Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #340057 > unrolled thread

Here piggy, piggy, piggy

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy

Contents

  Here piggy, piggy, piggy "Hardon" <hardon@gmail.com> - 2016-01-07 20:57 +0100
    Re: Here piggy, piggy, piggy Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-07 15:19 -0500
      Re: Here piggy, piggy, piggy "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2016-01-07 16:21 -0500
    Re: Here piggy, piggy, piggy chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-07 14:23 -0600
      Poor Shitv.  LOL!!! GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-07 13:50 -0700
      Here trolly, trolly, trolly Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-07 16:54 -0500
        Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-01-08 23:36 +0000
          Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly mike antipasto <pizzadude@mycomputerrox.org> - 2016-01-08 23:45 -0500
            Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2016-01-09 18:18 -0500
              Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-01-10 00:26 +0000
              Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-10 10:29 -0500
                Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2016-01-10 14:29 -0500
                  Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-10 19:42 -0500
          Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-01-09 00:14 -0500
            Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-01-09 00:16 -0500
            Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-09 10:19 -0500
              Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly "Dr. John Grubor" <grubor@grubor.org.invalid> - 2016-01-10 14:56 +0000
                Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-10 10:48 -0500
          Re: Scott Doty isn't trying to be a supermodel. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-01-08 21:26 -0800
            Spending less is smart. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-01-09 14:30 -0800
              Renting is cheaper. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-01-09 20:09 -0800
                Re: Scott Doty has the most rewarding job, I think. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-01-10 05:36 -0800
                  Re: "Smart" is spending less, and eating (slightly) more. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-01-10 16:17 -0800
                    Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-01-11 07:28 -0800
                    Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-01-11 21:33 +0000
                      Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-01-11 14:21 -0800
                        Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more. Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-11 17:31 -0500
                      Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-01-11 19:14 -0500
                        Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more. "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2016-01-11 20:01 -0500
                      Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-12 07:23 -0600
                        Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-12 09:27 -0500
                          Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-12 09:10 -0600
                        Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more. DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-01-12 11:14 -0500
                          Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more. Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-12 12:18 -0500
                Re: Renting is cheaper. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-01-11 09:03 -0800
                  Re: Be poor and fat. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-01-11 14:24 -0800
          Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-09 07:08 -0500
            Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-01-09 16:27 +0000
              Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-01-09 20:53 +0000
              Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-11 07:07 -0600
                Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-01-11 11:31 -0500
          Re: Here piggy, piggy, piggy "Henry" <henry@alpha.org> - 2016-01-09 13:56 +0100
          Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-11 07:03 -0600
    Re: Here piggy, piggy, piggy "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2016-01-07 16:21 -0500
      Re: Here piggy, piggy, piggy Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-07 20:51 -0500

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#340235 — Renting is cheaper.

Jeff Relf wrote:
> -hh wrote:
> > Jeff Relf wrote:
>> > Starving yourself, so you're less happy, longer,
>> > isn't necessarily a good idea.
>> 
>> Starving wasn't what was being suggested.  
>> There's ample latitude below clinical obesity levels 
>> to offer happiness without privations.
>
> Should Scott Doty eat less and exercise more ?
> I don't know|care.
> He's the most sucessful person here, I say.

Still depends on how one defines success.  When that definition 
includes elements health & well-being (and they commonly do),
it's clear he's not a leader, unfortunately.

>> > Everyone rents, even so-called "homeowners".
>> > Spending less is smart, I think.
>> 
>> & typically, lifecycle costs are lower when there's fewer 
>> intermediaries taking a cut for profit, which means to 
>> cut out the middleman of a landlord and owning directly 
>> to generally be more frugal in the long run.
>
> Renting is cheaper because you're dividing the costs many ways.
> You get less, a smaller area, but it costs less --
> and it's less work, less worry.

That's merely trying to sidestep with a "Do less with less".  There's 
not much stopping the owner from taking in paying tenants.


> And I don't want|need a car; I _walk_ to what I need,
> or order from Amazon et al.

No one said that you did, nor even that success is by 
necessity defined by one.  Yet it also is a commonly
enough included for many, which is probably why you 
felt that you needed to specifically mention it.

> I use this (below) to haul gallons of milk and stuff:
>
>  Beach All-Terrain Wagon; $110 after tax/shipping. 
>  BedBathAndBeyond.com/store/product/beach-all-terrain-wagon/1041696781
>
> Effectively, it's a tricycle (3 wheels), so it's
> easier to steer (compared to a 4-wheel wagon);
> most of the load should be in the back.

What works for you today may not for another five, ten or twenty 
years, which is also why many seniors are afraid of what happens 
to their quality of life when they can no longer be independent via a 
car and driver's license to get around.  For some seniors today, 
self-driving cars won't arrive in time.

