Lucky

From PCMag.com: Pros The thinnest tablet currently available. Excellent 10.1-inch HD screen. Honeycomb 3.1 brings improved multitasking, Flash support, and a higher-quality user experience. Comes with earbuds—a rarity for a tablet. Cons TouchWiz UI means update delays for future Android versions. App selection is weak. Even with a strong Wi-Fi signal, online video playback sputtered in our tests. Bottom Line The Wi-Fi–only Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 is the thinnest Honeycomb tablet available, and it's very capable, but its Touchwiz UI means Android updates are in doubt. *** I have no idea what a TouchWiz UI is. But I do want a good tablet. The Ipad2 was my choice. The KindleFire might have been a good compromise, but all of your software comes from Amazon (I think), which has no incentive to give you a good price. For example, magazine subscriptions cost more for the tablet than they do for the actual paper copies.

Here is an article from the LA Times on how some cancer patients react to 50/50, which, I neglected to point out, is based on a true story. Link to LA Times story

I dealt with American again this week on an international flight. 35 minutes on the phone, but when the confirmation came in the mail I saw that my partner did not get ticketed as he should have. So another 22 minutes on the phone today. They charged me a $25 processing fee on his ticket, but the other day they did not charge that for my ticket. I didn't say a word. They had already charged me $175 to get the miles from my canceled trip reinstated to my account. You know that required nothing more than a computer click. So, for my 57 minutes to get the ticketing done, do I get any reward? No, I just pay them $200 for the privilege of using my miles. At least we don't have middle seats to Rio.

Gawker.com today takes a long and hard look at the downside of Mr. Jobs. While everyone else is busy canonizing him, there is a long list of troubling facts that need to be heard, least among them is this: "In the name of protecting children from the evils of erotica — "freedom from porn" — and adults from one another, Jobs has banned from being installed on his devices gay art, gay travel guides, political cartoons, sexy pictures, Congressional candidate pamphlets, political caricature, Vogue fashion spreads, systems invented by the opposition, and other things considered morally suspect." But there is much worse, including the use of child labor and other bad labor conditions on his plants in China. It's worth a read: Jobs: Not A Saint

I was going to add this to the thread I started on 50/50, but it seemed odd to hijack my own thread, so here it is. My apologies if I have created too many threads lately: Kenneth, over at kennethinthe212.com, gives an opinion on seeing the gay movie Weekend. But I was taken with his comments on some of the other patrons as I had two of the other 4 people in the theater with me at 50/50 busy on their phones during the movie: Within seconds, it became obvious these two guys behind us were going to be "a problem" (that one of them had his legs folded in such a way that his FOOT was completely between our seats was our first clue), so we said fuck it and sat all the way near the front, flush right, where we could have our own row. During the film -- which is small and intimate and has thick British accents that are often muffled by the boys lying in bed -- a woman seated near us took -- TOOK!!! -- three phone calls, chatting with someone at a slightly muffled volume as if none of us could hear her because of her courteousness. It's been a week and I'm still in complete shock. Clearly there was no emergency -- her tone made it obvious, as had the fact that she remained in her seat -- so in addition to the phone ringing and her talking, rightfully furious patrons (who had not already seen the picture, mind you) took turns screaming at her -- "Get off the damn phone!," "Hang up that phone RIGHT NOW!" -- all the while the usual amount of phone ringing and texting (you can see the light -- totally takes you "out" of the film) went on, too. Did I mention that I'm still in shock? (kennethinthe212.com) *** (Not to hijack my own thread), but it does seem that people have decided they have a God-given right to talk on the phone or light it up in the dark theater as often as they want!

Well, Epigonos and I agree on guns, that is something! But a Republican party that supports the death penalty and opposes abortion is not a consistent party, so it is no surprise that he might disagree with them on a policy or two. With the Republicans obstructing any progress on the nation's deficit and faltering economy, we might all die anyway. Or at least the nation might. Remember, it's the Republicans who started the wars in Iraq, and Afghanistan, opposed gay marriage and gay soldiers, supported the Bush tax cuts which have contributed so much to our deficit, and supported the Patriot Act which is slowly destroying our civil liberties. I am glad that Epigonos can find at least one or two of those policies to disagree with.

