|
|
|
Things that make you go hm
Right there, in the pizza sauce!
When Mary Louise Salerno saw Jesus Christ in a bucket of pizza sauce, her instinct was not to alert the media or even to tell many friends.
She did not want people descending on her family's West Scranton pizzeria, and she did not want to invite critics or doubters of what she felt was a clear sign.
"To us, it was something special," Ms. Salerno, 65, of Old Forge said. "God smiled on us that day."
Oh, Scranton.
(h/t to Phawker)
That's beautiful.
How the hell do I describe my new favorite obsession, Chatroulette? Put simply by the site itself, it's a "brand-new one-on-one text-, webcam- and microphone-based chat with people around the world." So, you hook up your webcam and mic, get on the site, and it randomly connects you with one of the other thousands of users from around the globe â who can you chat with, mock, give the finger, play guitar to, flirt with, be harassed by, etc. until you're bored, at which point you press "Next" and then do it all over again, for hours and hours and hours.
It's kinda like speed dating meets performance art meets completely unfiltered Internet insanity. A succinct Fast Company article put it like this:
You might see people in horrifying masks dancing around. Chinese users seem to love virtual high fives. One person's shtick is a puppet who makes like a caring psychotherapist and will sit with you for hours. A friend reports a man holding up a sign that said, "Assroll?" â and promptly rolling over backwards, naked. (Nudity is hard to avoid.)
Anyway, give it a spin (later tonight, it's definitely NSFW). This site, I know, says volumes about how weird/disturbed/damaged/cruel the world is (a guy I chatted with last night held up a hilarious/terrible sign that read "Boobs for Haiti!"), but I'm not ready to look at it like that just yet. For now, it's just funny as hell.
Social comments and analytics for this post... This post was mentioned on Twitter by phillynewsnow: Dept. of Internet Memes: Go to chatroulette.com right now: How the hell do I describe my new favorite obsession, C... http://bit.ly/b3WRYD...
The alternative for chatroulette is anoChat.com It is much much better!
Received a letter to the editor (which you can read in its entirety after the jump) from Darco Lalevic of the Pennsylvania Cycling Association about the recent uproar over driving and cycling and walking in the city.
Among his very interesting points:
- "Enforcement will not fix things" — he cites the 270,929 tickets issued to motorists in 2008 as proof that enforcement doesn't alter behavior.
- More cyclists following the law — taking a full lane when entitled to, for example — would snarl traffic and thus "motorist aggravation and incidents of road rage would increase."
- Cyclists are killed by cars much more frequently than pedestrians are killed by cyclists.
He builds the idea, brought up in a 2008 article in The Atlantic, that essentially there are too many rules and regulations on streets and roads in the United States and that more rules, perhaps paradoxically, lead to more accidents.
The city needs to embrace newer thinking on urban traffic engineering going forward. There are more ideas other than just converting a car lane to a bike lane. In fact there is ample evidence that our tendency to add more rules and more signs increases our risk.
It reminded me of a trip I took to Hanoi, Vietnam, in 2004 and the shock and general amazement I felt at the way traffic seemed to move effortlessly despite there being no traffic signals at all. As you can see in the video (not mine) above, the motorbike-preponderant traffic weaved in and out at intersections, darting and bending, behaving more like schools of fish than the vector-based traffic stateside. This piece on the blog Cafe Hayek gets more into this trend of minimizing traffic laws rather than making them ever more complicated to deal with each new issue.
Could this work in Philadelphia? Or would the chaos be catastrophic?
Read Darco Lalevic's letter after the jump
Name: Darco Lalevic
Email: XXXXXXX@wharton.upenn.edu
Subject: Letter to the Editor
Message:
In all the media attention to City Council's efforts to crack down on cyclists, the resulting uproar over criminal cyclists, and cyclist's protesting their rights, none of the loud voices has addressed the practical issues involved. Stu Bykosfky pointed out that while cyclists gripe about dangerous motorists, in fact 270,929 tickets were issued to motorists in 2008, but only 14 to bicyclists. Clearly, enforcement of traffic rules for bicycles is necessary. However, what no one points out is that enforcement will not fix things (look at the number of tickets issued to motorists). Certainly the additional revenue for the city would be miniscule, and enforcement clearly does not change behavior. And while I wholeheartedly support enforcement of bicycle laws, does the general public know what would happen if all cyclists obeyed the law? More cyclists would take entire lanes of traffic where there are no bike lanes. They would stop at more lights and stop signs, delaying and slowing other vehicular traffic. Motorist aggravation and incidents of road rage would increase. Cyclists, who are already far more likely to be killed in a traffic accident, would be at even greater risk, for both accidents and intentional assaults. Motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians all regularly break traffic rules in this city, but it's the motorists who wield greater risk of death and injury.
