h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

>>Adverts that promote their own products by saying how rubbish somebody elses product is<<

Fortunately, that's illegal in Germany.

What really annoys me is the banner ads on Yahoo trying to get me to join the RAF because they have "the best nicknames" - what kind of a stupid reason is that?

Well, I for one joined hootoo for the nickname

"Adverts that make up scientific terms because they think we're stupid."

On a related point - adverts that use scientific terms nobody's ever heard of because they think it will impress you. I don't listen to an advert for shampoo and think: 'Oh, well, if *insert strange compound you've never heard of before here* in it, it must be good!'

I did laugh the other day. I saw an advert from Asda talking about how a recent study of supermarket prices found that they were cheaper on a load of products than Morrison's were. Problem was, this was the day after I saw a very similar advert, relating to the same study, trumpeting how much cheaper Tesco were than Asda!

On that note, I love this series...

(Four ads, sorry, I can only link to them individually...)

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/138/327964336_cc8df20ee8.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/136/327963885_2c592ca82d.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/143/327964340_eb0bb64973.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/138/327963886_ae35499c34.jpg

Is that last one for real?

I don't know, but it was too good not to include!

The Bentley one reminds me of the days when Rover used to boast about their hand-stitched genuine leather seats.

British car manufacturers always get their priorities right, don't they?

>>Adverts that promote their own products by saying how rubbish somebody elses product is<<

Fortunately, that's illegal in Germany."


It used to be the case in Britain, that you could only say "Our product is better than the nearest competitor" where in the States they could be specific and outright just say "Coke sells better than Pepsi" ...

I think in the UK the position is that it has to be provable - you can't just say 'Coke is better than Pepsi', but you could say 'Coke contains more sugar/colouring/gas than Pepsi', so long as that is a statement of fact and can be proven.

It's rarely done, though - advertisers are reluctant to name their competitors very often, even to slag them off - for obvious reasons.

It's irrelevant. Pepsi is far superior to Coke in every way, shape, and form. Even the name sounds better.

I think I've got a punctured lung or some weird fluid sloshing about in my chest cavity because when I lean forward a sound like a baby yoda talking in his sleep comes out from under my left-handside bit of ribcage.

So my petty hate for the day was being constantly pestered by the past tense and my possible place in it.

I might have been open to persuasion if you hadn't started a contest between two superfluous fluids.

I'm more of a "water is better than.....water?" person.

That's why I'm so perplexed.

Although they're very similar, the chemicals used in the two sodas are (allegedly) different enough to make them taste different from eachother. Water doesn't taste better than water because its molecular structure is identical to itself, but Pizza Hutt tastes better (or worse) than Dominoes because the ingredients are different enough.

Of course, this is all assuming you actually think they taste different. Which I do.

But water isn't always the same - nobody drinks distilled water (or shouldn't be!) and mineral content varies widely from one source to another...

Oh, and another petty hate for today: scalpel blades stuck together with oil, so getting a new one out of the container involves lacerating your fingertips

<>

And Irn-Bru is superior to both...

People who "reserve" their place at the front of a queue (for instance waiting to board a plane) by putting a bag there and walking away to sit down elsewhere.

I don't need to be at the front but it just looks so silly.

"Look I am at the front of the queue. I was there with my bag but I got tired and chose to sit down but my bag wouldn't come with me because it wanted to be in the overhead locker by the window!"

I was sitting waiting to get on a plane yesterday and with about 30 minutes to go there was a small queue of standing people. Someone broke ranks and within two minutes there were only about 20 of us still sitting down. It was a night flight - not a lot to see through the windows - I was nearly last on and pretty much first off.

And whilst I'm at it, the people who ignore requests from airline staff NOT to turn on mobiles and NOT to undo seatbelts and remain seated until the plane is stationary. Really, WHAT'S THE RUSH? 5 minutes is SO critical?

PP

Just step over their bags...

My petty hate of the day: people who refer to the US President as "the leader of the free world"

Only if they aren't using the phrase ironically.

With you on that Mr Pink. What I don't get at all though is the paying extra for 'priority boarding'
I mean WTF! it's a bleedin' plane- you wont get to your destination a milli-second earlier just because you got on first! Chances are in fact, as you say, you'll be one of the last off if you get on first, thereby delaying your onward journey - the important bit. By all means, I'd perhaps pay to be guaranteed to be amongst the first off...

It's a total money-making scam and how anyone intelligent falls for it and buys 'priority boarding' is beyond me. In fact Squeezy-jet and the like actually state in their T+C that people who have bought priority boarding aren't actually guaranteed priority if the plane is running late! (which they usually are), so what on earth is the point- I just don't get it Just sad people who want to feel special in some way.

You've bought a low-cost fare- well done don't ruin the whole point of the excercise by voluntarily paying extra to the airline for a non-existent benefit.

Summary. If it's really that important to you to be on first, then just turn up a bit earlier and you'll be nearer the start of the queue