luck

[sagefr0g]

On those match plays, a fellow I know showed me how to bet both sides of mini-baccarrat, one side with the coupon and the other side with cash. Sometimes they make you play money on the same side as the coupon, but as long as you bet the same on both sides, you can't lose, but you can convert your token into cash, minus a commission if you win on the bank side.

No AP says Ho Hum if they lose their bankroll. The amount of the bankroll is supposed to be such in keeping with RoR calculations that it is next to impossible to lose it all playing according to advantage play guidelines. If you do, you have overcome the odds of 99 to less than one, and I would consider wearing latex gloves at all times, a surgeon's mask. and staying home unless it is impossible to do so. Otherwise, you might catch avian flu or black plague and die a horrible death.

some how that just doesn't make me feel that warm and fuzzy. call me a skeptic, lol but you can bet i'll still look for some nice low ROR in my considerations, just in case, lmao. but i'll go beyond that as well, using my sense of security, intuition and thoughts and judgements regarding the question.
ok but so, how come the authors and experts say this bankroll, it's gotta be discretionary kind of money, money you can afford to lose, all of it? doesn't that mean, no big deal you lost it? here is Snyder on the subject pg 136 Blackbelt in Blackjack:
"Personally i'm not crazy about the idea of individual players determining their bet sizes soley based on Risk of Ruin. Uston discussed how some of the teams he was involved in based their bets on a 5% element of ruin. This sounds pretty good to most players; if you double your bank 95% of the time (19 out of 20 banks double) that a huge win expectation in the long run.
But Uston was involved in big teams of players, with multiple investors, and if the team went broke on a play, the inverstors could simply put together another bank and do it again. That's not an option easily available to a solo player. If you have a bank of $10,000, and lose the whole bank on your first play, can you simply put together another $10,000 and do it again? You might argue that it's unlikely that you'll lose your bank on your first attempt to double it, but consider it from the perspective as an author whose advice is being followed by thousands of individual players: For every ten thousand players who go out and play to a 5% ROR, 500 of them will go broke! How many of those players can quickly put together another bank? How many have lost their life savings? How many will write nasty letters to me blaming me for thier new poverty?"
here's Wong on the subject, Professional Blackjack pg 193:
Bankroll Advice
First decide how much money you are willing to risk at blackjack. By that i mean the amount if you lost it all you would give up the game. That is you total stake for the purposes of this discussion.......
pg 205
....You must be cold and calculating. Steely blue eyes will do. You must have no emotional attachemnt to that money you throw on the table. It must mean little to you. If you lose it so what; it's only money. If you cannot afford to lose it, you cannot afford to bet it....

so why do these authors say this stuff? me, i think they say it cause they darn well know their readers can easily and will often (more often than the odds) lose their money.
just my point is that risk is real, very, very, very, .... real. and take it from Bojack, or even moi, take a real hard, close look, put some numbers on that play action and results compare expectations from theory and let anyone determine just how skilled they might really be.

What do stylish frogs wear?

Jumpsuits!

What has more lives than a cat?

A frog, it croaks every night!

lmao, like i said you probably got a million of them.

 

[aslan]

some how that just doesn't make me feel that warm and fuzzy. call me a skeptic, lol but you can bet i'll still look for some nice low ROR in my considerations, just in case, lmao. but i'll go beyond that as well, using my sense of security, intuition and thoughts and judgements regarding the question.
ok but so, how come the authors and experts say this bankroll, it's gotta be discretionary kind of money, money you can afford to lose, all of it? doesn't that mean, no big deal you lost it? here is Snyder on the subject pg 136 Blackbelt in Blackjack:
"Personally i'm not crazy about the idea of individual players determining their bet sizes soley based on Risk of Ruin. Uston discussed how some of the teams he was involved in based their bets on a 5% element of ruin. This sounds pretty good to most players; if you double your bank 95% of the time (19 out of 20 banks double) that a huge win expectation in the long run.
But Uston was involved in big teams of players, with multiple investors, and if the team went broke on a play, the inverstors could simply put together another bank and do it again. That's not an option easily available to a solo player. If you have a bank of $10,000, and lose the whole bank on your first play, can you simply put together another $10,000 and do it again? You might argue that it's unlikely that you'll lose your bank on your first attempt to double it, but consider it from the perspective as an author whose advice is being followed by thousands of individual players: For every ten thousand players who go out and play to a 5% ROR, 500 of them will go broke! How many of those players can quickly put together another bank? How many have lost their life savings? How many will write nasty letters to me blaming me for thier new poverty?"
here's Wong on the subject, Professional Blackjack pg 193:
Bankroll Advice
First decide how much money you are willing to risk at blackjack. By that i mean the amount if you lost it all you would give up the game. That is you total stake for the purposes of this discussion.......
pg 205
....You must be cold and calculating. Steely blue eyes will do. You must have no emotional attachemnt to that money you throw on the table. It must mean little to you. If you lose it so what; it's only money. If you cannot afford to lose it, you cannot afford to bet it....

