Random Thoughts – Randocity!

Why doesn’t Randocity write about celebrities?

Posted in Random Thoughts by commorancy on February 12, 2020

dog-cupWhile no one has specifically asked this question here on Randocity, I’d like to answer this one anyway. Let’s explore.

Celebrity and Fame

Both of these are fleeting things. Just ask any celebrity. Part of the reason I don’t write about specific celebrities or their antics is that there are already “professional” (whatever that means) gossip monger sites out there that perform this service to the extreme. There’s no reason for Randocity to jump into this boat and begin writing about celebrities and their shenanigans.

For example, why do I care if some lesser celeb decides to take a walk down Rodeo drive or to the grocery store for a day of shopping? I don’t care about that. We all have to go shopping. Seeing them out and about is as natural as seeing any non-celeb out and about. For me, that kind of article is a non-article. It’s non-news. It’s, in fact, filler. Perhaps the celebs like this sort of non-coverage coverage, but to me it’s simply fluff designed to fill space.

Randocity is here to write about, yes, random thoughts, but also provide useful information… but not about celebrities or what they choose to do or not do. If you’re really interested in following a specific celebrity, there’s Twitter, Instagram and Facebook for that. Head over there and you can find out their latest news. If you can’t find it there, I’m sure you can find all about the minutia of a celebrity’s life on sites like The National Enquirer, TMZ or even DailyMail. That’s what those sites specialize in. That information is not what Randocity is about or why Randocity exists.

Randocity and the lack of Celebs

This site isn’t designed to deal with celebrities or their “fabulous” lives. In fact, I find celebrities far less interesting to write about than standard everyday folks. Why? Because we already know about celebrities. We know what they look like. We know how they act. We know how they dress. We know what cars they drive. We know what their profession is. We also know who their lovers are. It’s all pretty much an open book. Randocity doesn’t care at all about that. There’s nothing unique in writing about something that’s already been written about many times over.

No, I’d rather write about unique people and topics that are not typically discussed. I prefer writing about ideas and folks that are interesting, but not widely discussed. It’s not that celebrities aren’t interesting, but any celebrity is already a celebrity. There’s no need for me to help their career along on Randocity. There are plenty of other sites for those promotional efforts. Randocity isn’t the place for celebrity promotion.

Instead, Randocity would rather write about the latest toy, movie, book or even just a random thought rolling around. There are plenty of “News” sites that can tell you what happened around your town. There are plenty of tabloid sites that will gossip you into oblivion. Randocity is not here for that.

I’d rather discuss a great recipe or a way to save money when shopping or even talk about a great video game. You might say, “Well there are already recipe sites or video game review sites!” Yes, there are. But, these sites are not always great at providing the necessary levels of details that I can provide here on Randocity. That’s what Randocity is about. This is why Randocity exists. It’s about telling you about something that you couldn’t find on any other site. It’s the value in getting better and more detailed information than you can find on other web sites. That’s why Randocity exists. That’s what I have hoped to achieve with Randocity in the past and going into the future.

Randocity through the years

This blog has been continuously operating since October of 2008. That’s over 12 years of content. Yet, you’ll find little of that content related to Hollywood celebrities. While I have ranted on and railed against Hollywood’s commercialism and written a few movie reviews here and there, that’s as close as the content has gotten to talking about celebs.

Looking forward, I will continue to provide this same kind of content this site has always provided going forward. I like writing articles. What I don’t like writing is fluff pieces. I don’t intend to bring out the fake boobs and large butts or talk about someone’s bad plastic surgery simply to get people interested in this site. You can see boobs, butts and bulges at other web sites, but not here on Randocity.

Yes, I do realize that “sex sells”. But, I also realize that intelligence is more important than the shape of someone’s ass or the size of someone’s bra. Randocity has not in the past nor has any future plans to begin catering to that level of content on this blog.