> Note: I don't want|need a wife or kids.

A partner helps to split that rent :-). And the latter may very well be 
a commonly seen element of what constitutes personal success - 
even more so than mere money.  

>> In any event, the question isn't spending per se, but rather 
>> just what ones' specific priorities are.  One measure of success 
>> could be to not only have enough for today to do what one wants, 
>> but to also be putting away an acceptable amount for ones' plans 
>> for tomorrow and the day after tomorrow.  Unfortunately, far too 
>> many people today...
>
> I could go without income for many years (7?).

Projecting the future is always a challenge, particularly with healthcare 
expenses as one gets older.  For example ... and I forget the exact statistics
of what I read ... the reported expected cumulative cost of healthcare for 
an age 65 retired couple (Ie, how much until they've both died) is something
like $260,000.  I believe that this assumes Medicare benefits and is just the 
out-of-pocket expenses.  Now while one could say "just divide by two" for a
single, it doesn't actually work that way, because the healthier partner usually 
does ~5 years or so of "free" healthcare for their partner, which wasn't captured 
by how this study was done.  Either way, its a chunk of change which has to  
be skimmed off the top for any good retirement/endgame financial plan.

-hh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340241 — Re: Scott Doty has the most rewarding job, I think.

Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
>  
> You (HughHuntzinger) and I simply don't agree.

I'm simply saying that you've not made your case.
 
> Scott Doty has the most rewarding job, I think.

"Rewarding"?  That's a new & different metric than
what you were previously claiming.  


> Smart people spend less.
> I don't measure success in terms of cars, 
> homes, vacations, good looks, wives or kids.

So then just what do you measure success by?   If it
is in having a 'rewarding' job, then wouldn't even the
lowest janitor at  a nonprofit and charity rank higher 
than even the CEO of a for-profit?
 
> Eating more, enjoying life more,
> and dying sooner, is OK with me.
> Why be miserable, longer ? !

Because smart people will have both:  they'll figure out
how to enjoy life in balance and without excesses such 
as caloric overconsumption, so as to have multiple 
different metrics of life's quality.  


-hh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340290 — Re: "Smart" is spending less, and eating (slightly) more.

Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
>  -hh wrote:
> > > You (HughHuntzinger) and I simply don't agree.
> > 
> > I'm simply saying that you've not made your case.
> 
> You say X is 1, I say it's 0; we can't agree.

Using your analogy, I can agree that you've claimed a "0",
but I've not made a "1" claim.

Don't confuse that I've asked you to quantify what factors 
specifically are represented by your "0" with a disagreement:
at most, all you can say is that I'm choosing to not blindly 
agree to an uncharacterized claim.

  
> > > Scott Doty has the most rewarding job, I think.
> > 
> > "Rewarding"?  That's a new & different metric
> > than what you were previously claiming.  
> 
> Really ?  I feel like I've been repeating myself,
> over and over again, ad infinitum.

The terms 'success' and 'rewarding' are not synonyms.

For example, consider an individual who's living in a third
world country, no house, nor permanent residence, no
spouse/family, irregular & long working hours, not much in 
the ways of income, no car, no bike ... are they successful?  
Probably not, particularly by traditionally expected measures.

But ... when the job is to help protect threatened & endangered 
species from poachers, it very well may be very rewarding. 
Same job...different criteria.  


> Scott's job gives him a sense of satisfaction, I imagine.

Imagine = personal speculation on your part.

> His house is nice too, more than you imagine.

More speculation.  By the same token, there could 
just as readily be an "up to the eyeballs" mortgage 
payment:  consider that 4.5% 30yr fixed on $700K 
principle, plus $7K/yr in property taxes is ... before 
other expenses ... roughly $50K/year on net income. 

Which happens to illustrate the dilemma of choosing
to live in a high cost of living region:  higher housing 
& related expenses tends to offset higher pay rates,
and one's money doesn't go as far:  a "nicer" place
can certainly be found in some other region - - reminds
me of a place that was noted to me awhile back:  it
was a 3BR/2BA ranch, overall good, with 2 car attached
garage plus a 2 car detached and a pole shed for a
moderate sized powerboat...all for under $250K.   Oh,
and did I forget to mention that it was on 9 acres?  
"Location, location, location" ... was what it didn't have.
 
> > > Smart people spend less.
> > > I don't measure success in terms of cars, 
> > > homes, vacations, good looks, wives or kids.
> > 
> > So then just what do you measure success by?   If it
> > is in having a 'rewarding' job, then wouldn't even the
> > lowest janitor at a nonprofit and charity rank higher 
> > than even the CEO of a for-profit?
> 
> Bill Gates and Warren Buffett haven't "won the game"
> just because they made the most money (and speak English).
> You say game X is better than Y; I disagree.

