The Wolverine

Wow.  I've found that I tend to rate movies more highly when I walk out of the theater, then with time the rating might drop when I start comparing it to other films I've seen.  What brought this up?  Well I've noticed that recently I've been giving movies perfect scores, and others in the past I don't understand how I could have rated them as high as I did.

Regardless, I think The Wolverine will withstand the test of time.  I think it's definitely in the same discussion as Man of Steel and Iron Man 3. 

The Wolverine is based on one of the best storylines from the comics, and overall I enjoyed this interpretation of it.  I liked some of the changes they made to the original story, but wish they could have left or fit other parts in.

Anywhoo, I just have a few comments, though this time they have major ***SPOILERS*** so be forewarned.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

• I've never been a fan of actress Famke Janssen, particularly as the character Jean Grey.  Perhaps she just didn't fit the preconception of the character I gleaned from the comics.  However, I thought she was okay, in this movie.
• SPOILER WARNING, REDUX.  At one point Logan reaches in to his chest to remove a mechanical bug attached to his heart.  But since his entire skeleton is laced with admantium, how did he reach through his ribs?  Kind of awkward having to reach between with just his fingers (or claws) to rip out something apparently firmly clinging to his right ventricle.  Especially without anesthetic or assistance.
• I'm okay with Logan losing his metal claws, though it is still puzzling.  I thought his bone claws were merely laced with admantium, not separate.  Though I guess the bone could have regrown/healed during the battle?  Pretty quick, even for Logan.
• The whole 'two hands' to hold a sword felt a little gimmicky;  they put more screen time into the foreshadowing than the actual event required/deserved. 
• I thought Mariko's ninja friend's change of heart happened a little too quickly/abruptly.
• As soon as the metal samurai started moving, I kind of guessed where it was going in regards to the 'great reveal' at the end; so, in a sense it was predictable.

I actually think this movie was just as good if not better than Man of Steel, but I'm trying to temper my enthusiasm; this is a movie I'm definitely buying the BD (unlike ::cough:: that other solo Wolverine movie-  ugh.)

I rate The Wolverine 4.5 out of 5 stars.

Man of Steel

Fortunately, I watched Man of Steel, today.  I say 'fortunately', because the cinema I normally go to for new movies isn't showing Man of Steel in 2D.  3D, yes.  IMAX, yes, and even a second type of 3D, but not 2D.  Anywhoo, I managed to find a cinema showing it in 2D, and there I went.

Man of Steel was definitely worth the time and price of the ticket.  Though once again, the movie started late.  At the 'official' movie start time, the cinema showed ten straight minutes of commercials -- not movie previews, and not the 'while you're waiting for the movie to start' fluff.  The movie previews came after the commercials.  I fear this is the new normal.

So, anyway... as I said above, Man of Steel is a good movie, perhaps even a great one.  Henry Cavill was great in his role, Amy Adams was good, as were all the other actors.  There were a couple things here and there that bothered me, but it's more nitpicking things, and occurred mostly in minor character scenes, though there was one bit I felt they could have explained more explicitly the antagonists' rationale for a human co-captive.

It's hard to compare Man of Steel with Iron Man 3 because while they're both superhero movies, they each have their own tone.  Iron Man 3 went for more laughs and silly stuff amidst the drama and action, while Man of Steel took on a more serious tone overall, the humour more subdued, or not so obviously deliberate and frequent.

Without spoiling anything, I'll just say that I liked how in Man of Steel I could recognize and sympathize with all the major characters' motivations, even that of the main antagonist, making him a slightly more tragic figure rather than a run of the mill power/money hungry cardboard villain.

Man of Steel, 5 out of 5 stars.

Iron Man 3

I watched Iron Man 3, today.  Well worth the money, at least on 2D.  I've never been a fan of 3D movies so I saved a few dollars watching it the old fashioned way.  Iron Man 3 is much much better than Iron Man 2, and just as good as or even better than Iron Man.