Random Thoughts from the Vault

Randocity intends to continue its current trend of writing about random thoughts, but not about celebs, fame or any portion of Hollywood. I will discuss and critique bad writing, bad video games and, in general, critical failures in the creative world. But, I won’t discuss someone’s butt or kids or any other portion of celebritydom or fame, unless I’m ranting against it.

I will also discuss topical health discussions, such as the current nCoV-2019 outbreak and ways of helping you stay safe and healthy. While there’s no surefire guarantee to protect yourself from getting sick, you can perform certain things to help prevent getting sick.

I might also discuss using Portals within the No Man’s Sky video game. I might even decide to talk about how much I dislike Robocalls. Then there are work-related discussions such as wearing fragrance to work. In the kitchen, I might discuss how to make cinnamon raisin bread in a bread machine or how to create perfect Sushi rice in the microwave.

I occasionally review movies, such as 2010’s Tron Legacy, 2017’s Alien Covenant or even 2013’s Man of Steel. While I don’t go see every movie that’s released, I do go see movies that pique my interest. Unfortunately, Disney has lost me as a viewer to any of Disney’s films going forward after the incredibly poorly handling of its Star Wars franchise. Even were another Tron to release, I won’t go see it. It’s not an official Disney boycott, but it most definitely is unofficial. I just don’t want to fill the coffers of anyone at Disney when I know their goal is solely about making money and not about producing quality products.

I’ve also reviewed video games like 2019’s The Outer Worlds, going back to such games as discussing the now-defunct studio Irrational Games’s poorly conceived 2013 video game Bioshock Infinite and Bioshock Infinite’s poor storytelling choices. I’ve even discussed Rockstar’s bomb of a game, Red Dead Redemption 2, which is nothing at all like its predecessor, Red Dead Redemption… an amazing older video game only hindered by having been released using the Xbox 360’s limited graphics capabilities. I’ve even discussed how to articles, such as how you can pair your PS4’s DualShock controller wirelessly.

I’ve even discussed CBS’s bad choices with Star Trek Discovery. I’ve even further written about the now-defunct Star Trek Experience, which was located in Las Vegas before being dismantled and closed.

Back to more real world issues, I’ve discussed trying to use WiFi while traveling by Amtrak train and Getting the most out of Black Friday. I’ve even discussed such niche products as How to reset Philips Illuminate Lights.

There’s lots to discover and uncover from past articles here on Randocity. Simply use the search panel in the upper right corner of your browser or search from the mobile app to see if there’s anything I’ve written in the last 12 years that you might enjoy reading.

Sure, some of my articles approach 10,000 words, though many are in the 2,000 – 5,000 word range. A few are shorter. Whatever length it is, I hope you enjoy reading these articles as much as I have enjoyed writing them.

Thank You

From here, I would like to give a heartfelt thank you to all my current readers and followers. I hope that Randocity will continue to be a site that you value and enjoy in the future. If you enjoy reading the articles I write, I’d like to hear from you in the comments. Please feel free to write your comments in the space provided below. If you have a specific question about an article or you have a suggestion for a topic, please feel free to comment below or use the contact page and send me a message.

Thanks for reading…

↩︎

Rant Time: Pinterest

Posted in botch, business, Random Thoughts, rant, reviews, social media by commorancy on June 30, 2019

pinterestPinterest is an image sharing platform using image ‘pins’, which should be interesting. After all, the word “interest” is in its name. You would think that before releasing a platform designed around relevance, the Pinterest team could actually design an engine capable of producing relevant and interesting images. NOT! Pinterest is one of the worst, if not THE worst platform, at displaying relevant ‘pins’ in your feed, not that Tumblr and Instagram are much better at this. Let’s explore.

Search Interests

One of the things that has vexed developers for a long time is how to show you stuff that’s actually interesting and, more importantly, relevant to you. Amazon and Google have done a decent, albeit not any anywhere near perfect, job of implementing such search heuristics, where the results actually offer some measure of interest and relevance to you based on the data they know about you.

