There were several hundred thoughts that went through my head while reading this. 3 were positive*. Both companies are excellent customers of mine and I wish them well because I like me. I am, this very moment kind of sort of enjoying a Coors Light out of a can. It is cold and refreshing and nearly perfectly watery. I am unable to ascertain how much easier the can makes it to drink (they put some new bumps on it that supposedly fix the horrific problem of beer being nearly impossible to extricate from said can). Never had much trouble getting beer out of a can, but if lesser folk find the problem problematic, I applaud the effort to help them.

It makes me wonder what the other 63% describe it as was the worst thought. How else could they describe it?!? Spicy? It is watery-tasting. That is the point of light beer; to not be intrusive while doing its job. Refresh me, make me think a bit more clearly for a bit by shutting down the less useful parts of my brain and don't distract me by being too attention seeking.

*"Marketing puffery" was implicated in all two of the three.

37% say 'watery'

Sounds like huge progress has been made.

Every beer is watery, imo. Because of that I have switched to whisky and cognac.

So this great used bookstore lost its lease and has to move/go out of business for awhile, etc. Fifty percent off all books is the mantra of the owner. After a thorough perusal, I purchased:

A first edition of Life on the Mississippi, by Samuel Clemens
A first edition of Great Trade Route, by Ford Madox Ford
A first American edition of The Autobiography of Bertrand Russell (Three Volumes)
An oxford compact one volume book of Hume’s Treatise -Originally published in three volumes back in the day of more paper and less morals.
My Father Mark Twain, by Clara Clemens
First Edition of Tough Trip Through Paradise 1878-1879, by Andrew Garcia
A History of Free Thought in the Nineteenth Century, by J. M. Robertson (Two Volumes)

Total bill was less than $300, American of course. Other types of money don’t count. I will reserve other sarcasms and witty remarks for later on my choice of purchases. Feel free to critique or criticize as warranted, or unwarranted.

Is it me, or do Americans go nuts for Bertrand Russell?

Some Americans probably do.

It's not me, but do the British go nuts for Mark Twain?

Sure, he used to live just up the road.

some well done analysis of an UFC striker

Online nerdy fun game to kill time between friends/challenge; It may have side applications if you think about it.

Start with a web page like say this;

http://www.cnbc.com/id/17689937/site/14081545/

and without ever using your keyboard, only the mouse (and no bookmarks of course) (you also cant introduce any keyboard character replication software using mouse keys or any copy text paste method etc), just using content available on the webpage you happen to be and its links, develop a plan to reach for example and read about this story;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Meredith_Kercher

or this entry

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benoit_Mandelbrot


or even

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_refrigerator


The winner of course is the player that arrives at the destination (or at a site that nearly equivalently talks about the destination topic in similar content detail) with the minimum number of steps.

So only clicks to links. Try to see how connected the web is and how creative you can become in connecting common topics to keep advancing towards the target.

Seems like a race to Wikipedia and then the standard Wikipedia game. I also always preferred playing for time but to each their own.

Edit: I assume right click search is out of play because that would get you there pretty immediately...

"What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas" is some seriously false advertising.

we have a winner.

my whiskey/cognac collection gets a look-in every night and that daily nip of [insert today's choice of expensive booze] is one of life's joys.

don't forget Armagnac though. as a university student i spent $20 buying a shot of this stuff. cost an arm and a leg. forever after it was known as arm-and-a-legg-iac. i just rediscovered the stuff (1979 Bas Armagnac) and it lived up to all memories and expectations.

my first post to this thread. hope it was random and drunk enough.

Since you already knew it was false advertising, I presume you have felt the effects on a more personal serious level* and thus have to vent some emotion.

See a medical doctor; they have medicines that can clear that up.

*The condom broke

After drinking it I can't stop myself from singing 'Ah, but working too hard can give you an armagnac-ack-ack-ack-ack-ack'.

It never fails to not impress whomever I am with.

I've got no complaints. It is more of a story about a man from Hamelin.

Thoroughly enjoying trying to keep the balls in the air from a juggling perspective.

i would be impressed.

i'm sure you love a 'bottle of red...bottle of white' just as much

We can only go so far on caviar and Cabernet.

I'm currently drinking a red wine (merlot) out of a martini glass and eating brownies made by my sister-in-law days ago.

Life is good!

Liar!!! Have a bit more caviar and cab and it will make itself entirely clear. Switch to merlot if necessary.

Yes. Yes it is. Notes of chocolate and grass and how the **** do I deserve this nice treatment.

Dear god no.

Time to watch Sideways again.

evo question:

does a spices that has eyes on tentacles (like in some movies) have an evo support for existence? Can we expect aliens to look like that?

I would assume not, since it would be to easy to cripple their eyesight by predators and since eyesight is nm.1. to survival it is almost impossible to c how they would survive. Thompson gazelle could have them (since it has speed advantage) - and it would be better for them then static eyesight for example but we have to have in mind it evolved from smaller species that at one point didn't have that speed and at that time protecting eyes in a hard shell was better survival.

Other thing is we can't expect them to survive the mating game (fighting), so it really make it impossible possibility for some specie to be balling like that....

cliffs: Hollywood lies!!!!!

http://molluscs.at/gastropoda/index....tentacles.html

How come we haven't evolved to have eyes in the back of our heads?

my bad, snail was my reference

you're obv right, but I didn't target lower end of the food chain (bugs etc. obv have gazillion tentacles)

I was wondering: how would higher lifeforms look? and especially ones with the bigger brain....

funny that the snail has a shell to retreat for safety - maybe we can expect a retractable eyes from heads into the skull as a reasonable option (the more I think about it)

cuz we evolved from something that had only 2 eyes and depth perception is more important then 360 field of view for predators

if we evolved from something with three eyes who knows....

or maybe if more higher life had evolved with shells we would see all sorts of retractable stuff. Easy to imagine in some environment where a protective shell is a huge advantage.

In general though I think you way underestimate the possibilities, there's so much wierd stuff out there you might imagine was implausible if it hadn't happened. I guess if life on earth hadn't gone down a route with penes the we would find the idea totally implausible for much the same reason. Then there's the French.