I don't want to spoil anything, so I'll just make some general points:

• I would have thought that most people would know to stay until the end of the credits for Marvel movies, but I'd estimate a little more than half of the audience left early and missed the last scene.  Having said that, significantly more people did stay for Iron Man 3 than I remember did for Iron Man.
• One thing I did fine puzzling was how the main villain died, at the end.   Why did he die this time when he'd survived much worse?
• Given Robert Downey Jr.'s contract with Marvel has now expired, this may have been his last turn as Tony Stark.  If this turns out to be true, I'll be disappointed, but also happy that Robert Downey Jr.'s run as Iron Man ended on such a high note.
• Assuming Robert Downey Jr. is done playing Tony Stark, I wonder which is more likely, that Marvel 'reboots' the character of Iron Man (like Batman and Spiderman), or that Marvel maintains continuity and simply replaces the actor.  I'd lean towards the latter because of the way all the Marvel movies are linked together via The Avengers. Though right now I can't imagine anyone else in the role.  For now, at least, Robert Downey Jr. = Tony Stark.

Anywhoo, Iron Man 3 gets 5 out 5 stars.

Sardines in a Tin Can

Air Canada announced that their new discount carrier, Rouge, will start in July 2013.  Big whoo, I thought, until I came across this bit in the article:

Rouge will also try to keep costs low by squeezing up to 20 per cent more seats into its planes. "The configuration on both the 767 and the A319 will be more dense than what we have at mainline Air Canada," Smith said.

What's that... more seats!? Is it standing room only?

Now, I haven't flown via Air Canada for a long time, for reasons I won't get into here, but the last time I remember the seating being more than somewhat scrunchy.  I shudder how to think they plan on stuffing 20% more passengers/seats on international flights to Europe and the Caribbean.

LG Nexus 4 and Google Play Store

My current mobile (HTC S620 Excalibur) is a little over six years old, and has served its purpose satisfactorily.  Unfortunately, some of the buttons on the key pad are getting sticky, and the battery is losing its charge.  As a consequence, I've been looking around for a new smart phone. I've actually been looking around for a long while now, but any mobiles that both caught my interest and met my criteria were way too expensive with no contract.

Anywhoo,  although I'm by no means an 'early adopter' of new gadgets and technologies, when the LG Nexus 4 was announced, its price point and early previews were such that I fairly quickly decided this would be my next mobile and that I'd purchase one as soon as it was released.  Which brings me to today's irritation with Google and Google Play on-line store.

Irritation #1:  Google didn't announce what time on the 13th November the Nexus 4 would be available for sale.  Midnight?  Nine am? PST or EST? This lack of information told me Google doesn't think my time is valuable, and they couldn't care less if they waste it.

Irritation #2:  Either Google is incompetent at selling physical items and running on-line stores, or Google purposely 'under-stocked' the Nexus 4 so they could generate 'sold-out in 20 minutes' headlines and drive up demand.  I find it difficult to think Google incompetent.  Though Irritation #3 may suggest otherwise....

Irritation #3:  The fact that I managed to get past the 'input credit card information/billing-shipping address stage' of checkout, on three different occasions, only each time to end up with an error message and the purchase failing to complete, was extremely aggravating.  I can understand a site slowing down and such due to high traffic (though I thought Google would have been better prepared), but once the item is in the shopping cart, and you've entered all the information requested, and then you get an error!?  Frustrating.

Irritation #4:  Despite providing my e-mail address to be notified when the Nexus 4 was available, to date I never received any such e-mail.  What was the point of signing up?  Maybe they used the number of people who signed up as a way to gauge demand... but apparently not (see #2).  On the other-hand, from my point-of-view, as the Nexus 4 was never truly available, perhaps I should have waited for a notification e-mail and, if I had, I wouldn't have wasted my time.  So... shame on me?

Irritation #5:  This last is not really Google's fault, but I had to mention it here.  The fact that while the Nexus 4 was sold-out on the Play Store, units were quickly being advertised on-line (at a significant mark-up) on sites like E-bay -- this bothered me.  I don't begrudge anyone trying to make a quick profit legally.  If someone is willing to pay those inflated prices more power to them.  I just hope that in turn no one begrudges the fact that I sincerely hope the number of people who are willing to pay inflated prices (instead of waiting for Google to re-stock, or moving on to a different mobile) are few and far between.