This data collection, storage and mining issue is currently a point of privacy contention among many and is even in the news, but ‘search history’ is the primary means of showing you “stuff” that is actually of personal interest. The secondary method, which is less creepy and at least a bit more tolerable, is asking you directly for categories you’re interested in (i.e., sports, fashion, music, your age, single/married, kids, etc). Still, your search history actually contains the most relevant information about you as it’s recent and current. Unlike family relationships that can change (kids grow up, couples separate, graduate from college, move, get remarried, etc), search history implies a lot about your current situation and is way more up-to-date than explicitly given data that gets old even just a month or two after it’s given. Explicit offered data can even be based on lies, because some people roll that way.

As an example of recent search history, searching about baby related stuff (cribs, clothing, formula, diapers) might yield ads from Amazon, Target or Walmart selling baby goods. It only makes sense… and this is an example of ‘relevance targeting’. That is, targeting you with images or ads you have searched for in the recent past. Same for searching for wedding, bridal or other similar information. Same for searching for car buying. Search history is ‘in the now’ information that is clearly relevant to you “right now”. The “right now” portion of search relevance is key to a great relevance engine and to ad targeting.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t work if you share a computer with multiple people; for example, you might have a family of four or have roommates in your dorm. In cases like these, your daughter might have searched for Barbie dolls and now you have a bunch of irrelevant (to you) stuff related to Barbie or toys or kid related items. The search engine simply can’t recognize who is at the keyboard. It currently can only attribute search results to a specific computer. Until search engines can identify who is at the keyboard with each search (i.e., facial or voice recognition), engines must identify based only on the computer itself (a limited recognition system). This is the reason voice assistants like “Ok, Google”, Alexa, Siri and Cortana are so important. Unfortunately, I don’t believe these assistants yet identify the voice itself. They only recognize the words spoken and translate that into text search.

Search relevance definitely isn’t perfect much of the time and doesn’t work at all when using a shared device. Using a shared device, I do get why ‘relevant ad targeting’ doesn’t work. However, if your device is solely used by you, then relevance targeting should work perfectly… or at least as perfectly as today’s targeting algorithms allow. Yet, for Pinterest, it doesn’t.

Pinterest’s Targeting Engine

Why discuss the above? Let’s illustrate exactly how Amazon and Google work ad targeting relevance. If you’ve searched for “men’s clothing” in the recent past, then Google and Amazon will insert these kinds of items into your ‘feed’. A feed is basically a place on the screen where ‘Recommended for you’ stuff appears.

Pinterest doesn’t use a ‘Recommended’ area, instead choosing to intermix it all together in one immediate and immense jumbled mess. If any dictionary needs an example for ‘cluttered’, Pinterest certainly works.

[RANT ON]

Like bread falling butter side down, so this rant begins. Pinterest has one of the worst designed, most sloppy, most cluttered, most inaccurate relevance engines in existence. In fact, I don’t even think Pinterest has a relevance engine. They seem to vomit up all random irrelevant garbage into your Pinterest feed based on who knows what criteria.

Worse, they then attribute that random spewed garbage to being ‘Inspired by’ (a form of ‘Recommend’) to a board you’ve created. I’m sorry. Wait.. what, Pinterest? How does a picture of a baby in a carryall at all relate to men’s fitness? Seriously, I’m a single guy. I am not currently in a relationship. How does a picture of a baby at all interest me or, more specifically, how does that picture of a baby relate to body fitness? Clearly, a baby is not the definition of ‘fitness’. That is, unless Pinterest is actually trying to promote pedophilia?!?

Worse, I also see pictures of fat hipped women that claim to be ‘Inspired By’ a board on men’s bodybuilding and fitness (no women in that board at all). I also see women’s hair styles flooding my feed claiming to be ‘Inspired by’ a board on men’s underwear. I see pins of women in wedding dresses. I see pins of women’s high heeled shoes. I see women wearing random fingernail polish and acrylic nails. These are entirely fashion related and I have not a single board or pin devoted to women, women’s fashion or, indeed, women’s anything. Not a single board. How can you possibly claim attribution of these completely random images to any board in my account?

