When the built in timer just ain't good enough



  • A friend saw this which he posted on facebook... The image and the caption do the most justice without any further ado from me!!




  • It's obvious from the picture that something else is plugged in there at other times. You can see the plug and wire running away. If you have, say, a heater plugged in all winter, but unplug it in summer, would you take the time-switch out in May so you can't find it in October? Or just leave it in?



  • @MeesterTurner said:

    A friend saw this which he posted on facebook... The image and the caption do the most justice without any further ado from me!!

     

    I can overlook "clients house", but "just seen this at a" is downright despicable. WTF has happened to the English word "saw"?



  • @SilentRunner said:

    I can overlook "clients house", but "just seen this at a" is downright despicable. WTF has happened to the English word "saw"?
    It left on vacation with the expression "I've".



  • @SilentRunner said:

    WTF has happened to the English word "saw"?

    Nothing at all. Why, one could even have been used to cut the "I have" from the beginning of the "sentence" under the picture in MeesterTurner's post.



  • It could be that he only wants it dispensing fragrance at certain times.  It could be what dave said above.  It could be that he had something plugged into it that he wanted to hide while your friend was at his house.  Some people get suspcious when they see a big assed HID lamp plugged into a timer (for example) and didn't want it losing time so left it plugged in and put this air freshner as a decoy (which may have been serving a dual purpose in this scenario).  Though I'd be surprised if this was the case, and he was not using a higher-end digital timer with a battery backup.  They're only about $20.

    In any case, very strange and amusing thing to see.



  • @pauly said:

    It could be that he only wants it dispensing fragrance at certain times.
     

    Alternatively, clean your fucking house.

     

    That shit smells BAD.



  • @SilentRunner said:

    I can overlook "clients house", but "just seen this at a" is downright despicable. WTF has happened to the English word "saw"?
    Different tenses. 'I have seen' does not mean the same as 'I saw', although often the meanings are close enough that it makes no difference which you use. In the example, there are presumed words in the sentence either way. Personally, I think 'I just saw' is worse than 'I have just seen', but I'm not sure I could tell you why :)



  • @SilentRunner said:

    I can overlook "clients house", but "just seen this at a" is downright despicable. WTF has happened to the English word "saw"?
    May I just add that "clients house" is also perfectly cromulent if we think of it as a "house of clients" ?



  •  @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:

    @SilentRunner said:
    I can overlook "clients house", but "just seen this at a" is downright despicable. WTF has happened to the English word "saw"?
    Different tenses. 'I have seen' does not mean the same as 'I saw', although often the meanings are close enough that it makes no difference which you use. In the example, there are presumed words in the sentence either way. Personally, I think 'I just saw' is worse than 'I have just seen', but I'm not sure I could tell you why :)
    When spoken aloud, the more words you can be able to have packed into a verb tense, the more time you will have had to think about what you want to have been had to say next.



  • The real WTF is an air wick. Want more cancerogenes in your house? Why not just spray gasoline and/or bleach?



  • @alegr said:

    cancerogenes

    [citation needed]



  • @alegr said:

    cancerogenes
    I thought that was a joke, but then I googled it to be sure, and it appears to be French. Is it directly equivalent to 'carcinogen' or does it mean something different? Because I very much doubt that an air freshener is significantly carcinogenic - you'd breathe in more unburnt hydrocarbons on any city street.



  • @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:

    @alegr said:
    cancerogenes
    I thought that was a joke, but then I googled it to be sure, and it appears to be French. Is it directly equivalent to 'carcinogen' or does it mean something different? Because I very much doubt that an air freshener is significantly carcinogenic - you'd breathe in more unburnt hydrocarbons on any city street.



  • My knee-jerk reaction was the same, and I also googled it a bit. I can't find any reliable research, but a couple with a lot of "may" and "under certain circumstances".

    A recent article in the English Independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/breast-cancer-link-to-cleaning-products-and-air-fresheners-2030342.html The next link on Google was also interesting, in that respect.

    So, I'll withhold my scepticism for a bit; I can't find a reputable source that debunks it either. I guess dhromeds suggestion ("clean yo house") is safest.



  • @b-redeker said:

    A recent article in the English Independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/breast-cancer-link-to-cleaning-products-and-air-fresheners-2030342.html The next link on Google was also interesting, in that respect.