Whew.  This post turned out longer than I thought it would be.  So... what now?  For myself it's now a simple matter of waiting to see which occurs first:  whether Google can make available for purchase (by me!) a Nexus 4, or another mobile is released that meets my criteria and price.

Driving in a Parking Lot

More pet peeves:

1. Drivers swerving off the lane to avoid a speed bump.  It's one thing when the lot is empty, it's another when there are parked cars and pedestrians (like me) in the vicinity.
2. On a related note, drivers driving through a parking lot like it's a completely empty field despite clearly marked lines, parked cars, and pedestrians (like me -- can you guess what motivated me to post, today?).
3. Pedestrians who insist on crossing at high risk locations.  Not just risk for themselves, but for the drivers.  Many, many years ago by my office a pedestrian decided to cross the street at one of the stupidest locations, at the stupidest time, and in a stupid fashion.  Luckily, he was untouched.  Not so lucky was the driver who was forced to a screeching stop, or the other two vehicles who crashed into him in sequence.  But hey, the pedestrian was fine, so who cares?

Lance Armstrong Statement

Armstrong's statement over charges

"There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, 'Enough is enough.' For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in winning my seven Tours since 1999. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a two-year federal criminal investigation followed by Travis Tygart's unconstitutional witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for our foundation and on me leads me to where I am today — finished with this nonsense.

I had hoped that a federal court would stop USADA's charade. Although the court was sympathetic to my concerns and recognized the many improprieties and deficiencies in USADA's motives, its conduct, and its process, the court ultimately decided that it could not intervene.

If I thought for one moment that by participating in USADA's process, I could confront these allegations in a fair setting and — once and for all — put these charges to rest, I would jump at the chance. But I refuse to participate in a process that is so one-sided and unfair. Regardless of what Travis Tygart says, there is zero physical evidence to support his outlandish and heinous claims. The only physical evidence here is the hundreds of controls I have passed with flying colours. I made myself available around the clock and around the world. In competition. Out of competition. Blood. Urine. Whatever they asked for I provided. What is the point of all this testing if, in the end, USADA will not stand by it?

From the beginning, however, this investigation has not been about learning the truth or cleaning up cycling, but about punishing me at all costs. I am a retired cyclist, yet USADA has lodged charges over 17 years old despite its own eight-year limitation. As respected organizations such as UCI and USA Cycling have made clear, USADA lacks jurisdiction even to bring these charges. The international bodies governing cycling have ordered USADA to stop, have given notice that no one should participate in USADA's improper proceedings, and have made it clear the pronouncements by USADA that it has banned people for life or stripped them of their accomplishments are made without authority. And as many others, including USADA's own arbitrators, have found, there is nothing even remotely fair about its process. USADA has broken the law, turned its back on its own rules, and stiff-armed those who have tried to persuade USADA to honour its obligations. At every turn, USADA has played the role of a bully, threatening everyone in its way and challenging the good faith of anyone who questions its motives or its methods, all at U.S. taxpayers' expense. For the last two months, USADA has endlessly repeated the mantra that there should be a single set of rules, applicable to all, but they have arrogantly refused to practice what they preach. On top of all that, USADA has allegedly made deals with other riders that circumvent their own rules as long as they said I cheated. Many of those riders continue to race today.

The bottom line is I played by the rules that were put in place by the UCI, WADA and USADA when I raced. The idea that athletes can be convicted today without positive A and B samples, under the same rules and procedures that apply to athletes with positive tests, perverts the system and creates a process where any begrudged ex-teammate can open a USADA case out of spite or for personal gain or a cheating cyclist can cut a sweetheart deal for themselves. It's an unfair approach, applied selectively, in opposition to all the rules. It's just not right.

USADA cannot assert control of a professional international sport and attempt to strip my seven Tour de France titles. I know who won those seven Tours, my teammates know who won those seven Tours, and everyone I competed against knows who won those seven Tours. We all raced together. For three weeks over the same roads, the same mountains, and against all the weather and elements that we had to confront. There were no shortcuts, there was no special treatment. The same courses, the same rules. The toughest event in the world where the strongest man wins. Nobody can ever change that. Especially not Travis Tygart.

