So I was driving to a wedding once and I was noticing all the different signs on the road. There are really a lot of different kinds of signs if you think about it. I mean, the kinds that you learn about in Drivers Ed - yellow for warnings, orange for construction, brown for historical sites and recreation (there's that word again...). As I was driving at this moment one particular type seemed interesting to me. It's a blue sign with white writing, which means that it gives drivers information about services. You have probably all seen them before - telling you the gas stations or eating establishments that are at any given exit. Letting you know where the hospital is or the next rest stop (with or without restrooms). We probably don't notice these signs very much when we are driving through the city or town we live in, because we're already familiar with the information being shared. However, I seem to rely heavily on these signs during road trips through unknown territory, as I'm sure others do as well.
Regardless, the question that came to mind has to do with the choosing of information to go on those signs. Who decides whether or not the gas station on that exit is listed? What happens when a new restaurant is built - do they have to request for a little picture of their logo to be added? I also wonder if it's a state responsibility or a city responsibility. Is there a charge to put your name on the sign? It is marketing of sorts. If it weren't for those signs in the middle of no where, how would anyone know that the Sinclair station is on that exit, to the left approximate 0.2 miles? I think few people would know, except for the residents of said town. Also, if the blue signs are, by definition, to give us information about services - why not make signs for other types of services like hair salons and spas?
The wonders of the world. Maybe someday I'll know.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Friday, September 12, 2008
Interesting Words
So these are some words that I find particularly interesting. I'm sure there will be more at some point - I'll add a Part II if I think of more. Until then, here they are:
Flintstone - as in The Flintstones...Barney and Rubble. I guess I used to think it was Flinstones, but it certainly makes WAY more sense if you consider the show that it would be called Flintstones. Like flint...as in a kind of rock. Flint, steel, fire. Yeah, I'm sure that everyone knew this already.
Texarkana - So this was something that I realized while I was on a road trip and we drove through a city called "Kanorado" (cleverly named for it's location on the border of Kansas and Colorado). It was at this moment that I realized that Texarkana was named that way for a reason. Yeah, this was a few years ago :) I still have yet to figure out the relationship between Kansas and Arkansas.
Windshield - I get the shield part, but is it really just for wind? I guess it would be too long of a name if you tried to throw in Wind, Rain, Rocks, Debris-Shield.
Recreation - So this was something I had never thought about until a few days ago. So often we abbreviate this word by saying "rec" but I had never thought about breaking the word up as re-creation. That idea of a "recreation" center makes so much more sense! Now if I could only make it there to recreate myself...that's a whole different story.
Horsepower - So I understand the concept of this...the idea that it would take 300 horses to have the same amount of power...blah blah. I get that. But it seems like a gross generalization to me. There are so many different horses, each with different strength capabilities. Even trying to take an average of them seems nearly impossible.
Midwest - I've lived in two different states that are considered "Midwest." Iowa and Indiana. They are also a state away from each other, but still presumably in the same area. Neither of them, to me, is "Mid" or "West." In fact, Indiana is pretty East to me. Iowa is more Central than anything else. Either way. Just seems odd to me. I was also told that there is a city in Indiana that people call "the South." I don't think they could even imagine what The South is.
Flintstone - as in The Flintstones...Barney and Rubble. I guess I used to think it was Flinstones, but it certainly makes WAY more sense if you consider the show that it would be called Flintstones. Like flint...as in a kind of rock. Flint, steel, fire. Yeah, I'm sure that everyone knew this already.
Texarkana - So this was something that I realized while I was on a road trip and we drove through a city called "Kanorado" (cleverly named for it's location on the border of Kansas and Colorado). It was at this moment that I realized that Texarkana was named that way for a reason. Yeah, this was a few years ago :) I still have yet to figure out the relationship between Kansas and Arkansas.
Windshield - I get the shield part, but is it really just for wind? I guess it would be too long of a name if you tried to throw in Wind, Rain, Rocks, Debris-Shield.
Recreation - So this was something I had never thought about until a few days ago. So often we abbreviate this word by saying "rec" but I had never thought about breaking the word up as re-creation. That idea of a "recreation" center makes so much more sense! Now if I could only make it there to recreate myself...that's a whole different story.
Horsepower - So I understand the concept of this...the idea that it would take 300 horses to have the same amount of power...blah blah. I get that. But it seems like a gross generalization to me. There are so many different horses, each with different strength capabilities. Even trying to take an average of them seems nearly impossible.
Midwest - I've lived in two different states that are considered "Midwest." Iowa and Indiana. They are also a state away from each other, but still presumably in the same area. Neither of them, to me, is "Mid" or "West." In fact, Indiana is pretty East to me. Iowa is more Central than anything else. Either way. Just seems odd to me. I was also told that there is a city in Indiana that people call "the South." I don't think they could even imagine what The South is.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
More Retrospective Blogging (#2)
Just for the record, by "more" I mean further in retrospect as in it is more retrospective than the previous, but I suppose it would also be applicable to mean in addition to. Either way. You choose.
