Great car dealership

January 19, 2006

If you’re in the Seattle area and are in the market for a new Honda I highly recommend Honda Auto Center of Bellevue.  We purchased a 2005 Accord Coupe from this dealer last fall and were impressed by the organization at every turn.  The service department rocks too – we got assigned to Jason Diaz.  Awesome!

Today I had the unfortunate pleaseure of needing to buy a new tire ASAP.  :-(  I had to go pick up our daughter from daycare early because she’s got a little bit of a cold.  Then I also needed to stop by the Redmond Comcast office to get a digital converter for work.  When I pulled out of the Comcast lot I heard a thunk thunk thunk from a tire.  CRAP!  Just what I need, a sick kid in a sick car.

I got out and found a huge bolt sticking straight into the right-front tire.  At least it wasn’t flat (yet) and I wasn’t about to try to pull it out.  I’d guess it was a good 3/8” diameter shaft, and that was going to go flat quick.  So much for taking Kaitlyn home to let Alicea keep working.

I looked in my phone and found Jason’s number (I don’t have the main service line in my address book for some dumb reason).  I called Jason and he (luckily) was in and answered right away.  He remembered me and asked how he could help.  I explained the situation and he quickly identified they had a tire in stock and that they could squeeze me in right away.  Awesome!

Alicea showed up to the dealership just a few minutes after me and whisked Kaitlyn off to home and bed – boy does she need it.  I settled in to the waiting area and what to my wondering eyes does appear?  A little sign advertising free WiFi here!

Honda of Bellevue, you’ve got our business.

Update: Not only did the shop service my car quickly (and washed the outside … and vacuumed the inside) but they didn’t make me buy a new tire!  The tech was able to patch it – that’s right, a patch for a bolt.  Not a nail; a bolt.  I was prepared to buy a tire, and they knew that.  Most places I know would have sold me that tire.  So I went home having spent $55 instead of $190.  Sweet!


Don’t go there … ugh, too late

January 19, 2006

Chirac threatens nuclear weapons against ‘terrorist’ states (AFP):

French President Jacques Chirac comes aboard "The Vigilant" nuclear submarine, at l'Ile Longue military base, in the northwestern region of Brittany. Chirac for the first time warned Today that France could use nuclear weapons against states that launch or plan "terrorist" attacks against it involving weapons of mass destruction.(AFP/Pool/Jacques Demarthon)AFP - President Jacques Chirac for the first time raised the threat of a nuclear strike on any state that launches “terrorist” attacks against France.

[Via Yahoo! News: Top Stories]

Just what we need.  Iran pissed off France and now France is saying that if there are any terrorist events aimed at them they’re bringing out the nukes?  Shit, and I thought the US used questionable foreign policy.

It is interesting, though, with this whole Iran thing of late to see England, France, and Germany taking the lead in pissing off Islamic states.  I don’t want to comment on the merits of their decisions, but at least the world can get ticked off at them instead of us for once.

Maybe we should sever diplomatic ties to more countries around the world so we can’t get involved!  Isolationism returns and the US is safer!

Yeah, I didn’t think that was going to happen.  :-)


IT & Business consulting

January 19, 2006

“Our main consulting strategy is to convince clients that we do stuff they can’t do themselves, and that we deserve lots of money for it. The best way to do this is to always look good, and always sound like we know something you don’t. Because we do.”

Huh Corp - We do stuff

I used to work for a consulting firm, and this website pretty much sums it up!  :-)


How to confuse the mentally inept

January 19, 2006

Evolution Not Completely True?:

Yesterday I claimed in this blog “I will prove to you beyond all doubt that the theory of evolution is not completely true.”

About a third of you are reading this and thinking “Oh crap, not this boring topic again!” Another third are thinking “What stupid argument is this nut bag going to drag out now? We’ve seen it all.” And the remaining third are thinking “Let’s see how much trouble he can stir up with people who don’t realize he’s yanking their chains.”

I will put my argument in simple bullet points so that you may more easily follow.

1. Evolution is defined as the change in species over time. (Roughly speaking)

2. Einstein proved that time does not pass for an observer who is moving at the speed of light. It’s not just the observer’s perception; it’s his objective reality.

3. Therefore, evolution does not exist for an observer moving at the speed of light.

4. Although no people move at the speed of light, there is nothing special about our perspective except that it is ours.

5. Evolution is not true for all potential observers and therefore it is not completely true.

6. If something is not true for all observers, it is only a point of view.

My own definition of science is that it’s the search for what is useful. Evolution seems highly useful in terms of how we conceive the whole of biology, geology and whatnot. I’m all for it on the basis of usefulness. I’m even willing to call it a “fact” as we commonly use that term.

But I’d have to side with Einstein and say it’s not completely true.

[Update: Is it relevant to my point that no human can travel at the speed of light? Photons travel at the speed of light, and from their perspective there is no evolution.]

[Via The Dilbert Blog]