(Thanks Qwerty)

Battery Operated Cucumber

.

AlienResearchGrpHome wrote:pwnguin on polar bear
Note: Chop not mine. The image was too good not to share -- I just added the words.

Hm. Polar Bears: North Pole

Pwnguins: South Pole

Introducing them: Priceless.

As Boring old Cliff Clavin said on one of his tirades sitting at the bar on Cheers, B_0_C doesn't necessarily mean a bag of crap. You have to take the term in the uh context that it was spoken. Its earliest use was for referring to famed German botanist, Adelbert von Chamisso in the late 1790's and early 1800's. He was known to his friends as Bert of Chami and eventually just quoted by the initials B_0_C.
When I did my time in the Massachusetts park system we used the term to refer to your run of the mill Basic ol' Campsite and as I am sure that Frasier can confirm, psychologists use the term to describe a person who would be "better off constrained." The evil princess in her office over there probably uses the term with her Jenny Craig group to describe someone who "binges on chocolate." Sammy knows the term from its use in baseball where it refers to the pinch hitter, Jerry Carroll the guy that bats on command. The green stuff that Woody smokes is "banned on campus" for most college students. EMT's use the term to refer to a minor injury, or a "bandage on cut." Crime Scene Investigators and Police both use the term and often confuse each other. The officer is talking about someone who broke out of his car and the CSI is looking for blood on clothes. Michael Jordan was at his lowest point in his gambling addiction when he was in Central Park, betting on checkers. The uh Civil War buffs in South Carolina use it to refer to the second battle of Charleston Harbor because the first one isn't worth mentioning. My sister's daughter, Becky – the Girl Scout, has a map with the initials on the houses she wants to target. It stands for "buys our cookies." In high school we used it to mean, "Belches on Command." So Norm, you see that the context really does play a part in determining what B_0_C really means. This internet thing is just a passing fad anyway.

Josephus wrote:

Hm. Polar Bears: North Pole

Pwnguins: South Pole

Introducing them: Priceless.

Geez, joe, you're such a killjoy. I guess the next thing you're gonna tell us is the Flintstones couldn't have had "Dino" as a pet because dinosaurs were extinct over 64 million years earlier.

Last minute entry, different acronym this time for me.

P.O.O.P


click for larger

sources
bike postman
box

Bomb of Chowder


Sources:
http://www.davesfireworks.com/brev_files/dynomite.jpg
http://images.meredith.com/bhg/images/recipe/ss_R041653.jpg

or maybe...

oh last minute chop:

sources:http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/6304118937/103-1657702-9351020?v=glance&n=404272

Batboy - Our Candidate!


Larger Version

SOURCES:

Burned Out Corneas (click pic for bigger version, but nothing to see, really)



post on woot
JT screencap from asf file posted online somewhere

Thanks to ImageShack for Free Image Hosting

Some artists feel unappreciated. Do they feel as if Woot says:
Bend Over Choppers?

Beatified or Cannonized ?

Great new picture playing cards!

Learn while you play !

If you can correctly identify whether the person pictured on the card you played is Beatified or Cannonized, you automatically win the trick! Great fun for the whole family!

Included in this exciting 4th edition deck are:

Titus Brandsma
Juniero Serra
Mother Teresa
Pope Urban V
Pope John XXIII
Duns Scotus
Jan Franciszek Czartoryski
Kateri Tekakwitha
Agapitus I
Gaius Flavius Valerius Aurelius Constantinus (Constantine the Great)
Hatto Mainz
Nimattullah Kassab Al-Hardini
Thomas Beckett
And so many more!




Sources:
http://www.kampamersfoort.nl/images/titus_brandsma_01.jpg
http://www.wlra.us/hb/hbjuniperoserra.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/89/Mother-teresa-03.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Urban_V
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_John_XXIII
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duns_Scotus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Pius_IX
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/FatherDamien.jpeg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/09/Jan_Franciszek_Czartoryski.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a5/SantaFeSaint.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/78/Agapitus_I.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Constantine_Musei_Capitolini.jpg
http://www.beloit.edu/~nurember/book/images/People/Early_Christian_Medieval/big/Hatto%20Archbishop%20of%20Mainz%20CLXXXIIv.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/72/Hardini02-1-.jpg
http://www.fenwaynation.com/Thomas%20Beckett.jpg
http://gallery.hd.org/_exhibits/recreation/_more2000/_more10/playing-cards-worn-mixed-packs-decks-ace-A-1-2-3-4-5-6-clubs-spades-hearts-diamonds-1-DHD.jpg
http://www.alteredpages.com/playing%20cards.jpg

(For the record, the image was posted right at the deadline. The sources and the sales pitch were added in the following minutes.)

cdemaster wrote:OK, there are a few "Bee Oh Cee's" in this one. See if you can find them all.

