October 25, 2007

Pedestrian, Over-Easy

"What it means is that traffic will stop in all four directions, followed by a pedestrian free-for-all, where people cross the street in any direction they chose: left, right, diagonal." - CBC.ca, Toronto Edition.
In other words, nothing will really change. They're calling it a 'pedestrian scramble' or as most Torontonians already know it as 'crossing the street'. As anyone who has had the displeasure of driving anywhere downtown Toronto can attest to, pedestrians seem to dash across the street frogger-style at any damned moment.

My vote is to make very large sections of the downtown core a totally car-free zone. This is not some people-loving, altruistic, hippy sentiment towards a greener tomorrow. Instead, its' my bitter and cynical olive-branch. It's my hope to coral these wandering deadites of the Big Smoke and thereby free up the roadways in the rest of the city.

Much of Chinatown, Queen St., Kensington Market, and the greater entertainment district are already swarmed by street urchins, hipsters in throat-beards and Bay St. Commandos rendering the roads unnavigable. Let's just quarantine these areas and create a urban utopia of Chuck Taylors, RollerBlades, skateboards, and ramblers. All of them thrashing about in the once-forbidden asphalt rivers, euphoric in their ability to meander about in this concrete jungle.

Now for the hard part. The rest of the roads are meant for the gasoline chuggers only! Mean machines of plastic and steel rocketing from one end of the town to the other, nary a concern for any more wandering meat-packets drifting between the white lines. Designated cross-walks will be the pedestrian's only access for survival. And there will be no walking; only running.

There will only be two signs to indicate your access. An outline of a man running from a giant, flaming car or a skull-and-crossbones. Guess which means you get to go?

I'm done here.

October 17, 2007

Plus Less

My cable service provider has taken the time to write and inform me that my internet access fees will be going up by close to $10 per month. However, I can get that money back and save myself money by paying for more features.

Normally I'll now be paying $52 per month for access. However, if I subscribe to one of their packages, I can save $10 by paying $99 to $120 per month. Therefore, by their math, 120 < 50.

That's great! By this rationale, 0 > 50; so I can stop paying them for my service and they'll be saving a whole whack of cash!

How are they able to, without the assistance of irony or dark satire, say to me that by adding more services and paying for more things I'll be saving money compared to what I'm currently paying? It's as though math is now cyclical and that by adding so much I can arrive at an amount lower than when I began.

It's like you hired a stable-boy to clean out the horse manure. But instead, he just keeps adding more crap from other horses to the pile, stacking it ever-higher into a gigantic feces pyramid.

"Don't worry about the mess," he says, "I'm shoveling negative-shit onto the pile."