* * Archive: REAL17.NEW * * Created on: Tue Aug 3 15:24:41 1999 * * Number of articles: 24 * * Welcome! This is one of the files that goes to make up the archives of * Project Galactic Guide. To find out what the heck PGG is, go look at its * main Web site at , where you'll be able to find * an FAQ. * * * The articles in this file are: * * 12R2-1 Only Fools And Horses * 12R3-1 Passports * 12R4-1 Quartered Sandwiches * 6R85-1 Incremental Self-Promotion * 6R86-1 Putting Your Foot In It, The Art Of * 6R87-1 Leap Years * 6R88-1 Marketing, A Definition Of * 8R67-1 Definition: Everything Else * 12R5-1 E-Mail War * 12R6-1 Jigsaw Puzzles * 12R7-1 Meaning, The, A Non-Religious View * 8R68-1 St. Cyr Sur Mur, France, Earth * 8R69-1 Infinity, The Truth About * 9R16-1 Oestersund, Sweden, Earth * 9R17-1 Weather, Influencing The * 8R70-1 Politicians * 9R18-1 Arguments, Infinitely Prolonging * 9R19-1 Air France * 9R20-1 Country Music, A Guide To * 12R8-1 Airplanes * 8R71-1 Alien Invasions, How To Fake * 8R72-1 Haggling * 9R21-1 Bootlegging, A Guide To * 9R22-1 Profession: Paper Courier * %t Only Fools And Horses %n 12R2 %s The BBC Comedy %a Aaron Rice (a.rice@ukonline.co.uk) %d 19970130 %x Red Dwarf %i British Comedy: Only Fools and Horses %i Comedy: Only Fools and Horses %e Introduction ============ First transmitted in 1981, the programme follows the exploits of the Trotter family, who live in a council-owned flat [1] in the London borough of Peckham. Written by John Sullivan, who had previously written Just Good Friends and Citizen Smith, the series officially ended in 1991. After this, three subsequent Christmas specials were to appear until 1993. It was not until Christmas 1996 that the next, and perhaps last, Christmas special was transmitted [2]. Central Characters ================== Derrick ("Del" or "Del Boy") Trotter; played by David Jason ----------------------------------------------------------- Del is the eldest of two brothers. His mother, Joan, died when he was sixteen, and his father, Reg, ran off shortly afterwards. He was then left to bring up his young brother, Rodney. Del is an illegal market trader as he neither has permission to sell his goods, nor does he sell completely legal merchandise. He tends to dominate his younger brother, whilst remaining protective of him. For most of the series he drives an out-of-MOT [3] yellow three-wheeled van that habitually backfires and which he still retains right up to the present day. He is famous for saying "This time next year we'll be millionaires." Rodney Charlton Trotter; played by Nicholas Lyndhurst ----------------------------------------------------- Brought up by, and in the shadow of his brother, Rodney works for Del and is continually conned by his older sibling. He does finally manage to break free however, and get a proper job; not so easy if up until that point he's never appeared on any other document, apart from a criminal record for smoking an illegal substance at art college." In the 1989 episode, "Yuppy Love", he meets his future wife, Cassandra, while studying at an evening college for a computer diploma course. He is offered a job with Cassandra's father, which he later quits after miscalculating his usefulness with the firm. He then goes back to work for his brother, Del. He marries Cassandra in the 1989 episode, "Little Problems", in which his middle name, Charlton, is revealed to be named after Charlton Athletic [4]. "Grandad" Trotter; played by Lennard Pearce ------------------------------------------- Hardly ever leaving the flat, he spends most of his time watching two television sets. He claims this is because the other one's being mended. The character died in the 1985 season, and was replaced by his screen brother, Uncle Albert. Albert Trotter; played by Buster Merryfield ------------------------------------------- To become well known for his long white beard, and the phrase "During the war...", Albert joined the series in 1985 after the death of Grandad. He basically takes over Grandad's role in the series, though with a little more energy, and stupidity. Formerly a member of both the Royal and Merchant Navy, it is said that every ship he ever sailed in, has sunk. Cassandra Trotter, nee Parry; played by Gwyneth Strong ------------------------------------------------------ First appears in the 1989 episode "Yuppy Love", when she meets Rodney at an evening college. She introduces herself, as she finds that Rodney has taken her coat by accident; they both look very similar, but she knows which is which, because Del has written Rodney's name into his. Cassandra is later to marry Rodney, and for the last few years they have been trying for a child, but without success. Raquel Turner; played by Tessa Peak Jones ----------------------------------------- Formerly married to ex-Detective Inspector Roy Slater, she first meets Del in the 1988 Christmas Special, "Dates". They meet on a blind date beneath the clock at Waterloo station. She claims to be an actress, but is later revealed to be a stripper when she is unknowingly booked for Uncle Albert's birthday celebration. She returned to the series to stay in the 1989 Christmas Special, "The Jolly Boy's Outing", as she is working with a magician in Margate, and has since given birth to her and Del's son, Damien. "Trigger"; played by Roger Lloyd-Pack ------------------------------------- Trigger was introduced to the series in the first episode, where his nickname was immediately explained; it is because he looks like a horse. Throughout the series he always calls Rodney "Dave", because he still seems to believe that is his name. This is despite the fact that he has been corrected on numerous occasions. Aubrey ("Boycie") Boyce; played by John Challis ----------------------------------------------- Having formerly served a prison sentence, Boycie managed to build up a nice little second-hand car business. Married to Marlene he has one son, Tyler, who was born after many years of trying. Story Development ================= The story begins with general trading; buying and selling, and the occasional run from the police. The first mark on the series is the appearance of Roy Slater, in the 1983 episode, "May the Force be with You". Roy, it turns out, is an old school colleague of Del's, though he never managed to make friends with anyone. He arrives back in the area as a Detective Inspector at the local police station, and is making enquiries about a stolen microwave oven. Upon visiting the Trotter household, and a few words, he discovers the oven and arrests Del, Rodney and Grandad. After claiming that they had found the microwave and three completely conflicting descriptions of the man they claimed had dropped it, Slater mounts up the charges on Del, and eventually makes him tell him who stole the oven in exchange for his immunity from prosecution. As Del reluctantly signs the agreement he informs Slater that he stole it, himself. The 1983 Christmas special sees the appearance of Del and Rodney's Father, Reg, who claims to be suffering from a hereditary blood disorder. After trying to make Del think he isn't his real son, as his blood group is different, he departs once more. In the 1985 episode, "Happy Returns", it is revealed that Grandad is in hospital, though we don't see him again. In the following episode, "Strained Relations", his funeral is performed and we are introduced to his brother, Albert. Christmas 1985 saw the return of, now Chief Inspector, Slater, in the episode, "To Hull and Back". His is investigating a diamond smuggling operation, which Del and Rodney get wound up in. The Trotters are required to travel to Amsterdam, and meet with a man called Van Cleef, while avoiding the police at the stations and ports, so after Del is accidentally trapped in a lorry travelling to Hull, they eventually decide to sail a boat, themselves. In the end they are caught, and it turns out that Slater is one of the brains behind the operation. Slater is arrested and sent to prison. During a brief curtailment of the series between Christmas 1986 and 1989, several Christmas specials were shown, the last of which was "Dates" in 1988, in which Del signs up with a dating agency, and meets Raquel. They are parted later after a disagreement, Raquel's departure for an acting tour, and Del's brief arrest. In 1989, the series moved from the standard 30-minute episodes to 50-minute episodes. These began with "Yuppy Love", in which Rodney met Cassandra, and Del became a yuppy. It was not until the 1989 Christmas special, "The Jolly Boy's Outing", that Del met up with Raquel once more. This time, it was during an outing with Rodney, Albert, and friends, and while they were stranded in Margate, after their coach exploded. Raquel is found to be working with a magician, the Great Raymondo, but leaves with Del in the end. Slater returns once more, in the 1991 episode, "Class of 62". He initial appears to be trying to make friends with everyone, after the way he's treated them in the past, but it turns out that he's only back in the area to see his wife, Raquel. He leaves in disgust, as she is now pregnant by Del. Their child, Damien, is born in the 1991 episode, "Three Men, a Woman, and a Baby". He was named Damien, after Rodney suggested it, having privately joked with Cassandra, that the baby will become the anti-Christ. This is a theme that is carried through afterwards. This is the last proper episode to date. The series continued through several Christmas specials, the first of which was the two-part "Miami Twice" in 1991, when Del and Rodney go on holiday to Miami, and get wound up in the Mafia, a drugs operation, and finally a chase through the everglades. The following year Del discovers that there is money to be made out of nature, and fakes a spring in his newly-discovered allotment. This leads to the sale of "Peckham Spring" water, which brings in a nice amount of money. With their new-found wealth, they decide to go on holiday to Brighton, but their plans are ruined when it turns out that barrels of waste that Del cleared from the allotment, and his friends Trigger and Denzil subsequently dumped in the river, have polluted the water. The episode ends as Del switches the light out and a bottle of Peckham Spring, at their bedside, glows. Another Christmas special in 1993, was followed by two full years with no episodes, until finally, in 1996, what are thought to be the final three hour-long episodes, were shown. They begin with Rodney's nightmare vision of the future, where Damien is the boss of the Trotter business, while he is merely a messenger, which he feels reflects the current situation with his brother. The story follows Cassandra's announcement of her pregnancy, her subsequent miscarriage, and concludes in final episode, with the discovery of an old watch in the Trotter's garage, which turns out to be worth over six-million pounds. In the final scene, the Trotters are seen to walk off into the sunset, with Del claiming that this time next year, they will be billionaires. The Future ========== There are currently rumours flying about that there might be a Christmas special in 1999. The leading cast members are said to be happy to continue with the series. Availability ============ Most of the episodes are now available on video tape in the UK; the first, second, and third series