Hmm, yes. Quite woody. Regular flutes, too damn tinny.

I do appreciate that anytime a company or product uses the term "toxins" I can immediately flag it as utter bullshit. Same goes for people really - "detox" or "cleanse" used outside the scope of a joke immediately tells me they're stupid and/or gullible.

Pretty good, but I think Al did it better.

No kidding. The actual video effectively ends at 5:23.

Looking at you, George Lucas.

Hah, I got 39 - totally kicked your low-spectrum ass!

Thanks - I've suspected Asperger's as likely for some time, and that confirmed it to whatever degree a self-select internet-based test can do. Seems I fit that definition / set of traits moreso than ADHD. Yay?

This follow-up wins you 1 (one) Internet! I hit a fair number of points on her list and on the test, but fewer than I'd thought I might. Grey area, to be sure. Certainly will dig into it more though.

Thanks again!

Huh. At 38 I've never really seriously entertained the possibility that I might have ADHD, but this talk certainly gave me pause. Many of the behaviors she describes are something with which I identify, but I'm not certain whether that's because I actually share a set of peculiarities with her or because they are, much like a horoscope, things with which everyone identifies to some degree. If nothing else, I think I need to start looking into what actually defines whether someone has ADHD, and what to do with that knowledge if they do. Thanks for posting this notarobot!

This makes a lot of sense. In 2000, The Simpsons predicted President Trump. King of the Hill historically aired after The Simpsons. Mike Judge created King of the Hill. A few years after The Simpsons predicted Trump's presidency, Judge also created Idiocracy, in which Terry Crews played Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Comacho, five-time Ultimate Smackdown champion, porn superstar, and President of the United states.

I'd totally vote for him in Election 2020, brought to you by Carl's Jr.

So basically, the examples at the end reinforce her point at the beginning: fade-outs are a cop-out, an anti-ending. They function reasonably well in cases where the artist has no idea how to actually end the song. That seems particularly true with pop songs, where there really isn't a particular message or story in place, it's just some danceable nonsense - what's the logical conclusion to that?

I've become increasingly aware of fade-outs over the years when listening to older songs, and I suspect it's due to their relative rarity today. In the past they were so standard as to be the expected default, so I never noticed them. They irritate me now: "I don't know what to do with the ending, guess I'll just repeat this last bit an arbitrary number of times while slowly making it quieter." The example she gives of Holst's "Neptune" is in my view the somewhat rare case of a fade-out being used for the right reason, to convey a particular idea, or meaning, or feeling.

When used as the default in lieu of coming up with a real ending to the song, I hate the fade-out. When it makes sense in context, they're fine. I don't often run into the latter.

I shared that "brain turned off" feeling. I checked the lens cap ahead of time though, and got a couple decent photos.

Gotta appreciate that they used Nine Inch Nails starting at 5:47.

Hell, Camacho was vastly superior - he at least recognized when he was in the wrong, and made amends.

I would love to show this to my kids, but there's just a bit too much swearing. Perhaps I'll make an edited version...

Edit: Someone already did.