Dan's Landing » Newspapers

New superheroine?

Danny — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:05:43 +0000

Reading through The Hamilton Spectator site today, I came over this headline:

Would her sidekick be Alimony Payment Boy?

Posts that may be related:

Why does The Eyeopener need so much from me?

Danny — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:19:37 +0000

The Eyeopener is Ryerson University’s student newspaper. Like other university newspapers (not McMaster though) it is updated online and allows comments to be left if you have an account. To create an account though you must provide:

Username [OK]
Password [OK]
First & Last name [WHAT?]
E-mail [OK]
Birthday [WTF?]
Postal/Zip Code [WTF? x 2]
Province/State [WTF? x 3]
Country [WTF? x 4]

Also to accept some terms an conditions. I understand some of the fields required but whiskey tango foxtrot guys, why do you need my postal code? Brock’s paper doesn’t.

Screen cap of The Eyeopener’s account creation fields after the jump.

Technorati Tags: The Eyeopener

Posts that may be related:

Where’s the Sil?

Danny — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 05:02:01 +0000

Here’s a question for my McMaster friends: Why hasn’t The Silhouette online been updated since March 30 (I can only assume 2007) (see the screenshot below)For those that don’t know, The Silhouette is the McMaster University weekly newspaper. I wonder why it hasn’t been updated like EVERY OTHER NEWSPAPER.

(My guess is that it’s because of Joey Coleman. The second article on the online front page mentions the beginning of his involvement with Maclean’s so he wants to keep it that way.)

Posts that may be related:

A creepy love letter to Juno McGuff

Danny — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 04:33:30 +0000

I stumbled upon TOTALLY CRUSHIN’: Juno McGuff on the Brock Press site and after reading it I am a bit creeped out and amused.

I’m not sure if this is a regular column published in the paper but I still think it’s really weird to write a letter to someone (fictional nonetheless) and tell them you want to

“…ride my bike to your house, guitar strapped to my back, Sunny D in hand, and we could strum and sing and kiss and cuddle and you could tell me all about who you are, who you want to be and what you believe in and I could tell you how pretty you are, how much I appreciate that you exist, that you’re awesome and sassy but not sassy in that awful, daytime TV way and we could kiss again and snuggle and talk about it on your hamburger phone and exist for no one else but each other and I could love you forever and forever and forever until the world ends, the universe explodes and until the very last neutron of hope and love and wonder spirals through the galaxy and drifts into oblivion.”

That falls under the REALLY creepy category for me.

If you don’t know who Juno McGuff is, first of all get out from under your rock and while checking out show times in your area YouTube the trailer or watch it below.

If you go to the movie’s IMDB site, and check out the forums (or really check out any forum where Juno is discussed) you’ll find a lot of people saying the film promotes teen pregnancy and gives teens the impression that it’s as easy as having the baby and giving up for adoption. This is the main criticism I have found on the tubes and quite frankly it’s bull. Sure the movie isn’t exactly accurate in depicting the whole pregnancy experience (I don’t know what exactly that is since I don’t plan on experiencing pregnancy) but if you look at it as a whole EVERYTHING is treated lightly and humorously. Juno isn’t meant to be a “cautionary whale” but a “light-hearted feel good movie” as my sister called it.

On last check, people are complaining that the movie is over rated. It all depends on your expectations going in. Knowing Michael Cera’s performance in Superbad, the year’s MAJOR comedy motion picture, I wasn’t expecting a very serious movie on the subject. To be honest I would have been disappointed if it had been. Definitely the cheese to the macaroni of movies in 2007.

Posts that may be related:

Celebrate Drunk Times Come On!

Danny — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 02:35:50 +0000

I love RSS Feed Readers. When the feeds work, I grab a lot of very interesting articles, tips, etc. I happened to read this piece by my friend Joey. I’m going to categorize it as one of his opinion pieces.

Any way, in it he toys with the idea of the drinking age in Ontario (19 years) being lowered to the age of majority (18 years). His view is that the government won’t lower the age because “this would be political suicide for any government that has the courage to treat adults like, well, adults.”