so why do these authors say this stuff? me, i think they say it cause they darn well know their readers can easily and will often (more often than the odds) lose their money.
just my point is that risk is real, very, very, very, .... real. and take it from Bojack, or even moi, take a real hard, close look, put some numbers on that play action and results compare expectations from theory and let anyone determine just how skilled they might really be.

lmao, like i said you probably got a million of them.

5% is pretty high. Would you put up a million dollars against a 95% chance of winning a new $90,000 Porsche? I know I wouldn't. $500,000? Still too rich for my blood. $300,000? No. $200,000? Now I might say yes. At worst, I'd be out $110,000. 95% chance. It has a lot to do with how much money you have.

But I was talking about less than 1% chance, say. 1/2 of 1%. I might risk the $500,000 for that. I know I would risk $300,000. And only 50 of Snyder's ten thousand readers would lose. That's 1 out of 200. It's a whole lot better than 1 out of 20.

That's what I'm talking about.

What is a frog's favorite game?

Croaket

A frog telephoned the Psychic Hotline and was told, "You are going to meet a beautiful young woman who will want to know everything about you." The frog said, "That's great! Will I meet her at a party, or what?" "No," said the psychic, "Next term--in her biology class."

 

[sagefr0g]

5% is pretty high. Would you put up a million dollars against a 95% chance of winning a new $90,000 Porsche? I know I wouldn't. $500,000? Still too rich for my blood. $300,000? No. $200,000? Now I might say yes. At worst, I'd be out $110,000. 95% chance. It has a lot to do with how much money you have.

But I was talking about less than 1% chance, say. 1/2 of 1%. I might risk the $500,000 for that. I know I would risk $300,000. And only 50 of Snyder's ten thousand readers would lose. That's 1 out of 200. It's a whole lot better than 1 out of 20.

That's what I'm talking about.

i think you mean the worst you'd be out was $290,000 if you lost the $200,000 and decided to buy the Porsche or lost and out $200,000 and decided the heck with the car.
me i'd only bet those odds if my stake was less than the value of the car, way, way, way less, maybe about the same amount as some used car i might buy,lmao. but then i'd never pay $90,000 for a car anyway, if there was cheaper excellent cars available no matter how much money i had. am i less of a gambler than you? lmao.

but yeah, depends on how much money one has and the degree of value one attributes to money. that's what i was saying before the thing about utility theory, lmao what ever that is. i just know i'm cheap, real cheap and on top of that scared. lol.:cat::whip:

What is a frog's favorite game?

Croaket

A frog telephoned the Psychic Hotline and was told, "You are going to meet a beautiful young woman who will want to know everything about you." The frog said, "That's great! Will I meet her at a party, or what?" "No," said the psychic, "Next term--in her biology class."

 

[aslan]

i think you mean the worst you'd be out was $290,000 if you lost the $200,000 and decided to buy the Porsche or lost and out $200,000 and decided the heck with the car.
me i'd only bet those odds if my stake was less than the value of the car, way, way, way less, maybe about the same amount as some used car i might buy,lmao. but then i'd never pay $90,000 for a car anyway, if there was cheaper excellent cars available no matter how much money i had. am i less of a gambler than you? lmao.

but yeah, depends on how much money one has and the degree of value one attributes to money. that's what i was saying before the thing about utility theory, lmao what ever that is. i just know i'm cheap, real cheap and on top of that scared. lol.:cat::whip:

Yeah, I blew that. hahaha I'd be out $200,000. Then I'd take a second chance, get my $90,000, and I'd be out $110,000. I ain'ta gonna lose two 99.5% chances in a row!!! good thing I had a back up plan! The moral of the story is, have a back up plan, and keep in truck...er...betting!

