Random
Source Code
Random
The friend that leaves the bar first pretending to be drunk and unable to walk, let alone drive. He draws the attention of the officer laying-in-wait so the rest of his buddies (who probably *are* drunk) can escape unnoticed.
After your buddy passes the breathalyzer test with a 0.0 blood-alcohol level, the puzzled officer asks, "Sir, I saw you stumble out of that bar like you were under the influence, just asking to be pulled over. Are you nuts?"
"No sir," he answers, "I'm the designated decoy."
140👍 16👎
Noun.
1. A person who accepts the badass responsibility of wrangling a group of drunk people in one car and ferrying them home without succumbing to the temptation of delicious, delicious alcohol.
1. It's a good thing Nate was our designated badass last weekend otherwise we'd have never gotten home. The dude is a champ.
166👍 21👎
Short for user experience design. At one point the word had a lot of value until it was hijacked by ux gurus.
The word has become so diluted with nonsense that the industry has had to completely shift its definitions. You’ll now see the term “product designer” come up more often.
Ux designer: The human interaction of the users past experiences leads us to believe that his persona is more inline with the empathy of a German born uncle.
Product designer: so we’ll make the button blue.
19👍 1👎
A design victim will decorate his or her house by the book, ie. follow the latest trends in magazines, tv shows etc... According to a design victim absolutely everything in their house should be designed: from the teapot (Alessi), to the toilet brush (Starck). The sole aim in life of the design victim is to have a magazine publish his or her interiors. Most relationships with design victims end up in divorce.
Example of a design victim's dialogue: Darling how many times do I have to tell you not to wear those red slippers in the bedroom, your suppose to walk bare-footed on a Karim Rashid rug!
19👍 1👎
Those addicted to perfect typesetting, precise marks, killer color combos, and the lot.
Yo dude couldn't stop buying gig posters from Burlesque Design and Aesthetic Apparatus. Dude was hell of design junkies.
An attempt by the apologists for creationism to artificially inject their metaphysical theory with scientific credibility. Intelligent design makes the "deduction" that the development of complex life on this planet was an intelligent creator, largly on the basis of argument by personal incredulity, a flawed understanding of Darwinian natural selection and fundamental misunderstandings of basic principles of thermodynamics and biology. Advocates claim natural selection/evolution (which they frequently confuse) are impossible, and often have links to other biblical-literlists that believe the earth is only 30000 years old, and other such fantasies. There is reason that the evidence would lead any impartial person to come to such conclusions; it is therefore an example of wishful thinking and by the principle of Occam's razon is a metaphysical (faith) based belief, not a scientific one. The continued deliberate obtuseness on this issue has led to fundamentalists attempting to force science teachers to present it in the classroom, and the general devaluing of science in the population of the US and other countries as a whole.
Although there is not a scrap of evidence for intelligent design, it is impossible to disprove (because god can do anything!), and hence it is a metaphysical theory.
Because natural selection is demonstrably observably occuring right now, it is a scientific theory.
1134👍 284👎
An apparently unprovable hypothesis that living creatures were created by an all-powerful, intelligent entity that itself did not have a creator. Contrast with evolution. ID proponents typically fail to understand 4 things:
1) Scientists use the word "theory" differently than the layperson
2) Science operates just fine in the absence of absolute truths. Thus, if evolutionary theory doesn't explain everything, that's not a problem - it's a "work in progress"
3) People are no better off substituting a slightly imperfect scientific theory for a completely unsupported religious hypothesis
4) The fact that ID cannot be disproven is a weakness, not a strength (e.g. There are 482,331 raisins orbiting Saturn right now... I defy you to prove me wrong).
If Intelligent Design is such a great alternative explanation to evolutionary theory, why aren't proponents actually USING it to advance scientific understanding? In short, they should practice what they preach... literally.
862👍 240👎