I’m not against any of these topics. If I want to see them, I’ll go search for them and look at whatever pins are there by searching. However, I DON’T want them in my Pinterest feed. These pins have no place there.

It Gets Worse

From here, Pinterest’s relevance goes into the toilet (literally… yes, bathroom cleaners are there too). I get that Pinterest might think a single guy might have some interest in looking at the female form dressed or coiffed nicely. But, even if that’s true (and in my case it isn’t, at least I don’t want it in my feed), Pinterest insists on throwing all manner of completely irrelevant garbage into my feed.

It’s not simply limited to arbitrary women’s fashion, oh no no no, my reader friends. Pinterest insists on throwing Arabic writing into my feed… a language I not only cannot read, I also have no interest in. I’m sure that whatever is written there is fascinating, too bad it’s wasted on me by throwing it into my feed, an English speaking person.

It gets worse. For at least six months (maybe longer), my feed was entirely littered with page after page of all manner of tattooed body parts… just the parts. These included ankles, wrists, shoulders, backs, butts and torsos. Sometimes the tattooed body part is so close to the camera, I can’t even identify where it is. Worse, the tattoos are downright fugly. They looked like someone had done it themselves DIY at home. A few were professionally done, but many were so horrendous, who would even consider putting such a thing on their body? Anyway, I have no tattoos, have no interest in getting tattoos and don’t want to see tattooed body parts in my feed. I hadn’t searched for tattoos, so Pinterest didn’t get this ‘idea’ from my search history.

These tattoo body part pins were literally clogging up my feed. Nearly every image in my feed was of a body part. I might understand seeing a little of these images occasionally. As I said, it didn’t come from search. However, while I did have a fitness board that incidentally contained some men with tattoos, they were there because of their physique, not because of their tattoo. Pinterest doesn’t get it. It only saw a tattoo and then insisted that I might have some interest in tattooing my body… thus flooding my feed with body part after body part with UGLY tattoos. A completely wrong assumption, I might add.

Assumptions are, in fact, the prerequisite to search relevance. Unfortunately, Pinterest’s assumption engine is entirely wrong nearly 100% of the time. Just because an image contains a tattoo on someone’s shoulder, you can’t assume that to mean I want to tattoo my body and need help by flooding my feed with tattooed body parts. Wrong assumption, wrong results… or as the older computer adage goes, “Garbage In, Garbage Out!”

Pinterest Janitor

Here’s where it turns REALLY ugly. To clean up my feed, I had to play janitor. First, I had to spent valuable time going into all of my boards and clearing out ALL pins that had ANY tattoos in the image. Just gone… out of there. That helped a little, but only a tiny amount. It only helped a little because Pinterest’s engine had already ‘learned’ this ‘interest’ based on an incorrect assumption. Unfortunately, ‘unlearning’ learned stuff can he incredibly difficult… and, in Pinterest’s case, it is! Second, I had to spent time going through each new “tattooed body part” pin appearing in my feed, then following that pin through to the original account who pinned it… and then, you guessed it, block the account. That all sounds easy enough, but because of the way Pinterest works, it’s actually quite time consuming jumping from page to page and waiting for Pinterest to refresh each super long, image laden page.

I spent the better part of a week opening pins, going into accounts and blocking account after account after account. Blocking the account is the only way not to see these pins in the future (well, sort of… this is actually broken, too and I’ll discuss this next).

You’d think that a platform like Pinterest could figure out a way to wholesale remove an interest category from a feed… but you’d be wrong. Nope, there is no way to remove an interest (or should I say, exclude non-interests) from the feed. The only way to remove an interest is to, one by one, block the accounts producing the pins. It’s the only way. Even then, new accounts spawn all the time leading to brand new pins of the same old stuff recycled back into my feed… requiring even more blocking. It’s a never ending janitorial cycle.

Now, you might be asking, “Why not click the … (ellipsis) menu on the pin and report it?” I tried that. It doesn’t work. Reporting the pin as spam does nothing. The pins continue to show up. The only way to stop a pin is to block the account who pinned it. Even then, blocking an account has limited ability to even stop the problem…

When Blocking Doesn’t Work

You might think, once again, that blocking an account would block all pins by that account. Again, you’d be wrong. The only thing that blocking an account does is block pins created directly by that account. If a different unblocked account repins one of a blocked account’s pins, it can still end up in my feed. Repins via unblocked accounts allow pins through from accounts that are blocked. It’s not the pin that’s blocked, it’s the account. This is a huge heuristic mistake for a platform like Pinterest.

Even then, blocking an account doesn’t take effect immediately (or sometimes even at all). Pins that are already in your feed stay in your feed, even after you’ve blocked an account. I’ve blocked accounts and for several hours after continued to see that account’s pins in my feed after refreshing multiple times. A block seems to take up to 24 hours to actually take effect fully. Even then, I’m not entirely certain that blocking does much good because of repinning. Repinning is Pinterest’s version of Twitter’s retweet functionality. It allows any account to pin into their own account. Pinterest will then pull that pin out of that account and shove it into random people’s feed… even if the pin originated from a now blocked account.

Still, blocking an account doesn’t do anything to block Pinterest’s crap relevance engine. Even if I block account by account, Pinterest’s engine insists on filling my feed with all manner of random garbage similar to what was blocked.

Following Accounts

You would also think that by following other Pinterest accounts, Pinterest would be more inclined to show us pins by those accounts whom we follow. Again, you’d be wrong. While Pinterest does show pins by followed accounts in the feed, it also intermixes in accounts not being followed. In fact, I’d say that Pinterest tends to show more account pins not being followed than those who are being followed. Sometimes that may have to do with when those followed accounts are active.

For example, if your followed accounts haven’t been active in the last hour or two, then Pinterest still insists on filling your feed with pins (a feature that is entirely unnecessary). If those I’m following haven’t pinned recently, then show me a blank page. It’s fine if the page has no pins. I’d rather see no pins in my feed than a bunch of random garbage.

Anyway, when pins by accounts you are following don’t appear in the feed, it could simply mean they’re not pinning. Instead, your feed is being cluttered by extraneous random garbage. The trouble is, it is truly garbage and not at all relevant. The weird thing is, there is so much more relevant content on Pinterest that the engine never finds and places into my feed. I have to use Pinterest’s search panel to go find it. It’s this random irrelevant garbage that makes Pinterest completely worthless as a platform.

You’d assume that Pinterest would prioritize followed account pins over random pins, but again you’d be wrong. Pinterest has no interest in trying to make their engine more relevant. They’re simply interested in promoting random accounts’ pins into feeds, even when those pins make absolutely no sense for that particular user (i.e., image of babies shown to grown single men).

The Pinterest Idea

The idea behind the Pinterest platform has merit. Too bad Pinterest’s implementation is such absolute shit. Images can be incredibly powerful, particularly so when that image is actually of interest to the viewer. On the other hand, images shown to people who have absolutely no interest in that subject matter is a wasted opportunity to show much more relevant content.

Pinterest wastes its opportunities every single time you refresh the page. Instead of feeding me actual images of interest, I get images of high heel shoes, of wedding dresses, of women in wedding dresses, of women’s hair, of babies, of smokey eye makeup, of tattooed body parts. I even get images of dog food bowls, dog collars and of dogs. I don’t own a dog. I no have interests in any of that. Yet, image after image after image is shown. It’s entirely frustrating dealing with Pinterest’s garbage.

But, that’s not the problem. Pinterest gives us NO TOOLS to actually wholesale remove these uninteresting photos from our feed. We have to deal with them one by one. We have to block accounts one by one. Even after going through all of the hoop jumping of blocking and reporting and hiding, photos of similar content STILL appear in the feed… day after day. Sometimes even the same pin I’ve reported or hidden STILL appears.