A new study shows that licking the sweat off a frog can cure depression. The down side is, the minute you stop licking, the frog gets depressed again.

What is a frogs favorite time?

Leap year!

 

[sagefr0g]

lady luck

in games of chance
luck's been allowed
but something shrouds her expected dance
her nature tamed and shackled
her power even then
captivates the hearts of men
and yet this fickle lady wild but not free
charms our joy and misery
and all the while
it's not her guile
we might just have an inkling
that some one has been tinkering
locked her in a most uncompromising position
ever so slightly
we find her attention
directed and spread most impolitely
away from our direction
embracing some one else's expectation
and about her he really doesn't care
so it's our mission if we dare
to circumvent this trap he's set
determine when it's best to bet
to understand her ways
because we know on certain days
she is still to us most kind
if only her attentions we can find
free her from his trap for just a while
and upon us she just might smile.

 

[aslan]

in games of chance
luck's been allowed
but something shrouds her expected dance
her nature tamed and shackled
her power even then
captivates the hearts of men
and yet this fickle lady wild but not free
charms our joy and misery
and all the while
it's not her guile
we might just have an inkling
that some one has been tinkering
locked her in a most uncompromising position
ever so slightly
we find her attention
directed and spread most impolitely
away from our direction
embracing some one else's expectation
and about her he really doesn't care
so it's our mission if we dare
to circumvent this trap he's set
determine when it's best to bet
to understand her ways
because we know on certain days
she is still to us most kind
if only her attentions we can find
free her from his trap for just a while
and upon us she just might smile.

Well done! Po-et, po-et, po-et.

What do you get when you cross a frog with a pigeon?

A pigeon toed pigeon toad.

Why couldn't the snake talk?

Because he had a frog in his throat.

 

[sagefr0g]

Yeah, I blew that. hahaha I'd be out $200,000. Then I'd take a second chance, get my $90,000, and I'd be out $110,000. I ain'ta gonna lose two 99.5% chances in a row!!! good thing I had a back up plan! The moral of the story is, have a back up plan, and keep in truck...er...betting!

right borrowing from Warren Buffet, if you had a gun with say 1,000, no say a million chambers and just one bullet, would you hold it to your head and pull the trigger? how much would you want to pull that trigger? :yikes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKhCzubxOW0

 

[aslan]

right borrowing from Warren Buffet, if you had a gun with say 1,000, no say a million chambers and just one bullet, would you hold it to your head and pull the trigger? how much would you want to pull that trigger? :yikes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKhCzubxOW0

Maybe the one exception is if the gun has four wheels and a transmission. We could take a train, a subway, walk, ride a bicycle. But we continue to climb behind the wheel and pull the trigger. But even more absurd, some people, like myself, drive our full-sized vehicles like we were in first place at the Daytona 500. Go figure! Do you think we have a death wish?

What’s white on the outside and green on the inside?

A frog sandwich.

Which frog has horns?

A bull frog.

 

[sagefr0g]

Maybe the one exception is if the gun has four wheels and a transmission. We could take a train, a subway, walk, ride a bicycle. But we continue to climb behind the wheel and pull the trigger. But even more absurd, some people, like myself, drive our full-sized vehicles like we were in first place at the Daytona 500. Go figure! Do you think we have a death wish?

there ya go. but yeah, how many people when they hop in their vehicle consider for even a second their odds. something i heard or read about how going for a drive is right up there with being a soldier in a war sort of odds.
it's like you was saying depends on how much money you've got, or what ever. and i think what i've been saying a question of utility, like how the investment guhrus try and figure out with that utility theory stuff.
or that gun with all the chambers, maybe a guy goes by some doctor that just gave him six months to live and he's willing to pull the trigger maybe.:whip: so many things, so many things.

