XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 19:30:54 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 7/23/2024 11:27 AM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 07:56:32 -0000 (UTC), Charles Packer
<mailbox@cpacker.org> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike

Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

Not here. But then, I don't do that much on the Web. And I use Windows
10's security, which was not affected.

I saw an article where Microsoft was blaming the EU for forcing them
to allow 3rd-party access to the Kernal, which they claim is what
enabled the update to do bad things. If that is true, they may have a
point.

�Microsoft wants to make future CrowdStrike outages impossible, and it
could mean big changes for security software:

https://www.windowscentral.com/software-apps/windows-11/microsoft-wants-to-make-future-crowdstrike-outages-impossible-and-it-could-mean-big-changes-for-security-software

�Microsoft appears to want to shift away from security software having >kernel access on Windows 11, though the company hasn�t said that outright.�

Sounds like a good idea. And fix all of the other kernel holes while
they are at it.

But will the EU allow it?

I suppose they could do two versions, one for the EU and the other for
sane [1] areas.

The EU could enjoy a Windows subject to assault by poorly-programmed alternatives to Windows utilities/subsystems. The Rest of Us could
keep on using our computers. Well, except when Microsoft blunders, of
course.

[1] For a meaning of "sane" restricted to "believes restricting access
to the kernal is a good idea".
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 2024-07-27 15:36:31 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 19:30:54 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 7/23/2024 11:27 AM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 07:56:32 -0000 (UTC), Charles Packer
<mailbox@cpacker.org> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike

Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

Not here. But then, I don't do that much on the Web. And I use Windows
10's security, which was not affected.

I saw an article where Microsoft was blaming the EU for forcing them
to allow 3rd-party access to the Kernal, which they claim is what
enabled the update to do bad things. If that is true, they may have a
point.

�Microsoft wants to make future CrowdStrike outages impossible, and

could mean big changes for security software:

https://www.windowscentral.com/software-apps/windows-11/microsoft-wants-to-make-future-crowdstrike-outages-impossible-and-it-could-mean-big-changes-for-security-software


�Microsoft appears to want to shift away from security software
having>kernel access on Windows 11, though the company hasn�t said that
outright.�

Sounds like a good idea. And fix all of the other kernel holes
while>they are at it.

But will the EU allow it?

I suppose they could do two versions, one for the EU and the other for
sane [1] areas.
The EU could enjoy a Windows subject to assault by poorly-programmed alternatives to Windows utilities/subsystems. The Rest of Us could
keep on using our computers. Well, except when Microsoft blunders, of
course.

[1] For a meaning of "sane" restricted to "believes restricting access
to the kernal is a good idea".

The same with many of the other ridiculous new EU tech laws coming into
effect (e.g. the ones forcing Apple to allow other app stores,
payments, etc.). The problem is that many other places are also looking
at similar ridiculous laws, including the UK, USA, etc.

Most of these laws have nothing to do with the users / consumers, but
are greed-based to try to rinse more money out of big tech companies
for local governments, who then waste it on stupidities. The companies
already pay what they legally have to, and the loopholes they utilise
are the exact same ones most of those managers and policy makers
themselves use to squirrel away their obscene salaries from the tax
department. :-\

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

On Sun, 28 Jul 2024, Your Name wrote:

On 2024-07-27 15:36:31 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 19:30:54 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 7/23/2024 11:27 AM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 07:56:32 -0000 (UTC), Charles Packer
<mailbox@cpacker.org> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike

Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

Not here. But then, I don't do that much on the Web. And I use Windows >>>> 10's security, which was not affected.

I saw an article where Microsoft was blaming the EU for forcing them
to allow 3rd-party access to the Kernal, which they claim is what
enabled the update to do bad things. If that is true, they may have a
point.

“Microsoft wants to make future CrowdStrike outages impossible, and

could mean big changes for security software:

https://www.windowscentral.com/software-apps/windows-11/microsoft-wants-to-make-future-crowdstrike-outages-impossible-and-it-could-mean-big-changes-for-security-software

“Microsoft appears to want to shift away from security software
having>kernel access on Windows 11, though the company hasn’t said that >>> outright.”