    So, I'll withhold my scepticism for a bit; I can't find a reputable source that debunks it either.

    That's a pretty much self-debunking study, if you read even just the Indy article. They asked people with breast cancer if they used cleaning products. It's so flawed as to be completely meaningless. I would note that generally in the UK, cleaning is seen as a lower-social-class activity, and the Indy is a very upper-middle-class newspaper, so they like stories that have a subtext of 'being lower class than our readers gives you cancer'.


  • @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:

    @b-redeker said:

    A recent article in the English Independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/breast-cancer-link-to-cleaning-products-and-air-fresheners-2030342.html The next link on Google was also interesting, in that respect.

    So, I'll withhold my scepticism for a bit; I can't find a reputable source that debunks it either.

    That's a pretty much self-debunking study, if you read even just the Indy article. They asked people with breast cancer if they used cleaning products. It's so flawed as to be completely meaningless. I would note that generally in the UK, cleaning is seen as a lower-social-class activity, and the Indy is a very upper-middle-class newspaper, so they like stories that have a subtext of 'being lower class than our readers gives you cancer'.

    Sounds like a scientifically valid method to me.



  •  Surely the french would use "onco" instead of "cancer"



  •  I have something mildly similar, although it is a 'mozzie zapper', not an air wick, set to run a few hours a night to clear my room of the blighters.

     Pesonally, I wouldn't use an 'air wick' device full stop, as they all smell terrible. 



  • Hint: they're probably orthodox jews. We (not that I practice) are not allowed to "work" on saturdays.
    "Work" includes turning things on, like lights and airwicks.



  •  That's the configuration I use for the mosquito repellant. It's the best way I've found to keep a balance between mosquito-free sleep and chronic poisoning. In fact are we sure that's an air wick?

    @dhromed said:

    That shit smells BAD.
    Thank you! I thought I was the only one with a working nose. I just don't get how eau de accident in a chemical factory is a smell you want in your house.



  • @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:

    The Indy is a very upper-middle-class newspaper

    You obviously don't read much. The Independent's readership is probably 95% left-leaning liberal.



  • @bertram said:

    @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:
    The Indy is a very upper-middle-class newspaper
    You obviously don't read much. The Independent's readership is probably 95% left-leaning liberal.

    I don't see the contradiction.



  • @bertram said:

    @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:
    The Indy is a very upper-middle-class newspaper

    You obviously don't read much. The Independent's readership is probably 95% left-leaning liberal.

    Those two things are not mutually-exclusive.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @bertram said:
    @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:
    The Indy is a very upper-middle-class newspaper

    You obviously don't read much. The Independent's readership is probably 95% left-leaning liberal.

    Those two things are not mutually-exclusive.

    Like a right-leaning liberal?



  • @fluffy777 said:

    Hint: they're probably orthodox jews. We (not that I practice) are not allowed to "work" on saturdays.
    "Work" includes turning things on, like lights and airwicks.

    It's possible, but I wouldn't go as far a saying probable, for two reasons: 1) a lot of Orthodox Jews won't use time-switches, because there is such a thing as sticking to the spirit as well as the letter of the law; and 2) you'd think power-saving isn't an issue here. I guess if it's about making sure it doesn't smell too much or something, there might be a reason for it.

    @b-redeker said:

    @bertram said:

    @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:
    The Indy is a very upper-middle-class newspaper
    You obviously don't read much. The Independent's readership is probably 95% left-leaning liberal.

    I don't see the contradiction.

    Because there isn't one. I'd point you to an example of the Indie's middle-class credentials, but they're endless if you take a look at the website - from the ski holidays to the 'executive jobs' to the £1000+ "cheap high street handbags", and on ad hypocritical nauseam. Very sadly, the Indie is one of the better papers left in this country, as well.



  • @Xyro said:

    Like a right-leaning liberal?
    That's not a bad description of what most people think. I'd be happy to be called that, since, at least to me, it would imply some degree of pragmatism allied to a healthy dose of liberal idealism.



  • @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:

    @Xyro said:
    Like a right-leaning liberal?
    That's not a bad description of what most people think. I'd be happy to be called that, since, at least to me, it would imply some degree of pragmatism allied to a healthy dose of liberal idealism.

