Friday Squid Blogging: Squid Typo
From The Times.
From The Times.
James • March 16, 2007 4:33 PM
Very nice: cheered up my Friday afternoon.
Pete • March 16, 2007 4:38 PM
What’s it supposed to say?
Pete • March 16, 2007 4:39 PM
Somebody • March 16, 2007 4:49 PM
Yes, the correct phrase is “damp squib”. From http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/squid.html: “Squid are indeed usually damp in their natural environment; but the popular British expression describing a less than spectacular explosion is a “damp squib??? (soggy firecracker).”
Charles Aton • March 16, 2007 5:42 PM
What I like most about US politicians: they’re not afraid to take a stand.
Oops, that’s a typo. I meant “fake”, not “take”.
hawkins • March 16, 2007 8:30 PM
I thought “damp squid” was something like “wet noodle.” Or “limp biscuit.”
Really, it is kind of expressive.
Lisa Y • March 18, 2007 9:40 AM
Science News Online
Week of March 17, 2007; Vol. 171, No. 11
It’s a Girl: Atlantic mystery squid undergoes scrutiny
Three weeks ago, while working the waters south of Key West, Fla., a chartered fishing boat hauled in a surprise: the fresh carcass of a huge squid unlike anything that the people on the boat had ever seen. In fact, according to marine biologists, the gelatinous creature is unlike any known in the Atlantic Ocean.
The fishing boat’s captain sent the squid’s decomposing body to the Mote Marine Laboratory, headquartered in Sarasota, Fla., where cephalopod specialist Debra A. Ingrao has been studying it. When the specimen arrived on Feb. 22, Ingrao promptly sampled its DNA, fixed the carcass with preservatives, and then began a preliminary dissection. She’s sent photographs taken at every step to large-squid experts around the world.
…continued at http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20070317/fob5.asp
Dave • March 18, 2007 5:52 PM
Interestingly, my copy of Thunderbird thinks the latest issue of Crypto-Gram is a phishing scam.
Filias Cupio • March 18, 2007 6:36 PM
This is utterly unrelated to security, but related to the linked squid story. Has there ever been a case where two presidential primary candidates have joined tickets, so that one gives up on the presidential candidacy to become vice president candidate instead? If so, has the VP wannabe ever been someone still in contention in the primaries, or only those who had already dropped out?
As long as they haven’t generated too much bad blood between them during the primaries, it seems that combining a party’s two front-runners into one ticket would produce a strong team for the real election, and unite the party behind them.
Spider • March 19, 2007 9:00 AM
Yes, its actually happened many times 2004 (Kerry & Edwards), 1980 ( Regan & Bush). The nominee is known long before the actual nominating conference. Kerry chose Edwards after he had the nomination firmly in hand. It apparently wasn’t strong enough of a team as they lost
Pom • March 20, 2007 6:53 AM
Well, I thought the ‘sick squid’ / £6 joke was funny- very dry English humour, suitable for a Friday gag at the expense of a damp London Times typo. Shame to erase it…
Carol • March 21, 2007 9:38 PM
I’m sure you must have seen this. But just in case you haven’t, I’m sure you’ll enjoy it. I had a major attack of sticker-shock, so be warned:
Subscribe to comments on this entry
Sidebar photo of Bruce Schneier by Joe MacInnis.
Leave a comment