are available on double-videos, each containing seven or eight episodes, four "The Very Best of" episodes are available featuring eleven mixed fifty-minute episodes, and four of the Christmas specials are available. Availability outside the UK is unknown, and is perhaps unlikely. [1] Or "Apartment" to Americans. It should also be noted that they eventually buy their flat, as many did at the time. [2] An eleven-minute special was recorded for transmission as part of the quasi-annual charity fund-raising event, "Comic Relief". It was shown sometime in March 1997. [3] In the UK, a compulsory annual test for vehicles over a certain age, to ascertain whether they are road-worthy. [4] A British football (soccer) team, based in London. %e *EOA* %t Passports %n 12R3 %s ID For The International Traveller %a Aaron Rice (a.rice@ukonline.co.uk) %d 19970131 %x Travel Necessities %i Photographs, Passport %e Passports are a vital form of documented evidence used to prove your identity at border crossings, or in any case from one country to another, and in other occasional circumstances when visual identification is necessary. This is mostly true. The problem, however, is that most photographs on passports look nothing like their owner. Indeed it is deemed to be the height of suspicion if you look anything like your passport photograph unless it is very new [1]. If the picture is too dissimilar, it may be necessary to gain a replacement. Passports are generally stamped upon entry to another country though this is not necessarily compulsory. A regular international traveller can expect to fill his or her passport in a short time, and may need to obtain a replacement before it would normally expire. In recent years a standard European passport has begun to be issued to all residents of the European Union countries. It is still the case, however, that countries, the United Kingdom at the very least, still retain some form of crest or badge on the front. [1] That covers me, because unfortunately, I currently look like my passport photograph. %e *EOA* %t Quartered Sandwiches %n 12R4 %s Sandwiches Cut Into Quarters %a Aaron Rice (a.rice@ukonline.co.uk) %d 19970124 %i Sandwiches, Quartered %i Cutting Sandwiches Into Quarters %e Possibly the worst way you can actually cut a sandwich in my opinion. It leaves you with four small pieces of sandwich, barely big enough to leave you even partly full, and certainly leaving you wanting at least the other three quarters [1]. It seems like such a waste of effort to cut a sandwich into any more than two pieces, that the people who do so can only be doing it for visual effect. The premise being that four small pieces look better, or neater, than two larger pieces. This is not entirely untrue. The question remains, however, as to why people feel it necessary to cut their sandwiches into quarters when they're not going to be seen by anyone else. An easy answer is to say that they just like it that way. [1] Unless, of course, you have a very small appetite. %e *EOA* %t Incremental Self-Promotion %n 6R85 %s I've Got One. Well, I've Got Two. %a Aaron Rice (a.rice@ukonline.co.uk) %d 19970206 %x Winning Arguments %i Bettering %i Self-Promotion, A Statement On %i Necessary Exaggeration %e It's crazy to think that society on the planet Earth has developed so far, and still retains such primitive and weird customs. You can guarantee that, if we ever have proper interstellar contact with any other life form, a conversation in which we are both informing each other of our capabilities will run along the lines of a statement, followed by a return statement which roughly doubles the previous one. The usual formula for such an conversation/arguement will be as follows: * Person1 = statement * Person2 = statement X 2 * Person1 = statement + arguement2 * Person2 = arguement2 X 2 * Person1 = arguement2 X 4 To be repeated until both parties are bored or dead, or in extreme cases, both. This roughly mirrors the conversational technique of any two people picked out at random, that are determined to put forward their major view, which is that they are the best. Though this is a manner usually reserved for children, the age is never significant. An example communication will be something like this: Human: We are a peaceful race who abolished cruel weapons 50 years ago. Alien: Well, we abolished cruel and evil weapons 100 years ago! Human: We've got two arms. Alien: Well, we've got three! Human: You made that up! Anyway, we have two legs. Alien: Only two? Human: Don't say it... You have three? Alien: No. Four. This conversation will run for quite some time, and as it goes further on, things will become a little more heated, and each party will then concede less and less: Human: What do you mean, "Only five fingers"!? Alien: Our race have as many as seven! Human: Well, we have another five on the other hand! Alien: Oh, well, on the other two hands, we have another seven. Human: Okay, but we have five toes on each foot too! Alien: Only a puny species would have toes on their feet. We don't need those. Human: Oh sure... Well, why not? Alien: We have four heads. As you can see, in the event of any inability to enhance an aspect of themselves, the relevant party will then attempt to deny its impact completely. Eventually, of course, the conversation will drift away into infinity, and both parties will be left to consider what a total arse they have made of themselves, and to think about how they will explain to their friends that they "won". It is this method of argument that has for so long dominated the lives of anybody who is overwilling to portray themselves as "better" than everyone else. In the end, of course, exaggeration can lead to a call for "proof" which usually results in both parties having to admit that they were lying all along, and that they probably just got "carried away". %e *EOA* %t Putting Your Foot In It, The Art Of %n 6R86 %s A Guide To Embarrassing Others (And Yourself) %a James Crook (james.crook@ukonline.co.uk) %d 19970220 %e The art of "Putting your foot in it" is a great and noble one. It combines timing, skill, dexterity and, in some cases, the ability to withstand physical abuse. For centuries men [1] have been practising and perfecting the ability to embarrass both themselves and others with split second timing, precision and accuracy. One of the earliest recorded incidents of this nature is detailed below. Bishop Fisher and Sir Thomas More (1509) ---------------------------------------- Although this is one of the earliest recorded incidents it has to also be one of quickest success stories. It concerns two heads of church and state in 1509 who were very influential in the English royal court. King Henry VIII had married his dead brother's ex-wife, Catherine, who was Spanish. Through no fault of her own she had given birth to four girls, who mysteriously died (whose fault was that I wonder?). Henry wasn't best pleased about this for the simple reason that he wanted a son. Catherine, at this time, was getting on a bit and as Henry needed to do something quick, he hit on the idea of claiming that he never married her. Henry asked the Pope to say that the marriage was invalid, but the Pope wasn't too keen on committing himself. He then decided to make himself head of the church to get around the Pope problem; this is where it all went wrong for Fisher and More. Henry had to get permission from both of them to do this and the reply given resulted in their deaths. They said "No". That's it! One simple word terminated both their lives in dramatic fashion with More's head being stuck on a pole at London Bridge. This split second act lead to the church being dissolved and several more lives lost to the wrath of King Henry VIII. A more modern example of "Putting your foot in it" follows. The Ford Motor Company (1996) ----------------------------- Ford has always tried to promote a good worker/highly paid executive relationship within its own factories. The company produced a poster depicting a cross section of its workers, multi-national and different religious backgrounds. Everything was going swimmingly for Ford until they decided to release an almost identical version of this poster for a foreign brochure with all the black faces replaced by white ones. This created a huge storm of protest and complaint and caused considerable embarrassment for Ford and the robots who actually run the factories. Conversation Stoppers --------------------- By far and away the best way to put your foot in it is to embarrass yourself and others in a crowded room. It helps if you do not know the people you are embarrassing too well. * "Really? And I thought you hadn't had the surgery yet!" * (To a bad smoker's cough.) "That's a good sense of tumour you've got there!" [2] * "I've stopped taking the drugs now! I say stuff the neurotic and violent tendencies." * "Yes I know your husband was a good man and his death brings sadness to us all. Oh by the way can I have the electric mower back that he borrowed?" * "What a _huge_ nose you've got!" (Instant results.) * "You're obviously a very talented individual! Do you talk trash for a living?" * "I'd love measure your ego, is it off the scale?" * "I think you need a personality graft." * "I'd set my dogs on you but I'm afraid that they'd get rabies as a result of biting your leg." In short the graceful and long established art of "Putting your foot in it" is difficult to master but not _always_ a desirable one. [1] And indeed women, I don't want the PC liberation group on my phone again. [2] The Craig Charles Almanac Of Total Knowledge, Boxtree. %e *EOA* %t Leap Years %n 6R87 %s Why? %a Aaron Rice (a.rice@ukonline.co.uk) %d 19970203 %i Years, Leap %i Extra Day In The Year, The %i February 29 %i 29th February %i Days Of The Year, The Extra %e Leap years are a pain. Every so often they come along and dump an extra day on the end of February; a month so many people wish to progress out of post-haste. As if February wasn't already unique enough, having only twenty-eight days under normal circumstances. This is especially bad for people who are awaiting events in March, though in later months, people will have already adjusted to the change. And what about those who are born on the 29th February? Do they have to wait four years for their next birthday? I don't believe I have never met anyone born on this day, but if one of those people is reading this article, I would very much like to hear from them! In fact, the idea of having "leap years" was thought up to offset the difference between the normal calendar year of 365 days, and the solar year, which is roughly a quarter of a day longer. If the current, or any other, year is a leap year, it must be divisible by four, but not by one hundred. The exceptions to this are those years that are divisible by four hundred. This means: a) 1996 was a leap year [1]; b) 1997 is most definitely not a leap year; c) 1998 will _not_ be a leap year; d) 2000 will be a leap year; and e) 2100 will _not_ be a leap year [2]. This author wishes he could write this article on the 29th February, but he cannot be bothered to wait until the year 2000. [1] Think back; it wasn't _that_ long ago. [2] Of course, this hardly seems to make a lot of difference to anybody alive at this moment, as most of them stand little or no chance of ever seeing