Malina said "Mom,
this one says HUG ME". She thought about it for a moment, and then
said "It should say BITE ME or EAT ME 'cause that's what I'm gonna do".
Hee hee.I encountered a box of Sweethearts(R) candies, which are hard sugar candies in the shape of a heart with some sort of saying printed on each one. I remember something similar from grade school, usually seen around Valentine's Day.
One day a few years ago, my daughter, Malina, was riding in the back of her Mom's car and was eating some of these when she encountered one that said:
Malina said "Mom,
this one says HUG ME". She thought about it for a moment, and then
said "It should say BITE ME or EAT ME 'cause that's what I'm gonna do".
Hee hee.
Well, in the box I was recently holding in my hand, it caught my eye that some of these candies were apparently NOT made under the penultimate of quality control conditions. Some of them seemed to be trying to say something but I was not quite understanding. Others seemed to be insulting or taunting me. I offer some of them here, and you can see what you think.
These make me
nervous. Ask me what?!?
Huh?!?
I HOPE? Hope
what?!? Or is it I Rope? 4ope? I HOPE I'm not poisonous?
This one says MY
BABY, I guess, but notice the very odd texture on this one. I'm afraid to
eat it.
OK, so they just
stopped trying on this one. However, notice the complete use of all
available space, and the very heavy dose of edible (I hope) ink used to render
it. Perhaps this might be a better approach, actually, since the printing
on others is sometimes hard to read.
OK, so I think I
get the first one. Translation: YOU ARE A 10, most likely a reference to the movie "10"
starring Bo Derek, no doubt. But the other one appears to be saying YOU
ARE A ZERO, which I find to be rather insulting. In fact, this was the only one
in the box that seemed to have a negative message, and it impelled me to carefully
read through all of the messages in the box so that I didn't accidentally share the
wrong candy heart with the wrong person.
____ GIRL?
Hm. STUPID GIRL? URA GIRL? UGLY GIRL? And why it is spotted
with purple blotches?
____
ME. Another
fill-in-the-blank. Or perhaps this one is becoming sentient?
Perhaps EAT ME.
This came from the July 2002 issue
of Electronic Business magazine, page
12. The article was talking about various chips and chip technologies, and
in this section, about new designs that are meant to reduce the cost of products
for consumers. I assume they meant "milliwatts", but that's not
what they said.
From page 8 of the July 22,
2002 issue of COMPUTERWORLD magazine,
In the article, the term "public-access" was correctly used several
other times. In this case, I'm not really sure I want to know what
wireless pubic-access is...and I'm certainly not going to wait 2 years for
it. Or maybe I will...
Then, COMPUTERWORLD magazine
does it again in their September 2, 2002 edition, on page 30. I suppose if
you don't want to promise something that you can't deliver, you'll want to leave
yourself a nice wide range. I seriously think they need to find and fix
whatever is suggesting that "megawatts" is the thing to use instead of
the thing that they were thinking about.
Return to Chris
Olsen's Home Page
This page is maintained by Chris Olsen. Send comments and suggestions to cco@execpc.com 