Today I turn the page. I will no longer address this issue, regardless of the circumstances. I will commit myself to the work I began before ever winning a single Tour de France title: serving people and families affected by cancer, especially those in underserved communities. This October, my Foundation will celebrate 15 years of service to cancer survivors and the milestone of raising nearly $500 million. We have a lot of work to do and I'm looking forward to an end to this pointless distraction. I have a responsibility to all those who have stepped forward to devote their time and energy to the cancer cause. I will not stop fighting for that mission. Going forward, I am going to devote myself to raising my five beautiful (and energetic) kids, fighting cancer, and attempting to be the fittest 40-year-old on the planet."

Would it be naive of me if I said I believe Armstrong is innocent of the USADA drug allegations?  Most people, myself included, paying attention to this story have probably already decided for themselves whether Armstrong is innocent or guilty of the allegations, regardless of the outcome of any USADA arbitration hearing, now moot, of course.  Why is that?  In my case, beyond the plethora of passed drug tests, it's because I lack faith in any altruistic motives behind Mr. Tygart/USADA's actions.  Am I just being influenced by good Armstrong PR?  Perhaps.  It doesn't matter.  I want Armstrong to be innocent.  So there you go.  Until Armstrong indisputably fails an official drug test, I'll be hanging on to my naivete for a while longer.

Can Being Too Nice Be Dangerous?

It might be counter-intuitive, but recently I came across another example where being too nice might not be such a good thing on the road.  It's ironic, because I'm always annoyed when drivers display a lack of respect or safety for others by failing to signal and such.

There was a car speeding on the curb lane that failed to beat the traffic before reaching some parked cars, and hence came to a stop and turned on his/her signals to merge.  The car directly in front of me, who was leading a line of five vehicles, came to a rapid stop to let the person merge.  I had room to stop, but my first response after hitting the brakes was to glance in my rear-view to see whether the big honking SUV behind me -- with a bumper worryingly much higher than mine -- was paying attention and would stop in time, and the vehicles further down the line.

Anywhoo, everyone stopped in time, but I couldn't help but wonder whether the driver ahead of me, who was just trying to be nice, was perhaps being too nice in this situation.

Lazy Language

I decided to take the time to describe two more examples of what I consider to be very lazy and misguided use of language. A couple years ago I uploaded a post of a similar vein regarding a cbc.ca story I'd read. This time around, the examples happen to relate to NHL and NHL playoff reporting/commentary.

In what I can only attribute to a misguided and inane attempt to be (tragically) "hip", I've noticed several NHL commentators in both television and radio refer to the city of Vancouver as "Van", as in "the Kings next take on the Canucks in Van". Is it simply a matter of too many syllables, is three too much? Do they then refer to Winnipeg as "Win", Buffalo as "Buff", Montreal as "Mon", Ottawa as "Ott", Toronto as "Tor", Washington DC as "Wash", Winnipeg as "Win", Edmonton as "Ed", Anaheim as "An", and Los Angeles as "Los"? If that's the case then I wonder how they would bastardize Philadelphia with five syllables (apologies if I've left any surfeit-syllable cities out).

I don't want to single anyone out (though I will) because I've heard several reporters (both from Vancouver and not) abbreviate Vancouver in this fashion, but the most recent reporter (and the one that finally tipped the bucket, so to speak, and provided the motivation for this post) was James Duthie on TSN, on a live national broadcast of the NHL playoffs.  Say it ain't so!

The last example for this post is regarding a link on CNN.com, titled "Brodeur blanks Cats, sets record", linking to this story.  Now, abbreviating team names ('Nucks', 'Wings', 'Sens', "Hawks' for example) is nothing new, but this is just going too far.  Brodeur plays for the New Jersey Devils, who are currently in a series versus the Florida Panthers, not the Florida Cats.

Update (25APR2012):  Ugh. Now cbcsports is calling the Florida Panthers, "Cats".

Honking as an Excuse

My first post of 2012 and turns out it's another rant.  Oh well.