Sounds like a good idea. And fix all of the other kernel holes while>they >>> are at it.

But will the EU allow it?

I suppose they could do two versions, one for the EU and the other for
sane [1] areas.
The EU could enjoy a Windows subject to assault by poorly-programmed
alternatives to Windows utilities/subsystems. The Rest of Us could
keep on using our computers. Well, except when Microsoft blunders, of
course.

[1] For a meaning of "sane" restricted to "believes restricting access
to the kernal is a good idea".

The same with many of the other ridiculous new EU tech laws coming into effect (e.g. the ones forcing Apple to allow other app stores, payments, etc.). The problem is that many other places are also looking at similar ridiculous laws, including the UK, USA, etc.

Most of these laws have nothing to do with the users / consumers, but are greed-based to try to rinse more money out of big tech companies for local governments, who then waste it on stupidities. The companies already pay what they legally have to, and the loopholes they utilise are the exact same ones most of those managers and policy makers themselves use to squirrel away their obscene salaries from the tax department. :-\

And another perspective is that some of these laws are being driven by big
tech to stop new tech from forming due to too high costs for compliance.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Sun, 28 Jul 2024 11:26:36 +0200, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jul 2024, Your Name wrote:

On 2024-07-27 15:36:31 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 19:30:54 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 7/23/2024 11:27 AM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 07:56:32 -0000 (UTC), Charles Packer
<mailbox@cpacker.org> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike

Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

Not here. But then, I don't do that much on the Web. And I use Windows >>>>> 10's security, which was not affected.

I saw an article where Microsoft was blaming the EU for forcing them >>>>> to allow 3rd-party access to the Kernal, which they claim is what
enabled the update to do bad things. If that is true, they may have a >>>>> point.

�Microsoft wants to make future CrowdStrike outages impossible, and

could mean big changes for security software:

https://www.windowscentral.com/software-apps/windows-11/microsoft-wants-to-make-future-crowdstrike-outages-impossible-and-it-could-mean-big-changes-for-security-software

�Microsoft appears to want to shift away from security software
having>kernel access on Windows 11, though the company hasn�t said that >>>> outright.�

Sounds like a good idea. And fix all of the other kernel holes while>they >>>> are at it.

But will the EU allow it?

I suppose they could do two versions, one for the EU and the other for
sane [1] areas.
The EU could enjoy a Windows subject to assault by poorly-programmed
alternatives to Windows utilities/subsystems. The Rest of Us could
keep on using our computers. Well, except when Microsoft blunders, of
course.

[1] For a meaning of "sane" restricted to "believes restricting access
to the kernal is a good idea".

The same with many of the other ridiculous new EU tech laws coming into
effect (e.g. the ones forcing Apple to allow other app stores, payments,
etc.). The problem is that many other places are also looking at similar
ridiculous laws, including the UK, USA, etc.

Most of these laws have nothing to do with the users / consumers, but are >> greed-based to try to rinse more money out of big tech companies for local >> governments, who then waste it on stupidities. The companies already pay what
they legally have to, and the loopholes they utilise are the exact same ones
most of those managers and policy makers themselves use to squirrel away
their obscene salaries from the tax department. :-\

And another perspective is that some of these laws are being driven by big >tech to stop new tech from forming due to too high costs for compliance.

Ah. The old "auto manufacturers suppress alternatives to avoid
competition" story, updated for modern times.

Not saying it isn't true, just that it isn't new.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Sun, 28 Jul 2024 11:35:31 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-07-27 15:36:31 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 19:30:54 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 7/23/2024 11:27 AM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 07:56:32 -0000 (UTC), Charles Packer
<mailbox@cpacker.org> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike

Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

Not here. But then, I don't do that much on the Web. And I use Windows >>>> 10's security, which was not affected.

I saw an article where Microsoft was blaming the EU for forcing them
to allow 3rd-party access to the Kernal, which they claim is what
enabled the update to do bad things. If that is true, they may have a
point.