The need to pee when there is no toilet is a human condition known to almost everyone. Leave it to the Dutch to find a way to unplug the leak: AMSTERDAM (AP) — The Dutch national railway has an unusual solution for passengers who need the bathroom on a train line designed without them: plastic bags. The rail operator underlined that the bags, introduced Friday, are for use in emergencies only, when a train has stopped and passengers can't be evacuated. The idea has been met with incredulity by politicians and the general public already unhappy with the short-haul "Sprinter" trains' bathroomless design. NS spokesman Eric Trinthamer confirmed Friday the "pee-bag" plan is not a joke. The bags are kept out of sight in the conductor's booth. The bags have a cup-shaped plastic top and contain a highly absorbent material that turns urine into a gel-like mixture. After use the bags can be sealed and thrown in the trash.

Glad that you liked the review. I posted it here and at daddys. 18 views here, 13 there. Of course, 29 of the views are me!

In the movie, 50/50, there is a pot smoking scene. Seth Rogen's character got the pot with a medical marijuana permit. His illness? Night blindness!

The landlord is 14 years old?

In the huge auditorium where I saw the movie 50/50, there were 5 people, thus the party of five. I paid the senior rate of $7, but my movie loyalty card got me a free popcorn, which, if you believe the theater, is a $6 value. The movie has five main characters,so it too is a party of five. Cancer movies usually are parties, right? Melodramatic music, a lovable guy dying with his loyal wife at his side, thinking all the way that he can beat this, until he can't. Well, that's not 50/50. For one, the girl is out of it almost right away. After all, we can't have a girl who cheats on a cancer patient, can we? But if you are thinking that this might be your typical cancer movie, think again. Joseph Gordon-Levitt stars, and I dare you to find a JGL movie that wasn't good. JGL gets his diagnosis right off the bat. The doctor who informs him of it should get an Oscar, as he nails the uncaring caregiver with gusto. And it's not a very nice cancer, either. Were any other actor playing the role, it might be a challenge, but JGL has that sardonic wit and know-it all smile that carries him. After his diagnosis, he meets his therapist, who is much better than the doc at the TLC, but unfortunately for JGL, he is only her third patient. However she makes up in caring what she lacks in experience. By the end of the movie, you are quite fond of her. So if the girl is out of the way off the bat, we don't leave JGL alone, No, he has Seth Rogen as his best friend and sidekick. I don't often like Rogen's movie roles, but for this one he nailed it. He keeps JGL suitably distracted as they go on well, beaver hunts. Rogen's guy wants to get laid, and he soon figures out how cancer can help in that department. The other two characters in the movie, of the prominent ones, are the mom and dad. Dad doesn't have much to do as he has Alzheimer's and introduces himself to his son. But mom carries a big role. One might stereotype her, but I don't think the movie ever says that she is Jewish. But she could be. Does she seem a little overbearing? Perhaps, unless you understand how it might be to have a husband who can't communicate and a son who won't. (It takes the therapist to come up with that one, not me.) The movie even has a scene with the hospital workers in the background, smoking. How often do we see that in real life? So, being a cancer movie, something must happen, right? Either there is the tearful deathbed scene or the happy "he beats it" ending. I can't help you there, because I want you to see this movie. But trust JGL to make it all worth your while. He is credible throughout. I did wonder how a person who in fact is dealing with cancer in real life might react to this movie, and I decided that it would be just fine. No one mocks the disease or makes it look easy. The fact that one who has cancer must deal with friends and loved ones who don't know what to say, and thus say the stupidest things, is part of the movie. But there is plenty in the movie to make the topic serious while providing some comic relief. The ending may not please the cancer patient, but then again, it just might.

I think this is more likely for her:

But wouldn't leather beat polyester in hot weather? (PS: I tried to go to subwaycrush.net, but the site must be overloaded as the connection took so long that I gave up.)

The Playboy Club became the first show of the season to be canceled on Tuesday. According to the NY Times, the only hour long drama with poorer prospects was Charlie's Angels. From the Times: The first casualty of the new television season, “The Playboy Club,” which was canceled by NBC on Tuesday, was also one of the shows considered least likely to make it this season, according to players in The New York Times TV Ratings Game. And 12.3 percent of the participating readers correctly predicted that show would last only three episodes...Just 26.3 percent of participants in the Ratings Game predicted that “The Playboy Club” would last. The only hour-long drama with poorer prospects, according to Times readers, was “Charlie’s Angels.” Only 5 percent of players had that re-booted ABC drama in their virtual prime-time lineups, compared to 11.8 percent for “The Playboy Club;” fewer than a quarter of players — 24.7 percent — predicted that the Angels will survive at least eight episodes compared with 26.3 percent for the bunnies.