Just when I think I’ve got a handle on my feed, Pinterest re-ups and I get a whole new wave of garbage in my feed. With Pinterest, you simply cannot win that battle of spam photos. It’s a trash platform designed to be trashy. I’m amazed that it even still exists. I’m even more amazed that anyone finds it useful.

The Pinterest Dilemma

And here we come to the point that matters most. This is why Pinterest fails. The platform fails because Pinterest attempts to ‘guess’ what it thinks you want to see. Instead of actually asking you explicitly for interest categories, it attempts to learn what you like by the pins you click on. Unfortunately, it goes even deeper than that. It learns what you like by what those whom you follow click on… and those whom they follow click on. It feeds crap to you based on the interests and clicks of others, not what you specifically click on. It assumes that because somewhere down the line, someone you follow clicks on pictures of babies, you must also want to see pictures of babies or a bridal dress. This “sixth degrees of separation” assumption is entirely wrong for a relevance engine and needs to be removed. Of course, Pinterest also makes wrong assumptions simply by reviewing your activity.

When reviewing your personal activity, Pinterest’s difficulty is, like the tattooed fitness guys, its engine guesses wrong nearly every time. Instead of Pinterest seeing a bodybuilder in a fitness pose with a great physique, Pinterest sees the image as simplistically as a “person with a tattoo”. It then makes the entirely wrong assumption that “tattoo in image = interest in tattoos”.  It’s a simplistic, unsophisticated kindergarten assumption. It’s such a basic assumption, only a child could actually jump to that conclusion. Even then, only a child would jump to that conclusion if the parent already had tattoos and invited over a bodybuilder with tattoos. Only then might a child associate tattoo interest.

Having a relevance platform make the wrong assumption and jump to the most wrong conclusion is actually the worst of all possible outcomes for a relevance engine. It then leads your entire results astray and leads to frustration by what’s presented… thus making the platform worthless. It also means that once your “learning” machine learns this entirely wrong data, it’s doubly difficult to “unlearn” it. As I said, “Garbage In, Garbage Out.” In fact, Pinterest has no way to correct these completely incorrect assumptions its engine has made.

Pinterest could fix this by asking direct questions about pins to understand if the assumptions it has made about a specific pin is correct. If the assumption is incorrect, it can “unlearn” a learned assumption. Better, simply ask us what we want to see in our feed and exclude all else. Also, give us exclusion features. See a pin, click to exclude all similar pins from the feed. Even then, Pinterest still needs to get rid of its association algorithm where it associates “women in bridal outfits” or “babies in bassinets” or “doggie treats” with “men’s bodybuilding”… which is probably entirely attributed to its completely incorrect “six degrees of separation” relevance idea.

With all of that said, Pinterest does offer a mechanism to stop seeing pins “Inspired by”, but that’s a sledgehammer approach. Using that feature is all or nothing. It will stop the garbage, but it will also stop relevant pins. This feature is poorly designed and implemented. It’s the wrong approach for a relevance engine. Instead, as I said, as Pinterest users, we need exclusionary features that look at the image and exclude all like-kind images from the feed. Unfortunately, Pinterest just doesn’t get it!

[RANT OFF]

Since this is not only a rant and also doubles as a review of the Pinterest service, I rate Pinterest a solid 1.5 ★ out of 5. Pinterest, you seriously need to get your act together.

If you enjoy reading Randocity articles, please follow, like and share the article on your social media feeds. If you have had similar experiences with Pinterest, I’d like to hear your feedback via a comment below.

↩︎

 

 

Coincidence or Unexplained Event?

Posted in Random Thoughts by commorancy on August 14, 2014

I’m focusing this article on some recent events I’ve personally had. They are a bit on the creepy side, but this one is, amazingly enough, not a rant. 

Recently, I’ve had two unexplained events one might deem as coincidences. The first one I had definitely chalked up to coincidence. The second one, I’m not quite so sure. I typically don’t go in for the metaphysical aspect of life. I’ve also never been known to have any clairvoyant tendencies. But, these two events are so similar in what they are and how they manifested, I feel compelled to write this article. Let’s explore.

