In the last few months, Nordstrom has released an $85 rock in a leather holster and a $95 pair of mom jeans with clear plastic knees. Now they're really stepping up their game with a $425 pair of jeans that comes pre-dirtied with real mud.
The Barracuda Straight Legged Jeans are "workwear that's seen some hard-working action with a crackled, caked-on muddy coating that shows you're not afraid to get down and dirty." Because nothing says "I'm not afraid to get dirty" than paying for someone else dirty your pants for you.
If you really want to go all out, you can even buy the matching $425 jacket also covered in mud.
Via ABC Buffalo
Comments (3)
For greater legitimacy, the wearer can be interviewed, and a unique story can be told about what the clothing went through. Or each wearer can be identified on the tag (e.g. "Dave from Toledo"). Particular wear patterns, associated with particular wearers may gain special status among buyers. Maybe, in one season, everyone will want to wear clothes destroyed by farm workers. Another year, roofers will be all the rage. Perhaps "Joe from Albuquerque" will become a superstar of clothing distress.
http://www.wilottery.com/lottogames/apick3.asp
6-6-6
I saw it happen live on TV.
That's the thing about statistics. Statistically speaking, unlikely things should sometimes occur, but people will always impute meaning to things which are meaningless. Which isn't to say that it isn't interesting.
Lottery numbers 04-15-23-24-35-42
LOST numbers....04-08-15-16-23-42
The odds in the article about two consecutive draws being the same do seem low. In a fifty number field/six number draw the odds of picking all six is 14 million to 1. So how does the two day/same numbers odds end up at 4 million to 1? It all seems strange to me, especially the fact that 18 people picked those same six numbers for the next draw. Who picks the complete set of numbers that just won?
There's a similar problem about how many people do you have to have in a room before there's a better than even chance of two of them sharing a birthday. Turns out to be around 23, not the 180 or so you might expect. The reason is there are a lot of possible birthdays, but most people think only from their own perspective - i.e. how many people share /their/ birthday, not how many people share /any/ birthday.
There's a Wiki page which explains the maths and which can easily be extended to the lottery figures.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem
Skipweasel, here's another way to think of it: Suppose there are 5 million possible number combinations in a particular lottery. No matter what combination of six numbers comes up one day, the numbers the following day have a one-in-five-million chance of being the same.
I suspect that the one mathematician's odds are off because, frankly,many if not most mathematicians know squat about probability calculations.
By the way, reports are that 3 of the same 6 numbers turned up in the NEXT drawing.
Random chance? I don't think so.
sept 6 & 10
4, 15, 23, 2*4, 3+5, 42
6 + 10 -----/---/--
/ / \
/ / |
/ / |
// |
4, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42
sept 6 & 10
4,.15,.23,.2*4,.3+5,.42
6 + 10 -----/---/--
.........../.../...\
........../../.....|
........././.......|
........//.........|
...4,...8,...15,..16, 23, 42
sept 6 & 10
4,.15,.23,.2*4,.3+5,.42
6 + 10 --/---/--
.........../.../...\
........../../.....|
........././.......|
........//.........|
...4,..8,...15,..16, 23, 42
or it could have been the incident....