the year 2100. %e *EOA* %t Marketing, A Definition Of %n 6R88 %s The Double-Edged Sword Of Marketing %a Mark Seaborn (mseaborn@argonet.co.uk) %x Telemarketers, How To Hassle And Deal With %x Multi-Level Marketing %d 19970307 %i Definitions: Marketing %e The Institute of Marketing defines marketing as "the management process responsible for identifying, anticipating and satisfying customer requirements profitably". This definition is, however, a little cagey. A more honest definition of marketing can instead be formulated to define marketing as: a) the process by which a product is created that people actually want and will in fact buy and use without being forced to or conned into it; and b) the process by which this product is then sold to people who don't actually want the product, and who would never otherwise think of using it and especially not buying it. While section (a) of marketing appears to have merit, this is wholly cancelled out by section (b). Indeed, in many cases, section (a) is ignored completely and only (b) heeded; in these cases, the worth of marketing is less than zero, instead of merely being nothing. Marketing is, in essence, a con. %e *EOA* %t Definition: Everything Else %n 8R67 %s What's Left %a Aaron Rice (a.rice@ukonline.co.uk) %d 19970203 %i Everything Else %i Else, Everything %i All, The Remainder %i Remainder, The %i What's Left %e This is not everything. Neither is it nothing. It is all that isn't. But it isn't that either. The truth is that as soon as something has been defined, it isn't part of "everything else". Everything else is the exclusion of all that has already been mapped. Oh, well, now it no longer exists. Look what you made me do! %e *EOA* %t E-Mail War %n 12R5 %s Communication Through Blips, Bloops And Bangs %a Stuart Bruce (stuart@atomiser.demon.co.uk) %d 19970301 %x Telecommunications, Article II %x Signature Files %x Rich, Get %i Communication %i Telephone %e The arse-end of the 20th century saw the development of the widespread use of a new form of communication. In order to transmit their thoughts to others, humans would allow the neurons of their brain to influence muscle spasms, contractions and relaxations in their arms and hands, resulting in the minor repetitive movement of their hand digits. Coupled with the movements of the arm these digits would then apply a pressure onto one of over one hundred different pieces of plastic. Each one of these would then send a fixed pattern of pulses of electricity into a digital machine. The continued cycling of electricity would send these pulses round and round little wires, until a final fixed pattern of pulses would cause the digital machine to rotate a magnetically charged circular piece of metal. At the same time the machine would subtly alter a small section of this magnetism with some accordance to the digital pulses still running around inside the machine. The further muscle contractions and pressure application by the human body cause a succession of digital pulses which then cause a motor to be powered, which once again causes the magnetically charged circular piece of metal to rotate. This in turn makes the magnetic charging of the metal induce a series of currents in other wires, which make the pattern of electronic pulses fire around the wires in a slightly different way to before. Further muscle contractions and subsequent button presses cause a new set of particularly long wires to be brought into use, called "Telephone wires". Pulses are transmitted particularly slowly across a geographically small distance between two, or more often three, four, five or even more digital machines. By a symmetrical process of digital transfer, electronic pulses, more digital transfer, more electronic pulses, further digital pulses and several other wastes of perfectly good power, a specific set of similar pulses finally finds its way onto another digital machine a small distance away from the first. Another creature (often a deformed or socially inadequate human being) uses a "Complex" system to convert the pulses into beams of particles onto a screen in a fixed pattern of symbols. These can then be 'easily' misread and misinterpreted by the eventual recipient by passing it through millions of individual mental processes that rely on primitive human biology. In order to respond to this message, the second being is merely required to do all of that again. In true human style they call this "E-mail" and believe it to be a particularly efficient form of communication. Every new toy brings its novelties and its drawbacks and "E-mail" is no exception; alongside factors such as mindless hair replacement therapy advertising, "Get rich quick" notices and E-mail pen friends, any traveller wishing to utilise this digital nightmare should be aware of the existence of "E-mail war". E-mail war is a battle whereby E-mail messages are sent from one person to two or more people of their acquaintance, in which they say nothing of any importance; but much of passing interest or otherwise instead. Both recipients send their responses to both the sender and the other recipient. By the principles of exponential growth, each "Wave" of E-mails multiplies the total number (hereby referred to as "Ammunition") by a factor of 3. Since no waves are consistent (due largely to the fact that humans are utterly unreliable), this growth is inconsistent and growth is sporadic. If you engage in a war and leave your terminal for more than 24 hours you may find yourself on the receiving end of in excess of 100 meaningless, petty, vindictive, surreal, bizarre, confused, nonsensical and quite big E-mails. If you fail to have replied to each and every one of these within the same period of time, then everybody else in the war will laugh at you, like this: "Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!" %e *EOA* %t Jigsaw Puzzles %n 12R6 %s Coping With A Piece Of Cardboard Which Someone Deliberately Took Apart %a Daniel P. Noll (n3072129@student.anu.edu.au) %d 19970121 %e Jigsaw puzzles are a unique idea formulated by people of the planet Earth. They are basically constructed by taking a perfectly good picture, mounting it on a perfectly good piece of heavy cardboard, taking a perfectly good knife or saw and breaking the picture up into hundreds and thousands of tiny pieces, possibly never to be reassembled again. Once a puzzle is disassembled, you will see by looking at an average piece that each piece has a number of male and female edges, of which obviously the male (should) fit into the female. Many people will often ask why another would want to break up a perfectly good picture into hundreds and thousands of tiny pieces, and the answer is simple: they're idiots [1]. Not only does this make the picture impossible to see once it's disassembled, but it creates the need for another person to sit down for hours, days or perhaps weeks in order to put the picture back together again. As it is well known that a disassembled and jumbled puzzle is in a higher entropy state [2] than the original picture was, and as the natural trend in this universe is to increase entropy (until such a time as the universe begins to recollapse, at which time this statement may no longer hold), it can easily be seen that some energy, often a quite large amount of energy, is required to put the picture back into its original state. This leads to the First Law of Jigsaw Puzzles: 1) Any jigsaw puzzle will take much, much, much more energy to put back together than it did to take apart. There are several proven methods of dealing with jigsaw puzzles. It sounds strange to mention it here, but one option is to actually put the puzzle together. This usually requires a drug to allow your mind to forget what it is you are doing, and for this purpose, alcohol will work fine. You also need a table large enough so that you might try to fight off the Second Law: 2) Any given jigsaw puzzle will expand to fill up the entire surface on which it is being put together. You may observe, however, that this law is occasionally broken, however, as someone mentioned in another article, there are a great many laws that are often broken. Traffic laws, for instance. The puzzler, once emptying the puzzle onto the surface of the table will then attempt to make the pieces fit together. This stage usually begins by joining the edge pieces up, as they are the easiest to recognise. However, a jigsaw company a few years ago realised this strategy and released their puzzles (called Impuzzibles) without any edge pieces, plus an extra few pieces thrown in to confuse the puzzler. These puzzles are the same ones that have the most creatively frustrating of pictures on them. One of them is a photo of rows of eggs. Another is a photo of a heap of baked beans. Others are worse [3]. The edge will then be complete, assuming no pieces are missing from the puzzle. This is a stupid assumption, which is encapsulated by the Third Law: 3) Any given jigsaw puzzle at any time, except (but not excluding) the first time the puzzle has been attempted will have a number of pieces missing. A number of these pieces will be edge pieces. This will be due to pieces lost previously, pieces eaten previously (not usually by humans) and pieces borrowed by humans in the hope they will be the person to place the last piece. This last reason explains why there are usually more pieces missing than the number of people who know about the existence of the puzzle. Now the centre section can be filled in (missing pieces excepted, see above). This can also be done by a few methods: at random, by shape, by colour and by picture. Doing a puzzle at random means that once the edges are established, the puzzler gets every single piece and attempts to insert it into every single recess on the puzzle. This usually means trying to fit male edges into female edges, but some puzzlers even try to fit male into male or female into female. There is a technical name for these particular people: morons. You may have thought previously that this word just meant people were stupid in general, but in actuality this is the defining test. Doing it by shape is not much better that doing it at random, but at least there is some strategy in looking for a piece that will actually fit. This basically involves looking at the existing interlocked pieces, seeing what general shape the piece that you are looking for has, finding all the pieces with that shape and inserting the piece. This strategy works best nearer completion of the puzzle, as there will be less pieces left to sift through. Doing the puzzle by colour involves finding all pieces with a colour roughly the same as a given existing interlocked section of the puzzle. This works particularly well in brightly coloured puzzles but is not so successful in those nature puzzles that grandma gives you, with almost all grass and sky. A combination of colour and shape is actually quite a quick way to get the job done. But the best way of doing any puzzle is by picture. Taking a magnifying glass to view the control picture (on the cover of the box the puzzle came in) and comparing any piece with the magnified image, find where the piece goes and put it there. This is a good method only if each piece takes less than a minute to place, and becomes a really bad method when the picture on the box is not