My apartment building has multilevel underground parking, which is good; each and every corner, however, is a blind corner, which is bad.  When I first moved in I noticed some residents would honk as they approached a corner, which is good... in theory.  Why only in theory?  Two reasons, one perhaps slightly facetious, the second more dangerous. 

What happens if you're leaving and you hear someone honk?  What do you do, honk back?  Do you both stop, honking one after the other while you each try to figure out which direction the other is going, what level they're on?  Shave-and-a-haircut... two-bits! 

More seriously, though, is that too many use honking as license to drive too quickly in the underground parking.  Just because you honk doesn't mean you can blithely cruise around two successive blind corners at 30+ km/h. 

Fortunately, management has now placed convex mirrors on each and every corner, which is good, meaning that in practice there are no more blind corners.    The bad?  Some drivers are still honking (look at the mirrors, already!) and speeding like if they don't gain a minute on their day they'll lose a million bucks.

PS3 NHL12

NHL 12 for PS3 has been out for a while, now, and while there have been a some neat improvements, I have to say that despite the improvements over all NHL12 has been more frustrating than NHL11, and not in a good way.

Why is it frustrating (other than the fact that it's too difficult/slow to earn xp as a goalie -- that hasn't really changed from previous iterations)?  In my case, at least, NHL12 for the PS3 has the nasty habit of locking up mid-game, for no rhyme or reason that I can determine.  It doesn't lock up all the time, but just often enough for me that I've put NHL12 on the shelf.

A shame, really, because without this issue NHL12 may have been the best iteration, yet.

A few random proposals for NHL13:

• Fix the bug with the volume settings.  Every time I load a save file the menu volume settings are reset to default.  Annoying.
• Get rid of the Verizon (gag) advertising at the start of every BAP game.  Annoying redux.  Even if I were living in the U.S. (where Verizon is located), which I'm not, this unwanted intrusion of an undesired telecom into my home would make me less likely to become their customer.  At the very least, get rid of the vocal.  Ugh.
• Even if I decide to start a career in the WHL/CHL, I'd still like the option of choosing which team drafts my BAP player.

A Quarter Hour in Traffic

Ever since I stopped commuting to work by automobile, essentially only driving on weekends, I've found that I can accept the sometimes frustrating vagaries of traffic much more calmly (though I must admit my re-introduction to the world of drivers who ignore pedestrians hasn't been without close-calls or risk-free).   Anywhoo, this morning was one of those days where I was actually relieved to return home and out of traffic.  I hadn't had one of these in a long while.

In no particular order:

• I escaped, by less than a minute, being trapped in traffic behind emergency vehicles attending to the aftermath of a vehicular accident (I hope everyone involved is okay).
• I was boxed in by traffic insisting on traveling 10 kph below the posted speed limit, on a sunny, cloudless, dry day.
• A driver took a liking to my right blindspot and decided to take up residence there for a couple kilometers prior to, instead of pulling into the completely traffic-less space behind me, speeding up and cutting me off so she could make a left turn.  A turn signal wouldn't have noticeably lessened my annoyance, but it still would have been a nice gesture.
• A car on a side street with its nose blocking oncoming traffic.  This one I gave a good blast with the horn.

All of the above events occurred within the span of 10 - 15 minutes.  So, as I said, arriving home was a relief.

Phishing

In this era of viruses, malware, adware, trojans, hacking, malicious rootkits, worms, e-mail scams, phishing attacks, and what have you, one of the recommendations always given for users to protect themselves is to never click on any suspicious links in e-mails you don't absolutely know is legitimate.

That's why it always irritates me to find links in 'legitimate' e-mails from large, well known commercial companies.   They don't foster good habits when they include links in their e-mails that to my eye, at least, would look suspicious if I didn't already "know" they were legitimate .