Nope, I'm simply asking you to substantiate your claim that
game "Y" is the winner, such as by illustrating that "X" has
some merits, as does also "W" and "Z" and many others. 


> > > Eating more, enjoying life more,
> > > and dying sooner, is OK with me.
> > > Why be miserable, longer ? !
> > 
> > Because smart people will have both:  they'll figure out
> > how to enjoy life in balance and without excesses such 
> > as caloric overconsumption, so as to have multiple 
> > different metrics of life's quality.  
> 
> You define "smart" your way, not my way.

A suggested refinement to your thoughts.

> "Smart" is spending less, and eating (slightly) more.

Oh, so now it is only "(slightly)" more?  Sounds like you've
refined your thoughts ... who woulda thunk it?  :-)

So now, just what does this then mean for when one said 
"(slightly)" but has been clearly not followed by a nominee?  
To what degree does this disqualify said candidate?  

Again, a lack of clarity in how you've even chosen to define 
your terms make your claims based on essentially nothing and 
thus, ring impotently hollow.


-hh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340317 — Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more.

Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
> -hh wrote:
> > Again, a lack of clarity in how you've even chosen
> > to define your terms make your claims based on
> > essentially nothing and thus, ring impotently hollow.
> 
> [...]
>
> You know what he does for a living...

But you **don't** also know what everyone else does,
so as to have the basis to make a comparative claim.

> I think his job is cool, no matter what it pays.

And you also **don't** know how "cool" everyone else's
jobs may very well be, nor what those jobs pay.


> You think differently, OK ? no problem.
> My opinion is just that, nothing more.

You could just as easily have claimed that Scott 
has the worst job of everyone in the newsgroup, 
and for the same reasons of a lack of objective 
comparative data, that claim would be baseless too.  


-hh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340334 — Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more.

On Sun, 10 Jan 2016 23:41:24 -0800, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:

> <h2><PRE Style='Font-Family: OCR A, monospace !important;'>
> You (HughHuntzinger) replied (to me):
>> > "Smart" is spending less, and eating (slightly) more.
>> 
>> Oh, so now it is only "(slightly)" more?  Sounds like you've refined
>> your thoughts ... who woulda thunk it?  :-)
>> 
>> So now, just what does this then mean for when one said "(slightly)"
>> but has been clearly not followed by a nominee?
>> To what degree does this disqualify said candidate?
>> 
>> Again, a lack of clarity in how you've even chosen to define your terms
>> make your claims based on essentially nothing and thus, ring impotently
>> hollow.
> 
> I wouldn't tell Scott Doty to eat more and excercise less; nor would I
> tell him the opposite -- I just don't care. There are advantages to
> enjoying life more, dying sooner.
> 
> You know what he does for a living.
> I think his job is cool, no matter what it pays. Apparently, it pays
> plenty (by my standards).
> 
> You think differently, OK ? no problem.
> My opinion is just that, nothing more.

While I'm flattered to be the subject of personalities, there is no need 
to worry about my own personal circumstances.

I'm healthy as a horse, far healthier than some anonymous georgia 
squidbilly that ate himself into diabetes.  I also probably eat much 
healthier than he does -- and unlike him, I don't binge drink (or drink 
at all).

I could also go into the sociopathic tendencies of those who are clearly 
troubled, but all I'm going to say is this:

What we have here are anonymous trolls trying to get a rise out of 
people, me included.  They don't really believe what they're saying 
unless they are self-deluded idiots -- instead, they spew their vitriol 
by scouring the net for the most unflattering photos they can find, and 
then making moronic extrapolations from them.

Their "job" is to paint others in the worst possible light.  And again:  
unless they are self-deluded idiots, they must know that their idiocies 
include out-and-out lies.  And as I've said before, "they delight in 
clipping the wings of others because they cannot fly."

We can even go further than that now, because one of them has admitted to 
being jealous of my situation.  Given the amount of discussion on the 
topic, I have to wonder why people care so much about my personal 
situations, _unless_ they have some feelings of envy.

But there is no need for that.  Living and working here in Santa Rosa has 
its own set of challenges, and working in the fields I do require 
constant learning to separate the "wheat" from the "chaff" of 
technological advances.  However, the work I used to do on my own is now 
handled by a department (operations) with two divisions (systems and 
networking).