�Microsoft wants to make future CrowdStrike outages impossible, and

could mean big changes for security software:

https://www.windowscentral.com/software-apps/windows-11/microsoft-wants-to-make-future-crowdstrike-outages-impossible-and-it-could-mean-big-changes-for-security-software


�Microsoft appears to want to shift away from security software
having>kernel access on Windows 11, though the company hasn�t said that >>> outright.�

Sounds like a good idea. And fix all of the other kernel holes
while>they are at it.

But will the EU allow it?

I suppose they could do two versions, one for the EU and the other for
sane [1] areas.
The EU could enjoy a Windows subject to assault by poorly-programmed
alternatives to Windows utilities/subsystems. The Rest of Us could
keep on using our computers. Well, except when Microsoft blunders, of
course.

[1] For a meaning of "sane" restricted to "believes restricting access
to the kernal is a good idea".

The same with many of the other ridiculous new EU tech laws coming into >effect (e.g. the ones forcing Apple to allow other app stores,
payments, etc.). The problem is that many other places are also looking
at similar ridiculous laws, including the UK, USA, etc.

This is a long-standing tradition: my music player (Logitech
Squeezebox Touch, now completely abandoned by Logitech) has both RCA
and headphone outputs, but the one I bought was configured for the EU
and the RCA output levels are so low they are not useable. Well, maybe
if I used two amplifiers, but not with a normal setup. This was done
to ensure that EU consumer's ears would not be destroyed by loud
sounds.

So I am using the headphone output which, in the proud tradtion of
cables using headphone plugs, requires me to "tune" the plug by
rotating it until both channels are actually being captured whenever
the box is disturbed enough to rotate the plug.

Most of these laws have nothing to do with the users / consumers, but
are greed-based to try to rinse more money out of big tech companies
for local governments, who then waste it on stupidities. The companies >already pay what they legally have to, and the loopholes they utilise
are the exact same ones most of those managers and policy makers
themselves use to squirrel away their obscene salaries from the tax >department. :-\

If you say so.

Myself, I just chalk it up to letting MBAs run things.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 7/23/24 00:56, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike

Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

We were on a river cruise on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. We were
about 2 hours late leaving from one port because of the problem. It
makes no sense why this should be so.
--
----------------

Dave Scruggs
Senior Software Engineer - Lockheed Martin, et. al (mostly Retired)
Captain - Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
Board of Directors - Boulder Creek Fire Protection District (What was I thinking?)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 08:38:20 +0100, Robert Carnegie
<rja.carnegie@gmail.com> wrote:

On 27/07/2024 01:30, Lynn McGuire wrote:

On 7/23/2024 11:27 AM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 07:56:32 -0000 (UTC), Charles Packer
<mailbox@cpacker.org> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
���� https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
���� https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike

Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

Not here. But then, I don't do that much on the Web. And I use Windows
10's security, which was not affected.

I saw an article where Microsoft was blaming the EU for forcing them
to allow 3rd-party access to the Kernal, which they claim is what
enabled the update to do bad things. If that is true, they may have a
point.

�Microsoft wants to make future CrowdStrike outages impossible, and it
could mean big changes for security software:

https://www.windowscentral.com/software-apps/windows-11/microsoft-wants-to-make-future-crowdstrike-outages-impossible-and-it-could-mean-big-changes-for-security-software

�Microsoft appears to want to shift away from security software having
kernel access on Windows 11, though the company hasn�t said that outright.� >>
Sounds like a good idea. And fix all of the other kernel holes while
they are at it.

Rather, Microsoft wants its kernel holes and
any antivirus capability to be legally Microsoft
property, and secret. In software that everybody
has. So that won't work. I am not saying that
Crowdstrike doesn't have work to do. In a Microsoft
word, you will have only Windows Defender, and
they'll charge.

Alternate antivirus programs existed /long/ before the EU forced
Microsoft to expose the kernal.