The incidents which precipitated City Council's action are the issue. Cyclists killed by cars are the issue. Two pedestrians were killed in collisions with cyclists. Regardless of fault or negligence on either side (from what I have read, in one case the cyclist was riding illegally, in the other, the pedestrian was crossing illegally), and notwithstanding the personal tragedy for the families involved, death by bicycle is a rarity. In 2008, there were 92 traffic fatalities involving motor vehicles. 38 of those were pedestrians. Unfortunately, the city does not accurately track cyclists deaths, so I have been unable to tell if the approximately 22 cyclists killed are included in that number. Considering the overwhelming ratio of cars to bicycles, the higher risk of fatalities among cyclists is an issue.
The first step in addressing this is for the city and the police department to treat and respect bicycles as the vehicles they are. Enforce traffic laws, but treat bicycles as vehicles. Enforce laws on aggressive driving and prosecute road rage incidents. Many city cyclists have tales of being assaulted by vehicles, yet rarely is anything done when these are reported.
The city needs to embrace newer thinking on urban traffic engineering going forward. There are more ideas other than just converting a car lane to a bike lane. In fact there is ample evidence that our tendency to add more rules and more signs increases our risk. Last year, the Atlantic published a little recognized article on the very subject (http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/traffic).
I love my city, but it frustrates me when every debate comes down to calling cyclists "morally superior", calling drivers "reckless and stupid", and saying "sharing the road equally is insane". Let's stop bashing each other and do something positive.
Darco Lalevic
Board Member
Pennsylvania Cycling Association
Larry: I don't think it's apples and oranges. Most of the vehicles in that video are not bikes but motorbikes. So, yes, it is a little different, but maybe more like grapefruit and oranges. I think you might Americans by saying it couldn't* work here; I think it would take a MASSIVE education campaign and a lot of studies to make it work — and maybe it'd be too much work for it to be worthwhile, or perhaps the growing pains would dwarf the eventual benefits. Ron, I think the big difference between traffic here and traffic in other parts of the world is that there's more of a sense of responsibility for one's actions elsewhere. Maybe it's the preponderance of traffic signals here, but whereas in, say, Hanoi you'd approach every intersection alert and ready to maneuver through traffic, I think in the U.S. the attitude is "I've got the green, so I'm going and I'm not gonna look and if I get in an accident, let the lawyers will sort it out."
*might underestimate
After a week in Hanoi I finally understood the concept of crossing the street here, and having the balls to do it. Just walk across the intersection at a steady pace. Jump right in the fire. Traffic is heavy with motorbikes, cars, and bicycles but they will either stop or go around you. Very different here in the states. Try just walking into oncoming traffic in Philly like you would in Hanoi and you would wake up in a hospital missing limbs and multiple ribs tickling your lungs.
i cant wait to see a handsome lady trying to put her huffy back together. enjoy!
i encourage every vandal to find Bridget S's shanty hut and spraypaint pictures of cars running over bicycles etc etc........Sign it with the tag "courtesy." Then and only then will the american dream reach fruition.
i cant wait to bike home tonight and take up the entire lane. enjoy!
i encourage every cyclist in Philadelphia to take up the entire lane, stop for 3 seconds at every stop sign, etc etc...........we'll see how long it takes before the motorists are whining and complaining about it.... we ride to the side of the lane as a COURTESY, and have every right to take up the entire lane. i'd love to see the reaction, if i didnt think motorists in this city were crazy enough to run me down with their car (they almost do everyday as it is, when i ride hugging the curb). 2 pedestrians killed is, again, NOTHING near the number of cyclists killed every year. there needs to be more consequences to motorists... or some education that we are, in fact, allowed to bike in the road, something that none of the drivers seem to be aware of...
I'm an avid cyclist, and I agree with some of what he says, but I also understand basic statistics and I have state an exception to this point "Cyclists are killed by cars much more frequently than pedestrians are killed by cyclists." You can't make a valid comparison of these statistics so easily. Cars and cyclists have more opportunity to interact negatively, than do cyclists and pedestrians. It has to do with the frequency that each vehicle type occurs on the roads. I'd drop that 'point' as stated.
