approach: claim the airbags were being beta-tested and point out that cars with airbags are safer than cars without them so on average they're still coming out ahead. Or perhaps the Google approach: the accidents weren't technically our fault. (Admittedly a tough sell if the airbags just blew up on their own.) Admitting there's something wrong with the car you built is soooooo dinosaur, not the Silicon Valley way at all.
|4 days 1 hour ago||Yeah....that's a pretty damn||
Yeah....that's a pretty damn favorable depreciation rate they're offering.
|4 days 2 hours ago||Do I read it right that you||
Do I read it right that you have almost two years to decide and you can still sell the car back for the same $20K in two years?
If so, I think you'd be crazy not to hold on to the car til the last minute and then sell it back - there is no way you'd get that kind of money for a six-year-old, 90K miles, non-luxury-brand car otherwise. That is one hell of a down payment on a brand-new car, and it's unlikely your car will get the same mileage that you like, post-fix.
|4 days 2 hours ago||Question for the experts: My||
Question for the experts: My '06 Mustang has developed a mild case of road rash - small pinholes in the paint job - and I intend to fix it with Dr. ColorChip, which looks like just the thing for the job. However, I'm concerned about putting paint directly over rust, which is what some of these holes have. They're very small, the biggest is no more than a couple millimeters. What's a good way to remove the rust before applying the paint patches? Or, do I even need to?
|4 days 2 hours ago||The best piece of advice I||
The best piece of advice I can give is not to listen to any advice.
Most of it consists of "Get a (car that I have now)!" or "Don't get a (car that I once had that I hated)!" Anecdotal evidence sucks; people have this idea that if they had a car that was crap, every car of the same make and model and possibly everything ever made by that company was crap. And the same if the car was awesome and lasted half a million miles.
These days, car quality between automakers is almost completely indistinguishable. Quality rankings like JD Power tend to fluctuate wildly year to year, which is an indicator that most companies basically have it together and the rankings are susceptible to tiny changes. And truth is, a huge number of "initial quality" survey problems are infotainment systems that don't work like consumers want them to.
You gotta spend a lot of time in that car, so as silly as it sounds, cupholders are more important than airbags, so to speak. There isn't anything out there that's a deathtrap. You should try out different cars to see what you're comfortable with. If you live in a city with a big auto show (Detroit, Chicago, NYC, etc.) or even a medium-sized one, auto shows are wonderful places to get an idea of what you want. Then go test drive the ones you liked. You can use fueleconomy.gov to compare fuel economy - but the difference between, say, 32 mpg and 28 mpg is about $150-$200 a year in fuel costs, so keep that in mind when comparing prices.
In general, though, pay little attention to this or that specific recommendation, because people always place way too much value on anecdotal evidence.
|4 days 21 hours ago||You posted one without the||
You posted one without the other. Here, I'll fix it.
|4 days 23 hours ago||That's a true statement, but||
That's a true statement, but it would make a stronger argument if the previous swimming record was more than 12. It would weaken the argument for Phelps if his count were not much bigger than the rest of the field. But with only two Olympians in history that can even claim half his total (neither of which are swimmers), no, I think the most-medals argument is still strong.
|4 days 23 hours ago||You're not going to like it,||
You're not going to like it, but I'm going to double down on that controversial comment. Possibly "never learned to swim it" is an exaggeration, but I did swim competitively and I know very well that by high school, swimmers are already specialized and some would've been a disaster in their non-specialized strokes.
I'm sure the truth is closer to "many don't know how to swim butterfly" (which is what I said) than "everyone knows how to swim butterfly", in no small part because I knew quite a few competitive swimmers who did very well at one thing or another but there were also strokes where they would've floundered. For sure, precious practice time is not spent past age 12 or so (and definitely not in high school) trying to make distance freestylers practice their butterfly or backstrokers finesse their breaststroke technique - unless they're making IM part of their repertoire.
|5 days 1 hour ago||Who's the second-best||
Who's the second-best swimmer, though? It's easy to say who the second-best is in each individual event, but what about overall? Lochte? Le Clos? Cseh? Saying "there are more swimmers close to Phelps" just means Phelps swims more events - in each individual event where Phelps has dominated - say, the 200 IM which he's won four Olympics in a row, nobody's any closer to Phelps than to Bolt. In fact, Phelps has consistently been about 2% faster than his competition in that event; Bolt, about the same or less in his.
|5 days 2 hours ago||Wait a sec - the mechanics of||
Wait a sec - the mechanics of fly and free are similar? Not even close to true. If anything, backstroke and freestyle are far more similar. Literally the only similar thing is that you use an overhand motion with your arms. Otherwise:
- there is a rhythm to fly that doesn't exist in free
- you breathe in front vs. to the side
- you have a different kick - dolphin vs. flutter
- you use both arms at once vs. one at a time
- you lift up out of the water instead of staying in it
- you undulate your body instead of rotating and twisting it
I think it's the pro-Bolt crowd that downplays what Phelps does because they think swimming strokes are similar, when in fact they are nothing like each other. Many freestylers literally never even learned how to swim butterfly and would flounder around like breaching whales if you asked them to try.
|5 days 3 hours ago||Just because something is||
How do you define athleticism if that's not part of it?
|5 days 3 hours ago||Hurdling is just less||
Hurdling is just less efficient running, the same as doing another stroke.
Bolt is insanely good at doing one thing, but he'd lose almost every competition you care to put him in against Phelps. If you think "greatest athlete" means doing only one thing really really well, then you can have Bolt, but there's a reason the Olympic motto doesn't just stop at "Citius."