the same as the puzzle will be, which brings us to the Fourth Law: 4) The picture on the cover of the box, provided there is one, will either... a) Be a picture from a puzzle other than the one which you are attempting to put together. b) Be a picture which is basically the same as the one you are putting together, only with different colours. c) Be a picture which is exactly the right control picture, exactly the right colour but differs only in that the picture is upside down. The last of these cases can be rectified rotating the box a half turn [4]. Although puzzles are usually quite time consuming, there is a Fifth Law that describes how the ease of performing jigsaw completion increases with age: 5) The ease with which a jigsaw puzzle is completed can be measured as the inverse of the time required for completion, and is exponentially proportional to age. That is, if you are twice as old as another person, you will naturally complete the puzzle in a quarter of the time. This law, however, is not very obvious through middle age, but there is a remarkable change at the age of 60 and older, whereby it almost suddenly becomes incredibly easy to complete puzzles. This results in most people of age 70 and older being able to complete puzzles at lightning speed. Once the puzzle is completed and all the onlookers have dropped in their concealed pieces, occasionally concealed many days before the puzzle was begun, you can marvel at the nice-ness of the picture (or lack of it). This picture that you've put together will then possibly look just as nice as the picture on the box or even identical, making the entire construction of the puzzle absolutely pointless. Here is where the clever people will quickly grab some contact adhesive and stick the puzzle together permanently and the masochists will tear the puzzle apart to do some other time. There are some additional methods which help to fit pieces into places where they are not designed to fit. A hammer works best for fitting larger male edges into smaller female edges, although a few bangs with your fist may be sufficient. To fit a smaller male edge into a larger female edge, a few drops of hot water will allow the piece to expand to fill the hole. There is a downside to this, however, in that some people may regard these methods as cheating, and also the fact that pieces that are placed where they do not fit will not produce the intended picture, which may make people wonder why the finished puzzle looks like a collage. The most effective methods involve not doing the puzzle at all. By avoiding the puzzle altogether you can actually guarantee a longer life [5]. However, avoiding jigsaw puzzles is not very easy. Grandmothers tend to give these horrid things away all the time, and no matter how many she's already given you, you could always get another dozen, even a week after the last batch. So the next best thing to do is destroy them. To effectively destroy a puzzle, first soak in petrol and pack the puzzle in layers of petrol-soaked paper and cloth. Then you can encase the whole assembly in dynamite and store in a large drum, accompanied by a fission bomb. The entire drum can then be set off wherever you choose, although I would recommend the moon, then a large desert, a small island in the Pacific (preferably with no inhabitants), or failing all these possibilities, you could detonate the thing in a small city, like Melbourne [6]. To conclude, I will just remind you that there are many methods of coping with a piece of cardboard which some git deliberately took apart. Whether you decide that you'll complete the puzzle or destroy it (and which way you may intend to complete the puzzle if that is what you intend to do) is completely up to you. [1] Or arts students. But I think that's a clear synonym anyway. [2] Entropy (defined): The amount of disorder in a system. In general, the amount of entropy in a system increases with the passing of time, and for the entropy to decrease, you must add energy to balance the equation. [3] The idea of jigsaw puzzles with pictures of food on them was apparently done for a reason. By looking at heaps of baked beans, for example, and at the same time being completely frustrated by a puzzle full of them, you could theoretically be put off baked beans, which would consequently reduce flatulence. In the same way, puzzles featuring nothing but eggs could help to cut down cholesterol. [4] Through the correct axis, i.e. don't turn it upside down. [5] This is actually not proven, so don't quote me on it. [6] Provided you don't actually live there. %e *EOA* %t Meaning, The, A Non-Religious View %n 12R7 %s What Is The Point? %a Aaron Rice (a.rice@ukonline.co.uk) %d 19970131 %x Classification Of Religions %x Death And The Afterlife %x Problem Solving %x Time %i Life, The Meaning Of %i Existence, The Meaning Of %i Point, What Is The %i What The Point Is %i Everything, The Point Of %i Why? %i Because? %e Author's note: This article is not intended to offend anybody, and is merely a theory, albeit not necessarily fully formed, of existence. The author is happy to discuss any of the points raised in this article, and is also open to new ideas. But is there a point at all? "A point in what?" I hear you ask. Well, generally speaking, a point in everything; why are we here? What are we doing? How did the Conservatives regain power in 1992 [1]? For many there has to be some overall meaning for everything and for their individual lives to have effective meaning within it. The theory being that if they have no reason to be where they are, they've no reason to be doing anything. Another school of philosophy states that the general purpose is to exist; to be. Hence, the survival of any being aware enough to pursue it, is their purpose. The third approach is to combine the two, obtaining a unified theory that states, to a greater of lesser effect, that: a) There is some divine purpose; and b) To find it, I must kill everyone else. This has been expressed through various religions in the past, and can still be found in many modern philosophies. This, of course, stems from primitive instincts; the prime motivation of creatures who have no ability to think and assess their world as it is. Those are the creatures who are the dedicated followers of fashion [2]. Looking at creation as a whole, a lot of people can't help voicing the typical, and therefore agonisingly predictable, thought that it can't all just be an accident. In reply to this, it is possible to state that if it wasn't an accident, it wouldn't _be_ in the first place. Read it again; it does actually make sense. Stated basically, theoretically-speaking, it is likely for one person to stand on a mountain on the planet Earth, look into the sky towards the single moon, and exclaim that he or she believes that there must be some purpose to it all. It is equally as likely that one and a half green furry balls will stand on a crater on a geographically totally-dissimilar planet, stare into the sky at the moons and exclaim exactly the same thing. The point is that in theory, either can exist, both can exist, or neither can exist; the passage of history will determine which is the case. In fact it is more than a little arrogant for anyone to claim that on this single planet, they have been chosen for any divine purpose that is universally applicable, or at least denies the rest of the universe. The mere idea that the Earth is somehow special in this respect, stems back to the theory that the planet is at the centre of the universe; something that has since been disproved. We could indeed be the only form of life in the entire universe, or every planet could have some form of life, or at least the potential to support some form of life, or somewhere in between. The initial process of evolutionary life, creation, generally begins as an accident, and is just as likely to go one way as the other, in terms of survival or extinction. Put more simply, the human race were just as likely not to evolve as evolve, and the same thing is just as likely to, or to have, happened on every other planet in existence. If we are the only ones out there, we are not special, we are lucky [3]. It should also be stated that even if there is no real "meaning" to life in general, that doesn't mean that life itself has no individual meaning; things are not as bleak as they have been painted. For many, life is what you make it; you make your own meaning. To define a purpose for yourself is the most difficult thing to do, especially without guidance. Society is generally a good, or at least consistent, guide to how you might do this. We all have to survive and live together, so any purpose must in some way be associated with this. This is not strictly-speaking true, in fact. Some might say that life is about learning, discovering, and understanding, if not the universe [4], then their own mind, their person. Alternatively, your purpose might just be to survive, in which case, you'll do what the hell you like. Society might say, "We need you." You can either become a part of society or tell it to go to hell. If you join society, you can become an integral part of it, and therefore an overall strategy to survive, to prosper, to expand, to discover and all sorts of things you couldn't have a hope of doing on your own. If you tell it to go to hell, you shouldn't be surprised if it says the same to you next time you ask for something [5]. In the end, you're going to do whatever you instinctively feel like doing, whether that is watching the television, reading a book, listening to some form of music or following politics. A lot of people will look into the universe and see an infinite number of possibilities, with so much so to discover and to learn about; that is one meaning of existence. Personally, I'm going to go and get a cup of tea because I'm thirsty. [1] I can't answer that one without offending a significant proportion of the population of Great Britain; there is a time and a place for everything. [2] Well, not quite. Some will blindly follow what everyone else follows for various reasons, and sometimes the reason is that they don't have the intelligence to decide what to do for themselves. This is not always the case. [3] Or unlucky. Depends on how you look at it really. [4] Or at least the part of it you have access to. [5] This is inevitable if you're going to survive. Unless, of course, you're too proud to do so, in which case, your survival chances are significantly reduced. Though in a civilised society they might help you whether you want help or not. %e *EOA* %t St. Cyr Sur Mur, France, Earth %n 8R68 %s The Town Which Gave The Statue Of Liberty %a David Kraics (DavidKrai@aol.com) %d 19951125 %x Earth %x New York City, New York, USA, Earth %x Pizza %x US Naval Abbreviations %e The Statue of Liberty is a quite famous statue that is located on Liberty Island in New York Harbor, but how many people know where it actually came from? It was designed by Frederic Auguste Bartholdi and the inner structure was built by the same genius who built the Eiffel Tower in Paris, Gustave Eiffel. Actually, the first time it was fully erected was in a small town on the shore of the Mediteranean Sea. I had the unexpected pleasure of visiting this town while on a Med Cruise during the first half of 1989 while in the US