22 comments

[ 1.5 ms ] story [ 57.6 ms ] thread
Good commentary. I also see people walking their dogs while reading an article on their smartphone or listening to an audiobook and completely missing the point of taking the dog for a walk in the first place.
You mean getting the dog exercise?
No, I mean really smelling the dog poop. Everything else, in my opinion, takes away from the experience and is a distraction that needs to be cast aside.
The point of walking the dog is getting the dog exercise.
I feel like this advertorial for Candid Camera, appearing in the New York Times, is a meta-prank on the reader.

Seems like the show relies on the kindness of strangers and that still exists, even in a smartphone world.

I feel cheated that this isn't about the terminal control library.
Then the title should've been "ncurses, fooled again", unless someone fooled you into using old curses.
Skip the article. Three points seem most important:

> "I am Allen Funt's son!"

> A Candid Camera remake is coming soon. Watch it!

> The NYT can't find enough news, so it fills space with entertainment

This is an Op-Ed article, so it's not a replacement for news content. That said it does seem to be a few notches below the grey lady's usual standard.
I don't get it. These "pranks" are all just slightly silly, but not completely absurd.

For those behind a paywall, this is about Candid Camera, and some newer material they're trying. Among which :

- Postman telling people their mail will be delivered by drone (With a drone coming by dropping it off)

- People getting told that they'll be charged $10 "in store fee" for not buying online

- People being asked for 3 forms of photo ID to pay by credit card

- hired a cop to enforce a “2 m.p.h. pedestrian speed limit.”

The political ones are a bit sillier

> We showed New Yorkers petitions to recall state officials, but the names were all fictitious. Most people supported the effort, among them a lawyer who carefully explained that one should never sign anything without complete knowledge of the facts, and then signed anyway.

>our actress posing as a candidate obtained dozens of campaign signatures without ever stating a position, a party or even her last name.

The last one shows an example of "real life" bikeshedding though:

> I told residents in Queens, N.Y., that they would now be required to separate household trash into eight different color-coded bins. I can’t imagine someone being more passionate about any world controversy than the gentleman who was incensed about a bin devoted to “poultry waste.” “How,” he asked, “am I going to eat enough chicken in two weeks to fill that up?”

I don't get it. These "pranks" are all just slightly silly, but not completely absurd.

Yeah, I got that feeling too. It's not surprising that people are "taken in" when the pranks seem actually not that far off given the rate of technological progress. In a few years, chances are mail WILL be delivered by drones in some parts. Stores already effectively charge a premium compared to online purchasing. Credit cards are so insecure in the US that they ARE long due for an overhaul (e.g. getting the PIN system that's in place in the rest of the world). Two mph walking speed limit? Wouldn't be the most ridiculous law in a country that features "free speech zones" and cops that wait at pedestrian crossings to ticket people for jaywalking if they cross on a red light.

This is so mild, it's a bit as if you used a police car with sirens to get someone to stop on the motorway, and then told them "haha, I'm not real police".

I think those people's reactions are perfectly sane and reasonable. Kudos to the 80-year old dude who doesn't bat an eyelid when told yet another element of his life is going to be turned upside down by technology.

If the Candid Camera folks want to make an interesting show, they should perhaps consider doing things that are actually outlandish/extremes. I'm not even sure what that would be in today's world, though - in a world of absurd government, extreme violence, rapid technological change and general craziness, anything goes, really.

Great I don't feel stupid laughing at Candid Camera because it's on New York Times!
Perhaps in an effort to ensure success with their reboot of Candid Camera, it seems like they decided to go with pranks that are more plausible than were historically done. I think this'll end up being more sad than funny.

The Candid Camera episodes I remember watching often involved slapstick humor and ridiculous clown music. What music will they play during the scene where New Yorkers agree to recall imaginary state officials?

Those weren't very good pranks, IMO. They're all very similar to things that already exist.

Separating garbage into 8 categories? We already do 3 in real life. It's a matter of time before it's more.

A broken yogurt machine? It happens.

The political ones aren't even surprising. They could have put real names of city council members on the list, and I'm sure 90% or more of the participants wouldn't know if they were real or not.

The apartment building my mum lives in (in Sweden) already has six bins: paper, compostables, clear glass, coloured glass, metal tins, and remaining household trash.

Also, there are several things that can currently not be thrown away in the bins at all and needs to be driven to the recycling center (batteries, electronic items, large items, ...) so it would be easy to think of some more bins to add.

What a terrible article. Why even publish this NYT?
sorry candid camera, /r/dashcams has you beat. you're about 20 years too late.