Apples and oranges. You have a video of a place where bikes are the main mode of transit and a culture that, to some degree, is pretty different than our own. People in country aren't on the same level as those in Vietnam, and the idea of eliminating traffic lights wouldn't work here. Do we need LESS laws and regulation? Across the board, yes we do. But we also need to enforce laws we already have instead of constantly making new ones to do the same thing. Cars need to share the road, cyclists need to follow the law and stay of the sidewalks, and pedestrians need to be kind and courteous to all. It's just that simple.
Want to do something positive, Darco? Get your brethren off the sidewalks.
[...] that can hit them hard enough to hurt including cars, cyclists, and joggers (other pedestrians). Readers Write: We donât need your stinking traffic rules And apparently everybody hates the traffic [...]
I live in Los Angeles and ride an average of 150 miles/week with a local club. It is a very challenging environment as some motorists view cyclists as another delay in their already awful commute. There are a few nuts out there but most drivers are well meaning if you ride smart. 1. Be visible (don't ride in the middle of the road and don't ride in the ditch. 3' from the white line works). 2. Communicate. 3. Be predictable. 4. Keep the middle finger in your pocket. 5. Ride in groups when possible. If you are experienced then none of this is new but with all the new riders out there we need to keep beating the drum.
My friend just sent me this link and I am baffled yet mesmerized. It's one of the most surreal things I have ever seen. Does anyone have any idea what this is about?
It's somewhat NSFW so be careful with the speakers.
h/t Rusty
 |
| Remember how Space Cowboys ended? Like that. RIP, Hawk Hawkins. |
There was an interesting opinion piece in the New York Times a few days ago by Lawrence M. Krauss arguing for a one-way mission to Mars. Apparently bringing astronauts back right from the Red Planet now looks cost-prohibitive. Lugging enough fuel and dealing with solar radiation would, he argues, require a vessel too monstrous and expensive to build.
If it sounds unrealistic to suggest that astronauts would be willing to leave home never to return alive, then consider the results of several informal surveys I and several colleagues have conducted recently. One of my peers in Arizona recently accompanied a group of scientists and engineers from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory on a geological field trip. During the day, he asked how many would be willing to go on a one-way mission into space. Every member of the group raised his hand. The lure of space travel remains intoxicating for a generation brought up on "Star Trekâ and "Star Wars.â
We might want to restrict the voyage to older astronauts, whose longevity is limited in any case. Here again, I have found a significant fraction of scientists older than 65 who would be willing to live out their remaining years on the red planet or elsewhere. With older scientists, there would be additional health complications, to be sure, but the necessary medical personnel and equipment would still probably be cheaper than designing a return mission.
Better to send some elderly astronauts/scientists to Mars to spend their last remaining years there doing research and waiting for food drops from unmanned drones. Kraus doesn't mention going bonkers, which is what I would do pretty much straightaway. So that's my question to you, Clog readers: Would you, could you, go to Mars and never leave?
My immediate reaction is to say "Absolutely!", but its hard to know, I guess. What if you got sick, or like you mentioned, went insane? And desperately wanted to return home. It reminds me of a line from Will Oldham's character, Kurt, in Old Joy "I never get myself into something I can't easily get out of." Of course, I'm probably being dramatic and imagining it too much like a horror/sci-fi film. In reality, it would probably be like the rest of my life, really boring and banal. A Starbucks on Mars is still a Starbucks.
This is something I would love to be a part of after I have a couple of children to keep my family going of cause. I would love to go to Mars and never return because it is a big step for a species to colanise an alien world. And it's these baby steps which we have to take before we can run which will prove so vital to the success of doing this. Also I strongly believe for a successful colanisation of a planet you need to have some sort of sacrifice. And I believe anyone who doesn't believe it's an honour to die for ones species for the greater good needs to think again. I mean it's like dying for one's country I mean no-one makes those soldiers go out and risk there lives in hostile environments if it wouldn't help strive for the greater good. If anyone is reading this and is thinking I am deluded to want to die possibly all on my own then they need to think what am I doing to help my race advance and move forward before we over populate this world and destroy this wonderful gift we call home. I would love to see what options could come up if someone reads this as my other alternative for a job is a teacher and I would this exciting and thrilling job more!
Yeah, no, Jonty... That's exactly what I was thinking too. Totally.
I would hitch a ride back with the aliens...then have them eat everybody. Except for the sexy ladies, of course.
in the case of insanity if would only occur if you were the only one there. remember the phrase. the more the merrier. I would go but at about 65 or 70. in a heartbeat. isn't that why people take vacations and go to parks and play to have new experiences.