In fact, non-Microsoft antivirus programs existed for Windows NT 4 (at
least) /before/ Microsoft decided to write its own. Or acquire it by
buying out some hapless company, something they used to be infamous
for.

The EU's beef, essentially, was that Windows Defender had become so
competent [1] that, if it was provided with Windows, there would be no
reason to replace it, thus reducing the other vendors to the status of buggy-whip manufacturers.

But that is an interesting dilemma: is Microsoft being monopolistic
when it pushes its own software which is not part of the OS? Or have
things simply advanced to the point that, to be credible, an OS /must/
provide security, including antivirus security?

Which is, I suppose, a form of the philosophical question: just where
/is/ the boundary between "OS" and everything else?

[1] When it first came out, the existing antivirus programs had no
trouble competing because they had many more features and
capabilitiies. And said so in their advertising [2]. This made paying
for using them make sense. But Windows Defender eventually achieved
the status of "good enough", and it made less sense to pay for
something you could get for free.

[2] Which sometimes got a bit ... wild. One asserted that it updated
its virus signature files every morning, but only when the computer
was not in use. Experience showed that it, in fact, /waited/ until the
user was heavily involved in using the computer and /then/ updated so aggressively that everything else crawled to a halt. This experience
(software does the exact opposite of what it is supposed to do) is
not, of course, unique to antivirus programs. And, of course, Windows
10 has been known to do the same thing, from time to time (as opposed
to every single day in the case of the antivirus program).
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 00:58:16 -0700, BCFD 36 <bcfd36@cruzio.com> wrote:

On 7/23/24 00:56, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike

Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

We were on a river cruise on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. We were
about 2 hours late leaving from one port because of the problem. It
makes no sense why this should be so.

I'm sure an explanation exists. Probably something mundane, like "we
needed our navigation system to be up and it was down".

"To err is human, to /really/ screw things up requires a computer."
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 2024-08-01 07:58:16 +0000, BCFD 36 said:

On 7/23/24 00:56, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike

Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

We were on a river cruise on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. We were
about 2 hours late leaving from one port because of the problem. It
makes no sense why this should be so.

Various possibilities. For example, the Crowdstrike glitch could have
affected the boat's navigation computers, the company's ticket buying
and checking system, etc.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 7/23/2024 2:56 AM, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike

Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

We'd flown to Utah on Delta the Wednesday before and returned the
following Thursday. No problems.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

In article <v81f3u$32eu9$3@dont-email.me>,
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

“Microsoft appears to want to shift away from security software having >kernel access on Windows 11, though the company hasn’t said that outright.”

Sounds like a good idea. And fix all of the other kernel holes while
they are at it.

Of course, what will almost certainly happen instead is
that Microsoft will not fix all the other kernel holes,
and instead of a CrowdStrike "computers down for a while"
(which is unlikely to happen again, I would suspect that
this is a lesson they will not be forgetting) it'll be "mass
ransomware attack and nobody will get their data back without
paying a billion to Putin's hacker brigades."

Microsoft doesn't have the best record of proactively
dealing with security flaws in their products. And often
foot-dragging on patching known holes.

(I am most bodaciously *NOT* going to be installing any
version containing their "Recall" product. This may be the
thing that finally drives me to wipe all Microsoft from my
computers and go all Linux.)
--
Mike Van Pelt | "I don't advise it unless you're nuts."
mvp at calweb.com | -- Ray Wilkinson, after riding out Hurricane
KE6BVH | Ike on Surfside Beach in Galveston

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:46:39 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-01 07:58:16 +0000, BCFD 36 said:

On 7/23/24 00:56, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike

Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

We were on a river cruise on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. We were
about 2 hours late leaving from one port because of the problem. It
makes no sense why this should be so.

Various possibilities. For example, the Crowdstrike glitch could have >affected the boat's navigation computers, the company's ticket buying
and checking system, etc.

Just wait till we all have chips in our heads that can be disabled (by disabling a server they must connect to) by something like this. Won't
/that/ be fun!
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 16:41:48 -0000 (UTC), Mike Van Pelt
<usenet@mikevanpelt.com> wrote:

In article <v81f3u$32eu9$3@dont-email.me>,
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

“Microsoft appears to want to shift away from security software having >>kernel access on Windows 11, though the company hasn’t said that outright.�?

Sounds like a good idea. And fix all of the other kernel holes while
they are at it.

Of course, what will almost certainly happen instead is
that Microsoft will not fix all the other kernel holes,
and instead of a CrowdStrike "computers down for a while"
(which is unlikely to happen again, I would suspect that
this is a lesson they will not be forgetting) it'll be "mass
ransomware attack and nobody will get their data back without
paying a billion to Putin's hacker brigades."

Backups are the key here. Daily backups, and to items unlikely to be
affected (provided the hackers ignore USB/WiFi drives) or (not daily
but not too ancient either) USB thumb drives that /are not attached to
any computer/ and so cannot be reached by the kernal, however hacked.

/Serious/ backups, that's what I am talking about.

Microsoft doesn't have the best record of proactively
dealing with security flaws in their products. And often
foot-dragging on patching known holes.

I don't know if this is an example or not, but I remember an enormous
number of XP updates "fixing the XML bits".

(I am most bodaciously *NOT* going to be installing any
version containing their "Recall" product. This may be the
thing that finally drives me to wipe all Microsoft from my
computers and go all Linux.)

As I understand it, it's only runnable on a specific type of computer
with a special AI processor. I plan on avoiding such computers if/when
I need a replacement. Giving Microsoft's penchant for "enhancing" its
OSes, just buying a version without it won't necessarily keep it off
the computer -- but not being able to run it because the computer
doesn't have the processor needed probably would, at least for a
while.

They do remove features too. Home Network was useful, but apparently
they didn't want to support it, do they pulled the UI (to this day, my
desktop accesses files on my laptop not using my user name but using
"home users", suggesting that the underlying infrastructure is still
there). superfetch was a disaster that appears to have vanished.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

In article <d44qaj1qpguo4ae3onpfi359hpp3823mj6@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 16:41:48 -0000 (UTC), Mike Van Pelt ><usenet@mikevanpelt.com> wrote:

... it'll be "mass
ransomware attack and nobody will get their data back without
paying a billion to Putin's hacker brigades."

Backups are the key here. Daily backups, and to items unlikely to be
affected (provided the hackers ignore USB/WiFi drives) or (not daily
but not too ancient either) USB thumb drives that /are not attached to
any computer/ and so cannot be reached by the kernal, however hacked.

/Serious/ backups, that's what I am talking about.

Yeah. Alas, too many backups turn out to have been accessible by
the miscreants, or the backup process turns out to be less useful
for producing actual backups that can be recovered from than you
would hope.

The backup process needs to be verified to produce backups
usable for quickly restoring function, but this is very
rarely tested.

--
Mike Van Pelt | "I don't advise it unless you're nuts."
mvp at calweb.com | -- Ray Wilkinson, after riding out Hurricane
KE6BVH | Ike on Surfside Beach in Galveston

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 2024-08-02 17:13:14 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:46:39 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-01 07:58:16 +0000, BCFD 36 said:

On 7/23/24 00:56, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike

Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

We were on a river cruise on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. We were>>
about 2 hours late leaving from one port because of the problem. It>>
makes no sense why this should be so.

Various possibilities. For example, the Crowdstrike glitch could
have>affected the boat's navigation computers, the company's ticket
buying>and checking system, etc.

Just wait till we all have chips in our heads that can be disabled (by disabling a server they must connect to) by something like this. Won't
/that/ be fun!

If the moron Elon Musk had his way, that would be done tomorrow. The
guy is a lunatic who should be locked in a padded cell for the safety
of others ... and the padded cell next door should be occupied by
Donald Trump. :-\

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:03:54 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-02 17:13:14 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:46:39 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-01 07:58:16 +0000, BCFD 36 said:

On 7/23/24 00:56, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike

Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

We were on a river cruise on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. We were>> >>>> about 2 hours late leaving from one port because of the problem. It>> >>>> makes no sense why this should be so.

