I don't understand the practice of retail stores employing people to stand on street corners holding signs that advertise the store's sale and clearance events.  My confusion is twofold:  (1) Why can't stores use traditional advertising techniques, like, oh I don't know, real signs, and (2) what kind of person accepts a job opportunity that entails holding a sign? 

I realize that the purpose of the temporary signs is to advertise a temporary event, so a traditional permanent sign would be no good.  Then why don't they just hammer a stake into the ground and hang a sign on it?  Is there some law against that?  Don't people do the same thing when they have garage/yard sales?  The idea of hiring a person to stand there and hold a sign is just ridiculous. 

And as for the type of person that might accept that job opportunity, I realize not everyone has the same expectations from and qualifications for a job as I do.  Not everyone is interested in health insurance and a 401k, and not everyone has a clean legal record.  But still, it seems like there are about 100 jobs I would take before I even considered the idea of standing around and holding a sign.  That's just me. 

I'm a huge fan of the occasion pun run in Pearls Before Swine (examples here, here, and here).  The general pattern is to introduce some sort of strange scenario in the first few slides, gradually build it into a weirder and weirder scenario, then complete it with a pun, followed by Rat telling the comic's creator, Stephan Pastis, to retire.  I can always tell when one is coming because I can't stop myself from looking at the last slide.  But as soon as I see the last slide is unrelated to the rest of the strip, I look away and wait for the pun.  It's always good.  For nerds like me. 

I know some people who have the extremely awkward habit of calculating the approximate date and most-likely special event that led to a person's conception.  For example, it will be stated that a person's birthday is in September, at which point said "conception calculator" will think for a few seconds then blurt out with a grin, "A Christmas baby, eh?"  This is especially uncomfortable when family is involved, which it almost always is. 

This is apparently a Swedish ad for Swedish Fish (via bb), although a real Swedish person said the candy doesn't exist in his country. 

Kitty sandwich?  No.  Swedish Fish?  Yes. 

Scott Adams said a really smart thing on his website recently: 

"I'm not persuaded by the article, but neither do I discount it entirely.  My problem, as always, is that I don't have enough knowledge to make a judgment about it.  It sounds credible, but that doesn't mean much." (emphasis mine)

I feel that way in a lot of situations.  There's evidence and an argument for both sides, but I feel like I still don't have all the pieces, so I have trouble making a final decision.  In a culture where everybody has an opinion about everything, it's refreshing to hear a person honestly admit his need for more information. 

I'm often amazed at how awkward many leaders seem to be.  They look uncomfortable when they interact with people, they say stupid things that will inevitably later be used against them or at least heavily criticized, and they exhibit qualities like disorganization and a lack of attention to details that essentially make them unfit for their position.  One person that comes to mind is this McCain fella.  Watching him interact with that Obama fella during the debates, motioning towards him with head gestures, and then finally awkwardly shaking his hand while forcing a painfully fake smile, made me instantly not like the guy.  After eons of public service in politics, how is this guy still so weird and incapable, while his opponent is so relaxed and natural? 

At work, there are quite a few people who hold leadership positions, and I can't help but wonder how they managed to achieve such success while being so awkward.  These are the people who represent our organization to outsiders and are the names and faces associated with what we do.  So when you see that guy who wears a tie with a short-sleeved button-down shirt and never shows his teeth when he smiles, producing a weird, uncomfortable-looking chubby man-face, think of my organization.  My immediate boss is another story.  He's sociable and fun, but he's the most disorganized human being to ever walk the earth.  He could easily go for the whole mad scientist thing ... except that he's in charge of people.  He manages money and projects.  The fact that someone deemed him responsible enough to be in charge of anything other than dressing himself and finding his way to work is beyond me. 

I keep hearing about newspapers endorsing presidential candidates (NY Times for Obama, Washington Post and LA Times for Obama [ok, like everybody for Obama]), and I can't help but think it's completely backwards.  If I want a political opinion, I'll read some political opinions.  If I want news, I expect to find it in a newspaper.  And sure, we all know most major news outlets tend to show some political bias.  But not all of them explicitly state it.  I suppose I should be thankful that these newspapers are making their opinions open and honest, but at the same time, I'd rather have unbiased people reporting my news.  Thankfully, USA Today is still neutral. 

Tostitos Scoops may be one of the most significant inventions of our time.  With the standard Tostito chip, you had a problem of function:  Using a flat object to move semi-liquid contents (salsa) from one container (bowl) to another (mouth).  It's like using a piece of paper to clean up dog poop.  Sure it works, but by the end of the day, you're covered in crap.  Scoops simply solve the problem of function by holding the semi-liquid contents in a shape more like a shovel, which is also great for cleaning up dog poop (not that salsa is on the same level as dog poop; just a comparison of consistency).  Such a simple improvement, yet so perfect. 

I don't understand why people CC themselves when they send email.  Pretty much every email system since the creation of the universe has automatically saved all sent messages by default.  Maybe it's to see if the message was actually sent.  Again, if it's sent, it'll show up in the sent messages folder.  (And if there's an error in transit, you won't find out about it until the recipient's email server spits back an error message, which will happen independently of you receiving your CC.)  Maybe it's to see how the email looks for the person reading it.  Again, the sent message resides in the sent messages folder, exactly as it will look for the recipient.  Please, someone explain to me the practice of the self-CC. 

A few years ago, scientists at Princeton University discovered that oblate spheroids, when poured into a spherical container and shaken, pack more densely than any other shape.  In other words, the best way to fill up a spherical candy dish (which would be a stupid thing to own because it would roll off the table) is with M&M's (which are oblate spheroids), not Jelly Beans (which are prolate spheroids).  You can't argue with science.