I am inclined to argue that’s not the reason. Apart from the whole political and maybe financial sides of things there are social issues to consider. Underage drinking is a reality. Unfortunately so are young drunk drivers. Keeping the legal drinking age where it is now is not hurting anyone. The government has no reason to change it. It is a well established age of passage in our current culture. Everyone knows the age to drink is 19. Many respect it and many don’t.

Joey suggests the age should be lowered since it was set this high due to highschool’s grade 13 which does not exist anymore. That’s hardly a good reason for it.

Posts that may be related:

Breaking News: OPP Sends posse on investigation

Danny — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 02:45:12 +0000

Apart the normal police stuff like driving raids, arrests, big sting operations, and enforcing orders given by judges (OK maybe a little bit less of that last one) the OPP needs to keep itself busy some how right?

What better way to spend our tax dollars than investigating a missing ass.

“I think you might know him very well!”

Posts that may be related:

Ti-Cat news

The Ministry Strikes back

Danny — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 13:38:53 +0000

I have updated with my response to the letter. Please note I do not offer a solution just my opinion on the letter. As many people in our society nowadays, I’m an opinion-giver, let others do the work of fixing it.

I can’t write too much on this due to time constraints at the moment, but the Ontario Minister of Training Colleges and Universities responds to the Hamilton Spectator article condemning the government (on behalf of good ol’ Peter George – my entry on this) for not offering extra funding for the extra student McMaster decided to take on this year. ~~The text of the letter follows, I will come back to this post later on so fix it up~~

The article/letter is here: http://www.thespec.com/printArticle/20947.

To summarize it for you: ministry says “hey we gave you money and you would have received it even if you hadn’t taken on more students.”

Some key points of the letter (everyone likes numbers and statistics. Makes you look cool, unless you fail probability and have to take it again cos the damn prof figured theory would be much better to test students on than…but I digress). Note: these are from the article, in full, I did not even paraphrase. Got it? Alright so here we go with my opinion on this letter and the article it responds to: BULL. To both. I have already explained why I think McMaster’s position is bull (they keep building and the projects keep going over budget). So the key points:

Between 2002-03 and 2006-07, four years, McMaster’s operating funding increased by more than $60 million to $183 million, a 54 per cent increase in four years.

I understand the number of students taught increased, over the same period, by 32 per cent, substantially less than the budget increase. We are funding every student, and more. In presenting McMaster’s budget challenges, the much larger contribution by the people of Ontario to education at McMaster over the past four years should be recognized.

In terms of the government’s response…alright I’ll give you the operating fund increase. It’s huge, although I don’t quite see the correlation between a 54% increase in funding and a 32% increase in students. Actually I just don’t see the point of the second statement I’ve extracted. “The number of students taught increased…by 32 per cent, less than the budget increase.” That’s all fine and dandy but are you saying a 1% increase in students should result in a 1% increase in costs and thus funding? [seriously I'm not being sarcastic or anything of the sort, I would just like to understand what you meant to say by that.] Sure it’s a smaller increase but:

What if each 1% increase in students requires more than a 1.6875% increase in funding? Say 1.69%. That alone amounts to a shortage of 0.08%. It doesn’t seem like much, but take that out of the operating budget of $183 million and you end up with $~~14.64 million~~ $146,400. And all that because every 1% increase in students needed 0.0025% more funding than allotted. It’s amazing how numbers work isn’t it? [I'm not saying that's the math the ministry did, it's just what I understand from their letter. I welcome comments on it and everything else]

The number of students McMaster takes is up to McMaster, not the Ontario government. McMaster would have received more operating money even if it had not taken additional students.

Again, what are you saying? Of course the number of admissions is up to McMaster and not the Government. That’s just an obvious statement of fact, probably fort those of us who can’t see the obvious, obviously. You’re also saying “McMaster would have received more operating money even if it had not taken additional students.” Did you read the article? It was saying they took on students, and now you’re not giving them enough money. So what you’re saying is that even if you hadn’t taken on that extra 10% we would have given you the money that we haven’t given you anyway. Do you follow that? Because I certainly don’t.