So I had this thought. Okay, so when toilets were originally created, they were just a bowl made of any number of materials (I'm assuming, I haven't done my research on the history of toilets). But, as time progressed someone determined that it would be more comfortable if there was an actual seat to sit on. Enter the invention of the Toilet Seat. So who knows how long ago that was? I'm sure someone does, besides, someone's livelihood depends, or depended, on that, whatever the case may be. Anyway, so my question a few weeks ago (hence, retrospective) is that if it has been determined that toilet bowls are more comfortable when they have a seat on them and if generally speaking, all toilets have a seat on them now, why not just make the seat part of the original construction? Why the need for two separate parts? Would it not be more efficient to make one structure instead of making two parts and having to put them together?
Less retrospective:
So when I was talking about this last night like a flash I found the answer. With one structure, guys would not be able to lift the seat when they use the toilet (although some guys can't seem to lift the seat even when it is a separate part...but that's a whole different issue...). Therefore, if the toilet came in one piece (bowl + seat) cleaning and maintenance would be much more tedious. Rather, the separation of the pieces allows control for the cleanliness of the seat. In addition, the ability to purchase a seat separately from a bowl allows an individual to pick whatever kind of seat he or she would like based on color, size, fit or comfort. I mean, I have even seen a glow-in-the-dark toilet seat. Seriously...Google "Glow in the dark toilet seat" sometime, you would be amazed...or maybe not, I don't know. I do think it would be a great idea for kids though, although you would have to leave the light on throughout the day to "charge" it to glow at night and that just wouldn't be economical. I suppose people with glow-in-the-dark seats have these discussions with themselves...or maybe not, I don't know!
Anyway - so there you go, that's it. The reason (according to me) for a separate toilet seat and bowl.
Things I learned:
1. I appreciate having a separate seat from the toilet bowl.
2. I appreciate people who lift the seat when they should.
3. Sometimes critics and skeptics can become the greatest advocates.
How's that for blogging?
So I had this thought. Okay, so when toilets were originally created, they were just a bowl made of any number of materials (I'm assuming, I haven't done my research on the history of toilets). But, as time progressed someone determined that it would be more comfortable if there was an actual seat to sit on. Enter the invention of the Toilet Seat. So who knows how long ago that was? I'm sure someone does, besides, someone's livelihood depends, or depended, on that, whatever the case may be. Anyway, so my question a few weeks ago (hence, retrospective) is that if it has been determined that toilet bowls are more comfortable when they have a seat on them and if generally speaking, all toilets have a seat on them now, why not just make the seat part of the original construction? Why the need for two separate parts? Would it not be more efficient to make one structure instead of making two parts and having to put them together?
Less retrospective:
So when I was talking about this last night like a flash I found the answer. With one structure, guys would not be able to lift the seat when they use the toilet (although some guys can't seem to lift the seat even when it is a separate part...but that's a whole different issue...). Therefore, if the toilet came in one piece (bowl + seat) cleaning and maintenance would be much more tedious. Rather, the separation of the pieces allows control for the cleanliness of the seat. In addition, the ability to purchase a seat separately from a bowl allows an individual to pick whatever kind of seat he or she would like based on color, size, fit or comfort. I mean, I have even seen a glow-in-the-dark toilet seat. Seriously...Google "Glow in the dark toilet seat" sometime, you would be amazed...or maybe not, I don't know. I do think it would be a great idea for kids though, although you would have to leave the light on throughout the day to "charge" it to glow at night and that just wouldn't be economical. I suppose people with glow-in-the-dark seats have these discussions with themselves...or maybe not, I don't know!
Anyway - so there you go, that's it. The reason (according to me) for a separate toilet seat and bowl.
Things I learned:
1. I appreciate having a separate seat from the toilet bowl.
2. I appreciate people who lift the seat when they should.
3. Sometimes critics and skeptics can become the greatest advocates.
How's that for blogging?
Retrospective Blog #1
So I'm in grad school and I am taking a course called Theories of Health Behavior (or something like that). The initial assignment was a paper designed to help us understand the difference between (1) a health issue, (2) a health behavior, and (3) determinants. Very brief, simplified explanation: a health issue would be something that occurs in society (i.e. obesity); the associated health behaviors are things that impact that issue (i.e. lack of exercise); and determinants are things that determine (like that?) whether or not the behavior will occur (i.e. access to a gym, time, etc.). Got it? Okay - Issue, Behavior, Determinants.