Navy. I say unexpected because, when I heard where we were going, I was ignorant of the significance, and thought we were on our way to a rinky dink fishing village. The ship had to anchor outside the harbor, due to the shallowness of the water, so we took a "water taxi" to port. After being told that the main part of town was at the other end of a dirt road, me and my friends took a walk there. At the town hall we saw a small scale version of the original statue, all done up in bronze. Beautiful! We soon found out why it was there. Incidentally, the face of the statue really is Mr. Bartholdi's mother. The people in this town were very friendly. They had only met sailors from one other Navy ship before us, which was a good thing since natives tend to get sick of us after we've been around too much. It was in this town that I learned that Europeans ate Pizza with knife and fork. Also, I learned something about leaving the silverware crossed on the plate is a sign of dissatisfaction with the food. I'm not sure how true this last bit was since I never had the nerve to try to find out. The girls in this town are friendly but not in the way that sailors like, I'm afraid. The sunrise and sunset over the Med are beautiful. So are the girls! While there, you can also take a wine tasting tour at the local, family owned and run, vineyard and winery, or visit the local Roman ruins. There are plenty of taverns, restaurants, and even a nightclub to try out. All in all, a very nice place. Very peaceful. I'm glad to have been there. %e *EOA* %t Infinity, The Truth About %n 8R69 %s What Is It? %a Aaron Rice (a.rice@ukonline.co.uk) %d 19970210 %x Infinity %x Infinity, The Trouble With %x Insomnia %x Time Travel %i Messing About With Infinity %i Fun With Infinity %i Creative Accounting With Infinity %i Definitive Guide To Infinity, The %i Mathematics Of Infinity For Fun And Profit %e In some circumstances, infinity (to be algebraically represented in this article by the letter "I") can be used as a number: * in order to engineer a formula, * to extract and display some theory, or * to fill some empty space on a text book. However, in most cases, it makes a very bad number, and is mostly used as a concept. The reason for this is that it _isn't_ really a number. Take the following rules: 1) Infinity divided by a finite number is infinite (I / f = I); 2) Any finite number divided by infinity is a number infinitesimally larger than, but never equal to, zero (f / I = 1 / I); 3) Infinity divided by infinity is one (I / I = 1), or in fact any other positive number (I / I = and so on...); 4) Infinity multiplied by zero (no infinity) is zero (I * 0 = 0); 5) Infinity divided by a positive finite number is infinity (I / +f = I); 6) Infinity divided by a negative finite number is minus infinity (I / -f = -I); 7) Infinity divided by zero is not possible; 8) Infinity plus infinity is infinity (I + I = I); 9) Zero divided by infinity (nothing divided into infinity) equals zero (0 / I = 0); 10) Infinity plus a finite number is infinity (I + f = I); 11) Infinity minus a finite number is infinity (I - f = I); but 12) Infinity minus infinity, due to the nature of infinity, can be zero, infinity, or minus infinity (I - I = -I, 0, I). In some of these respects it appears to be a number; it shares some of the same properties. Unfortunately, when you start using it as a number, you experience a few problems. You might be thinking, so why isn't it a number? Well, if it is, then it is each and every imaginable and unimaginable number, while being none of them. If you can define a number, it isn't infinity. Therefore, infinity is not a number. Perhaps then, it is lots of numbers. Perhaps a variable? Well, this is an interesting point to consider, but again, any number you might apply to infinity, is quite obviously not infinity. It doesn't matter how many numbers you apply to it, if they are numerable, they are not infinity. Can you calculate it? Well, considering the nature of infinity, no. As soon as you apply a value to infinity, you find that it isn't. Pick a number; you can always add one more. So what can you use it for? In most cases, people use infinity to replace a number that is so large, they can't be bothered to work it out. Infinity is usually applied to the boundless limits of space, and time. The theory being that if you go far enough in space, you can go further [1], and time is just as bad. The closest way to experience infinity is to buy an "auto-reverse" tape recorder, fix it to a reliable power source, and never turn it off. Of course, you will never really experience infinity this way, as you will eventually die, the tape will break, the machine will break, or the power source will die [2]. Curiosities =========== Here follows a couple of examples of how one might happily misuse infinity for their own amusement, cheerfully putting a few rules to one side: If I + I = I and I + 2 = I Then I + I = I + 2 So I = I + 2 - I Then I = 2 But in the same spirit you could also say that: Since I + 2 = I and I - 4 = I Then I + 2 = I - 4 So 2 + 4 = 0 Then 2 = -4 Which is completely absurd, and is therefore the basis of most of the most advanced forms of modern creative accounting. In fact, all this proves is that infinity is most definitely not a constant value, and trying to use it as one can cause all manner of problems. Trying to fiddle with the rules of infinity can be hazardous to your health. [1] And further [1]. [2] Especially if you forget to pay the bill. %e *EOA* %t Oestersund, Sweden, Earth %n 9R16 %s Oestersund, Masters Of Life Quality! %a Olle Johansson (gardener@hem.passagen.se) %d 19960417 %x Sweden: The True Story %x Sweden, Earth %e Oestersund [1] is a town located roughly in the middle of Sweden. It is neither famous for its picturesque buildings nor its slogan [2], nor for its location, nor name. The thing that it could be famous for is its attempt to be the place that has to pay billions for housing thousands of athletes during a few weeks, just to let them show off [3]. It's probably a good thing the town has always come second place in the election for the Olympics. One thing that makes the town interesting for field researchers is the high pub-to-inhabitant ratio, so, if you're old enough, you'll always have a place to get a beer. Things of interest for the casual tourist include Sweden's most northerly rune stone, Froesoestenen [4], the lake monster that lives in the lake Storsjoen [5], and the world's first outdoors museum, Jamtli. The town is sometimes called "Sweden's Chicago" by the inhabitants since it's so windy. Another thing it could be called is San Francisco, since it's got so many steep streets that lead down to the lake. Oestersund is also the home town, more-or-less, of the field researcher Olle Johansson. [1] "East of the Sound." [2] The slogan is "Oestersund - Masters of Life Quality". [3] This sport event reference is the Olympics. [4] "The Froesoe Stone" (Froesoen is the name of the island on which the stone is located). [5] "Great Lake." %e *EOA* %t Weather, Influencing The %n 9R17 %s How We Change The Weather %a Roel van der Meulen (vdmeulen@strw.leidenuniv.nl) %d 19961219 %i Little Cogs In The Weather Wheel %i Consequences Of Chaos %i Influencing The Weather %x Weather And Your Health %x Martial Arts And Farts %x Flying %x Area 51 %k Chaos %e In the past years, many attempts have been made to gain the power to change the weather. In the present century, developments in physics and mathematics have led us to the realisation that we already possess it. The relatively new field of Chaos Theory is often illustrated by the example of the "storm butterfly". The motions of the wings of a butterfly above Area 51, Nevada, USA, for instance, can eventually cause a storm in the Bermuda triangle [1]. This example shows how seemingly insignificant distortions of a system can have large consequences on the state of the system later on. It also shows that every move we make will some time or other have an effect on that amazingly complex system we call weather [2]. We can choose to stand still in the wind, wave our arms frantically as if to fly, or fart; the effects will all be different. With this we see that without much effort we can influence the development of the weather in the future. _Control_ of the weather, now that's another thing... [1] Paraphrased from most of the popular, and less popular, books about Chaos Theory. [2] Imagine trying to calculate the weather on a computer. You would have to put in every little obstacle flowing air can encounter. Large buildings are easy, but what about twigs, scraps of paper, grains of sand? Not to mention moving things like insects. What's the point of this argument? Well, merely: don't bother trying this at home, folks! %e *EOA* %t Politicians %n 8R70 %s Selfish By Nature %a Matt Baier (geiiga42@aol.com) %d 19960626 %i Idiots, Elected %i Public Servants %x What To Do When Your Elected Head Of State Embarrasses You %e Politicians are large, disgusting creatures which draw power to themselves by power of advertising, untruthfulness, and completely faked hoopiness. As they are also skilled liars, the successful members of this species can survive by convincing a majority of the people that they have been in an identical situation to them, and thus can appreciate all of their own worst attributes which, for the average politician, at last count, is all of them. Their realization makes them fall into this line of thinking: "Nothing about me is good. Quick, let's draw up a tax-raise bill so at least I'll be richer." This is, of course, the cause of most bankruptcy, and thus of keeping the entitlement funds afloat. One of the greatest misnomers in politics is calling a politician a "public servant". This is incorrect because a politician serves only him/herself, and ignores the responsibilities of a servant to the people. %e *EOA* %t Arguments, Infinitely Prolonging %n 9R18 %s Arguments That Can Go On Forever %a John Haveman (jhaveman@u.arizona.edu) %d 19970424 %x Avoiding Conversations %x Winning Arguments %x Football, Association %x Football %x Schroedinger's Cat %x Top Twenty-Six Ways To Kill Time %x Eiffel Tower, The %x Pizza Ordering %x Pizza %x Delivered Pizza, Grand Unification Theory Of %i Infinitely Prolonged Participation In Arguments %i Prolonging Participation In Arguments Infinitely %i Participation In Arguments, Prolonging Infinitely %i Arguments, The Art of Infinitely Prolonging %e First off, the inaccuracy in the title should be noted. Very few Hitchhikers, or people in general for that matter, are immortal, so the "infinitely prolonging" bit is at best a misleading hyperbole, and at worst flat-out wrong. This is not suggesting taking up arguing full-time, since there is so much else out there to do, it is merely offering instructions on something to do to pass the vast amount of dead time available to the common hitchhiker. Winning arguments is a rather popular subject, because at times it can be very practical. An oft neglected subject, however, is that of _prolonging_ arguments. In this method of arguing, the objective is not to win [1] but to pass time. Anyone can win an argument with a little persistence, but only the true artist can keep a single, pointless discussion vibrant for a lifetime, providing endless hours of entertainment, not only to the participants, but also to countless others within earshot. The most delicate portion of this art is the selecting of a topic. Therefore, the following suggestions are given. You may, of course, feel free to disagree. 