Here's just a few recent examples that arrived in my inbox:

http://links.newsletter.futureshop.com/ctt?kn=15&ms=MzY5MDUxNzcS1&r=MzM0NDc2MDA3NQS2&b=0&j=MTA4ODM4MzgyS0&mt=1&rt=0

This one from Futureshop isn't too bad, since "futureshop.com" is in there, but what's with all that gibberish at the end? Is that supposed to instill confidence?

http://lt02.brierleycrm.com/track?type=click&eas=1&mailingid=6086068&messageid=6086068&databaseid=6086068&serial=16777794&emailid=myemail@xxx.xx&userid=xxxxxxxxxxxx=&extra=MultivariateId=&&&6086095&&&http://www.gamestop.com/StoreLocator.aspx?cid=eml_10000269

This link from a Gamestop e-mail only has "Gamestop.com" near the end. Besides, what the heck is "lt02.brierleycrm.com" and all that gibberish between?

To my admittedly non-expert eye these links look all too easy to spoof or mimic for non-legitimate purposes.

And finally the true impetus for this post was receiving an e-mail from Sony Playstation offering free identity theft protection for users in Canada:

"If interested, please submit your email address by 03/10/2011 at 11:59:59 PM CST at: http://www.playstation.ca/identity-theft-protection/. Please note, you must enter the same email address used to register your Playstation Network or Qriocity account[...]"

This sounds like a classic phishing attack, working on consumer concern regarding Sony PSN being hacked earlier this year, and that Sony had stated previously that they would provide something like this globally (where feasible) and not just the United States.  Sort of like those scams that show up trying to take advantage of natural disasters or real events.

Even worse, when I hovered my mouse over the link in the above excerpt, this is the actual address the link would take you to:

http://playstation-email.com/r?xnlJHTHEcqJqHTEHWTJnTnPPclH

Doesn't match too well, does it, and I'm expected to decide this is a legitimate link/e-mail?  When as of this writing I can't find any official announcement of this offer on Playstation Canada or PS blog?

Anywhoo, latest rant over.  I should say that as far as I know the above link examples are legitimate... just suspicious.

Trouble with E-Bikes

Generally I tend to have a favorable view of e-bikes (electric bicycles), but as an increasing number hit the city streets I have picked up on a safety issue that hadn't occurred to me previously.  The issue that worries me is that most of the e-bikes I've seen appear, to my eye, remarkably similar to real scooters.  The only sure way to identify them is to look for pedals or lack of a license plate.  Unfortunately, I'm not always in a position to have a clear view.

Why is this a safety issue?  When I see a car, bicycle, motorcycle, scooter, or pedestrian on the road I automatically expect certain probabilities of behaviour they may take dependent on what category they're in -- and in response to likely behaviour I can take certain defensive or cautionary actions to minimize the chances of an accident.  The safety issue comes up because it's too easy to confuse e-bikes with scooters.

This wouldn't be so much a problem if e-bikes stuck to one set of 'rules of the road'.  Legally, e-bikes are required to behave like normal bicycles but, people being people, I've all too often witnessed e-bikes driving like scooters one moment, and then abruptly acting like bicycles the next, and vice versa, making their actions appear surprising and startling.

And from a mutual safety perspective, one thing to avoid on the road, whether you're a pedestrian, bicycle, motorcycle, scooter or car, is surprising or startling the drivers around you.

Mutual Respect: The Lost Skill of Being Punctual

When did punctuality become a rarity rather than the norm?   I've long grown accustomed to it, but I can't remember the last seminar, speech, or talk that started on time, whether it's late by five minutes, fifteen, or longer.

Being punctual is more than just a matter of courtesy, it's a matter of mutual respect:   the audience's respect for the speaker's time and, vice versa, the speaker's respect for the audience's time.

The most common rationalization I've observed is the 'wait a few more minutes for those who are running late to trickle in'.  Why is *their* time more important than the speaker's or than everyone's already in the audience?  Needless to say I'm not talking about specific individuals or VIPs whose absence necessitates waiting, whether by virtue of their position or connection to the occasion.

There are numerous and legitimate reasons to be late.  I've been late, but not once did I expect the speaker or everyone else to wait for me before starting and I suspect most people feel the same.  So why do it?

Snowy Days in The Land of Tim Hortons

The Land of Tim Hortons had 15 cm  of snow a couple days ago, and overnight there was another 5 cm and it's still snowing as I type.  I had mixed feelings about heading out this morning, but most of all I was looking forward to it because it had been a while since I'd driven my R32 in significant snow conditions.