What’s white on the outside and green on the inside?

A frog sandwich.

Which frog has horns?

A bull frog.

 

[aslan]

there ya go. but yeah, how many people when they hop in their vehicle consider for even a second their odds. something i heard or read about how going for a drive is right up there with being a soldier in a war sort of odds.
it's like you was saying depends on how much money you've got, or what ever. and i think what i've been saying a question of utility, like how the investment guhrus try and figure out with that utility theory stuff.
or that gun with all the chambers, maybe a guy goes by some doctor that just gave him six months to live and he's willing to pull the trigger maybe.:whip: so many things, so many things.

The gamblers who try to parlay into a huge win know exactly what they are doing. They try to parlay, say, three or four wins in a row. $1,000 = $2,000 = $4,000 = $8,000 = $16,000. The reasoning is simple. Three or four consecutive wins appears frequently in any even or near even bet. $1,000 is a relatively small bankroll for someone accustomed to gambling, whereas, $16,000, now you're talking money! It's like money in the bank, anyway, because sooner or later, it's bound to come your way--and maybe sooner rather than later--that's the luck aspect of it. In summary, a gambler, as I know them, is willing to give up $1,000 several times in a row (16 maybe 17 times to be more exact) in order to have one large winner. It's the gambler's savings account, with a possible interest bonus on the side.

[SIZE=+1]What does a frog like to sing?

Hoppera[/SIZE]

[SIZE=+1]Where do baby frogs learn to swim?

In a tadpool.[/SIZE]

View attachment 1902

 

[sagefr0g]

risky behavior

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20081231/hl_time/08599186910600 (Archive copy)

Why We Take Risks - It's the Dopamine

Risk-taking, by definition, defies logic. Reason can't explain why people do unpredictable things - like betting on blackjack or jumping out of planes - for little or, sometimes, no reward at all. There's the thrill, of course, but those brief moments of ecstasy aren't enough to keep most risk takers coming back for more - which they do, again and again, like addicts.


A new study by researchers at Vanderbilt University in Nashville and Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City suggests a biological explanation for why certain people tend to live life on the edge - it involves the neurotransmitter dopamine, the brain's feel-good chemical. (See the Year in Health, from A to Z.)


Dopamine is responsible for making us feel satisfied after a filling meal, happy when our favorite football team wins, or really happy when we use stimulating drugs like amphetamines or cocaine, which can artificially squeeze more dopamine out of the nerve cells in our brain. It's also responsible for the high we feel when we do something daring, like skiing down a double black diamond slope or skydiving out of a plane. In the risk taker's brain, researchers report in the Journal of Neuroscience, there appear to be fewer dopamine-inhibiting receptors - meaning that daredevils' brains are more saturated with the chemical, predisposing them to keep taking risks and chasing the next high: driving too fast, drinking too much, overspending or even taking drugs.


David Zald, a professor of psychology and psychiatry at Vanderbilt, studied whether the brains of those thrill seekers differed in any way from those of the less adventuresome when it comes to dopamine. He gave 34 men and women a questionnaire to assess their novelty-seeking tendencies, then scanned their brains using a technique called positron emission tomography to figure out how many dopamine receptors the participants had. Zald and his team were on the lookout for a particular dopamine-regulating receptor, which monitors levels of the neurotransmitter and signals brain cells to stop churning it out when there's enough.


Earlier studies in rats had shown that animals that tend to explore and take more risks in new environments also tend to have fewer of these inhibitory receptors, and Zald wanted to find out if the same was true in people.


"This is one of those situations where the data came out essentially perfectly," he says. "The results were exactly as we predicted they would be, based on the animal data." That is, like the rats, humans who were more spontaneous and eager to take risks had fewer dopamine-regulating receptors than those who were more cautious.


The findings support Zald's theory that people who take risks get an unusually big hit of dopamine each time they have a novel experience, because their brains are not able to inhibit the neurotransmitter adequately. That blast makes them feel good, so they keep returning for the rush from similarly risky or new behaviors, just like the addict seeking the next high.


"This finding is really interesting," says Dr. Bruce Cohen, director of the Frazier Research Institute at McLean Hospital in Boston and a professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. "It's a piece of the puzzle to understanding why we like novelty, and why we get addicted to substances ... Dopamine is an important piece of reward."