Its important for us to colonize another planet, specifically to solitify the security of the human race. With nuclear/biochemical warfare, disease, global warming, and the possibility of an asteroid collision, we MUST expand into our universe. In either scenario of the human race being alone in the universe OR one of many, we are currently confined to our prescious planet. We're susceptible to all of the disasterous possbilities stated above, and if something were to happen, it would be the end of everything we've worked this hard to achieve. Thousands of years of history, innovation, and progress: down the tubes. Expansion into the universe is inevitable. Even if these disaster scenarios can be averted, overpopulation will eventually overflow Earth's carrying capacity and possibly ue up all of our resources. We will be forced upward and outward. It may sound like science fiction, but most tecnological advancements start out that way. Mark my words, in 300 years, people will be looking out into the night sky, only to see a pale blue dot, millions of miles away...and they'll think about what it must've been like to live on the one true planet we can call home.
- ActiVman
- adventures
- Arts
- Ask A Man-About-Town
- Award Tour
- Awards
- Bad Idea Factory
- Beer
- Below the Curve
- Bikes
- Booze
- Brian Hickey
- BRT
- Budget
- Budget Fuss
- Business
- Casinos
- City Council
- City Hall
- CouncilMANIC
- CP Abroad
- CP in the Community
- Criminal Justice System
- Day Tripper
- Death and Taxes
- Delaware River
- Design
- DROP
- Drugs
- Dubious Distinction
- Elections
- End of Days
- Environment
- Fashion
- Film Fest
- Financial Meltdown
- FrackTrack
- Free Library
- Gambling
- Gay Stuff
- Get Lit
- Greenstorming
- guns
- Hall Monitor
- Health
- Health Care
- Hello, Kitty
- Holidays
- Ice Cubes
- Iggles
- Immigration
- In Memoriam
- Labor
- Lawsuits
- Letters
- LGBTQ
- Maps
- Marcellus Shale
- Media
- MMA
- Mummers
- Music
- MUST READ
- Mysterious Mysteries
- Nation
- News
- Non Sequitur
- Opinion
- PA politics 2010
- Parking Wars
- Parks and Recreation
- People Send Us This Stuff
- Philadelphia Police
- Philadelphia Union
- Philaphemera
- Philly From Scratch
- philly madness
- Photos
- Poverty
- PPA
- President Obama
- Print Edition
- Prisons
- Protest
- Readers Write
- Real Estate
- Rock Bottom
- Schools
- Science
- Screwing Philly
- SEPTA
- snow
- So Lush
- Soccer
- Sporting Life
- Sports Complex
- State Politicians
- State Politics
- Street Art
- Strike
- Stuff We Like
- Taxes
- Taxi Drivers
- Tech Fetish
- television
- The Budget Crisis
- The City Paper
- The CLOG
- The Human Condition
- The Mayor
- The Phightin Phils
- The World
- Things that make you go hm
- Tinfoil Hats Off
- Under the Table
- Under the Tables
- Urban Development
- Urban Planning
- urban wildlife
- Video Poker
- We Call Shenanigans
- Weather
- Web Junk
- Weekend Omnibus
- White House
- What We've Found
- Women's Issues
- Flyered Up!
- How 'Bout That Weather?
- it's always sunny in philadelphia
- Stu!
- Shopping
- get out
- 10-track mind
- ArtsFlash
- Bloggity
- Bruce Being Bruce
- Colleges
- Comedy
- Gigantic Surprises
- Hello Canary
- Hello Puppy
- errata
- get lost
- Inside The Fishbowl
- Library Closings
- Local Support
- Movies
- Murder
- Night Moves
- Recycling
- radio
- Scientology
- Sex
- Sixers
- Skeeze Police
- State Politicians Screwing Philly
- That's a cool stencil!
- Theater
- Things We See
- This Week
- This Week in Oates
- University City
- WIN
- What we don't heart
- trailer!
- what we heart
- Feeling Guilty
- Askadelphia.
- Broke in Philly
- Contest
- Dance
- Dear Paper Doll
- Do A Good Thing
- Education
- Film Fest Schism
- G20-20 Vision
- Goodbye
- Gossip
- Great American Heroes
- PATCO
- Pearl Jam Week
- Puppy
- Stars of the Photostream
- sustainability
- Lower Merion Webcam-Gate
- The Cycle
- Equality Forum
- Bureaucrat of the Week
- Animals
- ElectionEar
- Photostream