1) Do Not Argue About Anything of Consequence. This includes, of course, politics. Not because politicians ever get anything of consequence done, but because these sorts of discussions tend to move beyond the "friendly chat" stage, to the "large-scale wars with intercontinental ballistic missiles" stage. 2) Do Not Argue About Anything Dangerous. Defending Erwin Schroedinger against a supporter of Werner Heisenberg is much safer than, for example, defending God versus a loyal fan of Zeus, mainly because both Schroedinger and Heisenberg, regardless of their relative importance to science, lack the ability to smite you. 3) Do Not Argue About Anything Definite [2]. Along the same line as the above rule, nothing could be more annoying [3] than spending months arguing passionately that the Eiffel Tower doesn't exist, only to arrive in Paris and see that it in fact does. A much better angle to take is that the Eiffel Tower is located somewhere in Texas. Then, you can wander throughout most of Texas and still claim to be correct. This is actually very advisable, since there is little else to talk about while in Texas. 4) Do Not Argue About Anything Immediate [4]. "Where are we going to eat dinner?" is a perfectly practical and immediate question, and therefore a dreadful one to have a good argument over. Sure, you can have a great time passionately comparing and contrasting the finer points of various cuisines, but, in the end, you're still just hungry. If you must, however, argue this topic, it is suggested that before posing the initial question, you order out for pizza. If you have a good argument going, no one will even realize when the food arrives that the whole discussion has been made moot. 5) Do Not Go Along With Conventional Wisdom. Always select the most outrageous opinions to defend. This not only guarantees you plenty of opponents, but adds to the over all absurdity of it all and allows you to demonstrate your superior skill. Any fool can come up with reasons to believe that chickens exist, but only a genius can indefinitely argue that chickens are the fabrication of an elite group of Spaniards bent on world conquest. 6) Do Not Choose A Too Complicated Topic. Few people can keep up with discussing the relative validity of the particle nature of light versus its wave nature, but most people can handle "less filling" versus "tastes great" [5]. Arguing, if done correctly, can provide cheap enjoyment for hours requiring nothing save for a head full of ideas, which can be purchased on the black market so that even most hitchhikers can have their very own. [1] In fact, if you follow these suggestions, you most likely will never win. [2] Unless the topic is exceedingly abstract. I was witness to one fine debate where the opponents argued the existence of thought. The scary thing is that the sides were not for/against. [3] Well, possibly Jim Carrey. [4] Following this advice even allows one to argue something that eventually will be definite. Take, for instance, the question of who will win the Earth's Soccer [6] World Cup in the year 2005. If the year is 1996, one could easily spend a great portion of the next several years proclaiming some perfectly absurd point of view. Two things, however, must still be carefully avoided: you must make sure to part company with your arguing companions well before 2005, lest the actual result comes out, unequivocally proving you to be a fool; and you must avoid the type of smart-ass that will point out that there will in fact be no World Cup in 2005, since they only happen every 4 years. [5] This will vary with the company that you are in. If you, for example, are Albert Einstein and happen to see Werner Heisenberg and Erwin Schroedinger sitting around looking bored, have at it; you'll be doing us all a favor. I realize that there is some sort of consensus that has been reached on this issue, but I doubt I'm the only one who is just a little bit uncomfortable with the resolution. [6] Or "Football", as most non-American-types call the sport. %e *EOA* %t Air France %n 9R19 %s An Airline Much Like Another %a Chris Tann, The (chris_tann@bigfoot.com) %d 19961202 %x Means Of Transportation For The Earth-Confined Hitchhiker %x Airplanes %i Air Inter %i French Airlines %i France, Air %e Being an up-and-coming Field Researcher, I often find myself happily trotting around the globe with one airline or another. This might not quite qualify me as an airline critic, but it doesn't qualify me for much else either, so I'll give it a go anyway. The limited amount of research [1], I was able to perform has revealed the following: 1) Air France has the best food; 2) Air France has the best red wine; 3) Air France has the second prettiest hostesses [3]; and 4) Air France has the most strikes. In the end, each traveler must make its [5] own decision as to whether the above counts as a good reason to make a conscious choice of Air Carrier next time they fly. For me, I'm going to flag down that pretty Hostess, and ask for some more red wine. [1] The "limited amount" of research was due to the fact that I spent half of the voyage trying to figure out how to pay for the flight, and the other half wishing I had been upgraded to First Class. Should any offers of free travel or free upgrades be forthcoming, I will probably be able to give a much more "detailed" [2] analysis. [2] For the cynical of mind, replace "detailed" with "biased". [3] "Prettiest" is, of course, a rather subjective term, but this was my personal conclusion, given the limited amount of research I was able to perform [4]. [4] The "limited amount" of research was due to the fact that I was too busy trying to meet my slave-driver Editor's deadlines, and incidentally, too shy. Should any offers of the chance to perform a more in-depth analysis on the Air France flight crew be forthcoming, I will be happy to re-evaluate my analysis. [5] After tremendous criticism of a previous article, where I shortened the unwieldy "he or she" definite article [6] to "he", I am now writing all of my articles in Uni-sex mode [7]. [6] All right, maybe its not the definite article, but who really cares [8]? [7] Sorry guys, that doesn't count for footnote 4. [8] Sick of footnotes? Me too. Now, where's that hostess... %e *EOA* %t Country Music, A Guide To %n 9R20 %s The World's Hoopiest Music %a Matt Baier (geiiga42@aol.com) %d 19970120 %x Country Music %i Country And Western, C&W %e Country music has long been laughed at, misrepresented, and thought to feature dead dogs and ex-spouses. This article was written for the sake of these poor delusional people. Recognizing Country Music ========================= Some people recognize country music by the apparel worn by the listeners. They site cowboy boots and hats as two of the main things worn by the fans of this music. This, unfortunately, has to be shown as incorrect. Admittedly I, a fanatic of the genre, wear cowboy boots, but it has nothing to do with hero worship. The fact is, cowboy boots are better than hiking boots for your average hitchhiker; they are more waterproof, keep bugs off your legs better, and also make better weapons than their counterparts. Another misconception is of cowboy hats. Travis Tritt, one of the most popular of all "new" country singers, does not wear a hat. So, you may ask, having destroyed all the visible methods of discerning country music from other styles, how is it done? The answer, of course, is it's not. For a 90% accurate judgment, listen for a steel guitar or a fiddle. Of course, there are exceptions, such as "Homesick" by Travis Tritt. Who's Good ========== For hot new country, I recommend that you listen to Garth Brooks and Travis Tritt. They are the new voice of country. If you want specific songs, I can only ask you to listen for yourself. Some people genuinely believe that country is bad. If you are one of these people, there is still hope. My best friend hated country for years, but now, especially with the southern rock that has been added to it, it is his favorite kind of music. Who To See In Concert ===================== From this, I can only give you first and second hand reports. If you want to see a good show, I recommend Garth Brooks. His shows have everything that a good concert has: loud tunes, good special effects [1], and of course, the best songs ever. Another good show is Clay Walker; he doesn't do much of the fancy stuff, but the music is excellent. If you are in Manhatten, Kansas, USA, during the summer, you may want to check out Country Stampede. It's a three-day show with all new bands. At all costs, avoid George Strait concerts. His new songs are fairly good, but he doesn't have much good old stuff, and that's what the first two hours of his singing are. He puts on a minimum of a show, and it is thus incredibly boring. [1] Usually the stage is circled with fire at some point in the show. %e *EOA* %t Airplanes %s The Truth About Traveling In Airplanes %n 12R8 %a Tom Millar (tmillar@cc.umanitoba.ca) %d 19970214 %x Flying %x Means Of Transportation For The Earth-Confined Hitchhiker %i Aeroplanes %i Planes %e Airplanes are machines used on Earth to make large numbers of people miserable in relatively small areas. To accomplish this purpose, the designers of airplanes (called aeroplanes in some parts of the world) have included such features as seats, meals, washrooms and movies. Seats ===== Airplane seats are cleverly built in such a way that they remain comfortable for approximately five minutes, while most flights last up to several hours. In addition, they include the ability to recline. This creates an extra level of discomfort for the passenger behind the reclined seat, the headrest of which is now ten inches from his face, and an extra level of frustration for the passenger in the reclined seat, since the seat remains uncomfortable regardless of its degree of inclination. Between each pair of seats is a single armrest, which is also effective in causing frustration if, as is often the case, each of the passengers sharing the armrest possesses two arms. The back of each seat contains a flip-down shelf, which serves the dual purpose of providing a surface on which to place the meal described later, and a mechanism of imprisoning the passenger in his seat after the meal is served, while the flight attendants are assaulting other passengers with meals. Meals ===== Airplane meals are composed of a material which is stunningly similar to food. They often include items which are similar to meat, items which are similar to vegetables and items which are similar to dessert. They are usually accompanied by items which are similar to knives, forks and spoons. Often served with airplane meals is a liquid which bears a startling dissimilarity to wine. Washrooms ========= The term "washroom" as applied to airplanes is a ridiculous overstatement. The term "water closet" may be closer to the point and "toilet locker" may hit the nail on the head. The washrooms are usually positioned in such a way that passengers who are imprisoned by their dinner trays will be able to see, if they turn their heads to such a degree