So I consider myself semi-retired.  Considering the extreme hours and 
sweat-equity I've put into our company, it's only fair that I have a lot 
of leisure time these days.  (And you would too, if you could swing it.)
We were in startup mode much longer than we should have been -- so much, 
that it affected my health.  So now I take it easy, and work on various 
devops projects that interest me.

But despite the toll it took on my personal health, I think everybody 
should try to be an entrepreneur in whatever field they enjoy.  Maybe I'm 
lucky, and this is a personal luxury that many can't swing -- but if you 
go into it with eyes wide open and a decent business plan, the rewards 
are tremendous.

In closing, I'll mention that I think the toughest part of 
entrepreneurship is growing a business from a sole proprietorship to more 
than just a few people.  Because: one has to learn to delegate tasks that 
one _feels certain_ can only be handled "properly" by oneself.  That 
letting go takes trust, and it's not easy, especially if you are working 
in a highly-technical field.

Anyway, I've rambled on enough.  Take care and happy new year.

-- 
 -v
Kernel:4.4.0-rc8-sd  Desktop:Xfce 4.12.2  Distro:Linux Mint 17.3 Rosa

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340336 — Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more.

vallor wrote:
> [...]
>
> While I'm flattered to be the subject of personalities, 
> there is no need to worry about my own personal circumstances.

It may have been an attempt at flattery, but it was baseless.
And as I pointed out, it would have been baseless even if it 
had instead been more negative.


> I'm healthy as a horse, far healthier than ...

FYI, do be aware that the "fat but fit" claim has been
studied, with at least one study showing that it is a fallacy:

<http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/12/21/fat-but-fit-health_n_8855824.html>


> So I consider myself semi-retired....it's only fair that
> I have a lot of leisure time these days.  

When you start to look towards taking time away on holidays, 
particularly in Western EU, don't forget to drop me a line 
for suggests/comments with what you're interested in.  Its 
been particularly growing to learn more about Western Art. 
 

> Anyway, I've rambled on enough.  Take care and happy new year.

Ditto.


-hh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340339 — Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more.

On 2016-01-11 5:21 PM, -hh wrote:
> vallor wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> While I'm flattered to be the subject of personalities, 
>> there is no need to worry about my own personal circumstances.
> 
> It may have been an attempt at flattery, but it was baseless.
> And as I pointed out, it would have been baseless even if it 
> had instead been more negative.
> 
> 
>> I'm healthy as a horse, far healthier than ...
> 
> FYI, do be aware that the "fat but fit" claim has been
> studied, with at least one study showing that it is a fallacy:
> 
> <http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/12/21/fat-but-fit-health_n_8855824.html>
> 
> 
>> So I consider myself semi-retired....it's only fair that
>> I have a lot of leisure time these days.  
> 
> When you start to look towards taking time away on holidays, 
> particularly in Western EU, don't forget to drop me a line 
> for suggests/comments with what you're interested in.  Its 
> been particularly growing to learn more about Western Art. 
>  
> 
>> Anyway, I've rambled on enough.  Take care and happy new year.
> 
> Ditto.

There is no such thing as "fat but fit" either way. The media tried to
make us believe that fat women are healthy (and sexy) but it failed
miserably and it is completely wrong anyway. If the man has a double
chin, he is unhealthy and needs to consider working out unless he
insists on dying early.


-- 
Slimer
EFF & OpenMedia member / IFAW, Mozilla & PETA supporter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340345 — Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more.

On 1/11/2016 4:33 PM, vallor wrote:


> While I'm flattered to be the subject of personalities, there is no
> need to worry about my own personal circumstances.

Your wife needs to worry, or she'll find herself doing CPR on a gasping, 
rotund lump of flesh that's turning blue.



> I'm healthy as a horse,

LMAO!   You're severely or morbidly obese, with the high cholesterol and 
triglycerides and blood pressure that go along with it.  I'd be shocked 
if you /didn't/ have diabetes, sleep apnea, and trouble finding 4XL briefs.



> far healthier than some anonymous georgia
> squidbilly that ate himself into diabetes.


By what measures are you considered "healthy", big fella?

If that corporate pic is anything to go by, you're FAR from healthy.  At 
that size, you're not far from death.

http://i.imgur.com/3k55mlR.jpg



Here's what I looked like when I was diagnosed diabetic (aic of 7.7):

http://s14.postimg.org/n23g3l4n5/DFS_FDB.jpg

That's 6'1" and 220lbs.  You can even see some veins.


Now you go ahead and strike a FDB pose for us, Jabba.  We need some laughs.



> I also probably eat much healthier than he does

All recent pics of you to the contrary.



> -- and unlike him, I don't binge drink (or drink at all).

Idiot.

Where's your single shred of evidence I drink more than once a year, let 
alone regularly or binge?  Bring it, or retract your whale babbling.




> I could also go into the sociopathic tendencies of those who are
> clearly troubled, but all I'm going to say is this:
>
> What we have here are anonymous trolls trying to get a rise out of
> people, me included.  They don't really believe what they're saying
> unless they are self-deluded idiots -- instead, they spew their
> vitriol by scouring the net for the most unflattering photos they can
> find, and then making moronic extrapolations from them.


Funny that the most unflattering pic of you is your official corporate
mugshot.

http://i.imgur.com/3k55mlR.jpg

Your cheek and chins melt into your neck, which melts into your 
shoulder. Since when did the camera add 100 lbs?




> Their "job" is to paint others in the worst possible light.  And
> again: unless they are self-deluded idiots, they must know that their
> idiocies include out-and-out lies.  And as I've said before, "they
> delight in clipping the wings of others because they cannot fly."
>
> We can even go further than that now, because one of them has
> admitted to being jealous of my situation.  Given the amount of
> discussion on the topic, I have to wonder why people care so much
> about my personal situations, _unless_ they have some feelings of
> envy.
>
> But there is no need for that.  Living and working here in Santa Rosa
> has its own set of challenges, and working in the fields I do
> require constant learning to separate the "wheat" from the "chaff"
> of technological advances.  However, the work I used to do on my own
> is now handled by a department (operations) with two divisions
> (systems and networking).
>
> So I consider myself semi-retired.  Considering the extreme hours
> and sweat-equity I've put into our company, it's only fair that I
> have a lot of leisure time these days.  (And you would too, if you
> could swing it.) We were in startup mode much longer than we should
> have been -- so much, that it affected my health.  So now I take it
> easy, and work on various devops projects that interest me.
>
> But despite the toll it took on my personal health,


huh?  You just said you were healthy as a horse?



> I think
> everybody should try to be an entrepreneur in whatever field they
> enjoy.  Maybe I'm lucky, and this is a personal luxury that many
> can't swing -- but if you go into it with eyes wide open and a decent
> business plan, the rewards are tremendous.

> In closing, I'll mention that I think the toughest part of
> entrepreneurship is growing a business from a sole proprietorship to
> more than just a few people.  Because: one has to learn to delegate
> tasks that one _feels certain_ can only be handled "properly" by
> oneself.  That letting go takes trust, and it's not easy, especially
> if you are working in a highly-technical field.
>
> Anyway, I've rambled on enough.  Take care and happy new year.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340351 — Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more.

"DFS" <nospam@dfs.com> wrote in message news:n71ge6$f25$1@dont-email.me...
> On 1/11/2016 4:33 PM, vallor wrote:
>
>
>> While I'm flattered to be the subject of personalities, there is no
>> need to worry about my own personal circumstances.
>
> Your wife needs to worry, or she'll find herself doing CPR on a gasping, 
> rotund lump of flesh that's turning blue.
>
>
>
>> I'm healthy as a horse,
>
> LMAO!   You're severely or morbidly obese, with the high cholesterol and 
> triglycerides and blood pressure that go along with it.  I'd be shocked if 
> you /didn't/ have diabetes, sleep apnea, and trouble finding 4XL briefs.
>
>
>
>> far healthier than some anonymous georgia
>> squidbilly that ate himself into diabetes.
>
>
> By what measures are you considered "healthy", big fella?
>
> If that corporate pic is anything to go by, you're FAR from healthy.  At 
> that size, you're not far from death.
>
> http://i.imgur.com/3k55mlR.jpg
>
>
>
> Here's what I looked like when I was diagnosed diabetic (aic of 7.7):
>
> http://s14.postimg.org/n23g3l4n5/DFS_FDB.jpg
>
> That's 6'1" and 220lbs.  You can even see some veins.
>
>
> Now you go ahead and strike a FDB pose for us, Jabba.  We need some 
> laughs.
>
>
>
>> I also probably eat much healthier than he does
>
> All recent pics of you to the contrary.
>
>
>
>> -- and unlike him, I don't binge drink (or drink at all).
>
> Idiot.
>
> Where's your single shred of evidence I drink more than once a year, let 
> alone regularly or binge?  Bring it, or retract your whale babbling.
>
>
>
>
>> I could also go into the sociopathic tendencies of those who are
>> clearly troubled, but all I'm going to say is this:
>>
>> What we have here are anonymous trolls trying to get a rise out of
>> people, me included.  They don't really believe what they're saying
>> unless they are self-deluded idiots -- instead, they spew their
>> vitriol by scouring the net for the most unflattering photos they can
>> find, and then making moronic extrapolations from them.
>
>
> Funny that the most unflattering pic of you is your official corporate
> mugshot.
>
> http://i.imgur.com/3k55mlR.jpg
>
> Your cheek and chins melt into your neck, which melts into your shoulder. 
> Since when did the camera add 100 lbs?
>
>
>
>
>> Their "job" is to paint others in the worst possible light.  And
>> again: unless they are self-deluded idiots, they must know that their
>> idiocies include out-and-out lies.  And as I've said before, "they
>> delight in clipping the wings of others because they cannot fly."
>>
>>
>> But despite the toll it took on my personal health,
>
>
> huh?  You just said you were healthy as a horse?
>

I believe the term is "denial."

I'm not fat. Yeah, but I'm a healthy fat. Their job is to paint me. Ignore 
that old picture of me. I'll change once I have more time.

Denial.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340360 — Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more.

vallor wrote:

>I think everybody should try to be an entrepreneur in 
>whatever field they enjoy. 

That takes some guts.  Many of us take comfort in the steady paycheck,
even though it means that we will never get rich.

-- 
"(What Micheal Dell said) negates every 'idiotic lie' cola losers have
ever drooled about Microsoft controlling OEMs."  -  DumFSck, lying
shamelessly

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340361 — Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more.

chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> vallor wrote:
>
>>I think everybody should try to be an entrepreneur in 
>>whatever field they enjoy. 
>
> That takes some guts.  Many of us take comfort in the steady paycheck,
> even though it means that we will never get rich.
>
> -- 
> "(What Micheal Dell said) negates every 'idiotic lie' cola losers have
> ever drooled about Microsoft controlling OEMs."  -  DumFSck, lying
> shamelessly

LOL

   http://www.extremetech.com/computing/147646-dell-sold-to-microsoft-silver-lake-for-24-billion-what-it-means-for-the-pc

   And then there’s the Microsoft link. At this point we can only guess at
   the true reason for Microsoft’s investment in Dell. Microsoft’s official
   statement is suitably vague: “Microsoft is committed to the long term
   success of the entire PC ecosystem and invests heavily in a variety of
   ways to build that ecosystem for the future.” $2 billion is a large sum,
   though, and it surely buys Microsoft something… but what exactly?

   . . .

   Maybe it’s down to patents — Dell owns a few thousand — or maybe it’s all
   about enterprise: Dell is big in business, and Microsoft could somehow
   ride on its back. Finally, the most obvious and boring option: Maybe
   Microsoft is simply trying to save one of the biggest PC OEMs. The bulk
   of Microsoft’s profits are from sales of Windows and Office, which in
   turn are installed on OEM PCs. Who knows, for $2 billion, maybe Dell
   agreed to stop installing shovelware so that new PCs are a joy to use and
   consumers actually look forward to buying them. Fat chance.

-- 
Make a wish, it might come true.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340371 — Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more.

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

>> -- 
>> "(What Micheal Dell said) negates every 'idiotic lie' cola losers have
>> ever drooled about Microsoft controlling OEMs."  -  DumFSck, lying
>> shamelessly
>
>LOL
>
>   http://www.extremetech.com/computing/147646-dell-sold-to-microsoft-silver-lake-for-24-billion-what-it-means-for-the-pc
>
>   And then there’s the Microsoft link. At this point we can only guess at
>   the true reason for Microsoft’s investment in Dell. Microsoft’s official
>   statement is suitably vague: “Microsoft is committed to the long term
>   success of the entire PC ecosystem and invests heavily in a variety of
>   ways to build that ecosystem for the future.” $2 billion is a large sum,
>   though, and it surely buys Microsoft something… but what exactly?
>   . . .
>   Maybe it’s down to patents — Dell owns a few thousand — or maybe it’s all
>   about enterprise: Dell is big in business, and Microsoft could somehow
>   ride on its back. Finally, the most obvious and boring option: Maybe
>   Microsoft is simply trying to save one of the biggest PC OEMs. The bulk
>   of Microsoft’s profits are from sales of Windows and Office, which in
>   turn are installed on OEM PCs.

Dumfsck's idiocy is simply *stunning*, isn't it?  A statement from
Michael Dell "negates" the mountains of evidence (and common sense)
that indicated that M$ had an unhealthy amount of control over OEM's?
Really?

FFS, how could they *not* have power over the OEM's, when the OEM's
had *no choice* but to buy M$ products?

Also, of course, Mr Dell is the "unbiased source of truth" who got in
trouble for accepting bribes from Intel to exclude AMD products.  But
a denial from *him* proves that everyone else is an idiot and a liar!

Where was Ezekreep to denounce his shitty pal's fsckwittery?  Oh,
that's right, that *stupid* kreep actually claimed that if a major OEM
like Dell didn't like the deal they were getting with Microsoft they
simply could have installed Linux or FreeBSD instead!  

Yeah, that would have worked well for them!  (rolling eyes)

I mean, you couldn't make this stuff up!

-- 
'However, you're free to point out the lies that Snit and I "spew."
All of you GNUslims are always very happy to call us liars yet none of
you ever bother to prove that we are.'  -  "Slimer", lying shamlessly

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340379 — Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more.

On 1/12/2016 8:23 AM, shitv lied:

> "(What Micheal Dell said) negates every 'idiotic lie' cola losers have
> ever drooled about Microsoft controlling OEMs."  -  DumFSck, lying
> shamelessly


In a pathetic effort to excuse Linux desktop failure, many of you 
brainless "advocates" whine and lie that Microsoft controls the OEMs. Of 
course they don't, and never did.  They offer an OS, and the OEM decides 
whether to buy/resell it or not.  Simple as that.


"Microsoft has not talked to us about Linux. If they did, I wouldn't 
care.  It's none of their business.", Michael Dell, early 2006

https://web.archive.org/web/20130130232546/http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS3822185143.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340388 — Re: My opinion is just that, nothing more.

On 2016-01-12 11:14 AM, DFS wrote:
> On 1/12/2016 8:23 AM, shitv lied:
> 
>> "(What Micheal Dell said) negates every 'idiotic lie' cola losers have
>> ever drooled about Microsoft controlling OEMs."  -  DumFSck, lying
>> shamelessly
> 
> 
> In a pathetic effort to excuse Linux desktop failure, many of you
> brainless "advocates" whine and lie that Microsoft controls the OEMs. Of
> course they don't, and never did.  They offer an OS, and the OEM decides
> whether to buy/resell it or not.  Simple as that.
> 
> 
> "Microsoft has not talked to us about Linux. If they did, I wouldn't
> care.  It's none of their business.", Michael Dell, early 2006
> 
> https://web.archive.org/web/20130130232546/http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS3822185143.html

Slam dunk!


-- 
Slimer
EFF & OpenMedia member / IFAW, Mozilla & PETA supporter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340322 — Re: Renting is cheaper.

 -hh wrote:
> 
> Projecting the future is always a challenge, particularly
> with healthcare expenses as one gets older.  For example ... 
> and I forget the exact statistics of what I read ... the 
> reported expected cumulative cost of healthcare for an
> age 65 retired couple (Ie, how much until they've both died)
> is something like $260,000....  Either way, its a chunk of
> change which has to be skimmed off the top for any good 
> retirement/endgame financial plan.


For those who are interested, here's an article on the topic:

<http://blogs.wsj.com/totalreturn/2015/03/26/grim-news-on-health-costs-in-retirement/>


-hh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340338 — Re: Be poor and fat.

Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: 
> [...]
> If you're unhealthy, and die sooner, your costs go down.

Now you can see why China's not tried to curtail cigarette smoking.

-hh

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340163 — Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly

vallor wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Thu, 07 Jan 2016 16:54:12 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>> 
>>> Hardon wrote:
>>>
>>>>Half way down the page are
>>>
>>> *plonk*
>> 
>> These k00ks just keep at it, eh Chris?
>
> Not only that, but they're just plain wrong.
>
> Dane and Dustin (who is cut off on the left) waylaid me at my wedding as 
> "payback" for an old picture we took while as SRJC:
>
>    http://imgur.com/tW1QGOx

I didn't even go to the original link.  Obviously a waste of time
or an insult or both.

> In which I sat up straight while my compatriots slouched.  In the new 
> photo, they dragged me way back so they both towered over me.
>
> But it doesn't matter, because DFS lives in a doublewide, has drunk 
> himself into diabetes, and still bing drinks.  All he can do is post 
> inaccuracies in hopes of dragging others down -- a sad life to live, 
> which will also be short, unless he changes something.

I dunno, scummy bastards have a way of cheating death for awhile.

-- 
Domestic happiness and faithful friends.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340183 — Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly

On Sat, 09 Jan 2016 07:08:55 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> vallor wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
> 
>> On Thu, 07 Jan 2016 16:54:12 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>> chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>> 
>>>> Hardon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Half way down the page are
>>>>
>>>> *plonk*
>>> 
>>> These k00ks just keep at it, eh Chris?
>>
>> Not only that, but they're just plain wrong.
>>
>> Dane and Dustin (who is cut off on the left) waylaid me at my wedding
>> as "payback" for an old picture we took while as SRJC:
>>
>>    http://imgur.com/tW1QGOx
> 
> I didn't even go to the original link.  Obviously a waste of time or an
> insult or both.