CDEMASTER



Source - http://www.poetryinlife.com/melissa_main/photos/larry_king/images/captureD26_jpg_jpg.jpg
http://www.westwildcon.org/photo/gallery/badger.jpg

IMHO, this is one of the best. Good stuff.

baseball opening-pitch chewbacca


black orangutan convention

stlwooter wrote:

Great minds think alike-- see mine a few posts up.

Tis awesome how minds such as ours connect so well XD

Happy Wooting and good luck ^.^

aww, crap! I wrote somthing about how great the entries where and then somehow deleated it.

breef sumery, before pg 13 thought i might win somthing bur not anymore
judges should just look at the last few pages insted of the fires few pages
everyone did a great job, I wish i could indivuadly say each one, but I'm pissed bc i just killed my last post

thank for crushing my hopes...

edit it's 230 so if this doesn't make any sense that's why, k? good, now I'm gonna sleep.

FenStar wrote:
Hmm... do you think he would freek out if we sent him some wedding gifts?

Maybe in a brown paper bag ???

jcoltrane wrote:Begging Orphan Child

heheh i like this one. it's deep =P

m.wiseman wrote:


Geez, joe, you're such a killjoy. I guess the next thing you're gonna tell us is the Flintstones couldn't have had "Dino" as a pet because dinosaurs were extinct over 64 million years earlier.

wha?

Don't you know the Flying Sphagetti Monster created the earth about 18,000 years ago? All those fossils were just planted by FSM to make it look like it was older. Same with the galaxies that are so far away that their light is just now reaching us as if they exploded out there 6 billion years ago. The really cool thing is the way that they keep finding more fossils of different times which fit perfectly. FSM did a heck of a job!

(anyway, I just wanted to type 'pwnguin'. Should it have been 'pwngwn'?)

mnementh wrote:

hmmm - i live in West Carrollton... it's the gun-toting redneck side of town, so I doubt those balloonists would dare drift near us.

buzzlightyear wrote:How about a picture in words...visualize that scene in Cabin Boy where Chris Elliott (Nathanial Mayweather, aka Cabin Boy) and Andy Richter (Kenny, aka former Cabin Boy) are discussing the location of lunch during the first day at sea. Kenny has no idea what Nathanial is talking about with all of the 25 cent words being thrown around in that fake privileged-English accent, so Nathanial is directed to the ... "Bucket of Chum". Bon appetit!

Um... Nah.

Josephus wrote:

wha?

Don't you know the Flying Sphagetti Monster created the earth about 18,000 years ago? All those fossils were just planted by FSM to make it look like it was older. Same with the galaxies that are so far away that their light is just now reaching us as if they exploded out there 6 billion years ago. The really cool thing is the way that they keep finding more fossils of different times which fit perfectly. FSM did a heck of a job!

Intelligent design...bah!

m.wiseman wrote:

Intelligent design...bah!

I read that when they put up the replacement for the Hubble, it will be able to look far enough back in time to see the energy emitted at the big bang.

mnementh wrote:

So mnementh, this is the second time I've noticed this building's picture of yours, supposedly of Woot HQ. Did you drive by and take a picture of it or what?

Josephus wrote:

I read that when they put up the replacement for the Hubble, it will be able to look far enough back in time to see the energy emitted at the big bang.

If it could just look back to Mardi Gras '82, I would feel my tax dollars were well spent.

Josephus wrote:

I read that when they put up the replacement for the Hubble, it will be able to look far enough back in time to see the energy emitted at the big bang.

I was really po'd when I heard they nixed funding for the LISA project. Cosmology and theoretical physics is, pathetically enough, a hobby of mine. Josephus, have you ever read Michio Kaku or Brian Greene?

Should be a tough contest to juggle err judge.

Never had a chance this weekend to enter these but I am sure there will be another contest with this similar theme ...

Bagel obduce Croissant

Bathroom outside Cousin

Babbling outpaces coherency

Bluto ordering cod

In honor of the Detriot Pistons ...

Basketball Original Chokers

Basketball's Overrated Chumps

Best Overstated Cockiness

Frankenroc wrote:

So mnementh, this is the second time I've noticed this building's picture of yours, supposedly of Woot HQ. Did you drive by and take a picture of it or what?

A half dozen pictures of Synapse Micro used to be on the site. There's a newer one, with the Woot logo, somewhere in the forums.

McGuffy wrote:

I was really po'd when I heard they nixed funding for the LISA project. Cosmology and theoretical physics is, pathetically enough, a hobby of mine. Josephus, have you ever read Michio Kaku or Brian Greene?

nope. It is so depressing to read how poor the prognosis is for this kind of research. Research as a whole is just gutted here in the US. The supercollider- gone, and was 25% finished- how many billion did they flush there?

Maybe though, some of it can come back if we ever get money usage better aligned for science. NIH is increased by about 1% this year- thats a substantial real cut in funding when you think about the increases in cost in science, and the budgets for already funded research.

I expect that physics and NSF kind of research is a lot worse- unless you're going to Mars.