Cohen suggests that a better understanding of novelty-seeking behavior may even help researchers find more effective treatments for addiction. If future studies validate Zald's findings and show that addicts also have fewer dopamine-inhibiting receptors than average, then medicines designed to replace the function of those receptors may help bring their dopamine levels down to normal and weaken their addiction.


On a more theoretical level, Zald's results may also help inform a long-ranging debate in the addiction field. Some experts believe that addicts suffer from a natural deficit of dopamine and self-medicate with drugs; others think addicts' brains make normal amounts of the neurotransmitter but just can't break it down and regulate it properly.


"We think a person who finds novelty and excitement more rewarding does so because he gets more dopamine release, or more of a boost," says Zald. "But it's one of the big controversies in the field of addiction research now." And it's yet another area for researchers to explore in trying to come up with a better treatment for substance abuse.

also see:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080808160331.htm

on dopamine and gambling:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/08/030812073612.htm

 

[aslan]

Why We Take Risks - It's the Dopamine

Risk-taking, by definition, defies logic. Reason can't explain why people do unpredictable things - like betting on blackjack or jumping out of planes - for little or, sometimes, no reward at all. There's the thrill, of course, but those brief moments of ecstasy aren't enough to keep most risk takers coming back for more - which they do, again and again, like addicts.


A new study by researchers at Vanderbilt University in Nashville and Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City suggests a biological explanation for why certain people tend to live life on the edge - it involves the neurotransmitter dopamine, the brain's feel-good chemical. (See the Year in Health, from A to Z.)


Dopamine is responsible for making us feel satisfied after a filling meal, happy when our favorite football team wins, or really happy when we use stimulating drugs like amphetamines or cocaine, which can artificially squeeze more dopamine out of the nerve cells in our brain. It's also responsible for the high we feel when we do something daring, like skiing down a double black diamond slope or skydiving out of a plane.

Dopamine probably does explain a lot of risk-taking behavior, but possibly not all. For example, I don't drink, take drugs, do dangerous things as a rule, and I hate the excitement of blackjack when experiencing negative variance with big money on the table. I do, however, speed to the extent I believe I can get away with and which I believe does not jeopardize my safety or others on the road. Still, there is some degree of greater risk, since the time allowed for reacting to emergency situations is obviously shortened, and of course, the faster one travels, the greater the chance of serious injury if one is involved in an accident. On the opposite extreme, it would not make sense to never leave the house, or if you do, to drive 5 miles per hour. These behaviors are safer, but the benefits given up are far greater than the risk avoided.

I guess I would argue with the author's premise that risk-taking by definition defies reason. Actually, it is a trade-off between benefits derived and degree of risk taken. Playing pool for money against comparable players is risky, but when it is done with the judgment that one possesses a slight edge, it is a calculated risk. In this light, it neither defies reason nor is it ill-advised. Playing blackjack with a 1% edge is risky, but it also neither defies reason nor is it ill-advised.

I wonder where one can get some of this dopamine? Can it be made in a laboratory? If so, it sounds like a safe sort of substance. It would be nice if you could get some without participating in some dangerous activity.

What do you get if you cross a science fiction film with a toad?

Star Warts.

Where does the frog borrow money?

From the river bank, of course.

View attachment 1911

 

[sagefr0g]

...
I wonder where one can get some of this dopamine? Can it be made in a laboratory? If so, it sounds like a safe sort of substance. It would be nice if you could get some without participating in some dangerous activity.

i'm pretty sure one way of getting some is to experience luck.
ingesting it or contriving to do so with it's precursors and the like is probably not adviseable, but i'm pretty sure you know that.

 

[aslan]

i'm pretty sure one way of getting some is to experience luck.
ingesting it or contriving to do so with it's precursors and the like is probably not adviseable, but i'm pretty sure you know that.

I don't know a thing about dopamine. Is it a dangerous thing to ingest? Is it even possible? A little dopamine and coke...er...pepsi, please.