that severe personal injury is likely, that the washrooms are currently free. Of course, by the time they are released from their imprisonment, the facilities will be in use, usually by someone with severe intestinal problems aggravated by eating the near-food. The corridor near the washrooms is designed in such a way that once more than five people are standing in line to get in, the person who is currently using the room (closet, locker) will be unable to get out until the captain requests that all passengers return their seats due to turbulence, and the fact that he needs to go to the loo himself. Movies ====== Sometime after the meal is served, usually when washroom line-ups are at their peak, a film will be shown. In-flight movies are generally not of the highest quality, especially when compared to, say, the movie shown near the beginning of the flight describing the emergency exits and life preservers. The movie will usually be selected from that group of films that people managed to avoid seeing when they were playing in the theatres. On those rare flights where the movie is actually one which many people would enjoy watching, few passengers will be in a position to see the screen. Tall passengers and passengers with tall hair (or hats) will block the view of those who would enjoy the movie. The obstructing passengers themselves will have no interest in the movie. Overall though, the most irritating thing about airplanes is that they inevitably transport you to a destination far from your home, forcing you to board another airplane to return. %e *EOA* %t Alien Invasions, How To Fake %n 8R71 %s A Few Tips To Create Fear And Panic %a Aaron Rice (a.rice@ukonline.co.uk) %d 19970227 %x Alien Identification %x Alien Elimination %x Exterminating Human-Kind %x Faking UFOs %x Incident At Roswell, The %x Moon Hoax, The %x Boredom %i Faking Alien Invasions %i Invasions, Faking %k Alien %k Invasion %k UFO %k Hoax %k Space %e Imagine looking up into the sky to witness the lightning effects, as hundreds of huge alien battleships blast their way towards you. This is a traditional image painted by those that usually express alien invasions, mostly in the form of films and television programmes. There are also more subtle forms, where mysterious apparently humanoid figures behave unusually, and eventually reveal themselves, whether intentionally or by way of dying in a pool of green slime [1]. These invasions are usually very carefully planned, and involve the infiltration of government [2]. Happily, it appears that all of these are all in the mind of writers and paranoid people, and that we are safe, at least for the moment, from anything of this sort. In case I am wrong, I state here that ignorance is a legitimate defence. Unfortunately, a safe universe is a boring universe. Sometimes it is necessary to make life more interesting, and therefore you might consider the possibility of faking an alien invasion. Here are a few hints that might help you... Spacecraft ========== Obviously, unless you already have an alien spacecraft in your possession [3], this can be difficult. It is not, however, impossible. Anything unusual and unrecognisable can be thought to be alien, if you present it correctly. Lighting, positioning, and timing are very important. There is no point in welding together two back halves of a pair of 2CVs and flying them across Trafalgar Square, if you do it in the middle of the night [4]. Infiltration ============ There are always creepy people about. It may be a good idea to latch onto one of these and exploit their appearance and behaviour [5]. To this end, write to newspapers, send mysterious letters, plant evidence (see below), and spread rumours. Evidence ======== Evidence can be difficult. Usually, you need to make something unusual, and hide it somewhere it can be easily found. People will usually be suspicious, and the sceptics will jump to the natural, logical, and indeed actual, conclusion that it is a fake, but as long as there is some degree of doubt, you are making _some_ progress. Desperation =========== Of course, you might find that your efforts are making little progress, and you will resort to panic. Perhaps this will manifest itself in a desire to jump up and down in cafes, exclaiming that the world is under attack. This can lead to your imprisonment, or at least your incarceration in some form of medical institution. However, this does have its positive side, as these places already contain a number of people who might be all to happy to help [6]. [1] It could be said that dying in a pool of green slime could be intentional. [2] This is pretty logical. So far, I haven't seen the alien infiltration of a major fast food outlet by a rather short-sighted alien. "Surrender your planet, and do you want fries with that?" just doesn't have the right ring to it. [3] In which case, you may fake an invasion by manipulating rumour. It's very simple; newspapers do that sort of thing all the time. [4] Unless, of course, you decide to coincide your experiment with the traditional New Year festivities. [5] Actually, it is possible that they may already be part of a real alien invasion. [6] Among these, you may find a combination of those who believe that aliens are invading, and those that know for a fact that aliens have invaded, because either they have witnessed their arrival, or they are the aliens in question [7]. [7] There has yet to be a survey to ascertain the exact number of incarcerated extra-terrestrials [8]. It's not usually as easy as asking them outright, as they tend not to be so forthcoming on these issues. Green skin, now that's another thing, but not necessarily the giveaway you might think. [8] A degree of sympathy might be spared for the innocent, but daringly hypothetical, alien who landed merely to ask for directions, and was locked up for speaking in a series of high-pitched whistles and bouts of expletive verse, while displaying a total lack of understanding for the rights of others, and a complete ignorance of the colour red [9]. [9] It takes all sorts. %e *EOA* %t Haggling %n 8R72 %s It's A Deal %a Aaron Rice (a.rice@ukonline.co.uk) %d 19970203 %i Deal, Making A %i Making A Deal %i Fixing Payment For Goods %i Goods, Fixing Payment For %i Payment For Goods, Fixing %i Trade, Fixing Payment For %x Politicians %x Tourists * %x Currency %k Trade %k Shopping %k Capitalism %e Haggling is, in many of what are regarded as "less economically developed" [1] civilizations, an acceptable means of agreeing payment for goods. It is not deemed to be good manners to, in the so-called civilized world, meet a request for payment with an attempt to haggle [2]. A "normal" conversation in a modern capitalist society might be: Cashier: "That'll be twenty-nine pounds and ninety-nine pence please." (Customer hands Cashier thirty pounds in cash.) Cashier: "Thank you. That's one penny change." (Cashier hands customer one penny and the receipt.) Customer: "Thank you." Though perhaps a little polite, this is a reasonable example of what might happen. There are, of course, various alternatives, such as the "credit card variant", the name of which will prove example enough. If you decide to mix cultures together, you could end up with something like this: Cashier: "That'll be twenty-nine pounds and ninety-nine pence please." Customer: "Fifteen." Cashier: "I beg your pardon?" Customer: "Okay, twenty." Cashier: "You must be joking." Customer: "Look, twenty-two, and it's my last offer." Cashier: "I'm going to get the manager/police/doctor." With this too, there are variants. The "pay up or I'll use your internal organs to redecorate the walls" variation, or the "humour the poor fool" method. The latter of these is less likely in most larger shops, as the cashiers are not trained for such intellectually challenging situations. If you are in a situation where haggling is legitimate, and you are able to partake in it, here are a few tips you might bare in mind. 1) Pick a low price to start at, and look totally serious about it. It matters not if your opening bid is way too low; it proves you are a shrewd bargainer. _Always_ open at a lower bid that the amount you intend to pay. 2) Try to move up in fairly small steps. If your opponent matches you in this, it may be necessary to enlarge the steps, just to prevent the whole process from failing totally. If these enlarged steps do not provoke an immediate compromise, return to the smaller steps. 3) Above all, be persistent and never give up. Added to this, you must never _look_ like you're going to give up; an experienced salesman will recognise the signs of a weak customer. Never lose your nerve [3]. 4) Never show that you have money. If a salesman can see that you can afford a certain figure, he or she will push at that figure as hard as possible. 5) If possible, try to drop into the conversation that you have already seen the item on sale elsewhere, and that it was much cheaper there. Do not, under any circumstances, do this if you think the item in question is unique. 6) On no account allow anyone else to join in the bidding, unless they are working for yourself; an experienced and crafty salesman may use a plant to draw the bidding upwards. 7) Never pay more for an item that you intend to; if the bidding reaches a certain point, simply state that you are no longer interested and begin to walk away. If your opponent is really desperate to sell, they will approach you with another offer. [1] Though this is not always the case. [2] There are exceptions, such as when you buy some second-hand goods, such as cars. In these situations, be very _very_ careful, as you almost certainly have less practice in payment negotiation. [3] To practice, approach every situation with monumental arrogance. You might want to enter conversations with outrageous and completely inaccurate statements, and totally refuse to admit your mistake. Just keep plugging away with more and more ridiculous arguments [4]. [4] When you are finished, you may even be ready to become a politician. %e *EOA* %t Bootlegging, A Guide To %n 9R21 %s Tape Trading For Fun And Profit %a Mike Schmitt (schmitt@vbe.com) %d 19961129 %i Guide To Bootlegging %i Tape Trading %i Trading Tapes %e Over the course of time, you're sure to run into them. You can't recognize them by sight: male and female, tall and short, plump or scrawny, they come in all shapes and sizes. In fact, if you're reading this you may very well be one of them. Yes, I mean bootleggers. So if you're one of them, or plan to be, read on and learn of the art! Definition Of Bootlegging ========================= Bootlegging is traditionally the buying and selling of an illegal product. In the 1920s, the United States had the Prohibition against alcohol and many people turned to bootleg moonshine [1]. Although this is what you'll find in a book, this is not the bootlegging I refer to. What I refer to is tape trading. And, unlike alcohol, it is technically legal to "bootleg" cassette tapes. As we are aware, you cannot legally record an officially released compact disc or cassette on to a blank cassette. There is at least one exception, however, and that's in Italy, where there are no such copyright laws [2]. A person may record a concert and keep it for their personal use, they may distribute it, but they may not sell it legally. Big companies work their way around this by bring their tapes to Italy and producing compact discs there. When brought back to the United States, or another country, they can be sold or copied as much as they please. Two Types Of Recordings ======================= There are two types of bootleg recordings, DAT and Soundboard (commonly abbreviated to "SB"). DATs, or Digital Audio Tapes, are similar to cassette tapes in appearance, but are more expensive, and do not record "air noise". Even so, you tend to get more of the crowd than the music on tape, so only concert-goers (non-company people) tend to use this method. Soundboards are the alternative. Bootleg companies purchase these, because of the superior near-studio quality sound. Basically, a soundboard is the audio that enters the microphones on stage, and is stored digitally on a special recording device (called the soundboard, of course). This method tends to pick up more of the music, and less of the audience. If you find a bootleg compact disc for sale and it does not say "soundboard" on it, I would question the dealer; non-SB discs are not worth the high price tag attached, which is usually between 22 and 28 American dollars. Trading Rules ============= These rules tend to vary from trader to trader, but the general guidelines are as follows: 1) Use Type II tapes, preferably Maxell XL-II. 2) Send the tapes out the same day as the other guy. 3) Use a padded envelope. 