Hi, my blog sounds like it is based on a negative premise. This is because of nothing more than the name being undeniably miss-leading. The name is merely a general definition of my personality, but not a full one. I am not all negative. I wanted that sentence to be specially emphasized in your minds because of how I meant it. If it was not specially emphasized in your minds, let it be now. anyway, an example of me being non-pessimistic, is tonight. Tonight, I will sit down with my whole family, which is not every night anymore, and eat a delicious meal that my mom and dad half (if not entirely) made up. here is an example in the midst of my example. I have complete faith that my parent's made up meal will be amazing. How could you be if they just now made it up? Ahh, that, is the right question. Every time that I can ever remember my mom making up a meal it was great, for one. And for two, my dad is infamous for being successfully bold when cooking. And three, when my mom and dad work together, it cannot be described in mere human words. Back to the original example. My family and I will laugh, joke, and in a whole be merry. Right now, I am not being in the least pessimistic. Why should I be? Today my mom, dad and I mulched the newly planted greens, fixed the car, and I got to talk to my best friend some. Life right now is genuinely good.
But I named the blog what I named it because I am notorious for being able to see the bad in things. If I make something and show it to someone, I will be able to tell them a flaw in the item. I don't think that's even up to debate. I do it literally every time I make something, and truly believe that it's true. So yes, I might burden any readers of this blog with negative posts, but there will be a lot of positive ones, or at least some. So don't let the name, or background, dissuade you from reading this blog, but if you think the writing is as bad as I do don't read it.
Friday, February 17, 2012
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Entering the blog world
Today I woke up, wandered around my house aimlessly, and eventually found something to do. My board game needed replacement triple A batteries, so I went to where the batteries were and got spares, only to find that they did not fit in the battery bank of the game. Being the pessimist I am this made me very angry, and my mom, (who is a saint) being the optimist she is, tried to calm me down. She decided to come up with a way for me to vent when I get angry at corporate insolence, so she told me to start a blog.
So now you know why I am writing, just not what my blog will be about. I started this because I am blessed with the curse of realizing just how badly the world needs change. The result of this is an unfortunate and slightly regulatable anger problem. So this blog is just a way for me to vent.
Now for the post itself. The reason I got mad when the triple A batteries didn't fit in the battery bank, is because of something called planned obsolescence. One description of planned obsolescence would be, when a corporation intentionally makes a low quality item so that you will buy a replacement from that corporation when the item fails. In the case of Khet, (my failed board game) when I tried to replace the batteries, the battery bank only worked with unusually small triple A batteries. I made sure by trying both kinds of batteries I have in my house, and although I could make them fit into the battery bank, I had to hit the bottom of the board to get them to come out. This wouldn't bother me if the game had worked with these batteries, but it didn't. So the company, I think, is trying to get you to buy another one of these expensive board games. Now this is only a half thought out speculation, so here is one that I have more evidence to support. There is a watch that I have bought twice called the Casio Forester. This watch is designed to last exactly three years. It's not just that after three years you have to get a new battery, the watch itself ceases to function. Now the multinational corporation Casio, with all of the "advances" in technology that the world has gone through, could easily make this affordable outdoors watch last for years. So why don't they? Well, my mom used to tutor a young lady that was having a hard time in school. One day she presented my mom with a paper she had to do for her school on durable modern goods that are made. When my mom asked what the definition of durable was, she was answered with, "Items that last for at least three years". What this means is Casio can produce this watch that they know will fail in three years, and advertise it as being "durable" without anyone being able to question it because it fits the technical definition of "durable". Also, I am not going merely off of personal experience, the lady in the jewelery section of Wal-Mart directed me towards this watch because it, and I quote, "It is a good watch, it is good for three years". So are these things all coincidences, or are they planned obsolescence? Honestly no one knows other than those who will never admit it if it is planned obsolescence, so you need to decide for yourself what you believe, but you know what I think.
So now you know why I am writing, just not what my blog will be about. I started this because I am blessed with the curse of realizing just how badly the world needs change. The result of this is an unfortunate and slightly regulatable anger problem. So this blog is just a way for me to vent.
Now for the post itself. The reason I got mad when the triple A batteries didn't fit in the battery bank, is because of something called planned obsolescence. One description of planned obsolescence would be, when a corporation intentionally makes a low quality item so that you will buy a replacement from that corporation when the item fails. In the case of Khet, (my failed board game) when I tried to replace the batteries, the battery bank only worked with unusually small triple A batteries. I made sure by trying both kinds of batteries I have in my house, and although I could make them fit into the battery bank, I had to hit the bottom of the board to get them to come out. This wouldn't bother me if the game had worked with these batteries, but it didn't. So the company, I think, is trying to get you to buy another one of these expensive board games. Now this is only a half thought out speculation, so here is one that I have more evidence to support. There is a watch that I have bought twice called the Casio Forester. This watch is designed to last exactly three years. It's not just that after three years you have to get a new battery, the watch itself ceases to function. Now the multinational corporation Casio, with all of the "advances" in technology that the world has gone through, could easily make this affordable outdoors watch last for years. So why don't they? Well, my mom used to tutor a young lady that was having a hard time in school. One day she presented my mom with a paper she had to do for her school on durable modern goods that are made. When my mom asked what the definition of durable was, she was answered with, "Items that last for at least three years". What this means is Casio can produce this watch that they know will fail in three years, and advertise it as being "durable" without anyone being able to question it because it fits the technical definition of "durable". Also, I am not going merely off of personal experience, the lady in the jewelery section of Wal-Mart directed me towards this watch because it, and I quote, "It is a good watch, it is good for three years". So are these things all coincidences, or are they planned obsolescence? Honestly no one knows other than those who will never admit it if it is planned obsolescence, so you need to decide for yourself what you believe, but you know what I think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)