Various possibilities. For example, the Crowdstrike glitch could
have>affected the boat's navigation computers, the company's ticket
buying>and checking system, etc.

Just wait till we all have chips in our heads that can be disabled (by
disabling a server they must connect to) by something like this. Won't
/that/ be fun!

If the moron Elon Musk had his way, that would be done tomorrow. The
guy is a lunatic who should be locked in a padded cell for the safety
of others ... and the padded cell next door should be occupied by
Donald Trump. :-\

I never said it was a /sane/ idea.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 17:23:12 -0000 (UTC), Mike Van Pelt
<usenet@mikevanpelt.com> wrote:

In article <d44qaj1qpguo4ae3onpfi359hpp3823mj6@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 16:41:48 -0000 (UTC), Mike Van Pelt >><usenet@mikevanpelt.com> wrote:

... it'll be "mass
ransomware attack and nobody will get their data back without
paying a billion to Putin's hacker brigades."

Backups are the key here. Daily backups, and to items unlikely to be >>affected (provided the hackers ignore USB/WiFi drives) or (not daily
but not too ancient either) USB thumb drives that /are not attached to
any computer/ and so cannot be reached by the kernal, however hacked.

/Serious/ backups, that's what I am talking about.

Yeah. Alas, too many backups turn out to have been accessible by
the miscreants, or the backup process turns out to be less useful
for producing actual backups that can be recovered from than you
would hope.

If I understand Microsoft's backup correctly, everying is on a single
attached drive in a format optimized for restoring prior versions
rather than copying the backup to another separate storage device and
then detaching that device.

The backup process needs to be verified to produce backups
usable for quickly restoring function, but this is very
rarely tested.

I occasionally test mine, usually when I have changed a file and need
to get the older version back.

This isn't the same as getting everything back, of course, but the
program I use (and probably others) allows a System Backup to be
mounted as a disk drive and explored. A problem with my laptop caused
me to to this and I can verify that the directory structure, at least,
was traversible. If it has to be done for real, just be sure that it
is a /copy/ of the System Backup that is being used, just in case. A
certain amount of paranoia is appropriate and helpful here.

And then there are those awful events where a full-scale test of the
backup is the /only/ way to recover the data after (say) re-installing
the OS or (even more fun) re-formatting the entire drive. Those always
worked for me provided, of course, that everything that needed to be
backed up was actually being backed up. But that is a matter of
configuring the backup tasks properly. And that is a battle between
safety and storage space for the backups.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:26:19 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 8/2/2024 12:13 PM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:46:39 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-01 07:58:16 +0000, BCFD 36 said:

On 7/23/24 00:56, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike

Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

We were on a river cruise on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. We were
about 2 hours late leaving from one port because of the problem. It
makes no sense why this should be so.

Various possibilities. For example, the Crowdstrike glitch could have
affected the boat's navigation computers, the company's ticket buying
and checking system, etc.

Just wait till we all have chips in our heads that can be disabled (by
disabling a server they must connect to) by something like this. Won't
/that/ be fun!

You first ! I will be the last and they will have to catch me first.

I don't really expect to see that day, being 77 and all.

Well, unless it's part of Project 2025 and a certain D Trump gets
elected.

The awesome "The Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047" by Lionel Shriver has
the entire population in the USA getting a money transaction chip at the >base of their skull connected to Starlink in 2040 and cash money is >outlawed.

https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/

I haven't read that, but that doesn't mean I didn't encounter the
concept of embedded chips somewhere -- oh, wait: /The President's
Analyst/ had it.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 2024-08-03 17:41:44 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:26:19 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 8/2/2024 12:13 PM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:46:39 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-01 07:58:16 +0000, BCFD 36 said:

On 7/23/24 00:56, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike

Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

We were on a river cruise on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. We were
about 2 hours late leaving from one port because of the problem. It
makes no sense why this should be so.

