Hi Again
I use to use Facebook a lot.
Tons.
If there was a new game (hehe) or app, I was using it.
Then the novelty wore off, and I had better things to do with my time.
I'll use it to check who is trying to get hold of me, make an event or check out some pictures, but generally I'll only log on 2 or 3 times a month lately, sometimes even less.
My fiancée hates this, she sits on her phone browsing status updates and liking things, then complaining because I haven’t replied to her cute wall post from a week ago.
I removed all Facebook notifications to email, and had my usage managed to what I want out of it.
Then I log into my Gmail, and noticed that Mr Zuckerburg has had a stroke.
Or something similar.
I found out that other people can add me to groups.
Not invite, fucking add.
Now suddenly, I get told that I am now a member of this random "Come check out this random inside joke that you had to be at this bar on this day to actually understand" group, and then 50 other updates telling me that Jeff Fucktard thinks it's funny in blue and Jenny Ballsack totally LOLZ when she….FUCK OFF!
So now there a new step in my Facebook routine.
It's now… reply to pokes, delete 90% or new messages, read the other 10%, dismiss all "Come mix a new drink in COCKTAIL WARS" requests, write something cute on my fiancée's wall, and now I have to also leave groups I didn’t even join.
Where is the "don’t let other people assume I'm interested in their group and add me without asking first" button?
I watch the "Social Network" movie, and I was told that the original idea around Facebook was exclusivity. You have to accept friend requests. You can make your profile private. Other stuff like that too.
Now I have to leave groups I didn’t join, I have friends messaging me to come to this gig that they helped organise the paper plates for, 50000 Farmville "give me a bunny" requests.
I think Facebook has lost the plot.
And I think I'm going to have to start de-friending people who join me to groups, or message or wallpost me about marketing crap.
I'm just glad I barely use the thing, cos then I'd probably get really annoyed.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
So where is the followthrough
In any sport where you swing a stick to hit a ball, the concept of follow-through is key.
Don’t stop hitting the ball when you hit it, keep hitting until the ball is well clear of you.
But I noticed the other day how little 'follow-through' governments have.
I stay in Bedfordview. Residents on Kloof road complained to the council that traffic was speeding too much, and requested a solution.
The council took action, and soon speed bumps and traffic circles (AKA Sandton speedbumps) appeared on the road.
Which worked. Usually the "rebels" that cause speeding issues have low slung road cars that kak over speedbumps.
Great, the democratic process in action.
A while later, at a town council meeting, residents were informed that after months of fighting red tape and other issues, the speed limit on Kloof road had been reduced to 40kph.
Residents were not impressed. The councillor was surprised that hardly anyone present approved.
Why, well, I reckon it's because "phase 1"of the cure worked.
But as far as the council was concerned, after Phase 1: Speedbumps, came Phase 2: Speed limiting.
They didn’t stop to check on the effectiveness of their initial solution.
No follow-through.
I watch and love Top Gear, and (forgive my chronology, I watch it on my PC, not on TV) and they recently (?) had an interesting piece of information.
A number of stretches of road were flagged as high accident zones.
Insane numbers of traffic cameras were installed and maintained at cost to the taxpayer. A year later, the accident figures on those bits of road were still the highest in the country.
You could even argue that the cameras were 100% ineffective.
Now in a private company, a revelation like that would lead to, maybe, a dismantling of the program.
Paying for a useless system is a drain on company resources, rather put those funds into researching an effective solution to the issue.
But not in government.
They have no follow-through.
They're not spending their own money, and maintaining those cameras creates jobs, which is a good thing for a government to do.
The original point of the exercise gets lost in the exercise.
It won't be canned because it failed to achieve its purpose, because its purpose becomes itself.
And, as evidenced in Egypt with Mubarak, once you have a self-purposed system in place, it will fight not to be questioned and examined, since it has lost its original purpose and would fold under scrutiny.
So sadly I bring you a clear problem but no idea of a solution. I kinda wonder if the entire government has become self-purposed?
Don’t stop hitting the ball when you hit it, keep hitting until the ball is well clear of you.
But I noticed the other day how little 'follow-through' governments have.
I stay in Bedfordview. Residents on Kloof road complained to the council that traffic was speeding too much, and requested a solution.
The council took action, and soon speed bumps and traffic circles (AKA Sandton speedbumps) appeared on the road.
Which worked. Usually the "rebels" that cause speeding issues have low slung road cars that kak over speedbumps.
Great, the democratic process in action.
A while later, at a town council meeting, residents were informed that after months of fighting red tape and other issues, the speed limit on Kloof road had been reduced to 40kph.
Residents were not impressed. The councillor was surprised that hardly anyone present approved.
Why, well, I reckon it's because "phase 1"of the cure worked.
But as far as the council was concerned, after Phase 1: Speedbumps, came Phase 2: Speed limiting.
They didn’t stop to check on the effectiveness of their initial solution.
No follow-through.
I watch and love Top Gear, and (forgive my chronology, I watch it on my PC, not on TV) and they recently (?) had an interesting piece of information.
A number of stretches of road were flagged as high accident zones.
Insane numbers of traffic cameras were installed and maintained at cost to the taxpayer. A year later, the accident figures on those bits of road were still the highest in the country.
You could even argue that the cameras were 100% ineffective.
Now in a private company, a revelation like that would lead to, maybe, a dismantling of the program.
Paying for a useless system is a drain on company resources, rather put those funds into researching an effective solution to the issue.
But not in government.
They have no follow-through.
They're not spending their own money, and maintaining those cameras creates jobs, which is a good thing for a government to do.
The original point of the exercise gets lost in the exercise.
It won't be canned because it failed to achieve its purpose, because its purpose becomes itself.
And, as evidenced in Egypt with Mubarak, once you have a self-purposed system in place, it will fight not to be questioned and examined, since it has lost its original purpose and would fold under scrutiny.
So sadly I bring you a clear problem but no idea of a solution. I kinda wonder if the entire government has become self-purposed?
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
OK, so yolasites is pissing me off even more...
In 1911, a law is passed in South Africa, the first of its kind worldwide.
This law was passed to control and oppress the culture and freedom of mine workers.
This law was the first of many that ended up being called Apartheid.
2011, 17 years after the new, free and fair regime took power, this law still stands.
One might think that there would be a reason for the continued legality of this law. But despite numerous studies, local and worldwide, indicating this law is illegal, it persists.
That law makes cannabis illegal in South Africa.
So, politically, there is no reason for the law.
Did you know you can overdose on alcohol…you probably did.
Tobacco…. Yep, you can OD on cigarettes.
Cannabis – You cannot OD on cannabis.
So, purely for that reason, with the legality of tobacco and alcohol, there is no valid reason, medically, why it should be illegal.
Economically..now we’re getting closer to the cause.
Weed is, well, a weed. It can grow anywhere just about. It can grow in your back garden. So if it becomes legal, it will need to be taxed. But how the fuck do you tax a weed. I don’t know, and until someone figures that out, the law will never make it legal.
That’s where decriminalisation comes in.
You may have heard that if you scrape the white kak from the insides of banana skins, bake it according to a recipe, you can get high.
So why aren’t bananas illegal or subject to ‘sin tax’ like smokes and booze.
Because the law doesn’t care about bananas in that way.
And decriminalisation will put cannabis it that boat too.
Or something like that.
So why the sudden history lesson?
Well I heard on the radio that a report has come back from Advocate Myeni about South Africas war on drugs.
It has almost no online prescence or reporting, all I could find was
this
on SAFM’s website, saying :
10:05 Decriminalise Cannabis in South Africa, says Advocate Myeni
The legality of cannabis has been the subject of debate and controversy for quite some time now in South Africa. Rastafarians are normally the ones who regularly push for the decriminalisation of dagga. Today we hear from Advocate Myeni who also thinks it should be decriminalised.
I hope that this report is not ignored like many before it.
But I guess you have to follow the money, and from that perspective, it doesn’t look good.
This law was passed to control and oppress the culture and freedom of mine workers.
This law was the first of many that ended up being called Apartheid.
2011, 17 years after the new, free and fair regime took power, this law still stands.
One might think that there would be a reason for the continued legality of this law. But despite numerous studies, local and worldwide, indicating this law is illegal, it persists.
That law makes cannabis illegal in South Africa.
So, politically, there is no reason for the law.
Did you know you can overdose on alcohol…you probably did.
Tobacco…. Yep, you can OD on cigarettes.
Cannabis – You cannot OD on cannabis.
So, purely for that reason, with the legality of tobacco and alcohol, there is no valid reason, medically, why it should be illegal.
Economically..now we’re getting closer to the cause.
Weed is, well, a weed. It can grow anywhere just about. It can grow in your back garden. So if it becomes legal, it will need to be taxed. But how the fuck do you tax a weed. I don’t know, and until someone figures that out, the law will never make it legal.
That’s where decriminalisation comes in.
You may have heard that if you scrape the white kak from the insides of banana skins, bake it according to a recipe, you can get high.
So why aren’t bananas illegal or subject to ‘sin tax’ like smokes and booze.
Because the law doesn’t care about bananas in that way.
And decriminalisation will put cannabis it that boat too.
Or something like that.
So why the sudden history lesson?
Well I heard on the radio that a report has come back from Advocate Myeni about South Africas war on drugs.
It has almost no online prescence or reporting, all I could find was
this
on SAFM’s website, saying :
10:05 Decriminalise Cannabis in South Africa, says Advocate Myeni
The legality of cannabis has been the subject of debate and controversy for quite some time now in South Africa. Rastafarians are normally the ones who regularly push for the decriminalisation of dagga. Today we hear from Advocate Myeni who also thinks it should be decriminalised.
I hope that this report is not ignored like many before it.
But I guess you have to follow the money, and from that perspective, it doesn’t look good.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Fuck you blogger, you suck giant hairy monkey balls
Fuck this shit.
If i type live, it loses my posts.
Now it wont let me fucking paste from word.
I'll have one more post here, the address of where I'm moving this blog.
If i type live, it loses my posts.
Now it wont let me fucking paste from word.
I'll have one more post here, the address of where I'm moving this blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)