- Me: I wish we owned yay.com
- Meghan: [silence]
- Me: Don't you? How awesome would that be?
- Meghan: [yawns]
- Me: How much do you think yay.com costs?
- Meghan: A lot.
- Me: But it'd be worth it, right?
- Meghan: Can you please stop talking now?
- Me: fine.
- Me: fine.com
From Wired’s contributor page this month. Probably one of the biggest compliments I’ve received in my life.
To see the actual karate kicks, check out the video prior to this.
Video for the Wired cover shoot by photographer Platon (whose name I still struggle to pronounce) directed and edited by Ronen.
Here’s the final product.
- Julia: I'm bored of myself.
- Meghan: God, me too.
- Meghan: Should we get you an iPhone today?
- Julia: Ummmm ...
- Meghan: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
- Julia: No.
On Langauge? Meh. On the joke that is web grammar.
I’m fascinated by Virginia Hefferman’s latest NYT column. “Consider [this] example,” she writes:
To show that Web users are curious about human reproduction, I might quote kavya on Yahoo Answers, word for word: “How is babby formed? How girl get pragnent?”
But that makes kavya look like an idiot. Readers might miss the sweet earnestness of his question. Maybe he (or she) is 7 or a native speaker of Hungarian. I should cut the kid a typographical break; that’s not an easy question to ask. The cockamamie diction and syntax of Internet English is, possibly, only incidental to his inquiry. A reporter could paraphrase or revise his question — “How is a baby formed?” — lest readers get blinded to the intent of the question by moronizing typos.
Men don’t realize that if we’re sleeping with them on the first date, we’re probably not interested in seeing them again either.
Jumping off the boat today, I learned that I do not make graceful or even accurate cannonballs.
End result, still happy. I long to insert a smiley emoticon there, but a moratorium on emoticons was declared yesterday, so I’m trying to abide by it. For now. Winky face.