 

[Kasi]

Bad Karma

It's like this. I go to the supermarket 4 days ago. I think she says it's $12.48 - can't see the screen. It looked like she counted $8.52 in change but I wasn't sure and it was a long line behind me. Took the change and went home. Yes, I was overpaid by $1. I said to myself "screw it".

The next day the washing machine squeals and won't spin. Get a new washing machine. Turn off the water and install it. Don't use it. Next day, tiurn the water on and the cold water to the laundry tub had burst. Cut out the burst pipe and install a sleeve over it. One side works, the other doesn't. Screw it, install a valve with a handle. Got cold water to the washer even though I can't turn on cold water to the laundry tub with the handle.

Turn on the hot water to the washer. Now there's a leak in the in the hot water to the laundry tub that wasn't there before. Screw it. Install another valve with a handle for the hot water to the laundry tub.

Use washer for the first time and hear wife upstairs scream "the kitchen faucet just blew itself out of its hole". Yep, it had. Probably not too surprising since I had put it in a couple months ago when a small drip occurred I couldn't fix. For that one I had to disassemble the garbage disposer, couldn't put it back together and had to buy a new one which still leaks. But not that much - just empty the bucket underneath every once in a while. Neither here nor there anyway.

Turn water to the whole house back on and the shut-off valve to the whole house now leaks. Call the water company to turn off my water at the street so I can replace the valve. They come out, look for an hour, and actually tell me they "can't find it."

Screw it, turn the washer on again and the hot and cold water work fine now.
Except for the leak through the bottom of the laundry tub where the dishwasher drains. Maybe I dropped a wrench or something - it wasn't there before.

Ask nicely of the water company if they think they can find my shut-off valve after I don't pay my bill for six months. They "weren't sure".

So now, I have a washer that works, a laundry tub I can't use the handles to turn water off and on and that leaks anyway thru the bottom and a constant leak at the house shut-off valve that nobody can fix.

You can't tell me any of this ever would have happened if I hadn't kept that extra $1. It's not "bad luck", it's "Divine Punishment". Not a doubt in my mind.

I returned the $1 today to the manager and just pray she does the right thing and doesn't put it in her pocket.

My wife bought a danish pretzel today saying it would be good luck for the New Year. And an open purse on the front porch for good luck in the New Year. Works for me lol.

Happy New Year.

 

[aslan]

It's like this. I go to the supermarket 4 days ago. I think she says it's $12.48 - can't see the screen. It looked like she counted $8.52 in change but I wasn't sure and it was a long line behind me. Took the change and went home. Yes, I was overpaid by $1. I said to myself "screw it".

The next day the washing machine squeals and won't spin. Get a new washing machine. Turn off the water and install it. Don't use it. Next day, tiurn the water on and the cold water to the laundry tub had burst. Cut out the burst pipe and install a sleeve over it. One side works, the other doesn't. Screw it, install a valve with a handle. Got cold water to the washer even though I can't turn on cold water to the laundry tub with the handle.

Turn on the hot water to the washer. Now there's a leak in the in the hot water to the laundry tub that wasn't there before. Screw it. Install another valve with a handle for the hot water to the laundry tub.

Use washer for the first time and hear wife upstairs scream "the kitchen faucet just blew itself out of its hole". Yep, it had. Probably not too surprising since I had put it in a couple months ago when a small drip occurred I couldn't fix. For that one I had to disassemble the garbage disposer, couldn't put it back together and had to buy a new one which still leaks. But not that much - just empty the bucket underneath every once in a while. Neither here nor there anyway.

Turn water to the whole house back on and the shut-off valve to the whole house now leaks. Call the water company to turn off my water at the street so I can replace the valve. They come out, look for an hour, and actually tell me they "can't find it."

Screw it, turn the washer on again and the hot and cold water work fine now.
Except for the leak through the bottom of the laundry tub where the dishwasher drains. Maybe I dropped a wrench or something - it wasn't there before.

Ask nicely of the water company if they think they can find my shut-off valve after I don't pay my bill for six months. They "weren't sure".

So now, I have a washer that works, a laundry tub I can't use the handles to turn water off and on and that leaks anyway thru the bottom and a constant leak at the house shut-off valve that nobody can fix.