Lurkerspeaks deserves a lot of credit for bringing up the subject and getting folks to open up about it. I doubt he feels too alone, as it seems that MER is attracting more posters than ever.

The NY Times today takes a look at marijuana vaporizers. Are they just a novelty item, or a new way to ingest marijuana without all of the smoke? If you cough and hack after taking a hit, this may be for you...if you can afford one! From the Times: Besides the novelty, advocates say that using vaporizers is healthier than inhaling smoke. “Vaporized marijuana is virtually free of whatever toxic properties come with burning the plant,” said Dr. Lester Grinspoon, an associate professor emeritus of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. The benefits of vaporization are not limited to health, added Dr. Grinspoon, who said that he owns a high-tech vaporizer called a Volcano, about $525. “Vaporizers use an internal heat source, so you conserve more of your grass,” he said. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/06/fashion/vaporizers-put-to-use-with-marijuana.html?scp=1&sq=vaporizer&st=cse Full disclosure: I spent $80 for a vaporizer at a local pipe shop, and it has hardly won me over. I am not a big pot fan anyway, but I do have a medical marijuana permit. I just don't see how the vaporizer beats the real thing. Mine is the one on the left, but it sits unused:

Does it matter how footballer Tom Brady wears his hair? The NY Times today takes a look at the various styles he has worn: More: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/06/fashion/tom-brady-cuts-his-hair-why.html?ref=style

A new website, www.subwaycrush.net, features photos of hot guys on the New York subway. Here's a sample from the Dailynews.com:

Turns out that the fee of which I complain is waived if I book 21 days or more ahead. AAdvantage Ticketing Service Charge Ticketing Service Charge (Waived for AAdvantage Executive Platinum® members) Ticketing Service Charge applies when ticketing via Reservations, American Airlines Travel Center or Airport Ticket Office AAdvantage Award Processing Charges Ticketing less than 21 days prior to departure $75 (Waived for AAdvantage Executive Platinum®, AAdvantage Platinum® and AAdvantage Gold® members using miles from their account)

Of course, alcoholics in recovery might disagree, and the families of those who cannot control their drinking might want to string this professor from the a rope. The rest of you, however, should pay heed.

Anton, are the tickets that you refer to frequent flier award tickets? because that's what I am speaking about. American charges a"redemption fee" for using your miles to get a ticket. I am also speaking of a domestic ticket, here in the US.

Even though we may think we know all of the arguments pro and con, I have not engaged in a debate on this for years, so I was interested to see what others had to say, and perhaps I might now react differently than I did in the past. You never know when an argument is finally going to hit home.

Here is how the $85 breaks down: AAdvantage Award Charge(s) First passenger $75.00 AAdvantage Award Charge(s) Taxes & Fees Additional Taxes and Fees per passenger $10.00 Tax and Award Charge Information Flight Subtotal 25,000 miles + $85.00 Your Trip Cost: 25,000 miles + $85.00 USD

Have you noticed how Obama seems to be doing the same thing, if not more of it, towards terrorists that Bush/Cheney did? So have the Cheneys. From HuffPost: But he (Cheney) also said Obama should take back his criticism of the Bush administration's tactics in the war on terrorism. "The thing I am waiting for is for the administration to go back and correct something they said two years ago, when they criticized us for quote overreacting to the events of 9/11," Cheney said. "They in effect said we had walked away from our ideals, taking policy contrary to our ideals when we had enhanced interrogation techniques. They have clearly moved in the direction of taking robust action when they feel it is justified. In this case, it was. They need to go back and reconsider what the president said in Cairo." The former vice president was referencing the speech Obama delivered in Cairo in 2009, in which he said the the trauma of 9/11 caused American to "act contrary to our ideals" and announced that "I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States" and ordered Guantanamo Bay to be closed. Cheney took issue with Obama's speech on Sunday. "We were never torturing anyone in the first place," he told CNN's Candy Crowley. "He said we walked away from our basic fundamental ideals. That simply wasn't the case. What he said then was inaccurate especially now in light of what they are doing with policy." "He slandered the nation," Liz Cheney added, "and I think he owes an apology to the American people. Those are the policies that kept us safe."