LordMango
LordMango
LordMango

Good point. The jockeys know that they don’t have to get the horses to beat records, they just have to win the race. In the Olympics, athletes may try to do both, but in horse racing, with large purses on the line, you do whatever you have to do to win the race. If American Pharaoh were in a hypothetical race against

Now playing

Okay, I'm surprised this hasn't been posted in the comments yet.

I think it's obvious to anyone who has ever boarded a plane that there are much more efficient methods than what the airlines do. And when you know that planes lose money while parked, there must be a compelling reason why they do what they do. I believe airlines like to make the process difficult so that they can

I think we are in agreement, but I originally used the term "sexualized" incorrectly. I tried to clarify that in another follow-up post. My point is that I believe that the level of sexual attraction that people feel toward women's breasts and men's chests are the same, but for some reason society has decided one must

I'm not sure what your point is. I am pretty sure I am criticizing the existence of the "societal norms." I'm not trying to be an authority on where they come from, just noting that it is a double-standard that we all agree is wrong. I'm also trying to make the point that when these "norms," which are wrong to begin

I believe you are referring to sexual harassment, which men do to women far too often, and I was referring to just basic sexual attraction (regardless of how people react to it). I think "sexualize" means to create something sexual out of something that is inherently non-sexual. I don't believe that breasts, or chests

I think its a little worse than that. I believe both men's and women's chests are equally sexualized (Chippendales, anyone?) but one is taboo to show in public and the other is not. That is the real double-standard.

Not all women's breasts are sexually attractive to all people and not all men's chests are sexually

That really goes for any crime which depends on eye-witness testimony to prove the case. The defense must question the credibility of the eye-witness. When the eye-witness is the victim, then the victim will be made to feel like they are the ones "put on trial." But this case should have been different, because the

My observation is that most companies respond to tweets as a matter of public relations, not to resolve the issue. Negative tweets from customers are bad press, so a quick response apologizing and directing them to customer service helps offset the negative press.

I'm going to say that, in this case, the opposite

It doesn't matter how often it is or isn't taken. The issue is that it has to be taken right away, and that means having $50 readily available. A young woman can't say "oh, crap, I really need to this pill, so let me save up some money, many sell a few things, and come back in a few weeks. . ." Sure, its cheaper than

I've taken some great pictures with my 24-105, and it is certainly a very sharp lens that produces great quality images, in the right light. But for me, in hindsight, I would have much rather saved the $800 and put it toward the 24-70 f/2.8. Sure, at $2,300 it costs more than twice as much, but if I've already

I was referring to the 5D bundle when I said "kit." It takes great pictures in daylight, and is "L" glass, but at f/4, it is one of the lowest end L lenses made. Good for the money, but I think a photographer investing in a high-end camera will want a faster lens, and the extra $800 spent on the kit could be put

Exactly. I admit I used some harsh language to describe the lens. It is a good lens, and does well in full daylight, but if you are going to spend money on a high-end camera, why would you settle for an f/4 lens? I bought the kit and then started investing in higher-end lenses and never looked back. I never use the

I agree with everything you just said, however, I did buy the 5D Mk II kit, and made the decision that the $800 extra for the kit was a really good price for what was otherwise listed as a $1,300 lens. However, over the last year, I have invested in other lenses such that I never use the 24-105 anymore at all. I

I was looking for the rest of the article after the pictures in which the question is answered by the writer actually trying it. Come on, Andrew, take one for the team!

Interesting that the second most popular camera, the Canon 5D Mark II, comes with a kit zoom lens, the 24-105mm, which barely made a sliver on the graph. Just goes to show you that the kit lenses are crap and a waste of money.

"Very rare" is an understatement. I understand some of the other parenting fears, like bullying or the kids running out in the street, or goofing off and missing the bus, but seriously, teach your kids and then learn to trust them. I used to catch the bus alone when I was 5, and I am teaching my own 5 year-old the

Depends on which version of the story you read and how you interpret it. They did manage to get one of their hackers released, which is sort of a win, but the cartel also promised to kill 10 people for every name that anonymous was threatening to release. The fact that the cartel was able to discover the identity of

Thank you for being the voice of reason among all of these other people complaining about lazy parenting and kidnapping. Although, this guy is bringing a whole new meaning to the term "helicopter parenting."

And thus the dad learned that, shocker!, the kid is perfectly capable of walking 400 meters to a bus stop by himself. I don't think he needed drone to figure that out, but, hey, we all learn differently.