Kenji Kawakami profesionally occupies in finding practical and convenient solutions of problems which actually don't exist...Creative Japanese discovers for example a butter in a tube, instrument for a toilet paper to hang on a head and portable pedestrian crossing. Would you like a nap in underground?Use a prop under a chin, which permits to sleep upright. You don't know where dry laundry? System of hangers Drymobile, installed on the roof of a car enables do it very fast thanks to air. Are you afraid of the darkness? You should have with you special torch with solar batteries. Don't like stooping? Try sensational tidying flip-flops with tagging brush or dustpan. Kawakumi's creativity is boundless. These unique constructions inventor called chindogu, in japanese 'strange tool'. Kawakami creates also code obligatory for all creators similar tools. According to his opinion, chindogu must be inspired by everyday life and seemingly useful. Kawakami's rules forbid the sale and patenting chindogu.
First projects of untypical inventions Japanese just in fun puts in his own magazine about furnishing. Response of readers was enormous. Kawakami was a real cult person. In the last twenty years he constructed almost thousend of instruments, wrote several books and his useless inventions were shown in many foreign exibitions. Nowadays thousands of fiends in the whole world concern themselves in inventing and constructing chindogu.
Have you ever wondered about your own invention? What could it be?
Murphy's lawis an adage in Western culture that broadly states:
"Anything that can go wrong will go wrong."
The perceived perversity of the universe has long been a subject of comment, and precursors to the modern version of Murphy's law are not hard to find. For example, an Am
erican newspaper in Norwalk, Ohio printed this verse in 1841:
I never had a slice of bread, Particularly large and wide,
That did not fall upon the floor,
And always on the buttered side.
Murphy's law emerged in its modern form no later than 1952, as an epigraph to a mountaineering book by Jack Sack, who described it as an "ancient mountaineering adage": anything that can possibly go wrong, does.
Association with Murphy
According to the book A History of Murphy's Law by author Nick T. Spark, differing recollections years later by various participants make it impossible to pinpoint who first coined the saying Murphy's law. The law's name supposedly stems from an attempt to use new measurement devices developed by the eponymousEdward Murphy. The phrase was coined in adverse reaction to something Murphy said when his devices failed to perform and was eventually cast into its present form prior to a press conference some months later—the first ever (of many) conferences given by Colonel John Stapp, a physician, U.S. Air Force colonel and Flight Surgeon in the 1950s.
Murphy's law emerged in its modern form no later than 1952, as an epigraph to a mountaineering book by Jack Sack, who described it as an "ancient mountaineering adage": anything that can possibly go wrong, does.
From its initial public announcement, Murphy's Law quickly spread to various technical cultures connected to Murphy's law emerged in its modern form no later than 1952, as an epigraph to a mountaineering book by Jack Sack, who described it as an "ancient mountaineering adage": anything that can possibly go wrong, does.
From its initial public announcement, Murphy's Law quickly spread to various technical cultures connected to aerospace engineering. Before long, variants had passed into the popular imagination, changing as they went.
Generally, the spirit of Murphy's Law captures the common tendency to emphasize the negative things that occur in everyday life; in this sense, the law is typically formulated as some variant of "If anything can go wrong, it will".
Although often equated with Sod's law (chiefly British), Murphy's law can be seen as a special case of this more general tenet, which holds that the most inconvenient turn of events is the most likely.
Murphy's law is sometimes strengthened, as Finagle's law. The comparative of Murphy's law then is: If anything can go even worse, it will go even worse. Or more comprehensive, as: "Whatever can go wrong will go wrong, and at the worst possible time, in the worst possible way.". Before long, variants had passed into the popular imagination, changing as they went.
Generally, the spirit of Murphy's Law captures the common tendency to emphasize the negative things that occur in everyday life; in this sense, the law is typically formulated as some variant of "If anything can go wrong, it will".
Finagle's Law of Dynamic Negatives (also known as Finagle's corollary to Murphy's Law) is usually rendered: Anything that can go wrong, will—at the worst possible moment.
Eventually the term "Finagle's law" was popularized by science fiction author Larry Niven in several stories depicting a frontier culture of asteroid miners; this "Belter" culture professed a religion and/or running joke involving the worship of the dread god Finagle and his mad prophet Murphy.
Parkinson's Law is the adage first articulated by Cyril Northcote Parkinson as the first sentence of a humorous essay published in The Economist in 1955 : Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion.
The current form of the law is not that which Parkinson refers to by that name in the article. Rather, he assigns to the term a mathematical equation describing the rate at which bureaucracies expand over time. Much of the essay is dedicated to a summary of purportedly scientific observations supporting his law, such as the increase in the number of employees at the Colonial Office while Great Britain's overseas empire declined (indeed, he shows that the Colonial Office had its greatest number of staff at the point when it was folded into the Foreign Office because of a lack of colonies to administer). He explains this growth by two forces: (1) "An official wants to multiply subordinates, not rivals" and (2) "Officials make work for each other." He notes in particular that the total of those employed inside a bureaucracy rose by 5-7% per year "irrespective of any variation in the amount of work (if any) to be done."
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/.../s400/for0225l.jpg
What are you thinking about modern 'laws'? How trudo you thinh they are?
http://sweetbrenton .files.wodpress.com/2009/03/key art law and order.jpg
In every day life, the sequence of people's political desires is well defined. First of all, people desire order. Without order, life is chaotic and people die. Next comes law, so people can predict what will happen. Law is not necessarily just. The key is that it provide enough predictability for people to survive.
We can speak about law and order, when the vast majority of population respects the rule of law, and where the law enforcement agencies observe laws that limit their powers. Maintaining law and order implies firm dealing with occurrences of theft, violence, and disturbance of peace, and rapid enforcement of penalties imposed under criminal law.
Different people have different interpretations about what the "rule of law" means. Among modern legal theorists, the two major views are known as the formal approach and the substantive approach.
The "formal" interpretation is the predominant view, and it holds that the law must be prospective, well-known, and have characteristics of generality, equality, and certainty. Other than that, the formal view contains no requirements as to the content of the law. This formal approach allows laws that protect democracy and individual rights, but recognizes the existence of "rule of law" in countries that do not necessarily have such laws.
The major minority view (i.e. the substantive interpretation) holds that the rule of law intrinsically protects some or all individual rights. There are other minority views as well, including the view that the rule of law impliedly guarantees democracy.
In politics, law and order refers to a political platform which supports a strict criminal justice system, especially in relation to violent and property crime, through harsher criminal penalties. These penalties may include longer terms of imprisonment, mandatory sentencing, and in some countries, capital punishment.
Supporters of "law and order" argue that effective deterrence combined with incarceration is the most effective means of crime prevention. Opponents of law and order argue that a system of harsh criminal punishment is ultimately ineffective because it does not address underlying or systemic causes of crime.
"Law and order" is a recurring theme in political campaigns around the world. Candidates may exaggerate or even manufacture a problem with law and order, or characterise their opponents as "weak" on the issue, in order to generate public support. The expression also sometimes carries the implication of arbitrary or unnecessary law enforcement, or excessive use of police powers.
Some governments fail to provide order and law. In that case, people group together to provide their own. Clans take on importance. So do villages in which people who grew up together look suspiciously on outsiders.
