Skip to main content

Unbalanced parking

I ventured out to our local Borders yesterday and encountered a bizarre phenomenon in the car park.

That's the view of the car park on the right - it was packed. Forget recession, it was heaving. This car park has two disabled rows. One was reasonably in use. But take a look at the other one.

There literally wasn't a single car in it. (It's not entirely obvious from the picture, but that's not just one row of spaces in front of the camera, there's another totally empty row to the left hand side of the roadway too.)

I'm all in favour of disabled parking, but I can't help but feel they've got the balance a touch wrong here.

Muttering about incompetent planners, I went into Borders only to be cheered up immensely by seeing the end of the popular science shelf. They've got taste in Borders:

Comments

  1. Did your publisher pay for this nice display or did Borders do it in a spirit of generosity.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It was Borders what done it, guv.

    I did a signing their a couple of weeks ago, and they ordered the stock in for that, and decided to give it a go while they had it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You're darned lucky, guv. Most booksellers charge publishers an arm and a leg for such a display. Is it a local store where you count as a 'local author'?

    ReplyDelete
  4. If it wasn't for being able to say "wow!" I'd have to say, I'm speechless!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sue - I hope that's a good thing?!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's recent gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some ex

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor

Which idiot came up with percentage-based gradient signs

Rant warning: the contents of this post could sound like something produced by UKIP. I wish to make it clear that I do not in any way support or endorse that political party. In fact it gives me the creeps. Once upon a time, the signs for a steep hill on British roads displayed the gradient in a simple, easy-to-understand form. If the hill went up, say, one yard for every three yards forward it said '1 in 3'. Then some bureaucrat came along and decided that it would be a good idea to state the slope as a percentage. So now the sign for (say) a 1 in 10 slope says 10% (I think). That 'I think' is because the percentage-based slope is so unnatural. There are two ways we conventionally measure slopes. Either on X/Y coordiates (as in 1 in 4) or using degrees - say at a 15° angle. We don't measure them in percentages. It's easy to visualize a 1 in 3 slope, or a 30 degree angle. Much less obvious what a 33.333 recurring percent slope is. And what's a 100% slope