The way I see this charade, university complains, Ministry responds generically. This response is so badly structured it might as well not have existed at all. The points it makes are confusing at best if not irrelevant. I’m sure the ministry’s PR people figured they should respond and wrote this after attending a pub crawl. At least I’m hoping, because if they actually put more thought than looking up facts and spewing them on paper…

~Last edited June 19, 2007 11:20 PM EST

Posts that may be related:

My 2 beef(s) with Maclean’s Education site

Danny — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 03:48:38 +0000

This post is about 2 problems I have with Maclean’s Education site. They may apply to other parts of the Maclean’s site but I haven’t visited them for long enough to notice.

Before I mention them, keep in mind that I am aware Maclean’s most likely is not the only site which may be suffering from these. I guess I just wanted to pick on them tonight (or place whatever other rationalization makes sense for you). Without further ado:

FLASH ADS -> Yes. A lot of other sites have them. However it seems that only the ones on their site cause my laptop to go bonkers (read: fans start pumping out a lot of heat). I understand they’re nice and although I enjoy the idea of being able to read a Maclean’s article and roast a marshmallow by my laptop’s air duct, I just plain hate the noise the fans make (yes I’ve cleaned them, I just like them OFF better). I don’t see why normal ads don’t work, but I guess the ad content is only approved to display, not designed by your webmasters. [Oh and I know I can use a Firefox extension to turn them off but I don't need to give FF more reason to be bloated]
RSS FEEDS -> specifically those that don’t work. I enjoy reading blogs in my RSS reader. Call me old fashioned(or I guess that would be new fashioned…either way) but I like knowing a new post was made so that I don’t have to check the blog everyday. I’m just lazy like that. I contacted Joey Coleman about his feed and it’s up and working now. If you guys want I can take a look at Erin Millar’s and Tony Keller’s and see if I can figure out what’s wrong. Please get them working. Readers expect more from a publication like yours.

I’m not sure how you’d be able to solve the first problem I have. I guess trying to figure out why a flash movie which only displays one or two screens with no advanced transition seems to take so much processing power to display would be a start. The RSS Feeds, like I said, contact me and I’ll be glad to help you out. I’m not much of a webwiz but I can troubleshoot really well so I’m offering my services for the rest of your site too.

Posts that may be related:

Day #158 of 2007, only 1168 to go

Danny — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 01:13:38 +0000

Since I have a lot to post about, here’s another from The Hamilton Spectator. The newspaper has a section dedicated to the schools in the area called The Pulse where every week or so one school (elementary or secondary) receives the chance to publish articles about their school.

Anyway enough introduction. I was browsing it today and I noticed my former high school had been recently published. I figured I’d give it a read. Unfortunately I started with this article on Organ Donation.

Organ Donation
By REMOVED TO SPARE SOME EMBARRASSMENT
The Hamilton Spectator

Heroes. No, not the ones we read or hear about in great sporting moments or the ones with supernatural powers, these heroes are different. These heroes are organ and tissue donors who, like any hero, make a difference in the lives of others. By volunteering to donate organs or tissue, their unselfish deed aids in the good of society.

In Ontario there are approximately 1,715 people on an organ waiting list. Facts show that one person dies every three days waiting for an organ; therefore in one year alone 442 people die waiting. Incredibly a person who has passed away still has the power to save lives through organ or tissue donations. One person alone can save up to 8 lives by donating organs or a remarkable 50 lives by donating tissue. Organs such as the heart, lungs, pancreas, or kidneys and tissues such as eyes, heart valves, or skin are all gifts which can be given to save or improve the lives of people in need. Individuals like Nancy Hemica who work for Ontarioâ€™s Trillium Gift of Life network are dedicated to not only finding suitable donors but also organizing the process by matching organs or tissue with people in need.

As Christians Jesus calls us to love one another as he has loved us. â€œThis is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this that one lay down his life for his friendsâ€ (John 15: 12-13). By donating a gift of life to a stranger we act upon what Christ has taught us. We have the power to become heroes to people in need by donating organs or tissues.

Notice anything wrong with it? Please say you did. If you didn’t go ahead and read it again.

