Let's Talk About McDonald's

Top 5 Worst Fast Food Items.

Fast food is almost never great. However some of it is far worse than others.


5. McDonald's Filet o Fish. Fish as fast food is not a great idea.

Grey fist and and tons of mayo.

4. Carl's Jr's Turkey Burgers. There are several version of this, all of them are dry, bland, and forgettable.

It like a real burger, without all the good parts.

3. Papa John's Frito Chili Pizza. Don't play games with pizza.

If you hate both yourself and pizza, order this.

2. Taco Bell's Beefy Crunch Burrito. Nasty fake cheese, overly salty chips. Taco Bell has a lot of gross items, but this is stands out even their.

It is like party in your mouth, if everyone had diarrhea.

1. McDonald's McRib. All the parts of the pig not good enough for bargain brand hotdogs.

I got nothing, just look at it.

Striving For Mediocre

Seems like the goal has changed. It is as if no one cares about being the best anymore. Food is getting worse, movies have nothing to say, and television after only the lowest common denominator. It is no longer a matter of trying to be the best, it is instead a quest not to be the worst.

McDonald's is not bad. It is not great either. It is edible, that is about all you can say. So why is there a trend of other fast food restaurants trying to emulate the food of McDonald's? Why is everyone making a version of the Big Mack? Jack in the Box has the Bonus Jack, Burger King has the Big King, Carl's Jr (Hardee's) has the Big Carl. The Big Mack is edible, but it is hardly great. It might only be fast food, but they could do better. Carl's Jr has made some great food in the past, the Prime Rib Burger and Steakhouse Burger come to mind, neither of which they make anymore. 

Television has gotten worse. The fact anyone knows who the person pictured above is, is proof television television is doing harm. How can "Honey Boo Boo" do better in terms of ratings than "30 Rock". "30 Rock" is a consistently well written and funny show. "Honey Boo Boo" is  very ugly white trash family eating horrid food and reinforcing stereotypes. When did quality stop mattering? When did shit become the gold standard? 

Movies. Sure it is January, and movies are usually weak this time of year. However that is no excuse for Hansel and Gretel being released. How did this happen? Some one had to first think this was a good idea, present it to their boss, who would then need to green light this idea. A writer then has to right it, and actors have to agree to be in it. How does all of this happen for an idea this bad?

So to sum up, the world is getting worse. Food is getting bland, TV is making you less intelligent, movies... dear god... When did being the best stop being the goal?

Success Does Not Equal Quality

For whatever reason thing that aren't very good become popular from time to time. Sometimes this is temporary and a backlash happens, and whatever it was is seen for what it really was all along. Others seem immune to any kind of backlash, and continue to make money for years. It is the successful low quality products, and the makers thereof, that are getting some attention today.

McDonald's might be the most successful restaurant on planet. It can be found in many countries around the world, and the company as a whole makes millions of dollars a day. That is all great for them. However, the food leaves much to be desired. The food is rather bland, is objectively bad for you, and the quality of the ingredients are a subject of debate. While no "fast food" is great, some of it is better than others, so why does one of the worst remain at the top? It is cheap, it is familiar, it is everywhere. How it got to this point is hard to say, one might assume they were better in the past than now.

Blizzard was great back about 15 years ago. Now they seem to be completely devoid of any original ideas, or even the smallest amount of innovation. They seem to be getting rather lazy, as if they think their brand alone is enough. Two releases of this company make me question the quality of there work. Both are extremely popular, but this popularity seems grossly undeserved. The releases in question are World of Warcraft and Starcraft 2.

The first is World of Warcraft, the Fisher Price of the MMORPG world. It is a very simple game, that seems to almost play itself. When it came out in 2004 it had almost nothing in the way of innovation. It was then, and is now, a much oversimplified game. Nothing is ever really a challenge, and therefore you never feel as if you accomplished anything. While simple design can be a wonderful thing, when you are paying a monthly fee to play, one comes to expect something more. Everything in the game comes with so little effort it never really feels like you are out of a tutorial. However most World of Warcraft fans don't expect more, and are happy to pay for the worlds longest running game tutorial. 

The other release that seems lacking is Starcraft 2, but for very different reasons than World of Warcraft. Starcraft 2 came out 12 years after the first game, the first game being mind blowing back in 1998. When Starcraft 2 came out in 2010, it had a somewhat interesting single player campaign, and multiplayer that was almost unchanged from the first game.  After over a decade of time it is time for something new, not just an old game with better resolution. If the multiplayer should have offered something new, something that would be as mind blowing today as the original was in 1998.

In the end we will never know why lazy and low quality products sometimes become grand successes. it is a matter of taste to some degree. Like the old saying goes "there is no accounting for taste". However, when the something lack luster makes money it leads to more of the same coming form others sources trying to emulate that success.

Job Interview Questions.

We all need to work. To get work, we all need to endure overly long applications, and interviews. An interview is someone trying to size you up, see if they think you will work well in there company, and accomplish whatever it is they are trying for. Sadly, there are certain question asked at an interview for which there is no right answer.

One question that always seems to come up is "Why are you interested in working here?" or some variation on that. You can't answer honestly and say "I need the money", or "Because I want my power and Internet turned back on". Instead you need to bullshit out an answer about how you care about whatever it is the company does. The sad part is if you were to be honest you would never be hired.

Another question that has no real answer is "Where do you see yourself in (insert number) years from now?", as if it you have some grand and detailed plan. Again, honesty will lead to you not getting the position. If you said "Hopefully in a position where I never have to deal with a gentleman like yourself again", or "High enough above you in this company to fire you and blacklist you in this industry". So you need to give a completely made up answer where you  seem ambitious, but not enough to be a threat to the interviewer or the company on question.

The real problem is that you can't really be honest with the interviewer. No one is really excited to start work anywhere. You are working to get money. It doesn't matter if you work for Microsoft or McDonald's, you are there for the pay check. The interview process is about you feigning excitement and motivation about the company in question. You get a job by lying, you keep it by not putting a bullet in your head, you advance by sucking just slightly less than the people around you.