You can't tell me any of this ever would have happened if I hadn't kept that extra $1. It's not "bad luck", it's "Divine Punishment". Not a doubt in my mind.

I returned the $1 today to the manager and just pray she does the right thing and doesn't put it in her pocket.

My wife bought a danish pretzel today saying it would be good luck for the New Year. And an open purse on the front porch for good luck in the New Year. Works for me lol.

Happy New Year.

​

Now I know why I don't do my own plumbing. :grin: I hate doing repairs around the house because I always screw it up the first time--either that, or injure myself in the process. I mean, there's a learning curve and I can't afford to learn on my own house or body.

 

[sagefr0g]

I don't know a thing about dopamine. Is it a dangerous thing to ingest? Is it even possible? A little dopamine and coke...er...pepsi, please.

well i'm not exactly sure how it works, just apparently tampering with dopamine and our normal bio-chemisty can be problematic:
(Dead link: http://www.enotalone.com/article/4115.html)

 

[sagefr0g]

​

Now I know why I don't do my own plumbing. :grin: I hate doing repairs around the house because I always screw it up the first time--either that, or injure myself in the process. I mean, there's a learning curve and I can't afford to learn on my own house or body.

you'd of thought he'd of learnt his lesson last year when he broke his mother in laws washing machine tryin to fix it. now with this current plumbing job, the whole city's water works and infra-structure may be in danger.
but the ripping off the store by accident for $1.00 theory doesn't hold. i know cause the other day the wife and i walked out of the grocery store and loading our car we discovered in the grocery cart a bag of coffee we hadn't paid for. like a dummy i actually went back in the store and paid for it.
the next day, i discovered that some one had hacked our credit card for a flight from or to Mexico for $499.96.
go figure.:cat::whip:

 

[aslan]

well i'm not exactly sure how it works, just apparently tampering with dopamine and our normal bio-chemisty can be problematic:
(Dead link: http://www.enotalone.com/article/4115.html)

Wow! Don't fool with Mother Nature!

 

[Kasi]

​

Now I know why I don't do my own plumbing. :grin: I hate doing repairs around the house because I always screw it up the first time--either that, or injure myself in the process. I mean, there's a learning curve and I can't afford to learn on my own house or body.

Well, basically, I agree with you 100%.

I negelected to mention I was going to take advantage of a Sears appliance sale that weekend wherein I counld get free delivery and installation, with removal of old machine too noless, but, although I had a Sears card with an expiration date of 5 months from now, they refused to take it over the internet. With 45 minutes left before the internet "sale" ends I called some 800 credit card number and was told my balance was zero. Tried again and refused again. Called some other number and finally was told they had cancellled the card because I hadn't used it frquently enough. I asked if they had notified me when they cancelled the card but they said their policy was not to send out a notice every time they did that or it would cost too much.

Sure, I asked why they told me the card had a zero balance when I phoned as opposed to saying "card cancelled" but they didn't know why. I even asked why not just wait 5 months and not mail me another card if I wasn't using it enough. They didn't know why they didn't choose that option either.

Then they told me I could always just apply for another credit card after I had asked "can you just re-instate this card now" and they said, of course, of course not.

So I told them, I will never set foot in a Sears store again and he thanked me and asked me if he had answered all my questions satisfactorally and had given good service. I told him, yes indeed he had.

So, I went to Lowe's and used a regular credit card. Saved me $100 too. Until I had to rent a U-Haul to pick it up since it wouldn't fit in my fancy Buick Century.

Cancelled (opted-out) of all my Sears e-mails but I'm still getting them, the b*stards.

But I have to face facts, I am not what one calls a "handy-man". I don't mind minor injuries, they're expected, I just hope, even when just hanging a picture, I don't have to replace the wall.

Been there, done that :grin:

But, taking that extra $1, still bugs me. It has to factor in somewhere, don't you think?

I tried to rationalize that 4 times in the last few years I had bought a 4-lightbulb pack and the 4th lightbulb I used didn't work right out of the pack.
I let it go. I rationalized a couple times I came home without something I had bought on the receipt - apparently they failed to pack it. So maybe I was entitled to that extra $1 after-all.

I don't know - be careful out there :grin: