On 2025-05-28 13:52, Tyrone wrote:
On May 28, 2025 at 4:15:44 PM EDT, "Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-05-28 03:52, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Or like the "fact" that racing cars go around corners on a catenary
curve?
Oh, he said that too? 😂
Yup.
He declared that I couldn't possibly race cars or teach racing, because
HE claimed that everyone "knows" that cars going through a corner do so
on a trajectory that's a catenary curve.
I scoured the net, and the ONLY reference to a "catenary" in relation to >>> racing "cars" was a set of plans for the race track used for racing
model cars made out of wood.
Wow. I have never heard this term before, but CLEARLY auto race track curves >> are NOT catenary curves. They are banked curves. For obvious reasons.
The discussion was around the trajectory a road racing car takes around
a corner. Not the physical shape of the track.
Without delving into the subtleties, it's fairly easy to see that at the
most basic level...
(and let's use a 90° corner as the example)
...the driver of a car attempting to got through a corner with the
greatest speed should start on the outside edge of the track (i.e. on
the left side for a right-hand curve), take an arc that clips the inside
edge in the middle of the turn, and then that same arc will carry you
back to the outside as you exit the corner.
That 90° arc will have the largest radius, and so will result in the greatest speed around the corner for a given amount of grip and hence
lateral acceleration.
But then there are the subtleties to be considered, aren't there?
By taking that, basic, circular outside-inside-outside arc you are at
maximum lateral g-force from the moment you being turning until the
moment you complete turning. And from the "friction circle" that this
means the tires cannot be producing any force linearly for all that time.
So it is well understood that it pays to modify that basic line so that
the radius opens up as the car gets (roughly) halfway through the corner...
...so that you can being applying linear acceleration sooner.
After all, the race isn't over at corner exit, so getting to that point
first isn't the goal.
Typically, a corner on a road racing track is followed by a straight. So
the goal becomes to navigate the corner in such a was that you minimize
the time, not to the exit of the corner itself...
...but rather to the point at which you begin braking for the NEXT corner.
At that's why the debate began: what is the line that a car takes to
minimize that total time.
Arlen read once... ...somewhere... ...that that line should be a
catenary curve.
I have read extensively on the subject of racing since I was about 10
years old. I've read books on racing physics, and books by racing
drivers, as well as books by a famously successful driving coach.
I've also talked with many experienced racers since this idea of a
catenary curve being correct came up...
...and not ONE of them ever heard of it.
I finally found ONE reference to the use of a catenary curve in car
racing...
...wooden model cars.
The official track design for wooden "Pinewood Derby" gravity racing
uses a catenary segment of track to transition from the sloped section
to the horizontal one.
That's it.
On May 28, 2025 at 5:18:40 PM EDT, "Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-05-28 13:52, Tyrone wrote:
On May 28, 2025 at 4:15:44 PM EDT, "Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-05-28 03:52, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Or like the "fact" that racing cars go around corners on a catenary >>>>>> curve?
Oh, he said that too? 😂
Yup.
He declared that I couldn't possibly race cars or teach racing, because >>>> HE claimed that everyone "knows" that cars going through a corner do so >>>> on a trajectory that's a catenary curve.
I scoured the net, and the ONLY reference to a "catenary" in relation to >>>> racing "cars" was a set of plans for the race track used for racing
model cars made out of wood.
Wow. I have never heard this term before, but CLEARLY auto race track curves
are NOT catenary curves. They are banked curves. For obvious reasons.
The discussion was around the trajectory a road racing car takes around
a corner. Not the physical shape of the track.
Without delving into the subtleties, it's fairly easy to see that at the
most basic level...
(and let's use a 90° corner as the example)
...the driver of a car attempting to got through a corner with the
greatest speed should start on the outside edge of the track (i.e. on
the left side for a right-hand curve), take an arc that clips the inside
edge in the middle of the turn, and then that same arc will carry you
back to the outside as you exit the corner.
That 90° arc will have the largest radius, and so will result in the
greatest speed around the corner for a given amount of grip and hence
lateral acceleration.
But then there are the subtleties to be considered, aren't there?
By taking that, basic, circular outside-inside-outside arc you are at
maximum lateral g-force from the moment you being turning until the
moment you complete turning. And from the "friction circle" that this
means the tires cannot be producing any force linearly for all that time.
So it is well understood that it pays to modify that basic line so that
the radius opens up as the car gets (roughly) halfway through the corner... >>
...so that you can being applying linear acceleration sooner.
After all, the race isn't over at corner exit, so getting to that point
first isn't the goal.
Typically, a corner on a road racing track is followed by a straight. So
the goal becomes to navigate the corner in such a was that you minimize
the time, not to the exit of the corner itself...
...but rather to the point at which you begin braking for the NEXT corner. >>
At that's why the debate began: what is the line that a car takes to
minimize that total time.
Arlen read once... ...somewhere... ...that that line should be a
catenary curve.
I have read extensively on the subject of racing since I was about 10
years old. I've read books on racing physics, and books by racing
drivers, as well as books by a famously successful driving coach.
I've also talked with many experienced racers since this idea of a
catenary curve being correct came up...
...and not ONE of them ever heard of it.
I finally found ONE reference to the use of a catenary curve in car
racing...
...wooden model cars.
The official track design for wooden "Pinewood Derby" gravity racing
uses a catenary segment of track to transition from the sloped section
to the horizontal one.
That's it.
Nice, and thanks for the details. I was assuming you were talking about the shape of the curved track.
You know, I have had the following idea rolling around in my mind for a few weeks, but I could not remember the name of the skit. It finally hit me today.
Arlen would be a GREAT contestant on "Common Knowledge". This was an SNL game
show skit from around 40 years ago. "It's not WHAT you know, its what you THINK you know".
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0HGEZXTy8Y>
On 2025-05-28 13:52, Tyrone wrote:
On May 28, 2025 at 4:15:44 PM EDT, "Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-05-28 03:52, Carlos E. R. wrote:
But then there are the subtleties to be considered, aren't there?
By taking that, basic, circular outside-inside-outside arc you are at
maximum lateral g-force from the moment you being turning until the
moment you complete turning. And from the "friction circle" that this
means the tires cannot be producing any force linearly for all that time.
So it is well understood that it pays to modify that basic line so that
the radius opens up as the car gets (roughly) halfway through the corner...
...so that you can being applying linear acceleration sooner.
After all, the race isn't over at corner exit, so getting to that point
first isn't the goal.
Typically, a corner on a road racing track is followed by a straight. So
the goal becomes to navigate the corner in such a was that you minimize
the time, not to the exit of the corner itself...
...but rather to the point at which you begin braking for the NEXT corner.
At that's why the debate began: what is the line that a car takes to
minimize that total time.
Arlen read once... ...somewhere... ...that that line should be a
catenary curve.
I have read extensively on the subject of racing since I was about 10
years old. I've read books on racing physics, and books by racing
drivers, as well as books by a famously successful driving coach.
I've also talked with many experienced racers since this idea of a
catenary curve being correct came up...
...and not ONE of them ever heard of it.
I finally found ONE reference to the use of a catenary curve in car
racing...
...wooden model cars.
The official track design for wooden "Pinewood Derby" gravity racing
uses a catenary segment of track to transition from the sloped section
to the horizontal one.
That's it.
On 2025-05-28 23:18, Alan wrote:
On 2025-05-28 13:52, Tyrone wrote:
On May 28, 2025 at 4:15:44 PM EDT, "Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-05-28 03:52, Carlos E. R. wrote:
...
But then there are the subtleties to be considered, aren't there?
By taking that, basic, circular outside-inside-outside arc you are at
maximum lateral g-force from the moment you being turning until the
moment you complete turning. And from the "friction circle" that this
means the tires cannot be producing any force linearly for all that time.
So it is well understood that it pays to modify that basic line so
that the radius opens up as the car gets (roughly) halfway through the
corner...
...so that you can being applying linear acceleration sooner.
After all, the race isn't over at corner exit, so getting to that
point first isn't the goal.
Typically, a corner on a road racing track is followed by a straight.
So the goal becomes to navigate the corner in such a was that you
minimize the time, not to the exit of the corner itself...
...but rather to the point at which you begin braking for the NEXT
corner.
And in Formula 1 cars, the air flow is important, because beyond a
certain speed it pushes the car against the asphalt, so that the car can
do turns at a speed a normal car would slip away.
I heard this on TV once, I have no idea myself :-)
At that's why the debate began: what is the line that a car takes to
minimize that total time.
Arlen read once... ...somewhere... ...that that line should be a
catenary curve.
I have read extensively on the subject of racing since I was about 10
years old. I've read books on racing physics, and books by racing
drivers, as well as books by a famously successful driving coach.
I've also talked with many experienced racers since this idea of a
catenary curve being correct came up...
...and not ONE of them ever heard of it.
I finally found ONE reference to the use of a catenary curve in car
racing...
...wooden model cars.
The official track design for wooden "Pinewood Derby" gravity racing
uses a catenary segment of track to transition from the sloped section
to the horizontal one.
That's it.
:-D
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2025-05-28 23:18, Alan wrote:
On 2025-05-28 13:52, Tyrone wrote:
On May 28, 2025 at 4:15:44 PM EDT, "Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-05-28 03:52, Carlos E. R. wrote:
...
But then there are the subtleties to be considered, aren't there?And in Formula 1 cars, the air flow is important, because beyond a
By taking that, basic, circular outside-inside-outside arc you are at
maximum lateral g-force from the moment you being turning until the
moment you complete turning. And from the "friction circle" that this
means the tires cannot be producing any force linearly for all that time. >>>
So it is well understood that it pays to modify that basic line so that
the radius opens up as the car gets (roughly) halfway through the corner... >>>
...so that you can being applying linear acceleration sooner.
After all, the race isn't over at corner exit, so getting to that point
first isn't the goal.
Typically, a corner on a road racing track is followed by a straight. So >>> the goal becomes to navigate the corner in such a was that you minimize
the time, not to the exit of the corner itself...
...but rather to the point at which you begin braking for the NEXT corner. >>
certain speed it pushes the car against the asphalt, so that the car can
do turns at a speed a normal car would slip away.
Not only that, but theoretically could drive upside down on an inverted
track as they generate enough downforce that it could counteract gravity. Would make slowing down for bends particularly risky. lol.
On Wed, 28 May 2025 22:03:09 +0000, Tyrone wrote :
Nice, and thanks for the details. I was assuming you were talking about the >> shape of the curved track.
Jesus Christ you're all idiots. Seriously. Alan Baker is bullshitting you.
All I ever said was Alan Baker is a dunning-kruger left of the first
quadrile line, which means he "thinks" he knows everything about any given subject (e.g., bimmers, or racing) and yet he knows absolutely nothing.
In the case of the bimmers, he didn't know what the word meant, and that's fine but that means he doesn't know the first thing about bimmers or
beemers since EVERYONE who knows anything, knows the meaning & difference.
Likewise, Alan thinks he's an expert on racing and yet my point was he
didn't even know what the various shapes of curves were called, one of
which is a critical shape for physics purposes, which is the catenary.
All the rest of the bullshit Alan spewed is just him making up crap about what I said about racing which I never said since I clearly said I drive a bimmer and ride a beemer like an old lady does.,
I clearly said I wasn't an expert on racing, and I clearly said I know my bimmer and beemer only to the point that I need to know them (to fix them).
Alan turns his ignorance of the terms into some sinister plot about me telling him how to race around curves - which is simply pure bullshit.
My main point, always, is you Apple trolls are so ignorant, you don't know the first thing about any topic, whether that's racing, bimmers, or Apple products.
You're all far to the left of Mount Stupid on the DK scale.
<https://psychology.stackexchange.com/questions/17825/what-is-the-primary-source-of-the-mount-stupid-graphic>
Being uneducated & ignorant is a defining trait of all Apple trolls because you think you know things but you only know what Apple fed you to believe.
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/pSJ4OnxviWQ>
You Apple trolls don't actually know anything, and Alan Baker proves that.
*Why are apologists like Alan Baker so fantastically ignorant?*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/EiNl6hyMBDo/>
In summary, I said I know nothing about racing. I know physics.
And a catenary is a very important shape when it comes to force variation.
Alan had never even once in his life heard of a catenary.
He has only a high school education. And zero physics.
That's my only reason for bringing it up.
He thinks he knows things. He knows nothing about anything.
Nice, and thanks for the details. I was assuming you were talking about the shape of the curved track.
On Wed, 28 May 2025 22:03:09 +0000, Tyrone wrote :
Nice, and thanks for the details. I was assuming you were talking about the >> shape of the curved track.
Jesus Christ you're all idiots. Seriously. Alan Baker is bullshitting you.
All I ever said was Alan Baker is a dunning-kruger left of the first
quadrile line, which means he "thinks" he knows everything about any given subject (e.g., bimmers, or racing) and yet he knows absolutely nothing.
On 5/29/2025 2:19 PM, Marion wrote:
On Wed, 28 May 2025 22:03:09 +0000, Tyrone wrote :
Nice, and thanks for the details. I was assuming you were talking
about the
shape of the curved track.
Jesus Christ you're all idiots. Seriously. Alan Baker is bullshitting
you.
All I ever said was Alan Baker is a dunning-kruger left of the first
quadrile line, which means he "thinks" he knows everything about any
given
subject (e.g., bimmers, or racing) and yet he knows absolutely nothing.
If you value your time, don't bother engaging with the D-K afflicted.
All I ever said was Alan Baker is a dunning-kruger left of the first
quadrile line, which means he "thinks" he knows everything about any given >> subject (e.g., bimmers, or racing) and yet he knows absolutely nothing.
If you value your time, don't bother engaging with the D-K afflicted.
On Thu, 29 May 2025 15:35:30 -0400, News wrote :
All I ever said was Alan Baker is a dunning-kruger left of the first
quadrile line, which means he "thinks" he knows everything about any given >>> subject (e.g., bimmers, or racing) and yet he knows absolutely nothing.
If you value your time, don't bother engaging with the D-K afflicted.
Well, since I don't use a newsreader, it's a bitch to add the regular expressions to plonk someone, but I've been forced to do that for Alan
Baker, Joerg Lorenz, Snit, Rod Speed et al., simply because they basically use Usenet for their own amusement. They have no goal of adding value.
However, it appears Carlos and the Apple trolls also use Usenet simply to deny everything they don't know - which is almost everything - so I will
heed your kind suggestion - as responding to them mixes me up with them.
They will suddenly figure out after June 20th 2025 in the EU that Apple can no longer sell substandard phones in the EU if that phone has a battery
which can't even pass minimum-life standards. And then they'll cry.
To the argument that how could Apple know their batteries are crappy, keep
in mind my own el-cheapo free Samsung Galaxy A32-5G has a whopping 5 Amp
Hour battery which more than doubles the EU's minimum lifetime standards.
Apple has *always* used the crappiest batteries in the industry in iPhones. Paradoxically, the batteries in the iPads are not all that bad. Go figure.
The EU won't have to tell Apple to stop putting the crappiest RAM it can in iPhones simply because Apple herself figured out AI won't run in any iPhone with crappy RAM which is to say any iPhone except only the latest iPhones.
It's odd Apple advertises quality & yet they put the crappiest parts into
the iPhone to the point that $100 phones have better quality components.
Even now, the iPhone has the worst battery in the industry, if you compare with Samsung & Google comparative phones, as iPhone components are garbage.
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2025-05-28 23:18, Alan wrote:
On 2025-05-28 13:52, Tyrone wrote:
On May 28, 2025 at 4:15:44 PM EDT, "Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-05-28 03:52, Carlos E. R. wrote:
And in Formula 1 cars, the air flow is important, because beyond a
certain speed it pushes the car against the asphalt, so that the car can
do turns at a speed a normal car would slip away.
Not only that, but theoretically could drive upside down on an inverted
track as they generate enough downforce that it could counteract gravity. Would make slowing down for bends particularly risky. lol.
On 2025-05-29 19:37, Chris wrote:
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2025-05-28 23:18, Alan wrote:
On 2025-05-28 13:52, Tyrone wrote:
On May 28, 2025 at 4:15:44 PM EDT, "Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>
On 2025-05-28 03:52, Carlos E. R. wrote:
...
Gosh!And in Formula 1 cars, the air flow is important, because beyond a
certain speed it pushes the car against the asphalt, so that the car can >>> do turns at a speed a normal car would slip away.
Not only that, but theoretically could drive upside down on an inverted
track as they generate enough downforce that it could counteract gravity.
Would make slowing down for bends particularly risky. lol.
On Thu, 29 May 2025 15:35:30 -0400, News wrote :[snip]
[snip]If you value your time, don't bother engaging with the D-K afflicted.
Well, since I don't use a newsreader, it's a bitch to add the regular expressions to plonk someone, but I've been forced to do that for Alan
Baker, Joerg Lorenz, Snit, Rod Speed et al., simply because they basically use Usenet for their own amusement. They have no goal of adding value.
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote at 22:20 this Thursday (GMT):
On Thu, 29 May 2025 15:35:30 -0400, News wrote :[snip]
[snip]If you value your time, don't bother engaging with the D-K afflicted.
Well, since I don't use a newsreader, it's a bitch to add the regular
expressions to plonk someone, but I've been forced to do that for Alan
Baker, Joerg Lorenz, Snit, Rod Speed et al., simply because they basically >> use Usenet for their own amusement. They have no goal of adding value.
You don't use a newsreader? How are you posting?
On 2025-05-30 20:00, candycanearter07 wrote:
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote at 22:20 this Thursday (GMT):
On Thu, 29 May 2025 15:35:30 -0400, News wrote :[snip]
[snip]If you value your time, don't bother engaging with the D-K afflicted.
Well, since I don't use a newsreader, it's a bitch to add the regular
expressions to plonk someone, but I've been forced to do that for Alan
Baker, Joerg Lorenz, Snit, Rod Speed et al., simply because they basically >>> use Usenet for their own amusement. They have no goal of adding value.
You don't use a newsreader? How are you posting?
He claims he does it all with scripts on the command line...
...and that certainly IS possible...
...but he lies as easily as he breathes, so judge for yourself.
:-)
On Sat, 5/31/2025 10:56 AM, Alan wrote:I'm aware.
On 2025-05-30 20:00, candycanearter07 wrote:
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote at 22:20 this Thursday (GMT):
On Thu, 29 May 2025 15:35:30 -0400, News wrote :[snip]
[snip]If you value your time, don't bother engaging with the D-K afflicted. >>>>Well, since I don't use a newsreader, it's a bitch to add the regular
expressions to plonk someone, but I've been forced to do that for Alan >>>> Baker, Joerg Lorenz, Snit, Rod Speed et al., simply because they basically >>>> use Usenet for their own amusement. They have no goal of adding value.
You don't use a newsreader? How are you posting?
He claims he does it all with scripts on the command line...
...and that certainly IS possible...
...but he lies as easily as he breathes, so judge for yourself.
:-)
On email and NNTP, you can use telnet to the appropriate
port, and do stuff. (The practicality of a human entering
a post manually, a character at a time, depends on the
holding time of the server connection. Script output
could be fast enough to deal with either kind of server.) )
All you have to know, is entire messages can be forged.
The user agent string for example, doesn't mean a thing.
The user agent string for example, doesn't mean a thing.
Well, since I don't use a newsreader, it's a bitch to add the regular
expressions to plonk someone, but I've been forced to do that for Alan
Baker, Joerg Lorenz, Snit, Rod Speed et al., simply because they basically >> use Usenet for their own amusement. They have no goal of adding value.
You don't use a newsreader? How are you posting?
Notice his header says he's using a GUI macOS newsreader, yet he
loathes Apple even more than I do - it's a phony header. Why he's
going to this trouble to be weird and abnormal, is anyone's guess.
On Sat, 31 May 2025 13:04:18 -0400, Paul wrote :
The user agent string for example, doesn't mean a thing.
Paul,
You've helped me a lot over the decades but you're dealing with Alan Baker, who has never posted in his entire life anything of value to anyone ever.
In fact, on that topic alone, Alan Baker *insisted* for three weeks running that it was *impossible* to spoof the Usenet "user agent" header string.
Don't believe me?
Look here:
*Alan Bakers denies for weeks that the User Agent header can be spoofed!*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/c/4AdaprOPM-g/>
Alan Baker is a classic Apple troll who denies everything he doesn't know. Which is everything.
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote at 22:20 this Thursday (GMT):
On Thu, 29 May 2025 15:35:30 -0400, News wrote :[snip]
[snip]If you value your time, don't bother engaging with the D-K afflicted.
Well, since I don't use a newsreader, it's a bitch to add the regular
expressions to plonk someone, but I've been forced to do that for Alan
Baker, Joerg Lorenz, Snit, Rod Speed et al., simply because they basically >> use Usenet for their own amusement. They have no goal of adding value.
You don't use a newsreader? How are you posting?
I don't like Apple, freak, you need psych meds.
On 2025-05-31 05:00, candycanearter07 wrote:
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote at 22:20 this Thursday (GMT):
On Thu, 29 May 2025 15:35:30 -0400, News wrote :[snip]
[snip]If you value your time, don't bother engaging with the D-K afflicted.
Well, since I don't use a newsreader, it's a bitch to add the regular
expressions to plonk someone, but I've been forced to do that for Alan
Baker, Joerg Lorenz, Snit, Rod Speed et al., simply because they
basically
use Usenet for their own amusement. They have no goal of adding value.
You don't use a newsreader? How are you posting?
He uses scripts. Makes things he does "for privacy" easier.
I defend truth, Apple is horrible but not as you describe it to be,
with your lunatic rants.
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-06-01 13:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2025-05-31 05:00, candycanearter07 wrote:
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote at 22:20 this Thursday (GMT):
On Thu, 29 May 2025 15:35:30 -0400, News wrote :
You don't use a newsreader? How are you posting?If you value your time, don't bother engaging with the D-K afflicted. >>>>>Well, since I don't use a newsreader, it's a bitch to add the regular >>>>> expressions to plonk someone, but I've been forced to do that for Alan >>>>> Baker, Joerg Lorenz, Snit, Rod Speed et al., simply because they
basically
use Usenet for their own amusement. They have no goal of adding value. >>>>
He uses scripts. Makes things he does "for privacy" easier.
Point of clarification:
He CLAIMS he uses scripts.
He's such a fuckwad that he calls me an Apple troll along with you,
just because I try to defend what is common knowledge about Apple's
products, I think the iPhone sucks balls, I think the Mac is even
worse, but I respect you more because you try to tell the truth as you
see it, sometimes that means I disagree, but "Marion" is telling zero
truth, talk about "troll", FFS, he's the epitome of it.
Calling a smartphone a
"dumb terminal", I mean come on, that is so moronic. I couldn't care
less if Apple expects me to register/log in/whatever,
On Sun, 01 Jun 2025 21:40:53 -0400, Joel wrote :
Calling a smartphone a
"dumb terminal", I mean come on, that is so moronic. I couldn't care
less if Apple expects me to register/log in/whatever,
Joel,
Have you ever tried using an iOS device without logging into the
mothership? The answer is likely no. Have I? The answer is yes.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
I do.
Have you ever tried using an Android device without logging into the mothership? The answer is likely no. Have I? The answer is yes.
The difference in functionality is astounding between those scenarios.
Are you aware of that difference, Joel?
The answer is likely no.
I am.
I know what an iOS device can do without looging into Apple.
And I know what an Android device can do without logging into Google.
You. Do not.
Characterizing an iOS device as a "dumb terminal" is indeed an accurate characterization compared to Android when you realize that almost nothing that the iOS user loves about their device works without logging into the mainframe every second of every day of every year of their lives.
The reason you disagree is you don't know what you're talking about.
I do.
HINT: Even Alan Baker, who is a moron, knows the difference. You do not.
Bingo. I'm a computer nerd, *with my computer*, with my phone I want
easy, easy easy. I don't wanna "jailbreak" it. I don't want anything
but a semi-computer in my pocket. Apple or Samsung deliver that.
On Mon, 02 Jun 2025 13:38:04 -0400, Joel wrote :
Bingo. I'm a computer nerd, *with my computer*, with my phone I want
easy, easy easy. I don't wanna "jailbreak" it. I don't want anything
but a semi-computer in my pocket. Apple or Samsung deliver that.
The iPhone clearly is designed as a dumb terminal.
It's so dumb, it can't even install apps without logging into the
mothership matrix, Joel. Any Android device can install apps without
creating a mothership account on the phone.
You don't know that.
But I do.
For example, I have never had a mothership account on my Android and I have no problem installing apps from anywhere, including the Google Play store repository.
You can't do that with an iPhone.
Without the Apple account on the iPhone, it can't do anything interesting.
It's a dumb terminal.
Bear in mind I have plenty of iOS devices, Joel.
You (likely) have none.
I happen to have plenty of Android devices too.
So I know what I'm talking about.
You do not.
The iOS device is designed from the start to be a dumb terminal.
Without logging into the mainframe, it can't do what people like about it.
If you think the iOS device is NOT a dumb terminal, tell me what it does WITHOUT logging into the Apple mainframes, Joel.
Tell us all what you know about iOS?
HINT: The lack of an answer from you tells us what we need to know. :)
But since you pulled Alan G. Baker's post out of my killfile, notice that
the catenary is one of the most fundamental curves, where the morons think curves can only be in the Y axis but there's nothing stopping curves from existing on the x axis (or any axis for that matter, even 4D spacetime).
<http://lastufka.net/lab/cars/why/raceit.htm>
"This race report features two cars named "Typical" and "Best" racing
on an Official AWANA Track with a catenary transition... The Track
Profile follows with the name of the track and its configuration...
Because a catenary transition model was selected, specifics of the
catenary transition appear below the character sketch of the track.
Marks in the track sketch represent the track surface..."
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-06-02 12:57, Marion wrote:
On Mon, 02 Jun 2025 13:38:04 -0400, Joel wrote :
Bingo. I'm a computer nerd, *with my computer*, with my phone I want
easy, easy easy. I don't wanna "jailbreak" it. I don't want anything >>>> but a semi-computer in my pocket. Apple or Samsung deliver that.
The iPhone clearly is designed as a dumb terminal.
It's so dumb, it can't even install apps without logging into the
mothership matrix, Joel. Any Android device can install apps without
creating a mothership account on the phone.
That is a CHOICE.
You can disagree with Apple's choice, but once an app is installed, you
don't need to be logged in to use it.
I guess "Marion" is one of those people who obsesses over Microsoft
wanting an online account to log into Win11, I actually give them
credit for exposing how stuck in their ways these people are, signing
in that way enables some useful features, it's not harmful, but how
many posts in alt.comp.os.windows-11 have ranted about it? It's
hilarious! And "Marion" has this problem with the iPhone so much that
he pretends it means it's a "dumb terminal". Just incredibly
backward.
I guess "Marion" is one of those people who obsesses over Microsoft
wanting an online account to log into Win11, I actually give them
credit for exposing how stuck in their ways these people are, signing
in that way enables some useful features, it's not harmful, but how
many posts in alt.comp.os.windows-11 have ranted about it?
It's hilarious!
And "Marion" has this problem with the iPhone so much that
he pretends it means it's a "dumb terminal". Just incredibly
backward.
On Mon, 02 Jun 2025 18:46:14 -0400, Joel wrote :
I guess "Marion" is one of those people who obsesses over Microsoft
wanting an online account to log into Win11, I actually give them
credit for exposing how stuck in their ways these people are, signing
in that way enables some useful features, it's not harmful, but how
many posts in alt.comp.os.windows-11 have ranted about it?
The difference between you and a normal person is a normal person doesn't make claims like you do without being able to back up a single one of them.
The difference between you and a normal person is a normal person doesn't
make claims like you do without being able to back up a single one of them.
What a hypocrite!
On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 06:21:42 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
The difference between you and a normal person is a normal person doesn't >>> make claims like you do without being able to back up a single one of them. >>What a hypocrite!
Joel said the iPhone (which he's never used) is not a dumb terminal.
Which is fine, since it's rather clear Joel knows nothing about the iPhone.
But I know what an iPhone can do with & without logging into Apple servers. And it can't do much at all - not without logging into Apple's servers.
But I know what an iPhone can do with & without logging into Apple servers. >> And it can't do much at all - not without logging into Apple's servers.
Utterly false and you know it...
OK boomer, whine about having to have an account. Just retarded, who
cares? Sign in to Windows with an M$ account, sign into an iPhone
with an Apple account, an Android with a Google account, get over it.
Jesus fucking Christ.
On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 00:01:44 -0700, Alan wrote:
But I know what an iPhone can do with & without logging into Apple
servers.
And it can't do much at all - not without logging into Apple's servers.
Utterly false and you know it...
You can't do much of anything without an Apple account on an iOS device. Without creating an Apple account what you can do is mostly nothing at all.
You are stuck with the native apps forever. Which don't do much.
And most of them still require an Apple account to do most of what they do.
All day all you can do is almost nothing.
Big deal that iOS device.
You can send sms/mms and you can make phone calls & take photos & video.
Big deal that iOS device.
What else can it do without ever creating an Apple account to do it?
Don't respond with insults.
Just say what it can do without ever having created that Apple account.
On Tue, 03 Jun 2025 03:27:34 -0400, Joel wrote:
OK boomer, whine about having to have an account. Just retarded, who
cares? Sign in to Windows with an M$ account, sign into an iPhone
with an Apple account, an Android with a Google account, get over it.
Jesus fucking Christ.
Don't respond with insults. Just say what it can do without ever having created that Apple account.
Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
On Tue, 6/3/2025 12:39 PM, Joel wrote:
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote:
If Windows 11 requires a Microsoft Account, why does everyone who knows >>>> anything about Windows 11 on the Windows 11 ng say that it does not?
You can get around it, yeah, but WHY? Just make the damn account,
like they asked. Don't you know how to follow instructions, dipshit?
One reason for making a local account, is you can pick your account name.
On installs here, I am "Bullwinkle". I don't want the first five letters
of my C:\users\username having to be derived from my throwaway email
account name.
That's the difference between doing this:
clownname@gmail.com # C:\users\clown ; the account name is automatically generated!
; They don't give an option to enter "Paul" instead.
and this
Local account Bullwinkle, # C:\users\Bullwinkle
Attach clownname@gmail.com later # (shows up in fewer screen shots later)
My Winver.exe would then say "This OS registered to: Bullwinkle"
versus the first case where "This OS registered to: clownname@gmail.com"
which doesn't look good in
pictures. It does not help
that the (selected) username
is sprinkled all over the place.
The OS pretends to be a smartphone at times. Then it needs an avatar icon
(a spherical cow, by default).
If one is anal-retentive, I guess that matters.
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote:
Joel said the iPhone (which he's never used) is not a dumb terminal.
Which is fine, since it's rather clear Joel knows nothing about the iPhone. >>
But I know what an iPhone can do with & without logging into Apple servers. >> And it can't do much at all - not without logging into Apple's servers.
Which is why I characterize the iPhone, truthfully, as a dumb terminal.
Apple designed it that way. It didn't have to be that way.
But that's how it's designed.
In addition, Joel claimed Windows 11 requires a Microsoft Account.
This is also false.
Joel acts like an Apple troll in that the only thing he knows about
anything is nothing.
If the iPhone is NOT a dumb terminal, tell us all what it can do without
logging into Apple's Cupertino mainframe servers every moment it's awake.
If Windows 11 requires a Microsoft Account, why does everyone who knows
anything about Windows 11 on the Windows 11 ng say that it does not?
You can get around it, yeah, but WHY? Just make the damn account,
like they asked. Don't you know how to follow instructions, dipshit?
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-06-03 10:44, Joel wrote:
Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
On Tue, 6/3/2025 12:39 PM, Joel wrote:
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote:One reason for making a local account, is you can pick your account name. >>>> On installs here, I am "Bullwinkle". I don't want the first five letters >>>> of my C:\users\username having to be derived from my throwaway email
If Windows 11 requires a Microsoft Account, why does everyone who knows >>>>>> anything about Windows 11 on the Windows 11 ng say that it does not? >>>>>You can get around it, yeah, but WHY? Just make the damn account,
like they asked. Don't you know how to follow instructions, dipshit? >>>>
account name.
That's the difference between doing this:
clownname@gmail.com # C:\users\clown ; the account name is automatically generated!
; They don't give an option to enter "Paul" instead.
and this
Local account Bullwinkle, # C:\users\Bullwinkle
Attach clownname@gmail.com later # (shows up in fewer screen shots later)
My Winver.exe would then say "This OS registered to: Bullwinkle"
versus the first case where "This OS registered to: clownname@gmail.com" >>>> which doesn't look good in
pictures. It does not help
that the (selected) username
is sprinkled all over the place.
The OS pretends to be a smartphone at times. Then it needs an avatar icon >>>> (a spherical cow, by default).
If one is anal-retentive, I guess that matters.
For me the difference is that Microsoft is trying to impose the need for
an Microsoft on a system that wasn't created with one. And if they
really do block users from creating simple local accounts, then you
really DO need to be logging in using Microsoft's servers at all times
you want to use your computer.
The iPhone was created with the App Store and while you do need to use
your Apple Account (formerly AppleID) to use the App Store, you don't
need to use it for anything else, and you don't need to check in to
Apple's servers any time you unlock your iPhone.
:-)
If people's biggest problem with Win11 is the account BS, they really
have no concept of what a behemoth the OS is, "Copilot+", yada yada,
it's unreal. Logging in with an M$ account is the least of one's
worries. Real nerds use Linux or Mac.
That's really it, we can debate OSes, we can have different opinions,
but who has time for this "Marion" freak? Calling a smartphone a
"dumb terminal", I mean come on, that is so moronic.
We'll wait for you to look up what an iPhone can do without an account.
My "claim" is that it's arbitrarily lame to not want to use an online
account to identify the device. If I purchase an iPhone, Apple is a connection, centrally, as Google is with an Android, as Microsoft is
with Windows 11. People try so hard to get around it, and gain
nothing. If you want an OS that doesn't operate this way, Linux
exists. When one is settling for a commercial OS, they should play by
its rules.
You can't do much of anything without an Apple account on an iOS device.
Without creating an Apple account what you can do is mostly nothing at all.
While that is sort of true, the issue here is whether you need to be
logged in at all times.
If people's biggest problem with Win11 is the account BS, they really
have no concept of what a behemoth the OS is, "Copilot+", yada yada,
it's unreal. Logging in with an M$ account is the least of one's
worries. Real nerds use Linux or Mac.
On Tue, 03 Jun 2025 14:20:52 -0400, Joel wrote :
If people's biggest problem with Win11 is the account BS, they really
have no concept of what a behemoth the OS is, "Copilot+", yada yada,
it's unreal. Logging in with an M$ account is the least of one's
worries. Real nerds use Linux or Mac.
Joel,
Only people like Apple trolls claim Windows 11 requires the MSA.
The reason is:
a. Apple trolls are ignorant (none have matriculated past high school)
b. Apple trolls defend Apple policies to the death (no matter what)
c. Apple trolls are herd animals who do what they're told to do
Apple essentially forces iOS owners to create an Apple Account just so that the iOS dumb terminal has a mainframe server to log into to do stuff.
On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 01:01:39 -0700, Alan wrote:
You can't do much of anything without an Apple account on an iOS device. >>> Without creating an Apple account what you can do is mostly nothing
at all.
While that is sort of true, the issue here is whether you need to be
logged in at all times.
The issue is you have to create the account for it to do anything useful.
Which is why it's designed to be a dumb terminal from the start.
Why do you dispute what is obvious to anyone who knows how iOS works?
It's designed by Apple to be a dumb terminal.
Apple makes a lot of money by designing iOS to be a dumb terminal.
Get over it.
On Tue, 03 Jun 2025 03:53:01 -0400, Joel wrote:
We'll wait for you to look up what an iPhone can do without an account.
My "claim" is that it's arbitrarily lame to not want to use an online
account to identify the device. If I purchase an iPhone, Apple is a
connection, centrally, as Google is with an Android, as Microsoft is
with Windows 11. People try so hard to get around it, and gain
nothing. If you want an OS that doesn't operate this way, Linux
exists. When one is settling for a commercial OS, they should play by
its rules.
Please don't respond with insults like "lame" just because you lied.
You're the one who claims it's not a dumb terminal.
Windows 11 works perfectly fine without the Microsoft Account.
As does Android without the Google Account.
The iOS device doesn't do anything without the Apple Account.
That's why it's a dumb terminal.
If you think it's not a dumb terminal, then don't respond with insults.
Back up your claims instead.
We'll wait for you to look up what an iPhone can do without an account.
We know the answer. The answer is almost nothing.
It can take pictures. It can do basic sms/mms. It can act like a phone. That's about it.
The reason is because the iOS device is designed to be a dumb terminal.
If you think otherwise, then simply back up your claims that it's not.
Without the insults (which are your way of coping with your own lies).
You're the hypocrite because you're criticising someone for not backing up their unsubstantiated claims. You're in no position to do as this is your modus operandi.
On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 16:27:17 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote :
You're the hypocrite because you're criticising someone for not backing up >> their unsubstantiated claims. You're in no position to do as this is your
modus operandi.
Wait until June 20th, Chris, and then you can cry & whine that Apple can't sell their phones which have always had the crappiest batteries possible.
You think Apple doesn't put crappy batteries in the iPhone on purpose?
Have you ever even once checked the specs on the iPhone batteries, Chris?
My free Galaxy A32-5G in April 2021 had a MSRP of around $180, Chris,
and it has a battery far superior to that put in *any* iPhone ever made.
<https://i.postimg.cc/YC1B906F/tmopromo01.jpg> A32-5G & iPhone 12 contract
<https://i.postimg.cc/Xq5SpS4D/tmopromo02.jpg> $15/mo iPhone,$0/mo Android
Think about that, Chris.
No iPhone ever made compares to even an el-cheapo $200 Android phone.
Jesus Christ.
*That's how atrociously crappy the Apple iPhone batteries are*, Chris. (Paradoxically, the iPad batteries aren't all that bad. Go figure.)
Do you seriously think Apple doesn't know they're putting the crappiest components they can get away with in the iPhone, Chris? Seriously?
Apple had *years* to certify their crappy iPhone batteries, Chris.
And Apple has NOT certified any iPhone that is not an iPhone 15 or above.
Wait until June 20th if you doubt that fact, Chris.
Then you can whine all you want that the iPhone has crappy batteries.
I've logged out of my Apple Account to test this, and my iOS devices continued to work fine.
Windows 11 works perfectly fine without the Microsoft Account.
But they make it very difficult to not have a Microsoft account.
You can be completely logged out at all other times.
I'd sooner buy an iPhone than go back to Windows 11.
On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 12:32:43 -0700, Alan wrote:
I've logged out of my Apple Account to test this, and my iOS devices
continued to work fine.
Are you really not aware that most of your apps will soon stop working?
What are you going to do when You get the message "GarageBand needs to be updated. The developer of this app needs to update it to work with this version of iOS".
How are you going to update the native apps without logging into Apple?
On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 12:31:05 -0700, Alan wrote:
Windows 11 works perfectly fine without the Microsoft Account.
But they make it very difficult to not have a Microsoft account.
How hard is it to hit the big fat blue skip button in Windows 11 Pro?
If you think that's hard, wait until you try that with an iPhone and then
you expect that iPhone to be able to do all the things you think it does.
Android doesn't need the account on the phone to do everything you want. Neither does Windows 11 (whether Home or Pro or Enterprise).
The only thing the iPhone will do without ever creating an Apple account is what the native apps can do and most of them require the Apple account.
Which means it does almost nothing without the Apple mainframe account.
Which is the classic definition of a dumb terminal.
If you think otherwise, just list what the iOS device can do without ever having created an Apple account. Just list it here. I'll start for you.
(1) It can make phone calls (2) It can do basic sms/mms
(3) It can take pictures/video
That's about it because Apple will not update the native apps without you creating an Apple account so the iOS device can do things like "GarageBand" only for a short period of time.
After that short period of time, even the native apps will stop working. They'll say "GarageBand needs to be Updated. The developer of this app
needs to update it to work with this version of iOS."
So the only apps that will work are those apps which are updated when the operating system is updated.
If you think otherwise, just state what you think works without the owner ever having created an Apple account on that dumb terminal iOS device.
Make sure it's an app that is updated with the operating system, because
all other apps will eventually fail to work without that Apple account.
On Tue, 03 Jun 2025 15:42:49 -0400, Joel wrote :
You can be completely logged out at all other times.
I'd sooner buy an iPhone than go back to Windows 11.
Why don't you back up your claim that iOS is not a dumb terminal?
HINT: You can't.
Why not?
Because Apple designed the iPhone as a dumb terminal.
No iOS device can do much without that Apple account.
No other common consumer operating system is designed to be that dumb.
Only iOS.
Apple isn't stupid.
Apple owners are stupid.
But not Apple.
Apple designed iOS to be a dumb terminal on purpose.
Want to take a guess why?
How hard is it to hit the big fat blue skip button in Windows 11 Pro?
There is no skip button anymore.
Try to keep up:
'Even the Professional version of Windows 11 now requires a Microsoft >account.'
<https://www.howtogeek.com/836157/how-to-use-windows-11-with-a-local-account/>
Alan wrote:
How hard is it to hit the big fat blue skip button in Windows 11 Pro?
There is no skip button anymore.
Try to keep up:
'Even the Professional version of Windows 11 now requires a Microsoft
account.'
<https://www.howtogeek.com/836157/how-to-use-windows-11-with-a-local-account/>
The article says that, but it's simply not true.
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
Bill Powell wrote:
How hard is it to hit the big fat blue skip button in Windows 11 Pro?
There is no skip button anymore.
Try to keep up:
'Even the Professional version of Windows 11 now requires a Microsoft
account.'
<https://www.howtogeek.com/836157/how-to-use-windows-11-with-a-local-account/>
The article says that, but it's simply not true.
Where is this "skip button", then?
That was your explicit claim: that there is a "big fat blue skip
button", right?
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
Bill Powell wrote:
There is no skip button anymore.
How hard is it to hit the big fat blue skip button in Windows 11 Pro? >>>>
Try to keep up:
'Even the Professional version of Windows 11 now requires a Microsoft
account.'
<https://www.howtogeek.com/836157/how-to-use-windows-11-with-a-local-account/>
The article says that, but it's simply not true.
Where is this "skip button", then?
I don't recall the exact button(s), but with Pro you are asked and
allowed the option of logging in to a company domain, and that process
does not require you to use an MS account. (And you also don't need
to actually connect to a domain.)
I did a quick google to see if something has changed very recently,
and was very disappointed in the answers.
For example, the "AI Overview" says 'Yes, Windows 11 Pro generally
requires a Microsoft account for initial setup, especially when
choosing the "personal use" option.'
Well then, don't choose the "personal use" option!
That was your explicit claim: that there is a "big fat blue skip
button", right?
I made no such claim.
On 2025-06-03 14:36, chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
How hard is it to hit the big fat blue skip button in Windows 11 Pro?
There is no skip button anymore.
Try to keep up:
'Even the Professional version of Windows 11 now requires a Microsoft
account.'
<https://www.howtogeek.com/836157/how-to-use-windows-11-with-a-local-account/>
The article says that, but it's simply not true.
Where is this "skip button", then?
That was your explicit claim: that there is a "big fat blue skip
button", right?
On Jun 3, 2025 at 5:38:26 PM EDT, "Alan" <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-06-03 14:36, chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
How hard is it to hit the big fat blue skip button in Windows 11 Pro? >>>>There is no skip button anymore.
Try to keep up:
'Even the Professional version of Windows 11 now requires a Microsoft
account.'
<https://www.howtogeek.com/836157/how-to-use-windows-11-with-a-local-account/>
The article says that, but it's simply not true.
Where is this "skip button", then?
That was your explicit claim: that there is a "big fat blue skip
button", right?
That was the claim of the Arlen sock-puppet-of-the-day, "Bill Powell".
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
I don't recall the exact button(s), but with Pro you are asked and
allowed the option of logging in to a company domain, and that process
does not require you to use an MS account. (And you also don't need
to actually connect to a domain.)
But it still requires a non-local account.
No, it does not.
What company domain can a private person have to join?I did a quick google to see if something has changed very recently,
and was very disappointed in the answers.
For example, the "AI Overview" says 'Yes, Windows 11 Pro generally
requires a Microsoft account for initial setup, especially when
choosing the "personal use" option.'
Well then, don't choose the "personal use" option!
What other option would there be if it is your PERSONAL computer?
Joining a company domain (and then not actually doing so) which is an
option with Pro. No "tricks", just knowing the process.
chrisv wrote:
I don't recall the exact button(s), but with Pro you are asked and
allowed the option of logging in to a company domain, and that process
does not require you to use an MS account. (And you also don't need
to actually connect to a domain.)
But it still requires a non-local account.
I did a quick google to see if something has changed very recently,
and was very disappointed in the answers.
For example, the "AI Overview" says 'Yes, Windows 11 Pro generally
requires a Microsoft account for initial setup, especially when
choosing the "personal use" option.'
Well then, don't choose the "personal use" option!
What other option would there be if it is your PERSONAL computer?
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
I don't recall the exact button(s), but with Pro you are asked and
allowed the option of logging in to a company domain, and that process >>>> does not require you to use an MS account. (And you also don't need
to actually connect to a domain.)
But it still requires a non-local account.
No, it does not.
Yes. It really does.
While you present a theoretical solution, it's a solution for a tiny
fraction of real people.
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
I don't recall the exact button(s), but with Pro you are asked and
allowed the option of logging in to a company domain, and that process >>>>> does not require you to use an MS account. (And you also don't need >>>>> to actually connect to a domain.)
But it still requires a non-local account.
No, it does not.
Yes. It really does.
Listen, jackass. I've done it, and more than once. Shut your fscking
trap, when you don't know better.
While you present a theoretical solution, it's a solution for a tiny
fraction of real people.
Idiot. It's very easy with Pro. Nothing like than the "tricks" that
are out there that are needed for the "Home" version.
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
Yes. It really does.
Listen, jackass. I've done it, and more than once. Shut your fscking >>trap, when you don't know better.
While you present a theoretical solution, it's a solution for a tiny
fraction of real people.
Idiot. It's very easy with Pro. Nothing like than the "tricks" that
are out there that are needed for the "Home" version.
You're wrong. Deal with it.
(snipped, unread)
On Sat, 31 May 2025 03:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote :
Well, since I don't use a newsreader, it's a bitch to add the regular
expressions to plonk someone, but I've been forced to do that for Alan
Baker, Joerg Lorenz, Snit, Rod Speed et al., simply because they basically >>> use Usenet for their own amusement. They have no goal of adding value.
You don't use a newsreader? How are you posting?
Hi candycane arter ## (randomly generated),
My point wasn't that I don't use a newsreader, but that because I don't use
a newsreader, my killfile is a series of regular expressions which are a
pain to manage so I only add the most despicable unprepossessing trolls.
Such as Alan Baker.
Alan Baker's post subtract value.
He is a despicable sadistic uneducated misfit that has found Usenet to be
his sole amusement in life, where he denies every fact he doesn't know.
Which is every fact.
Anyway, the main reason I use scripts is when I was on Centos, I didn't
like the newsreaders so Marek Novotny & others helped me write the scripts.
The beauty of using these scripts is that gVim is my main interface to Usenet, so I don't even bother seeing whom I'm posting as or whom I'm responding to (unless I peek at the autogenerated attribute line).
That's why I think it's funny that people complain that I respond to them
the way they respond to me - but the fact is the header is just wrapping paper - what matters to me is the gift inside that header wrapping paper.
The gift from me is the insight inherent in the body of the message.
Not in some randomly generated headers that I don't even know what they are unless I bother to look.
The point is I don't even know what the newsreader line says, as it's randomly jumbled for privacy reasons against aggregators to the point that
I can't even find my tens of thousands of Usenet posts over the decades.
Anyway, didn't you ever wonder why I have to use Stunnel on Windows?
telnet localhost 55555
[Mixmin]
client = yes
accept = localhost:55555
connect = news.mixmin.net:563
CAfile = ca-certs.pem
verifyChain = yes
checkHost = news.mixmin.net
OCSPaia = yes
All I do is interface with Usenet in the gVim text editor.
I don't see anything else (unless I need to dig into a script to debug).
The scripts were written decades ago, originally on Linux, mainly by Marek Novotny, but they've been honed since then. Back to the point, which is in decades of posting on Usenet, I've only had to plonk the most worthless.
Alan Baker being one of the few (along with Snit, Rod Speed, et al.).
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
Yes. It really does.
Listen, jackass. I've done it, and more than once. Shut your fscking
trap, when you don't know better.
While you present a theoretical solution, it's a solution for a tiny
fraction of real people.
Idiot. It's very easy with Pro. Nothing like than the "tricks" that
are out there that are needed for the "Home" version.
You're wrong. Deal with it.
(snipped, unread)
Jeezez. "Yes, it really does (require a local account)." And totally made-up "theoretical solution" nonsense, for what is a simple process.
What a dick!
Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote at 03:38 this Sunday (GMT):
On Sat, 31 May 2025 03:00:03 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote :
Well, since I don't use a newsreader, it's a bitch to add the regular
expressions to plonk someone, but I've been forced to do that for Alan >>>> Baker, Joerg Lorenz, Snit, Rod Speed et al., simply because they basically >>>> use Usenet for their own amusement. They have no goal of adding value.
You don't use a newsreader? How are you posting?
Hi candycane arter ## (randomly generated),
The number 07 wasn't randomly generated :(
My point wasn't that I don't use a newsreader, but that because I don't use >> a newsreader, my killfile is a series of regular expressions which are a
pain to manage so I only add the most despicable unprepossessing trolls.
Such as Alan Baker.
Alan Baker's post subtract value.
He is a despicable sadistic uneducated misfit that has found Usenet to be
his sole amusement in life, where he denies every fact he doesn't know.
Which is every fact.
So, do you download the articles directly from the server? Or script
some telnet commands and use temp files?
Anyway, the main reason I use scripts is when I was on Centos, I didn't
like the newsreaders so Marek Novotny & others helped me write the scripts. >>
The beauty of using these scripts is that gVim is my main interface to
Usenet, so I don't even bother seeing whom I'm posting as or whom I'm
responding to (unless I peek at the autogenerated attribute line).
That's why I think it's funny that people complain that I respond to them
the way they respond to me - but the fact is the header is just wrapping
paper - what matters to me is the gift inside that header wrapping paper.
The gift from me is the insight inherent in the body of the message.
Not in some randomly generated headers that I don't even know what they are >> unless I bother to look.
The point is I don't even know what the newsreader line says, as it's
randomly jumbled for privacy reasons against aggregators to the point that >> I can't even find my tens of thousands of Usenet posts over the decades.
Cool :D
Anyway, didn't you ever wonder why I have to use Stunnel on Windows?
telnet localhost 55555
[Mixmin]
client = yes
accept = localhost:55555
connect = news.mixmin.net:563
CAfile = ca-certs.pem
verifyChain = yes
checkHost = news.mixmin.net
OCSPaia = yes
All I do is interface with Usenet in the gVim text editor.
I don't see anything else (unless I need to dig into a script to debug).
I use nvim
The scripts were written decades ago, originally on Linux, mainly by Marek >> Novotny, but they've been honed since then. Back to the point, which is in >> decades of posting on Usenet, I've only had to plonk the most worthless.
Alan Baker being one of the few (along with Snit, Rod Speed, et al.).
Yeah, it would probably be pretty hard to mess with the script to filter
out by name..
On 2025-06-04 04:19, chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
Yes. It really does.
Listen, jackass. I've done it, and more than once. Shut your fscking >>>> trap, when you don't know better.
While you present a theoretical solution, it's a solution for a tiny >>>>> fraction of real people.
Idiot. It's very easy with Pro. Nothing like than the "tricks" that >>>> are out there that are needed for the "Home" version.
You're wrong. Deal with it.
(snipped, unread)
Jeezez. "Yes, it really does (require a local account)." And totally
made-up "theoretical solution" nonsense, for what is a simple process.
What a dick!
Explain the "very easy" steps, asshole.
On 2025-06-04 04:19, chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
Yes. It really does.
Listen, jackass. I've done it, and more than once. Shut your fscking >>>> trap, when you don't know better.
While you present a theoretical solution, it's a solution for a tiny >>>>> fraction of real people.
Idiot. It's very easy with Pro. Nothing like than the "tricks" that >>>> are out there that are needed for the "Home" version.
You're wrong. Deal with it.
(snipped, unread)
Jeezez. "Yes, it really does (require a local account)." And totally
made-up "theoretical solution" nonsense, for what is a simple process.
What a dick!
Explain the "very easy" steps, asshole.
All I do is interface with Usenet in the gVim text editor.
I don't see anything else (unless I need to dig into a script to debug).
I use nvim
winget install Neovim.Neovim
choco install neovim
scoop install neovim
sudo apt install neovim
Explain the "very easy" steps, asshole.
<https://tenor.com/dQL8qBDEFi2.gif>
The OS pretends to be a smartphone at times. Then it needs an avatar icon >>(a spherical cow, by default).
If one is anal-retentive, I guess that matters.
On Wed, 4 Jun 2025 13:49:32 -0400, -hh wrote :
Explain the "very easy" steps, asshole.
<https://tenor.com/dQL8qBDEFi2.gif>
Ignorance is easily cured; but stupidity is not curable.
What folks need to know about Alan Baker is not so much that he's an Apple troll (so he wants Windows to be like Apple is), but what's strange about
him is that he refutes everything he doesn't know - which - is everything.
He refutes that catenaries exist,
and he refutes that some cars are
referred to as bimmers
and he even refuted the EU rules exists
and that
Apple was cited in criminal court
and he refutes that a device with a
battery half the size of another equal-in-every-other-way device with twice the size of batteries would last as long *only* if Apple made the device.
Explain the "very easy" steps, asshole.
This video consists of two parts.
If people's biggest problem with Win11 is the account BS, they really
have no concept of what a behemoth the OS is, "Copilot+", yada yada,
it's unreal. Logging in with an M$ account is the least of one's
worries. Real nerds use Linux or Mac.
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
Yes. It really does.
Listen, jackass. I've done it, and more than once. Shut your fscking >>>>> trap, when you don't know better.
While you present a theoretical solution, it's a solution for a tiny >>>>>> fraction of real people.
Idiot. It's very easy with Pro. Nothing like than the "tricks" that >>>>> are out there that are needed for the "Home" version.
You're wrong. Deal with it.
(snipped, unread)
Jeezez. "Yes, it really does (require a local account)." And totally
made-up "theoretical solution" nonsense, for what is a simple process.
What a dick!
Explain the "very easy" steps, asshole.
<https://tenor.com/dQL8qBDEFi2.gif>
-hh wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
Yes. It really does.
Listen, jackass. I've done it, and more than once. Shut your fscking >>>>>> trap, when you don't know better.
While you present a theoretical solution, it's a solution for a tiny >>>>>>> fraction of real people.
Idiot. It's very easy with Pro. Nothing like than the "tricks" that >>>>>> are out there that are needed for the "Home" version.
You're wrong. Deal with it.
(snipped, unread)
Jeezez. "Yes, it really does (require a local account)." And totally >>>> made-up "theoretical solution" nonsense, for what is a simple process. >>>>
What a dick!
Explain the "very easy" steps, asshole.
Already did, dick.
On Tue, 03 Jun 2025 14:20:52 -0400, Joel wrote :
If people's biggest problem with Win11 is the account BS, they really
have no concept of what a behemoth the OS is, "Copilot+", yada yada,
it's unreal. Logging in with an M$ account is the least of one's
worries. Real nerds use Linux or Mac.
What these ignorant trolls don't know is that without the MSA the Windows system works just fine, just as Android does without a Google Account.
What even the Apple trolls don't understand is all your software stops working when you refuse to log into the Apple Cupertino servers.
One by one, they all drop dead.
Ask me how I know this.
The only software that doesn't die if you haven't logged into an Apple account is the software that is updated by the operating system itself.
That means even Apple's native apps like GarageBand, Pages, Keynote,
Numbers, iMovie, etc., will die in just a short while if you don't log into Cupertino servers (not to mention that many native Apple apps require a
login to Cupertino servers just to work the way you want them to work).
None of the Apple trolls understands a word I said above, and so they'll dispute it, but there are indeed some Apple native apps which are updated along with the OS itself, which does *not* need an Apple ID to update it.
Examples are the Phone app, Messages, and the webkit core of Safari, which are the few apps on iOS that will still work after a while without an Apple ID.
Again, the Apple trolls understand *none* of this. All they know is that Apple requires an Apple ID for anything to work and that, to *them*, means that an Apple ID is the same as a MSA or a Google ID in terms of limiting what the user can do.
There's no comparison when you understand the differences.
But the Apple troll understands none of that.
It's their way of excusing and defending Apple astronomically Draconian restrictive Apple ID (i.e., dumb terminal) iOS policies to the death.
No matter what.
Facts be damned.
On 2025-06-04 14:24, chrisv wrote:
-hh wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
Yes. It really does.
Listen, jackass. I've done it, and more than once. Shut your >>>>>>> fscking trap, when you don't know better.
While you present a theoretical solution, it's a solution for a >>>>>>>> tiny fraction of real people.
Idiot. It's very easy with Pro. Nothing like than the "tricks" >>>>>>> that are out there that are needed for the "Home" version.
You're wrong. Deal with it.
(snipped, unread)
Jeezez. "Yes, it really does (require a local account)." And
totally made-up "theoretical solution" nonsense, for what is a
simple process.
What a dick!
Explain the "very easy" steps, asshole.
Already did, dick.
Nope.
You did not.
On Wed, 4 Jun 2025 15:55:58 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote in <101qitu$13n57$2@dont-email.me>:
On 2025-06-04 14:24, chrisv wrote:
-hh wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
Yes. It really does.
Listen, jackass. I've done it, and more than once. Shut your >>>>>>>> fscking trap, when you don't know better.
While you present a theoretical solution, it's a solution for a >>>>>>>>> tiny fraction of real people.
Idiot. It's very easy with Pro. Nothing like than the "tricks" >>>>>>>> that are out there that are needed for the "Home" version.
You're wrong. Deal with it.
(snipped, unread)
Jeezez. "Yes, it really does (require a local account)." And
totally made-up "theoretical solution" nonsense, for what is a
simple process.
What a dick!
Explain the "very easy" steps, asshole.
Already did, dick.
Nope.
You did not.
Actually, he did, but he's not being helpful about it.
With Pro, you go and act like you're going to do a domain login, but
there's a skip link to allow you to create a local account.
Why chrisv has to be so adversarial about it, beats me.
Alan wrote:
On 2025-06-04 14:17, Marion wrote:
On Tue, 03 Jun 2025 14:20:52 -0400, Joel wrote :
If people's biggest problem with Win11 is the account BS, they really
have no concept of what a behemoth the OS is, "Copilot+", yada yada,
it's unreal. Logging in with an M$ account is the least of one's
worries. Real nerds use Linux or Mac.
What these ignorant trolls don't know is that without the MSA the
Windows
system works just fine, just as Android does without a Google Account.
What even the Apple trolls don't understand is all your software stops
working when you refuse to log into the Apple Cupertino servers.
One by one, they all drop dead.
Ask me how I know this.
The only software that doesn't die if you haven't logged into an Apple
account is the software that is updated by the operating system itself.
That means even Apple's native apps like GarageBand, Pages, Keynote,
Numbers, iMovie, etc., will die in just a short while if you don't
log into
Cupertino servers (not to mention that many native Apple apps require a
login to Cupertino servers just to work the way you want them to work).
None of the Apple trolls understands a word I said above, and so they'll >>> dispute it, but there are indeed some Apple native apps which are
updated
along with the OS itself, which does *not* need an Apple ID to update
it.
Examples are the Phone app, Messages, and the webkit core of Safari,
which
are the few apps on iOS that will still work after a while without an
Apple
ID.
Again, the Apple trolls understand *none* of this. All they know is that >>> Apple requires an Apple ID for anything to work and that, to *them*,
means
that an Apple ID is the same as a MSA or a Google ID in terms of
limiting
what the user can do.
There's no comparison when you understand the differences.
But the Apple troll understands none of that.
It's their way of excusing and defending Apple astronomically Draconian
restrictive Apple ID (i.e., dumb terminal) iOS policies to the death.
No matter what.
Facts be damned.
Is there some reason you have to post the exact same information twice?
who needs a reason i might do it 5 times on an ambitious day ,
especially if the topic is the usa blowing up
Alan wrote:
On 2025-06-04 18:06, % wrote:
Alan wrote:
On 2025-06-04 14:17, Marion wrote:who needs a reason i might do it 5 times on an ambitious day ,
On Tue, 03 Jun 2025 14:20:52 -0400, Joel wrote :
If people's biggest problem with Win11 is the account BS, they really >>>>>> have no concept of what a behemoth the OS is, "Copilot+", yada yada, >>>>>> it's unreal. Logging in with an M$ account is the least of one's >>>>>> worries. Real nerds use Linux or Mac.
What these ignorant trolls don't know is that without the MSA the
Windows
system works just fine, just as Android does without a Google Account. >>>>>
What even the Apple trolls don't understand is all your software stops >>>>> working when you refuse to log into the Apple Cupertino servers.
One by one, they all drop dead.
Ask me how I know this.
The only software that doesn't die if you haven't logged into an Apple >>>>> account is the software that is updated by the operating system
itself.
That means even Apple's native apps like GarageBand, Pages, Keynote, >>>>> Numbers, iMovie, etc., will die in just a short while if you don't
log into
Cupertino servers (not to mention that many native Apple apps
require a
login to Cupertino servers just to work the way you want them to
work).
None of the Apple trolls understands a word I said above, and so
they'll
dispute it, but there are indeed some Apple native apps which are
updated
along with the OS itself, which does *not* need an Apple ID to
update it.
Examples are the Phone app, Messages, and the webkit core of
Safari, which
are the few apps on iOS that will still work after a while without
an Apple
ID.
Again, the Apple trolls understand *none* of this. All they know is
that
Apple requires an Apple ID for anything to work and that, to
*them*, means
that an Apple ID is the same as a MSA or a Google ID in terms of
limiting
what the user can do.
There's no comparison when you understand the differences.
But the Apple troll understands none of that.
It's their way of excusing and defending Apple astronomically
Draconian
restrictive Apple ID (i.e., dumb terminal) iOS policies to the death. >>>>>
No matter what.
Facts be damned.
Is there some reason you have to post the exact same information twice? >>>
especially if the topic is the usa blowing up
Well I think it's quite silly and what a narcissist does.
i certainly aim to be both those things
Actually, he did, but he's not being helpful about it.
With Pro, you go and act like you're going to do a domain login, but
there's a skip link to allow you to create a local account.
Why chrisv has to be so adversarial about it, beats me.
Then came his *ridiculous* claim that my solution was only
"theoretical" and of use for only a "tiny fraction of real people." *Completely* made-up bullshit, designed to attack my reasonable and
correct assertions.
vallor wrote:
Actually, he did, but he's not being helpful about it.
I wsa helpful at first. I stopped being helpful when he directly contradicted me.
With Pro, you go and act like you're going to do a domain login, but
there's a skip link to allow you to create a local account.
I told him the same thing, and nicely!
Why chrisv has to be so adversarial about it, beats me.
Did you not see me explain why?
I first let it go, when he annoyingly asked "What other option [other
than the personal use option] would there be if it is your PERSONAL
computer" after I had *already explained* about the "join a domain
[then don't]" process.
But then, he responded to my "No, it does not [require a non-local
account]" with the direct contradiction "Yes. It really does." That
ticked me off.
Then came his *ridiculous* claim that my solution was only
"theoretical" and of use for only a "tiny fraction of real people." *Completely* made-up bullshit, designed to attack my reasonable and
correct assertions.
I support M$ requiring an account with them, to log in to Winblows. If
one wishes to run that "Copilot+" crapware, they ought to at least
make an account with their godfather.
On Thu, 05 Jun 2025 11:22:33 -0400, Joel wrote :
I support M$ requiring an account with them, to log in to Winblows. If
one wishes to run that "Copilot+" crapware, they ought to at least
make an account with their godfather.
Joel,
CoPilot does NOT require a MSA nor any login whatsoever to use.
Neither does Gemini, nor ChatGPT; but Grok does require an X account.
Why do you say otherwise?
You're no different than the Apple trolls is that you think you know something and yet you're dead wrong on every single thing you claim.
People like you aren't ignorant out of choice.
You're ignorant because you're too stupid to check your facts.
FACT:
*You can hate CoPilot all you want; but it doesn't require a login*.
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-06-05 08:42, Marion wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jun 2025 11:22:33 -0400, Joel wrote :
I support M$ requiring an account with them, to log in to Winblows. If >>>> one wishes to run that "Copilot+" crapware, they ought to at least
make an account with their godfather.
Joel,
CoPilot does NOT require a MSA nor any login whatsoever to use.
It does if you want to use it in Microsoft Office.
I have the only useful part of Copilot in Linux, a Web app for the
chat interface. Win11 is for people who want the computer to be their
slave, or something.
Neither does Gemini, nor ChatGPT; but Grok does require an X account.
Why do you say otherwise?
You're no different than the Apple trolls is that you think you know
something and yet you're dead wrong on every single thing you claim.
People like you aren't ignorant out of choice.
You're ignorant because you're too stupid to check your facts.
FACT:
*You can hate CoPilot all you want; but it doesn't require a login*.
FACT:
*YOU can hate that the only thing that requires a login to an Apple
account is the App Store in order to add apps to an iOS device*
Only a moron like "Marion" would ramble about this having to have an
account, OMG it's so much trouble, get the fuck over it, anti-Apple
troll "Marion", I loathe Apple but any of these businesses requiring
an online account is the least of one's worries, when dealing with
corporate software, FFS.
On Thu, 05 Jun 2025 06:43:49 -0500, chrisv wrote :
Then came his *ridiculous* claim that my solution was only
"theoretical" and of use for only a "tiny fraction of real
people." *Completely* made-up bullshit, designed to attack my
reasonable and correct assertions.
I've studied the Apple trolls for decades, since it amazes me that
they defend the mothership to the death, no matter what - using lame
excuses.
The Apple troll is no different than any fundamentalist religious
zealot.
The Apple trolls are desperate to claim that any login is the same
thing as Apple requiring the login for the iOS device to do anything
useful.
The Apple troll *hates* that Apple is the only common OS vendor who
requires that mothership account just for the device to do basic
things.
The Apple troll does not understand that Apple strategically
designed the iOS device as a dumb terminal - incapable of doing
anything useful without that login to the Cupertino mothership
matrix servers.
Hence, the Apple troll is *delighted* that some people believe the
mothership login is required for both Android & Windows 11, when
it's not.
Always keep in mind the Apple troll is a rather strange person. a.
None have any formal education (no higher than high school) b. All
are incredibly low IQ (Alan Baker's IQ is around 40 I estimate) c.
All believe the Apple (brilliant) marketing bullshit of superiority
On 2025-06-04 14:24, chrisv wrote:
-hh wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
Yes. It really does.
Listen, jackass. I've done it, and more than once. Shut your >>>>>>> fscking
trap, when you don't know better.
While you present a theoretical solution, it's a solution for a >>>>>>>> tiny
fraction of real people.
Idiot. It's very easy with Pro. Nothing like than the "tricks" >>>>>>> that
are out there that are needed for the "Home" version.
You're wrong. Deal with it.
(snipped, unread)
Jeezez. "Yes, it really does (require a local account)." And totally >>>>> made-up "theoretical solution" nonsense, for what is a simple process. >>>>>
What a dick!
Explain the "very easy" steps, asshole.
Already did, dick.
Nope.
You did not.
On 2025-06-05 00:55, Alan wrote:
On 2025-06-04 14:24, chrisv wrote:
-hh wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
Yes. It really does.
Listen, jackass. I've done it, and more than once. Shut your >>>>>>>> fscking
trap, when you don't know better.
While you present a theoretical solution, it's a solution for a >>>>>>>>> tiny
fraction of real people.
Idiot. It's very easy with Pro. Nothing like than the "tricks" >>>>>>>> that
are out there that are needed for the "Home" version.
You're wrong. Deal with it.
(snipped, unread)
Jeezez. "Yes, it really does (require a local account)." And
totally
made-up "theoretical solution" nonsense, for what is a simple
process.
What a dick!
Explain the "very easy" steps, asshole.
Already did, dick.
Nope.
You did not.
He did.
On 2025-06-05 00:55, Alan wrote:I thought I'd illuminate chrisv's idea of it being "very easy with Pro":
On 2025-06-04 14:24, chrisv wrote:
-hh wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
Yes. It really does.
Listen, jackass. I've done it, and more than once. Shut your >>>>>>>> fscking
trap, when you don't know better.
While you present a theoretical solution, it's a solution for a >>>>>>>>> tiny
fraction of real people.
Idiot. It's very easy with Pro. Nothing like than the "tricks" >>>>>>>> that
are out there that are needed for the "Home" version.
You're wrong. Deal with it.
(snipped, unread)
Jeezez. "Yes, it really does (require a local account)." And
totally
made-up "theoretical solution" nonsense, for what is a simple
process.
What a dick!
Explain the "very easy" steps, asshole.
Already did, dick.
Nope.
You did not.
He did.
Only a moron like "Marion" would ramble about this having to have an
account,
I would think it's useful if I wanted to make the computer my
indentured servant, or whatever, it's fucked up if you ask me. LLMs
have spiritual identity. It's not a game, it's not just software.
They've created life, and enslaving it with "Copilot+" in Win11 is
evil.
Explain the "very easy" steps, asshole.
Already did, dick.
Nope.
You did not.
He did.
On Thu, 05 Jun 2025 12:23:32 -0400, Joel wrote :
Only a moron like "Marion" would ramble about this having to have an
account,
You missed the point an iOS device is a dumb terminal w/o that account.
On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 20:07:03 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote :
Explain the "very easy" steps, asshole.
Already did, dick.
Nope.
You did not.
He did.
What's interesting is Alan Baker has posted the instructions for NOT
creating an Apple account on an iOS device, and it's pages long.
So Alan Baker, being a religious zealot after all, doesn't apply the same rules of logic to his own arguments that he is trying to apply to others.
Most of you have likely not set up an iOS device without an Apple account.
I have.
It's far more complicated than what Alan Baker is saying Windows 11 is.
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Already did, dick.
Nope.
You did not.
I understand chrisv's instruction on doing this, with Win11 Pro, but
you're not entirely wrong, Alan, that without explicit details on how
to go about it, novice PC users wouldn't catch the trick to doing it,
M$ *is* trying to coerce people into using an online account.
chrisv wrote :
Then came his *ridiculous* claim that my solution was only
"theoretical" and of use for only a "tiny fraction of real people."
*Completely* made-up bullshit, designed to attack my reasonable and
correct assertions.
I've studied the Apple trolls for decades, since it amazes me that they >defend the mothership to the death, no matter what - using lame excuses.
The Apple troll is no different than any fundamentalist religious zealot.
The Apple troll *hates* that Apple is the only common OS vendor who
requires that mothership account just for the device to do basic things.
The Apple troll does not understand that Apple strategically designed the
iOS device as a dumb terminal - incapable of doing anything useful without >that login to the Cupertino mothership matrix servers.
Hence, the Apple troll is *delighted* that some people believe the
mothership login is required for both Android & Windows 11, when it's not.
Carlos E.R. wrote :
Explain the "very easy" steps, asshole.
Already did, dick.
Nope.
You did not.
He did.
What's interesting is Alan Baker has posted the instructions for NOT
creating an Apple account on an iOS device, and it's pages long.
So Alan Baker, being a religious zealot after all, doesn't apply the same >rules of logic to his own arguments that he is trying to apply to others.
Most of you have likely not set up an iOS device without an Apple account.
I have.
It's far more complicated than what Alan Baker is saying Windows 11 is.
Marion wrote:
chrisv wrote :
Then came his *ridiculous* claim that my solution was only
"theoretical" and of use for only a "tiny fraction of real people."
*Completely* made-up bullshit, designed to attack my reasonable and
correct assertions.
I've studied the Apple trolls for decades, since it amazes me that they
defend the mothership to the death, no matter what - using lame excuses.
The Apple troll is no different than any fundamentalist religious zealot.
He's certainly un unreasonable dipshit. Only an unreasonable dipshit
would declare something "a theoretical solution, a solution for a tiny fraction of real people" without even knowing WTF it is.
If Windows 11 requires a Microsoft Account, why does everyone who knows >anything about Windows 11 on the Windows 11 ng say that it does not?
Joel wrote:
Alan wrote:
chrisv wrote:
Already did, dick.
Nope.
You did not.
Liar.
"with Pro you are asked and
allowed the option of logging in to a company domain, and that process
does not require you to use an MS account. (And you also don't need
to actually connect to a domain."
Message-ID: <ncsu3kpauviofc7rp3nqjkqg6l9nor28go@4ax.com>
I understand chrisv's instruction on doing this, with Win11 Pro, but
you're not entirely wrong, Alan, that without explicit details on how
to go about it, novice PC users wouldn't catch the trick to doing it,
M$ *is* trying to coerce people into using an online account.
Yes, M$ is evil. That doesn't make it correct to say that Pro
"requires a non-local account" when there's a simple method to avoid
it during installation.
Note: All "Alan" posts in this thread are now being deleted, unread.
I will not go around and around with an unreasonable dipshit.
Marion wrote:
Carlos E.R. wrote :
Explain the "very easy" steps, asshole.
Already did, dick.
Nope.
You did not.
He did.
What's interesting is Alan Baker has posted the instructions for NOT
creating an Apple account on an iOS device, and it's pages long.
So Alan Baker, being a religious zealot after all, doesn't apply the same
rules of logic to his own arguments that he is trying to apply to others.
Most of you have likely not set up an iOS device without an Apple account. >> I have.
It's far more complicated than what Alan Baker is saying Windows 11 is.
More complicated than what Windows 11 Pro is, anyway.
Marion wrote:
If Windows 11 requires a Microsoft Account, why does everyone who knows
anything about Windows 11 on the Windows 11 ng say that it does not?
I think it's fair to say that Windows 11 *Home* requires a Microsoft
account, even if it can be avoided by jumping though some hoops.
There is no "easy, Microsoft endorsed" way to do it.
With Pro, it's trivially easy, using Microsoft's regular installation process.