Josephus wrote:

nope. It is so depressing to read how poor the prognosis is for this kind of research. Research as a whole is just gutted here in the US. The supercollider- gone, and was 25% finished- how many billion did they flush there?

Maybe though, some of it can come back if we ever get money usage better aligned for science. NIH is increased by about 1% this year- thats a substantial real cut in funding when you think about the increases in cost in science, and the budgets for already funded research.

I expect that physics and NSF kind of research is a lot worse- unless you're going to Mars.

The cold war drove technology. We always felt the need to compete with the Russians. Funding for the SSC was killed because there was no more Russian competition.

As sad as it may be, war (or the threat thereof) drives that type of innovation and science. Nuclear energy, jet engines, GPS, all products of the military-industrial machine.

McGuffy wrote:

The cold war drove technology. We always felt the need to compete with the Russians. Funding for the SSC was killed because there was no more Russian competition.

As sad as it may be, war (or the threat thereof) drives that type of innovation and science. Nuclear energy, jet engines, GPS, all products of the military-industrial machine.

We can always hope that people will stop buying anti-wrinkle cream and start buying from a company that would create that sort of stuff. Of course, stargazing isn't exactly a high profit (or any profit for that matter) business, and the R&D for that sort of stuff probably would be more than you could sell it for. Perhaps there is some hope that the rising fuel costs will force more power companies to use nuclear energy or other power sources, but that's still just using what we already know.

McGuffy wrote:

The cold war drove technology. We always felt the need to compete with the Russians. Funding for the SSC was killed because there was no more Russian competition.

As sad as it may be, war (or the threat thereof) drives that type of innovation and science. Nuclear energy, jet engines, GPS, all products of the military-industrial machine.

There's plenty of technology development going on, problem is for the most part it is invention for the sake of invention without a goal state in mind. Seems the pharma based research is the only ones that have the goal in mind, and they don't stop to examine potential benefits outside of that goal. There's tons of research sitting on the shelf because the funding stopped once it didn't show promise to become anything substantial to a consumer market, or it didn't serve the mission of the warfighter in the military arena.

So many hidden gems out there that researchers can't transition into a value proposition and attract industry to fund product development, and too limited budgets going to pure research to begin with. If only every company truly adhered to the 5% of sales rule for research, we'd see an explosion in technology advancements. Unfortunately, wall street only rewards the success, not the trial or error, and hence nobody wants to gamble. :sigh:

vagel wrote:

There's plenty of technology development going on, problem is for the most part it is invention for the sake of invention without a goal state in mind. Seems the pharma based research is the only ones that have the goal in mind, and they don't stop to examine potential benefits outside of that goal. There's tons of research sitting on the shelf because the funding stopped once it didn't show promise to become anything substantial to a consumer market, or it didn't serve the mission of the warfighter in the military arena.

So many hidden gems out there that researchers can't transition into a value proposition and attract industry to fund product development, and too limited budgets going to pure research to begin with. If only every company truly adhered to the 5% of sales rule for research, we'd see an explosion in technology advancements. Unfortunately, wall street only rewards the success, not the trial or error, and hence nobody wants to gamble. :sigh:

That's true but they say that they are so afraid of being sued, manny of the products don't reach the shelves.

FenStar wrote:

We can always hope that people will stop buying anti-wrinkle cream and start buying from a company that would create that sort of stuff. Of course, stargazing isn't exactly a high profit (or any profit for that matter) business, and the R&D for that sort of stuff probably would be more than you could sell it for. Perhaps there is some hope that the rising fuel costs will force more power companies to use nuclear energy or other power sources, but that's still just using what we already know.

Sure, but the government isn't spending its (our) money on wrinkle creams. The pharmaceutical companies and other businesses are spending their money on that stuff.

THe need for alternative fuels will doubtless fuel (ha!) research in that area, but again, that is applied technology, not basic research.

Josephus wrote:

Sure, but the government isn't spending its (our) money on wrinkle creams. The pharmaceutical companies and other businesses are spending their money on that stuff.

THe need for alternative fuels will doubtless fuel (ha!) research in that area, but again, that is applied technology, not basic research.

Perhaps pursuit of such truths as the origin of the universe is academic and of little commercial value, but if we don't ask and try to answer these questions, then what is the point to it all? I don't think nations should go bankrupt trying to answer questions that may be unanswerable, but I for one am fascinated by the seemingly endless expanse of our universe, how it could have began, what was there before? What is the ultimate fate of the universe? Where else does life exist? What does it look like?

And while wondering about all of this stuff, I will still likely buy wrinkle cream (or whatever) when I need it.


Also, many practical technologies come from seemingly academic pursuits. Long before the radio, some physicist was experimenting with electromagnetism. Long before aircraft, someone was doing the math behind aerodynamics.

There is no quantum theory of gravity. We don't know how or why gravity works. If we solve the riddle, then anti-gravity technologies will emerge just as sure as an understanding of electromagnetism gave us telecommunications (and computers).