    We need a 2-axis system. I'm socially liberal, but fiscally conservative... right now there's no party that helps me. (And the worst part is both large American parties are fiscally liberal, the only way to get fiscal conservatives in office is to vote for crackpot parties. RON PAUL!)



  • @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:

    @b-redeker said:

    @bertram said:

    @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:
    The Indy is a very upper-middle-class newspaper
    You obviously don't read much. The Independent's readership is probably 95% left-leaning liberal.

    I don't see the contradiction.

    Because there isn't one.

    Some might even say that the only ones who can afford to be a left-leaning liberal (like me), are upper-middle-class people (like me).



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:
    @Xyro said:
    Like a right-leaning liberal?
    That's not a bad description of what most people think. I'd be happy to be called that, since, at least to me, it would imply some degree of pragmatism allied to a healthy dose of liberal idealism.

    We need a 2-axis system. I'm socially liberal, but fiscally conservative... right now there's no party that helps me. (And the worst part is both large American parties are fiscally liberal, the only way to get fiscal conservatives in office is to vote for crackpot parties. RON PAUL!)

    I think the whole concept of right-wing is about slurring people who don't agree with you, myself. The evil-minded fuckers are everywhere, not just on the right. Aside from that, though, 'right-wing' people generally don't oppose principles of 'the left', but have pragmatic objections. To my mind, politics would benefit greatly if the left were to propose nice ideas, and the right to be responsible for implementing them to the greatest practical extent.

    That said, right now I'd vote for almost anyone if he/she actually had some integrity. There's no doubt in my mind that the worst part of our political system is the politicians.



  • @dhromed said:

    @pauly said:

    It could be that he only wants it dispensing fragrance at certain times.
     

    Alternatively, clean your fucking house.




  • @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:

    To my mind, politics would benefit greatly if the left were to propose nice ideas, and the right to be responsible for implementing them to the greatest practical extent.

    A big part of the conservative movement is composed of people who don't want anything to change, ever. Which is good when it comes to, say, levying new taxes to pay for stupid things we don't need. But it's bad when it comes to, say, amending the Constitution to clarify/redefine the meaning of the Second Amendment.

    @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:

    That said, right now I'd vote for almost anyone if he/she actually had some integrity. There's no doubt in my mind that the worst part of our political system is the politicians.

    Yeah, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington was a long, long time ago.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election



  • @joe.edwards said:

    [Nice diagram]
    Why are republicans and democrats on opposite sides of the graph?

    @wiktionary said:

    Republic: a state where sovereignty rests with the people or their representatives, rather than with a monarch or emperor; a country with no monarchy.

    Democracy: a government under the direct or representative rule of the people of its jurisdiction.
    Not to mention that fascists are totalitarians, are they not?


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    It's like the Unified Atheist League versus the United Atheist Alliance versus the Allied Atheist Allegiance. (Go God Go (South Park))



  • @joe.edwards said:

    That's ludicrously wrong, verging on propaganda. The Democrats are far closer to (although still far from) fascists than the Republicans, for whom individualism and small government is a core principle.



  • @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:

    @joe.edwards said:
    That's ludicrously wrong, verging on propaganda. The Democrats are far closer to (although still far from) fascists than the Republicans, for whom individualism and small government is a core principle.

    There's no label on the axis, it could mean anything. "Tendency to wear sweaters."


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    Alright, relax. Somebody said it should be a 2-dimensional graph, and I vaguely remembered seeing one, so I typed it into Google images and pasted it here.

    The axes had labels in the version I originally saw, and for the most part it seemed to make sense.

    I believe it was socially conservative/permissive and fiscally conservative/permissive.



  • @joe.edwards said:

    It's like the Unified Atheist League versus the United Atheist Alliance versus the Allied Atheist Allegiance. (Go God Go (South Park))

    You mean the 'People's Front of Judea' vs the 'Judean People's Front', the 'Judean Popular People's Front', the 'Campaign for a Free Galilee,' and the 'Popular Front of Judea'.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    There's no label on the axis, it could mean anything. "Tendency to wear sweaters."

    It makes a lot more sense if you read the subject line.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.