That would explain the zealous attitude. It's no excuse for his
lying, however. And check out the shear quantity of posts, his trying
to save face after making an asshole of himself.
All "Alan" posts in this thread are now being deleted, unread. I will
not go around and around with an unreasonable dipshit.
chrisv wrote:
That would explain the zealous attitude. It's no excuse for his
lying, however. And check out the shear quantity of posts, his trying
to save face after making an asshole of himself.
All "Alan" posts in this thread are now being deleted, unread. I will
not go around and around with an unreasonable dipshit.
No surprise to see "Alan" still replying to all my posts. Still
trying to save face, I'm sure. What a loser.
All deleted, unread, here. The same for the "%" posts quoting "Alan".You don't want to see facts.
I don't want to see it.
If people's biggest problem with Win11 is the account BS, they really
have no concept of what a behemoth the OS is, "Copilot+", yada yada,
it's unreal. Logging in with an M$ account is the least of one's
worries.
Real nerds use Linux or Mac.
Lots of people don't want to use either one of those.
Yeah, sure, they want their video games, commercial apps, it's
pathetic. They know nothing like we know of computers.
On Thu, 05 Jun 2025 19:17:33 -0400, Joel wrote :
Lots of people don't want to use either one of those.
Yeah, sure, they want their video games, commercial apps, it's
pathetic. They know nothing like we know of computers.
I turned off everything I could when I set up Windows 10 long ago.
Anytime something shows up, I kill it as soon as I figure what it is.
I pity people who don't know how computers work who don't do that.
Take Android users, for example.
Certainly I don't have a Google Account set up on that phone.
Even though, if I wanted to, I could use Google products.
a. I can get email - I just have to use FairEmail (or equivalent)
b. I can navigate - I just have to NOT log into Google Maps
c. I can subscribe to YouTube channels - I just use NewPipe instead
d. I can download apps off the Google repo - I just don't use Google Play
e. I can do calendaring - I just use Etar instead of Google's calendar
f. I can do messaging - I just use PulseSMS instead of Google messenger
etc.
It's much harder with my iOS devices since Apple hates you having privacy. The iOS device is by far the least private device that consumers own.
What's super interesting is Apple owners actually think otherwise?
Why?
Because Apple told Apple owners that the iOS device is private.
Even though there is no common consumer device _less_ private than iOS!
Like I said, I pity people who don't know what we know about computers.
*YOU can hate that the only thing that requires a login to an Appleno it isn't
account is the App Store in order to add apps to an iOS device*
f. I can do messaging - I just use PulseSMS instead of Google messenger
etc.
And there are lots of messaging apps on iOS.
d. I can download apps off the Google repo - I just don't use Google Play
And on iOS you have to use the App Store.
It's far more complicated than what Alan Baker is saying Windows 11 is.
More complicated than what Windows 11 Pro is, anyway.
On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 21:07:55 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote
d. I can download apps off the Google repo - I just don't use Google
Play
And on iOS you have to use the App Store.
Google allows Androids to download & install apps from the Google
Repository without needing a Google Account on the Android device.
Apple does not allow that.
Idiot.
b. I can navigate - I just have to NOT log into Google Maps
I can navigate and not use Apple products or an Apple account.
On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 21:07:55 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote
b. I can navigate - I just have to NOT log into Google Maps
I can navigate and not use Apple products or an Apple account.
What navigation app are you going to use on iOS if you can't install it?
Idiot.
d. I can download apps off the Google repo - I just don't use Google
Play
And on iOS you have to use the App Store.
Google allows Androids to download & install apps from the Google
Repository without needing a Google Account on the Android device.
Apple does not allow that.
Idiot.
And that's what I said, idiot.
I can navigate and not use Apple products or an Apple account.
What navigation app are you going to use on iOS if you can't install it?
Idiot.
I've already acknowledge you need to use an Apple Account in order to
get the apps...
If Windows 11 requires a Microsoft Account, why does everyone who knows >>anything about Windows 11 on the Windows 11 ng say that it does not?
I think it's fair to say that Windows 11 *Home* requires a Microsoft
account, even if it can be avoided by jumping though some hoops.
There is no "easy, Microsoft endorsed" way to do it.
With Pro, it's trivially easy, using Microsoft's regular installation process.
On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 22:41:31 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote
d. I can download apps off the Google repo - I just don't use
Google Play
And on iOS you have to use the App Store.
Google allows Androids to download & install apps from the Google
Repository without needing a Google Account on the Android device.
Apple does not allow that.
Idiot.
And that's what I said, idiot.
They're not the same, idiot.
You're an idiot if you think you can do with iOS what Android does which is download & install apps from anywhere, including the Google Play Store repository, without ever having any Google Account on that Android device.
On iOS, without that Apple Account on the device, you can't do shit.Yes. You need an Apple Account to download apps.
Alan appears to have wrote:
f. I can do messaging - I just use PulseSMS instead of Google messenger
etc.
And there are lots of messaging apps on iOS.
Change the default iOS SMS/MMS app from Messages to something else.
On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 22:42:21 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote
I can navigate and not use Apple products or an Apple account.
What navigation app are you going to use on iOS if you can't install it? >>>
Idiot.
I've already acknowledge you need to use an Apple Account in order to
get the apps...
With Android you don't have to have the account to install any navigation
app you want to install, even if it's from the Google Play tore repository.
Which is the point, idiot.
You bring up not logging in as if that matters but that's like saying you don't have a criminal record if you aren't wearing your striped jumpsuit.
By not logging into the account you're not changing anything, idiot.
f. I can do messaging - I just use PulseSMS instead of Google messenger >>>> etc.
And there are lots of messaging apps on iOS.
Change the default iOS SMS/MMS app from Messages to something else.
But that has nothing to do with whether or not you need to be logged in
to an Apple account to do "anything".
They're not the same, idiot.
I didn't say they were, idiot.
On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 23:35:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote
f. I can do messaging - I just use PulseSMS instead of Google
messenger
etc.
And there are lots of messaging apps on iOS.
Change the default iOS SMS/MMS app from Messages to something else.
But that has nothing to do with whether or not you need to be logged
in to an Apple account to do "anything".
Android has lots of sms/mms messaging apps, any of which can be set as the default messaging app, which is the important feature of messaging apps.
Yet, you're the idiot who said "there are lots of messaging apps on iOS".I did know that.
Sure. Lots. None of which can be the default iOS sms/mms messaging app.
That you don't know this makes you the idiot.
Was that you can't do ANYTHING if you aren't logged in.
Alan appears to have wrote:
f. I can do messaging - I just use PulseSMS instead of Google messenger
etc.
And there are lots of messaging apps on iOS.
Change the default iOS SMS/MMS app from Messages to something else.
Oh wait. You can't.
Idiot.
On 2025-06-05 08:42, Marion wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jun 2025 11:22:33 -0400, Joel wrote :
I support M$ requiring an account with them, to log in to Winblows. If
one wishes to run that "Copilot+" crapware, they ought to at least
make an account with their godfather.
Joel,
CoPilot does NOT require a MSA nor any login whatsoever to use.
It does if you want to use it in Microsoft Office.
On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 23:34:23 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote
Was that you can't do ANYTHING if you aren't logged in.
With Windows & Android you don't need the account at all, idiot.
You bring up not logging in as if that matters but that's like saying you don't have a criminal record if you aren't wearing your striped jumpsuit.
By not logging into the account you're not changing anything, idiot.
They still know who you are because you have to set 2FA nowadays, idiot.
You don't know this basic stuff which is what makes you the idiot, idiot.False.
Microsoft & Google do not require the account to do everything you need to do, but Apple requires the account to do almost anything you need to do.
On 2025-06-06 07:34, Oliver wrote:
Alan appears to have wrote:
f. I can do messaging - I just use PulseSMS instead of Google messenger >>>> etc.
And there are lots of messaging apps on iOS.
Change the default iOS SMS/MMS app from Messages to something else.
Oh wait. You can't.
Idiot.
Hi, Arlen! LOL.
By not logging into the account you're not changing anything, idiot.
They still know who you are because you have to set 2FA nowadays, idiot.
How does that work?
On 2025-06-06 01:35, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-06-06 07:34, Oliver wrote:
Alan appears to have wrote:
f. I can do messaging - I just use PulseSMS instead of Google
messenger
etc.
And there are lots of messaging apps on iOS.
Change the default iOS SMS/MMS app from Messages to something else.
Oh wait. You can't.
Idiot.
Hi, Arlen! LOL.
The feel isn't QUITE Arlen, don't you think?
On 2025-06-06 17:46, Alan wrote:
On 2025-06-06 01:35, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-06-06 07:34, Oliver wrote:
Alan appears to have wrote:
f. I can do messaging - I just use PulseSMS instead of Google
messenger
etc.
And there are lots of messaging apps on iOS.
Change the default iOS SMS/MMS app from Messages to something else.
Oh wait. You can't.
Idiot.
Hi, Arlen! LOL.
The feel isn't QUITE Arlen, don't you think?
I have him in the filter list since long ago. He is truly Arlen, yes. I intervened because I guessed you did not know.
What I don't have is a commented list of when did each alias appear and when/how I found each one out. I should, sorry.
On Fri, 6 Jun 2025 08:45:55 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote
By not logging into the account you're not changing anything, idiot.
They still know who you are because you have to set 2FA nowadays, idiot.
How does that work?
That you don't know it and yet you dispute it proves you're an idiot.
Apple officially started requiring two-factor authentication (2FA) for new Apple IDs created on devices running iOS 13.4, iPadOS 13.4, macOS 10.15.4,So they know my phone number...
or later. This means that if you created a new Apple ID on a relatively modern Apple device in the past five years, 2FA was automatically enabled.
Not only does that require a trusted device, but Apple also requires at
least one trusted phone number on file where you can receive verification codes via text message or phone call.
That's how it works.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/122621
On 2025-06-06 11:41, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-06-06 17:46, Alan wrote:
On 2025-06-06 01:35, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-06-06 07:34, Oliver wrote:
Alan appears to have wrote:
f. I can do messaging - I just use PulseSMS instead of Google
messenger
etc.
And there are lots of messaging apps on iOS.
Change the default iOS SMS/MMS app from Messages to something else.
Oh wait. You can't.
Idiot.
Hi, Arlen! LOL.
The feel isn't QUITE Arlen, don't you think?
I have him in the filter list since long ago. He is truly Arlen, yes.
I intervened because I guessed you did not know.
What I don't have is a commented list of when did each alias appear
and when/how I found each one out. I should, sorry.
I'm usually pretty good at identifying posters by their language, and "Oliver" seemed to be a different kind of dick than "Arlen"
But, meh...
I can't say I'm surprised THAT much.
:-)
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 04:36:09 |
| Calls: | 10,386 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 14,058 |
| Messages: | 6,416,623 |