4) Do _not_ include a tape case or J-Card. 5) _Do_ include a set-list and all info available. 6) If a song cuts off, restart the whole song on the back of the tape. I repeat: these rules tend to vary. Selling Prices ============== If someone wishes to have a copy of one of your shows, the going price for a cassette seems to be five American dollars, including the case. You may wish to lower it to four dollars [3]: a lower price may get you more customers. Note: the author does not advocate the illegal sale of these tapes. The selling price of a compact disc tends to vary more. I have seen discs, including postage, costing between thirteen and thirty dollars. As a rule, I try not to deal with people selling for more than sixteen dollars unless I'm _extremely_ interested. It just isn't worth the time and money, and someone will sell a copy cheaper sooner or later; it always happens. Grading ======= Grades follow the basic A through F scale, using pluses and minuses to help determine the quality just a tad more. Here is an easy-to-follow guide: A+) This is a recording just as good as a studio recording, and is therefore decent leggage. A must have for collectors. A) Almost as good as A+, but maybe their CD player skipped once during recording. B) The music is still very clear and singing distinct, but some of the crowd somehow got mixed in. C) This is probably someone using an analog tape recorder. Fizzy sound, and some crowd filling the foreground. D) Pure bull. Barely able to tell it's music. Only for people looking for complete sets. Basically: don't even bother. F) Someone recording the concert sounds _exactly_ like some recording an air conditioner constantly exploding or dehydrolatittilating. Perhaps a nice Christmas gift for that punk girl that turned you down last month? Now you know, and knowing is half the battle. Hope to deal with you soon! [1] A great percent died from it, too, due to poor fertilization, and use of _rubbing_ alcohol [4] in the mix. [2] This is a hazy legal point and, as such, if you get in trouble here, you may be able to enter a plea of insanity. [3] Blank tapes themselves cost anywhere from one to two and a half dollars, and postage would be roughly a dollar, so you're still making profit. Besides, the whole idea is _sharing_, not selling. [4] Rubbing alcohol is something you put on cotton to rub on wounds, to heal them. %e *EOA* %t Profession: Paper Courier %n 9R22 %s Teenaged Postal Workers %a Mike "Gavin" Schmitt (schmitt@vbe.com) %d 19961119 %i Newspaper Delivery %i Paper Courier: A Profession %i Courier, Paper %i Delivering Papers, The Profession Of %e Paper couriers are the people, usually teenagers, who deliver the newspaper to your door every day, rain or shine, in sleet or snow, tornado and earthquake. We're more devoted to the cause than postal workers, being generally earlier and working all seven days a week. However, we have two peeves we'd like to bring up front: a) We are not 'paper carriers'. We don't carry the paper, we go door to door to bring your news; and b) We are not 'paper boys'. A good percentage of our staff are not even male, and some who are have become too old to be called 'boys'. Pay, Hours, And Respect ======================= If you're looking to become a paper courier, chances are it's because you can't get anything else. The pay is incredibly low, with an average of seven cents a paper [1]. Any other job in the USA has a minimum wage of $5.15 an hour, even making hamburgers. We have set hours. My personal hours are deliver by 5:00 PM on weekdays (I get home from school at 4:00) and 7:30 AM on weekends, even though most people don't get up til past 9:00. Assuming you have no life, these hours are fine, but most of us _do_ have a life. Even those who don't are late occasionally because the man who drops off the bundles is late. Finally, we get no lenience or respect from the people we deliver to. If a paper is late, we get harassed for it, even though it's rarely ever the courier's fault. If the paper gets wet, we also get blamed. Is it our fault they have us put the papers in such stupid places? Mailboxes, Lawns, And Advertising ================================= One of the biggest conflicts involves mailboxes. The people will tell you to put the paper in their mailbox, so we do. Then what happens? A few days later either the postal workers will yell at _us_ because it's illegal to put non-mail in a mailbox, or the route people complain to _us_ that they aren't getting mail [2]. Walking through lawns is a nice benefit, because most people don't care if you do it. I have found that if you were to cut through forty yards, you can save up to ten minutes route time. Unfortunately, not everyone likes you doing this, and not everyone is on your route. The final legal benefit is free advertising. If you double as a babysitter or are trying to sell something, you can print out a letter to everyone and just insert it in the paper. I have never done so, but can see where this would come in handy. Scams And Illegal Benefits ========================== Route people, beware! Unlawful couriers may try the two following: 1) Overcharging. The average person does not know the weekly or monthly cost of getting a paper, so when collecting from them, Mr. Bad Courier will tell them an amount over the right one. So, know the price! 2) Grand Theft Vacation. Yes, some couriers are in connection to the mob, or at least local gangs. When you go on vacation, the courier always knows, and often knows how to enter your home, too. Lock your doors, and don't tell them too much. Tips ==== On Christmas, most routers will give the courier a tip anywhere from one dollar to ten dollars; ten being rare, but it happens. If you make the people aware of your birthday, you can often get a tip then, too. The third way I've gotten tips is just for miscellaneous reasons: people just happy with your service, or people moving giving you a monetary goodbye. Tips are nice legal ways to get extra money. Equipment ========= You will need a paper sack (either a single shoulder sack or double sack for both shoulders), and possibly pads for your route. Pads are for your shoulders, because younger couriers tend to have bony shoulders that will otherwise ache under the strain of forty pounds (it happens). Bonus (i.e. optional) equipment would be plastic bags to place the papers in, or rubber bands to wrap them up in. Both are for convenience, allowing the courier to simply throw the paper at the house. Some routers may not want this, and it may actually take longer to do the route this way. Hazards And Annoyances ====================== Motorized vehicles tend to be a common problem with being a courier of any sort. You're in constant danger around automobiles, because you never know when they'll swerve on to the lawn and run you over. Or maybe they're just backing out of their driveways at excessive speeds. Sometimes a child imitates this behavior while driving a PowerWheel (tm). And of course we cannot forget the mobile domestic rocket launchers: lawnmowers and snow blowers. A hit from them is an unpleasant and smelly experience. Most routes have one customer who is never happy. One minute late, and they call the cops on you. Or they say you don't collect often enough, but if you collect more often, they never have the money ready. Or they're never home to collect from. Worst of all was a man who would, everyday, complain he didn't get a paper the night before, and he wasn't even a subscriber! Another hazard: Dogs. [ed.: enough said here, I think, as long as you can imagine an enthusiastic canine playing toyfully with a semi-pulped mess of paper.] Sprinkler systems don't tend to be a problem, but if you don't hurry through them, the papers will get exceedingly wet. The same goes for rain, of course. Personally, I don't care. It's raining, your paper is wet. To have it be dry would go against the natural flow of nature and Chaos Theory. Along with rain comes another precipitation: ice and snow. When you have to deliver fifty papers in twenty minutes you either have to be late or run on the ice and risk spinal relocation. I think you see where I'm going with this. On Sundays, not only are the papers delivered in the morning, but they are up to four times normal size due to the hundreds of ads from Best Buy, Target, ShopKo, and other half-assed department stores. There is no way a kid of my stature, or less, can haul a hundred pounds for an hour. Even if they could, it wouldn't fit in _any_ sized paper sack, so you're forced to make several journeys with a wagon or have your parents drive you around [3]. The biggest pain in the backside is the complete score or so of hecklers that insult you for being "a stupid paper boy". Sadly, I agree with them, but what most couriers don't realize is this: the hecklers are nine times out of ten the people who don't have _any_ job. So in fact, you can laugh off just about any comment they send your way. A problem that has recently showed up, is that a paper company will constantly update its computer, and the printouts that come with it. This means that just when you finally figure out what "DS-49-Sch" means, they completely change it to "DD-22-27-MSc" so you need another year to get it right. I hope this enlightened all the would-be couriers and routers out there. Respect your delivery person, and I even encourage you to tip them. The job they do is treacherous, poorly benefited, and under appreciated. Help make a difference in a young person's life. [1] For a forty-paper route, that's a measly $2.80 a day in United States currency. [2] The US postal service will not deliver to a full mailbox. [3] Usually by the time you can drive yourself around, you're smart enough to realize you can work at a grocery store or restaurant for ten times the salary and without any of these hassles. %e *EOA* * * End of file: REAL17.NEW * Share and Enjoy! *