Tuesday, October 28, 2003
A nefarious scheme to sell more detergent
I've been cleaning the Facility in the Middle of Nowhere, preparing for The
Kids' father arrival on Wednesday night (he's on shore leave from the Middle
East for the next two weeks and he's taking the kids with him! Woo hoo!).
Kitchen, entry hallway, downstairs bathroom yesturday, cleaning and
vacuuming the dining room, living room and computer room today. And laundry
in between. It was doing the laundry that I noticed an odd thing. The last
box of detergent claimed enough detergent to do 40 loads of laundry (not
that I counted) and the new box, same brand, same size, claimed only 33
loads.
As far as I can tell, the only difference between the two is the inclusion of Color Safe Bleech™ in the new box. Could that really account for a difference of -7 loads? Especially since the plastic scoops in both are the same size?
Or is this some nefarious marketing scheme to sell more detergent?
More academic dishonesty in spamming circles
I don't think all spammers are using copyright material to avoid Bayesian filtering. I received some today that are using public domain material—one using a section from Jack London's White Fang (and funnily enough, trying to get me to refinance Condo Conner, which I sold last year!—okay, okay, I lived there for 14 years but still, you'd think they could update their information) and another one using a section from Rudyard Kipling's Rikki-tikki-tavi (which is yet another one trying to get me to refinance Condo Conner).
But then I get another one, this time quoting from an essay about Bill Gates, so there is still hope of getting DMCA on their ass …