Various possibilities. For example, the Crowdstrike glitch could have
affected the boat's navigation computers, the company's ticket buying
and checking system, etc.

Just wait till we all have chips in our heads that can be disabled (by
disabling a server they must connect to) by something like this. Won't
/that/ be fun!

You first ! I will be the last and they will have to catch me first.

I don't really expect to see that day, being 77 and all.
Well, unless it's part of Project 2025 and a certain D Trump gets
elected.

The awesome "The Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047" by Lionel Shriver

the entire population in the USA getting a money transaction chip

at the>base of their skull connected to Starlink in 2040 and cash money

outlawed.

https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/

I haven't read that, but that doesn't mean I didn't encounter the
concept of embedded chips somewhere -- oh, wait: /The President's
Analyst/ had it.

There are quite a few fools who have had chips implanted into their
arms so they can do checkout tap-n-pay, open security doors, etc.
without having to go to all the "difficultly" of taking a card out of
their pocket / lanyard or using a smartwatch.

There have also been a few people with disabilities that have trialed
brain implant chips to allow them to regain some abilities. I don't
think any have been fully successful, but some have worked better than
others (Elon Musk's Neuralink trial "malfunctioned" ... unsurprisingly,
just look at his failures with his rockets, his Tesla cars, etc. to
know how much of an idiot he is and rushes things out to suit his own
looney ideals).

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 8/3/2024 1:41 PM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:26:19 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

The awesome "The Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047" by Lionel Shriver
has the entire population in the USA getting a money transaction
chip at the base of their skull connected to Starlink in 2040 and
cash money is outlawed.

https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/

I haven't read that, but that doesn't mean I didn't encounter the
concept of embedded chips somewhere -- oh, wait: /The President's
Analyst/ had it.

Excellent film. Parts have not aged well, but the opening session with
Godfrey Cambridge is worth the price of admission all by itself.

--
Mark Jackson - https://mark-jackson.online/
It is a gift to be furious and funny at the same time.
- Mike Peterson

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 2024-08-04 03:14:42 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:

On 8/3/2024 6:18 PM, Your Name wrote:

On 2024-08-03 17:41:44 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:26:19 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 8/2/2024 12:13 PM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:46:39 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-01 07:58:16 +0000, BCFD 36 said:

On 7/23/24 00:56, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike >>>>>>>>>
Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

We were on a river cruise on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. We were >>>>>>> about 2 hours late leaving from one port because of the problem. It >>>>>>> makes no sense why this should be so.

Various possibilities. For example, the Crowdstrike glitch could have >>>>>> affected the boat's navigation computers, the company's ticket buying >>>>>> and checking system, etc.

Just wait till we all have chips in our heads that can be disabled (by >>>>> disabling a server they must connect to) by something like this. Won't >>>>> /that/ be fun!

You first !� I will be the last and they will have to catch me first.

I don't really expect to see that day, being 77 and all.
Well, unless it's part of Project 2025 and a certain D Trump gets
elected.

The awesome "The Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047" by Lionel Shriver

the entire population in the USA getting a money transaction chip

at the>base of their skull connected to Starlink in 2040 and cash money >>>> is>outlawed.

https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/

I haven't read that, but that doesn't mean I didn't encounter the
concept of embedded chips somewhere -- oh, wait: /The President's
Analyst/ had it.

There are quite a few fools who have had chips implanted into their
arms so they can do checkout tap-n-pay, open security doors, etc.
without having to go to all the "difficultly" of taking a card out of
their pocket / lanyard or using a smartwatch.

There have also been a few people with disabilities that have trialed
brain implant chips to allow them to regain some abilities. I don't
think any have been fully successful, but some have worked better than
others (Elon Musk's Neuralink trial "malfunctioned" ... unsurprisingly,
just look at his failures with his rockets, his Tesla cars, etc. to
know how much of an idiot he is and rushes things out to suit his own
looney ideals).

Only by failing can one find the right path to success. Nothing was
ever invented without failures leading the path to it.

Thomas Edison tried over 8,000 materials before he found the right
element for the first light bulb.

