I saw a woman on the street today, wearing a T-shirt that said [geek] (except with real pointed brackets, which LJ apparently doesn't like you to use if you don't mean them). Why didn't I like it? Because it didn't say [/geek] on the back. Sloppy coding, says I.
And I read a case that referred to "a bountiful harvest for those of us who now walk the same interpretive path," and thought, shouldn't that be "those of us who now raid the interpretive larder"?
I saw
Fahrenheit 9/11 last night and found it painful, but not in a bad way, if that makes any sense.
( Read more... )Also, to finish on a lawyerly-geeky note, one of the ads before the movie was for C2, Coke's new half-sugar half-Nutrasweet beverage, and the thing that really interested me about it was that the low-carb craze hit so fast that Coke didn't have time to register "C2" as a trademark; all it had was the TM next to it, and not the (R) of a registered trademark. Z. was highly amused that this was what I found most memorable about the ad. He thinks C2 is not so much about carbs as it is about tapping into the guy market, because most guys won't buy Diet Coke, but they might try something that comes in a black can. Evidence for this proposition comes from the steps outside the school, where a bunch of people including me were waiting for the fire alarm to end so we could go inside -- a group of people were discussing low-carb stuff, and one mentioned C2. The guy in the group said, "I bought that. I didn't even know what it was at the time, but it had a wicked can." He didn't say what he thought of it
qua beverage. I guess image isn't nothing, after all.