Okay, that was probably more information than you needed to understand the point, but whatever. There were a lot of people having a difficult time understand the difference between the three things. To help us understand, our professor encouraged us to walk through the same process (outlining issue, behavior and determinants) for a random behavior, i.e. someone standing in a bus line bouncing a volleyball. Now, what are all the determinants for why the person would perform that behavior? Could be boredom, habit, stress level, any number of things.
This is the real point - if you only have a limited amount of time, start reading here:
By taking a moment to step back and think of what all the determinants for a given behavior could be, it helps us cope better with the world and be more understanding of other people.
For example,
(SIDEBAR: Supposedly, when I grow up I am going to be a teacher, I guess that is why I talk in examples.)
If you are in the store buying something and the checker is going soo slow or keeps messing things up, you could get frustrated and be really rude to the person. But, if you take a second to think of what all the possible determinants of that behavior are, you may find a little patience. The person may be sick, they may have physical or mental disability that prevents them from working as fast as you think they should be capable of. They may have not had enough sleep because they stayed up late talking to a friend in need. Their cat may have been run over and now only have 3 legs. It could be anything. Regardless, if you think of the numerous reasons that they may be acting (or not acting) a certain way, hopefully you'll be able to muster a little compassion for them.
So next time someone does something that makes you angry or that you simply don't understand - instead of being judgemental, try a little tenderness :)
Okay, that was probably more information than you needed to understand the point, but whatever. There were a lot of people having a difficult time understand the difference between the three things. To help us understand, our professor encouraged us to walk through the same process (outlining issue, behavior and determinants) for a random behavior, i.e. someone standing in a bus line bouncing a volleyball. Now, what are all the determinants for why the person would perform that behavior? Could be boredom, habit, stress level, any number of things.
This is the real point - if you only have a limited amount of time, start reading here:
By taking a moment to step back and think of what all the determinants for a given behavior could be, it helps us cope better with the world and be more understanding of other people.
For example,
(SIDEBAR: Supposedly, when I grow up I am going to be a teacher, I guess that is why I talk in examples.)
If you are in the store buying something and the checker is going soo slow or keeps messing things up, you could get frustrated and be really rude to the person. But, if you take a second to think of what all the possible determinants of that behavior are, you may find a little patience. The person may be sick, they may have physical or mental disability that prevents them from working as fast as you think they should be capable of. They may have not had enough sleep because they stayed up late talking to a friend in need. Their cat may have been run over and now only have 3 legs. It could be anything. Regardless, if you think of the numerous reasons that they may be acting (or not acting) a certain way, hopefully you'll be able to muster a little compassion for them.
So next time someone does something that makes you angry or that you simply don't understand - instead of being judgemental, try a little tenderness :)
To Blog or Not To Blog...
That is the question! It is a question that has captured my attention enough to make me do something about it and hey, that's a big deal.
Reasons that I have had NOT to blog:
1. Is it really worth it? I mean, what does it accomplish putting your senseless thoughts out on the Internet for the world to read?
2. I have no intention to share my life story or my deepest and darkest secrets on the world wide web...that's what a journal is for. Besides, I have trust issues with actually writing things where other people could see them, but I digress! Anyway, that's also part of the "deepest and darkest secrets" that I am NOT sharing :)
3. Audience - so obviously if I am blogging for me, then I may as well just write in a journal. If I am blogging for others that changes the language and the writing style, but how more or less the only conversation I am having is between me and my keyboard and screen and unfortunately they don't talk back.
Reasons I have TO blog:
1. There is a vast, staggering range of things that go on in my little head every day.
2. Maybe someone can benefit from the things I have to say? (I won't hold my breath for this considering the limitation of content due to Reason Not To Blog #2 - see above).
3. Sheer entertainment.
Well that's it. And it came to pass that I started blogging.
DISCLAIMER: No expectations allowed.
Reasons that I have had NOT to blog:
1. Is it really worth it? I mean, what does it accomplish putting your senseless thoughts out on the Internet for the world to read?
2. I have no intention to share my life story or my deepest and darkest secrets on the world wide web...that's what a journal is for. Besides, I have trust issues with actually writing things where other people could see them, but I digress! Anyway, that's also part of the "deepest and darkest secrets" that I am NOT sharing :)
3. Audience - so obviously if I am blogging for me, then I may as well just write in a journal. If I am blogging for others that changes the language and the writing style, but how more or less the only conversation I am having is between me and my keyboard and screen and unfortunately they don't talk back.
Reasons I have TO blog:
1. There is a vast, staggering range of things that go on in my little head every day.
2. Maybe someone can benefit from the things I have to say? (I won't hold my breath for this considering the limitation of content due to Reason Not To Blog #2 - see above).
3. Sheer entertainment.
Well that's it. And it came to pass that I started blogging.
DISCLAIMER: No expectations allowed.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)