Random observations and/or rants after returning from my snowy foray:

• The same truck made me cringe twice, today, and I'm not talking about a pick-up truck.  It was more similar to a mid-sized fire truck size, and wider, to boot.  The first cringe occurred when he changed lanes to my direct right -- the sudden impact of his snow splatter hitting the R's side was very irritating.  The second cringe happened when he immediately turned on his left turn signal, indicating he wanted to make the same left turn I did.  The fact that he wanted to turn per se wasn't what made me cringe, it was the fact that the truck left it so late that he didn't leave me any safe options to get out of his way. Oh yeah, and the itty bitty  fact that I was in a dinky little hatchback facing up against a monster metal box on wheels was quite cringe-inducing, too.  Anywhoo, to cut this short, I made a safe, legal left turn, and the truck made an illegal one.  All's well that ends well.  I guess.
• Thumbs down to the pedestrian who tried to cross a major intersection against the lights with approaching traffic.  A bad proposition at any time, but a snowy, slushy road isn't the best time to be in a hurry.  You might slip.  Which that pedestrian did.
• The same Impreza fish-tailed twice making two different left turns.  The first left turn was from a parking lot.  Traffic was extremely light, so I don't know why he/she didn't wait for a larger gap so that he had time to take it slower, and safer.  The second left turn and fish-tail was at a traffic light.  This time there was no approaching traffic at all so I really don't know why the Impreza didn't take it more slowly, especially as this happened only a minute after the first.  Perhaps a really short term memory.  I hope the Impreza wasn't misled by how relatively quickly I made the turn -- I was trying to stay sufficiently ahead of (i.e. away from) him.  Anywhoo, I made doubly sure to stay well away from this particular Impreza.
• I liked how on the highway slower traffic kept left, and drivers generally were traveling at slower speeds than normal.  Still, I'm not sure how helpful this would have been given how closely most drivers were still following one another.  If you need to stop suddenly the best brakes and winter tires in the world won't help much if you lose traction on the snow.

Two Spaces after a Full Stop

One of the things that bothers me whenever I read and/or edit a manuscript, or any text at all, is when the author doesn't use two spaces after a full stop, or end of a sentence.  That goes for colons, too.  When did the standard change to a single space?  Why?

Hmm... now that I think about it, maybe I was taught to put two spaces after full stops and colons in typing class.  Typing was an elective in high school, so perhaps most students weren't taught the correct spacing.  Then when word processing software became more mainstream in school the sheer number of students using single spacing became the norm.  Sad, if true.

I think Microsoft Word would do the world -- okay, me -- a lot of good if they made a tool/option to automatically add two spaces after each full stop in a document. Perhaps in the grammar checker or something.

A Tale of Two Idiots

Two unrelated pedestrians, separated by seconds, jay-walking at one of the busiest downtown intersections in the middle of rush hour, brazenly ignoring the honking vehicles.  The second pedestrian even crossed the intersection diagonally.

Made me wish Stephen King's Christine was around to help demonstrate natural selection.  I jest, of course, but wow.  Someday those two are going to get themselves run over, and you know what?  The only sympathy I'll feel is for the unfortunate driver.

Something Odd

There was an article in a local paper about the tragic death of a young man.  One paragraph in the article immediately struck me as odd.

"The pedestrian has been identified, but his family has requested to not release his name. Friends have identified the man killed by a train early Sunday as Brendan Swanson." -- thespec.com

Perhaps odd isn't the most accurate description, but these two sentences definitely felt dichotomous or incongruous.

For now, ignore the question of whether the identity of this particular individual was of sufficient newsworthiness that the release of his name overrode his family's request for anonymity.  Why even mention that the family had requested to not release his name if in the following sentence you identify him by name?

It feels like the author is flaunting the fact that he has ignored the family's wishes.  That probably wasn't the author's intention, but that was the impression I had while reading it.  Maybe I'm thinking too much.

Still, it's... odd.

PS3: NHL 11

I'm still debating whether NHL 11 for the PS3 is worth purchasing.  So far NHL 11 is
definitely an improvement over NHL 10, but is it enough of an improvement to merit its
price?  In my case, I'd have to say "yes", but not by much.

NHL 11 addresses and fixes some issues I've mentioned before that irritated me with NHL
10.  I've only started NHL 11, recently, so it's still wait and see for some longer term
issues, but here's what has been immediately noticeable (to me) in NHL 11, both good and
bad, compared to NHL 10.

• The garish, colour-blind and ugly upgrade equipment is gone in NHL 11.  You can still earn and use boosts to your player's attributes, but the terribly awful-looking equipment in NHL 10 is no where to be found in NHL 11, thank the hockey gods.
• It remains to be seen whether NHL 11 fixed the bug where unlocked attribute boosts spontaneously re-locked.  This next point requires some context.  One of the selling points EA Sports has been pushing strongly, to convince NHL 10 owners that it's still worth purchasing NHL 11, is a new physics engine.  I won't get in to too much detail here other than to say that it does make the game look more interesting and realistic, perhaps most noticeable with body checks.  My issue is that it feels like EA Sports has fell a little too much in love with it.  What do I mean?  Well, during stops in play the game plays short video replays of recent on ice action.  Theoretically this is a good idea, though even in NHL 10 the game often didn't show the play I actually wanted to see.  In NHL 11 it's even worse.  NHL 11 just loooves to replay body checks.  Goalie just make a save that necessitated a face-off?  Forget replaying that.  Replay a body check.
• Also on the naughty list:  home goalie make a spectacular glove save?  Instead of playing that, let's see a video of the other goalie drinking out of his water bottle.
• NHL 11 has shortened the video where you watch your player skate on to the ice prior to the start of each game.  I miss the longer version in NHL 10.  If you didn't want to watch it you could end it at any time by pressing a button so I'm not sure why they decided to short change it.
• NHL 11 has stopped providing the seating capacity and name of the arena prior to each game.  Not a biggie, but something I appreciated in NHL 10.
• I've just started a career as a goalie in Be a Pro mode and I'm already wondering what the GM AI has been smoking.  After a 4-0 record in the pre-season, with a save percentage of 0.947, 2 SO, and a 0.500 GAA, what does the GM say to McLean?  "The only reason you're not going down to the AHL is because you were drafted 9th overall".  Eh?
• It's early days in the season, but I'm already worried McLean's Wild won't even make the playoffs.  Why?  Because to date the Wild have never managed to win a game McLean did not start, and the Wild coach insists on giving Backstrom, who has yet to win a game and has much poorer stats than McLean (in NHL11, obviously), the majority of starts.

UPDATE 2:  Over-reaction over.  With calm, clear mind, I realized my issue with the inability to turn off the auto-save feature is easily solved.  Start with two game saves pre-draft.  Take saved game #1 through the draft.  If I get drafted by one of my unacceptable teams, then quit the game and load saved game #2.  Save over saved game #1.  Then take saved game #1 through the draft again.  Repeat as necessary.

This way saved game #2 is always maintained at the pre-draft point.  Once I load saved game #2, it's critical to remember to save over saved game #1 before going through the draft.  Else the auto-save will re-write over #2 and I'd no longer have a save point prior to the draft.


UPDATE: I've just discovered what I think is a major disappointment with NHL11.  Unlike NHL10, in NHL11 apparently there's no way to turn off the auto-save feature.  Majorly frustrating.  In my futile search for method to turn it off, I read in some forums that EA Sports did this to prevent cheating of some kind for online play.  I never play online so I can't confirm it, but it sounds reasonable.

Unfortunately, this inability to turn auto-save off is a source of major irritation for someone like me who doesn't play online.  I would like the ability to re-do drafts in Be a Pro mode just in case my player gets drafted by a team I out right refuse to play for.  The way NHL11 is set up now, any save game prior to the draft is automatically overwritten with post-draft data.  Ugh.  I really do not want to have to play through the Memorial Cup tournament over and over again just because I get drafted by one of the handful of NHL teams I dislike.  Which just happened, now.  Ugh. 

I'm going to put NHL11 back on the shelf until I recover from the frustration.  What a waste of my time.