First Event

I had been recently interested in both contemporary and past vocalists. Don’t know why, I was just tired of the same old rock and wanted a change. Specifically, I had been listening to Michael Bublé, Celine Dion and Barbra Streisand. Nothing out of the ordinary there.

In the past, I had never really gone out of my way to buy or listen to Whitney Houston when she was big in the 90s. Though, it was hard not to hear any of her music as it was playing everywhere. I’d pretty much heard all of her hits just strictly because most of them had been played on the radio, but I had never purchased a single album. While I was going through all of these vocalists, it popped into my head that I should get Whitney’s greatest hits. I hadn’t heard her music in quite some time and I should give it a fair shake with objective ears. I also realized that her voice in recent years wasn’t that great, but I still wanted to hear her early stuff. So, I placed an order on Feb 6th, 2012 for her CD. I ordered it Amazon Prime with 2 day shipping and was playing the CD by the 8th of Feb 2012. I was diggin’ it. Though, I will say at the time she was really a scream-singer. But, she had such style around it, it really worked for her.

On February 11, 2012 came word that Whitney Houston had passed away. We were all a bit shocked and saddened by this news. Though, considering the life she choose to lead, it was not at all unexpected. Note that some of my co-workers had seen me open the CD package on the 8th and were just a tad bit freaked out on the 11th. I had opened the package just 3 days before. Granted, I was a bit freaked too. For years I had largely ignored Whitney Houston’s music and 5 days before her death, it pops into my head to buy her music. It’s creepy yes, but I simply chalked it up to coincidence.

Second Event

Fast forward to 2014. August 1st, I’m poking around on various videos on YouTube and I happen across random videos in the suggestion panel. Sometimes I click. This time I happened upon a video of the creation of Marvel’s Ultron character. For whatever reason while watching that video, it popped into my head ‘nanooo nanooo’ (like saying it all slow). I don’t know why. I don’t really see any relationship to Marvel’s Ultron and that phrase, but it just popped in. I realized that nanu-nanu was what Mork used to say on Mork and Mindy. So, I searched for a full episode on YouTube. I found and watched the opening intro, then one full episode and part of another. And, that’s where it ended for me. Content with having gotten that out of my system, I moved onto many other other unrelated videos and forgot all about it.

Note that I haven’t seen a Mork and Mindy episode since it was originally on the air. I also hadn’t seen a Robin Williams movie in probably 5 years or longer. I haven’t seen Pam Dawber in anything since Mork and Mindy. So, it’s not like I’d recently had any inkling to go watch Robin Williams, Pam Dawber or a Mork and Mindy episode until I thought ‘nanooo nanooo’. 

August 11 rolls around only to find out Robin Williams is dead by asphyxiation. When I first heard the news, I actually thought it might be a hoax because few major sites were yet reporting it. It wasn’t until about an hour later that it was officially being reported on all major news sites.

Again, a creepy coincidence. Yet, because this is the second one of these I’ve had, I’m beginning to wonder if there’s something else at work.

Coincidence?

But wait, it gets even creepier. Reviewing the dates of these two deaths, they both happened on the 11th of a month. February 11th, 2012 and August 11th, 2014. That leads to an 11 11.  If you do the math around all the numbers here it’s also somewhat creepy.

One more event, but not at the same level. Tonight on the way home, I happened to look up at the clock at precisely 11:11PM and then precisely again at 11:21PM. While tonight’s event isn’t related to the previous two events in type, it is related by the number 11.

I don’t know how to explain these off as mere coincidence. I want to.  One event like this I might be able to chalk to coincidence. But two with almost the same signature? The first was basically 5 days before the event. The second was 10 days before the event. Usually things tend to come in threes. So, I am now on the lookout for the third going forward. But, it may again take 2 years before the third happens. Now, I’m just waiting. If a third doesn’t happen, maybe these are coincidence. Is it a message?

Comment if you can suggest any insight or have any experience with events like these.

Tagged with: ,
%d bloggers like this: