There were three bomb threats at Walgreens stores yesterday. I was near one of them - the Hiawatha location - but saw nothing. I was at another earlier, which did not have a bomb threat. I was buying cold medicine, just to stock up; the stuff I bought last year and never used had expired. At least the "Best By" date had come and gone. Don't know if that means it's okay afterwards, but not superb, or actually worse. Had the usual choice: the name-brand stuff or the cheaper store brand that has the exact same ingredients, but tastes like berry-flavored paint thinner. It never occurs to the stores that they could sell more of their stuff if they used better flavoring agents, or none at all. It's as if they think "well, if people can't afford the good stuff, then they're going to suffer somehow. Make it taste like donkey mucus." None of this has anything to do with the bomb threats, so never mind.

Although it does bring up the eternal question: does Walgreens have a brand identity, or is it just . . . something you use because it's close and has stuff? Brand Autopsy wants to know. It's an old post, written before Walgreens came up with new store brands (Nice! for foods and dry goods) and a new slogan, "At the intersection of Happy and Healthy." I suppose that's a nice thought, but I think of the number of times I walked back to the pharmacy last winter to get antibiotics and painkillers. At the intersection of Miserable and Sick is just as apt.

HEY YOU Today's irritating YOU headlines come from the Gawker empire, of course. Gizmodo has this:

One of these days a writer for these sites will be chatting with someone at a party and mention where he works and what he does, and he'll gt popped right on the nose. "Dude! What was that about?"

"You told me I should eat bugs. Should, as if there's a moral imperative. Well, I don't want to. Stop telling me what to eat. Last week you told me I was killing the earth by eating hot dogs. I haven't eaten a hot dog since 2002. Make another overgeneralization in the second person and I'll paste you another one."

"You wouldn't dare."

"Try me."

"Okay, You Won't Believe What It'll Take to Free the Costa Concordia - Owwww!"

"Seriously dude I warned you."

By the way, I'm reasonably certain I will believe what it takes to raise the ship. It involves machinery and cranes and does not require Superman. You're better off reading the story at the Atlantic, which is run by adults.

GEEK Yes, the cast of ST: TNG does look pretty good in TOS uniforms.

More here.

Related: This is incredible work. A Daily News photographer photoshopped old crime photos on their locations today. (via Coudal.)

ARCHITECTURE I'm assuming it's nowhere near a flight path: Permit granted for World's First Invisible Skyscraper.

TECH The NYT article title is "When Tech Turns Nouns into Verbs." The story begins:

First of all, it is a phone in the new sense, which will become the conventional sense, and this does not require a new way of thinking about the world. Let alone the one around us. As for turning nouns into verbs, the piece doesn't appear to be about that at all, and even if it is, that's hardly new. Let me think of an old noun that became a verb . . . hold on . . . oh! "Phone."

We continue:

I have no idea what that means.

Okay, checking to see if this is from 2001. No. Checking comments to see if everyone else is as confused as I am . . . Yes.

Someone notes that he thought it would be about, say, turning nouns into verbs. As in "PDF that, would you?" Or "Instagram that lunch." This is probably regarded with horror by linguistic purists, but it's natural. I do wonder if people say "telegram him the news" - never heard anything like that in an old movie. "Send him a telegram," yes.