Was just a goofy photo from my wedding.  Naturally, trolls are using it 
to tell lies to try to discourage me from posting -- I think they must 
have the mentality of 4th graders.

> 
>> In which I sat up straight while my compatriots slouched.  In the new
>> photo, they dragged me way back so they both towered over me.
>>
>> But it doesn't matter, because DFS lives in a doublewide, has drunk
>> himself into diabetes, and still bing drinks.  All he can do is post
>> inaccuracies in hopes of dragging others down -- a sad life to live,
>> which will also be short, unless he changes something.
> 
> I dunno, scummy bastards have a way of cheating death for awhile.

Who is it that said, "the world will be a better place when his 
generation dies out"?

Doofus did perform a service though -- he showed just how low these low-
life liars actually are, lol.

ObLinux:

RAM(4)             Linux Programmer's Manual             RAM(4)

NAME
       ram - ram disk device

DESCRIPTION
       The  ram device is a block device to access the ram disk
       in raw mode.

       It is typically created by:

              mknod -m 660 /dev/ram b 1 1
              chown root:disk /dev/ram

FILES
       /dev/ram

SEE ALSO
       chown(1), mknod(1), mount(8)

COLOPHON
       This page is part of release 3.54 of the Linux man-pages
       project.   A description of the project, and information
       about    reporting    bugs,    can    be    found     at
       http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/.

Linux                      1992-11-21                    RAM(4)


-- 
 -v
Kernel:4.4.0-rc8-sd  Desktop:Xfce 4.12.2  Distro:Linux Mint 17.3 Rosa

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340188 — Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly

vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Jan 2016 07:08:55 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> 
>> vallor wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>> 
>>> On Thu, 07 Jan 2016 16:54:12 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>
>>>> chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hardon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Half way down the page are
>>>>>
>>>>> *plonk*
>>>> 
>>>> These k00ks just keep at it, eh Chris?
>>>
>>> Not only that, but they're just plain wrong.
>>>
>>> Dane and Dustin (who is cut off on the left) waylaid me at my wedding
>>> as "payback" for an old picture we took while as SRJC:
>>>
>>>    http://imgur.com/tW1QGOx
>> 
>> I didn't even go to the original link.  Obviously a waste of time or an
>> insult or both.
> 
> Was just a goofy photo from my wedding.  Naturally, trolls are using it 
> to tell lies to try to discourage me from posting -- I think they must 
> have the mentality of 4th graders.
> 
>> 
>>> In which I sat up straight while my compatriots slouched.  In the new
>>> photo, they dragged me way back so they both towered over me.
>>>
>>> But it doesn't matter, because DFS lives in a doublewide, has drunk
>>> himself into diabetes, and still bing drinks.  All he can do is post
>>> inaccuracies in hopes of dragging others down -- a sad life to live,
>>> which will also be short, unless he changes something.
>> 
>> I dunno, scummy bastards have a way of cheating death for awhile.
> 
> Who is it that said, "the world will be a better place when his 
> generation dies out"?
> 

No doubt some baby-boomer, gen-x'er, or millenial -- all of whom seem to
be competing for the title of the Worstest Generation.

http://www.the-american-interest.com/2011/11/13/listen-up-boomers-the-backlash-has-begun/
<quote>
All of this was done by a generation that never lost its confidence
that it was smarter, better educated and more idealistic than
its Depression-surviving, World War-winning, segregation-ending,
prosperity-building parents.  We didn’t need their stinking faith,
their stinking morals, or their pathetically conformist codes of moral
behavior. We were better than that; after all, we grokked Jefferson
Airplane, achieved nirvana on LSD and had a spiritual wealth and
sensitivity that our boorish bourgeois forbears could not grasp.
They might be doers, builders and achievers — but we Boomers grooved,
man, we had sex in the park, we grew our hair long, and we listened to
sexy musical lyrics about drugs that those pathetic old losers could
not even understand.
</quote>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#340307 — Re: Here trolly, trolly, trolly

vallor wrote:

>Doofus did perform a service though -- he showed just how low these low-
>life liars actually are, lol.

Oh, that dumb fscking bag of filth will go lower yet.

"Ezekiel" likes him, though.

-- 
"I think it was a vile, crass, heartless exploitative move on the part
of the FSF scum to promote specific free software packages on the
backs of 50,000 Haitians who perished just one week prior."  -
DumFSck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy

csiph-web