Sitting on the balcony watching the world go by, thinking “I really should update my blog”. So… here’s the update. Enjoy.
Sitting on the balcony watching the world go by, thinking “I really should update my blog”. So… here’s the update. Enjoy.
I’m testing a new design today. If things look a bit wonky, it’s not your eyes, it’s the blog. I’m bored with the design and think it’s time to refresh the ole litter box. Won’t take too long, promise.
Someone wrote in and made a great suggestion. Vespa Virgins for the new Church of the Holy Vespa! We could have Vespers for the Vespa Virgins to attend. Oh this could get totally out of control. Wonder how much I could sell spots in the Vespa Virgins for? I could get the donators photo, airbrush robes on them and put them on a Vespa scooter.
Anyone know how many Vestal Virgins there were? (I so wish I had thought of Vespa Virgins!)
I have been thinking a lot this month. No, no.. don’t scurry away! You have nothing to fear, I think. You see, I want a scooter. Not just any scooter, but a beautiful Vespa. Since the first time I saw one in a film in the 1980′s I’ve coveted the Vespa. Well, I’ve hatched a cunning plan to get one. I’m going to start my own religion and fleece receive donations from my flock. It’s brilliant, isn’t it? I’ll take donations via paypal and sock the money away until I have enough for my lovely, lovely Vespa.
I’ve been pondering what the new faith will be called. I’m thinking of Church of the Holy Vespa. Rather a nice ring to it, eh? With each donation you will get a photo of a Vespa, with a baddly scribbled drawing of a cat riding it. If you are the first 100 faithful, then I’ll bestow upon you the title of “Vespa Supplicant”, which allows you the privilege of purchasing your own robes, in tasteful red or green, and wander the land begging for more alms for the Holy Vespa. My scooter will be our holy grail of sorts.
What do you think? … hmmm wonder if i can tax exempt status for this.
I wrote that title and then realised common sense has been absent in a large portion of society for a very long time. But every once in awhile, I find myself shaking my head in utter disbelief at the level of monumental stupidity, and arrogance of those who want to be rewarded for their moment in the Darwinian sun.
It’s never a good idea when stupidity and greed marry, it inevitably ends up in a lawsuit. Take for instance the woman in Utah who walked onto a busy highway and was hit by a car. Who does she blame? Herself? Oh silly reader, you should know better by now. Of course she isn’t to blame. It was the driver on the highway she strolled out on and Google Maps for supplying her with the information:
As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant Google’s careless, reckless, and negligent providing of unsafe directions, Plaintiff Laren Rosenberg was led onto a dangerous highway, and was thereby stricken by a motor vehicle
Yes the main plaintiff is Google Maps because it didn’t warn her it could be dangerous stepping out onto a road – busy or otherwise. Yes, it was a newsflash to me that you need to look both ways and use judgment before crossing the road, but I’m funny that way. No where on the Google Maps page does it say the path shown is safe or traffic free. It is assumed the user should use certain amount of caution regardless of the route. Simply because the path has been supplied by Google Maps, does not mean the user does not have to exercise due care and caution. The main question that should be asked of this person is “do you normally step onto a road/highway without looking”?
An element of personal responsibility comes into this entire sorry episode. Ultimately it is the plaintiff’s responsibility to look both ways before crossing the road or choosing to walk along a busy highway. It is not Google’s responsibility to hold her hands. They made no promises the route was traffic free. They simply supplied a path from point A to point B. If she had looked at a paper map and followed the same route would she sue Rand McNally? Is she going to sue BlackBerry for displaying the route?
As a user of Google Maps, I am rather ticked off. Never in my wildest dreams would I blindly follow a set of instructions. I use the route as a reference only. I wouldn’t walk out into traffic, I wouldn’t walk off (or drive off) a bridge as happened to some, I would not drive into a corn field because the map said to. While I was researching this story, I was shocked by the number of people who wrote Google was sued for giving bad directions. No Google did not give bad directions. Google did what it was asked to do – supply a pedestrian route. It was not asked to supply a route that was car free. The user opted to suspend common sense and put the onus for her safety onto the shoulders of everyone around her.
Perhaps Google Maps should be suing her for bad publicity and egregious use of their mapping tool.
The Royal Bank of Canada was targeted by a shadowy group called Direct Action in Ottawa. One of the RBC banks was firebombed the other day by this group as part of their protest against RBC and greater corporate Kanada. Like most groups that commit stupid crimes that endanger the innocent, they posted their manifesto shortly after the attack. Here is a snippet:
“Royal Bank Canada is one of the planet’s greenest companies” according to one of its own brochures. Coporate Kanada saw fit to include RBC as one of the top 50 in a competition dubbed Canada’s Greenest Employers, which purports to recognize organizations that have created “a culture of environmental awareness.” Yet RBC is now the major financier of Alberta’s tar sands, one of the largest industrial projects in human history and perhaps the most destructive. The tar sands, now the cause of the second fastest rate of deforestation on the planet, are slated to expand several times its current size.
Dudes! I’d take your manifesto a wee bit more seriously if you hadn’t been caught on camera driving away in an SUV! Come one. If you are going to attack “Corporate Kanada” for it’s anti environmental activities, the least you could do is drive up to the site you are going to firebomb in a Smart Car. Seriously – an SUV? I hope it was at least a hybrid. Maybe you can contact the makers of Smart Cars and get them to sponsor you. Or better yet, ride up on a bicycle. Now that’s environmentally conscientious!
What makes me think these nobs don’t see the irony of using an SUV to strike in the name of environmentalism.