Done? OK Well you might have noticed that to the writer, there are over 1300 days in a year. Where did I get this number? Well according to the writer: “one person dies every three days waiting for an organ” and in “one year alone 442 people die waiting.”

Some great math there buddy (and amazing proofreading). Let’s recap:
1 person dead / 3 days
442 deaths / year (=x days)
Solve for x. x = 442 * 3 = 1326 days in a year.

Great math skills there buddy. That’s why when you write something, you don’t just COPY the numbers, you try to make sense of them too. It’s called thinking. Apparently they don’t teach that in high school…I wonder if a teacher proofread that article…if he or she did…oh boy!

Today is day # 158 of 2007, only 1168 to go…bet Christmas seems that much farther away doesn’t it?

Posts that may be related:

Letters In The Spectator…

Danny — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 00:43:23 +0000

I was browsing the Hamilton Spectator today just to keep apprised of what’s going on around town and country and such. As always I read the letters received and two of them really stood out (read: made me go Whiskey Tango Foxtrot are you thinking). As such I thought I would share them and what I would say to the writers. Read on, enjoy and feel free to respond as well. You can read the Letters June 8th, 2007 to see I’m not making this up.

Letter the first:

Fund private schools

By REMOVED, Stoney Creek
The Hamilton Spectator
(Jun 7, 2007)

I am ashamed that my Ontario government does not provide funding for families that send their children to private schools. This is in violation of our federal Charter of Rights, which states, “every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.”

As a Christian living in a country founded on Christian beliefs, I struggle daily with being discriminated against. Funding our public and Roman Catholic school systems, but failing to fund private schools, is discrimination. I don’t advocate removal of funding from our Catholic system, but I don’t understand why other school choices should be discriminated against. By refusing to fund private schools, more students are forced to attend public schools because their parents are unable to pay for the private education.

This has been justified by arguments saying that, by funding private schools, the public system will lose its ability to meet the needs of students. This is false. Looking at Catholic schools, it is evident the public system is not affected by having the government funding split.

Funding the current private institutions would lessen the load on the public and Catholic systems, allowing a more desirable situation overall. Private schools in Ontario are having their rights trampled. British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Quebec and Newfoundland fund private schools. The Ontario government needs to reverse its position on this issue.

My response: You’re kidding me right? First of all, let’s stop right here with using the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to make your cause seem worthy. You’re equal, yes, no one has said you’re not. How exactly is it discrimination under the charter if PRIVATE schools don’t receive funding? (You didn’t prove your point. Unfortunately just stating it, does not make it true.) I’m sorry to inform you, but PRIVATE schools are just that PRIVATE. Since not everyone can attend…there’s no reason why my tax dollars should go to your kid’s private school. I’m sorry, I’m not going to pay for that. Also, are you talking about private schools or Christian schools. Last I checked Catholicism was part of Christianity, or did my Catholic school education steer me wrong?

OK that’s it for letter one.

Letter the second:

Companies outsourcing our jobs to other countries

By REMOVED, Hamilton
The Hamilton Spectator
(Jun 7, 2007)

Today I had occasion to phone Bell Canada. The young lady had an East Indian accent. I asked her where is she located in India, she replied just east of New Delhi.

So Ma Bell is outsourcing our calls to India. Not only our phone business but also Sympatico Internet service calls.

Another time I phoned a different Internet company, and that call was answered from the Philippines.

Is it any wonder workers in Canada are losing their jobs?

Companies eager to get our money for their services or products outsource our jobs to other countries, not because we are unable to do the job but because it is much cheaper for them elsewhere.

My response: This one is right up there with the Bushisms we all make fun of. You’re telling me companies outsource because it’s cheaper? You’re kidding me! I thought it was because we really don’t have people who are prepared to answer the technical questions posed of Bell Support and many other companies. Those people in India and the Philippines must be so much better trained than people here. It’s not hard to believe though. I’m sure the writer of this letter is one of those people that go shopping for technology and start the conversation with “I don’t know anything about ______.” Way to have some confidence. Oh and yes it is cheaper to outsource…take a WILD guess why almost everything says “Made in China.”

That’s it for this letter too. Now it’s your turn, leave your comments, tell me what you think.