Edison didn't create the lightbulb. At best he used the work of others
before him, at worst he stole the idea. Nobody really know for sure.
What is known is that Edison's "demonstration" of his lightbulb is
known to be highly dubuious - he purposely ended the deomnstration just
before he knew the filament would burn out.

Joseph Swan may well be the real creator of the lightbulb we have used
in homes for years. He critised Edison's demonstration and eventually
the two "worked together".

Musk is the most successful rocket launcher ever. He just had his
first failure in over several years of weekly launches.

Musk's rocket and cars work despite him, not because of him. They are
the work of hundreds of people - he does nothing except supply the
money and spout off his big mouth.

He has sold almost ten million electric cars. Find me a single person
or country that even meets ten percent of his records.

Tesla cars are all horrible and unreliable (with numerous recalls), and
the "self-driving" is a dangerous joke that should be banned from use
in any sensible country.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:14:35 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote
in <v8n68a$3u46q$1@dont-email.me>:

On 2024-08-04 03:14:42 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:

On 8/3/2024 6:18 PM, Your Name wrote:

On 2024-08-03 17:41:44 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:26:19 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 8/2/2024 12:13 PM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:46:39 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> >>>>>> wrote:

On 2024-08-01 07:58:16 +0000, BCFD 36 said:

On 7/23/24 00:56, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike >>>>>>>>>>
Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

We were on a river cruise on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. We >>>>>>>> were about 2 hours late leaving from one port because of the
problem. It makes no sense why this should be so.

Various possibilities. For example, the Crowdstrike glitch could >>>>>>> have affected the boat's navigation computers, the company's
ticket buying and checking system, etc.

Just wait till we all have chips in our heads that can be disabled >>>>>> (by disabling a server they must connect to) by something like
this. Won't /that/ be fun!

You first !  I will be the last and they will have to catch me
first.

I don't really expect to see that day, being 77 and all.
Well, unless it's part of Project 2025 and a certain D Trump gets
elected.

The awesome "The Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047" by Lionel Shriver

the entire population in the USA getting a money transaction

chip at the>base of their skull connected to Starlink in 2040 and
cash money is>outlawed.

https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/ 006232828X/

I haven't read that, but that doesn't mean I didn't encounter the
concept of embedded chips somewhere -- oh, wait: /The President's
Analyst/ had it.

There are quite a few fools who have had chips implanted into their
arms so they can do checkout tap-n-pay, open security doors, etc.
without having to go to all the "difficultly" of taking a card out of
their pocket / lanyard or using a smartwatch.

There have also been a few people with disabilities that have trialed
brain implant chips to allow them to regain some abilities. I don't
think any have been fully successful, but some have worked better than
others (Elon Musk's Neuralink trial "malfunctioned" ...
unsurprisingly,
just look at his failures with his rockets, his Tesla cars, etc. to
know how much of an idiot he is and rushes things out to suit his own
looney ideals).

Only by failing can one find the right path to success. Nothing was
ever invented without failures leading the path to it.

Thomas Edison tried over 8,000 materials before he found the right
element for the first light bulb.

Edison didn't create the lightbulb. At best he used the work of others
before him, at worst he stole the idea. Nobody really know for sure.
What is known is that Edison's "demonstration" of his lightbulb is known
to be highly dubuious - he purposely ended the deomnstration just before
he knew the filament would burn out.

Joseph Swan may well be the real creator of the lightbulb we have used
in homes for years. He critised Edison's demonstration and eventually
the two "worked together".

Musk is the most successful rocket launcher ever. He just had his
first failure in over several years of weekly launches.

Musk's rocket and cars work despite him, not because of him. They are
the work of hundreds of people - he does nothing except supply the money
and spout off his big mouth.

Reminds me of someone I read about in my SF-reading youth:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delos_D._Harriman

--
-v

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 11:18:08 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

<chips implanted in everybody's brain ... and then CrowdStrike
happens>

There are quite a few fools who have had chips implanted into their
arms so they can do checkout tap-n-pay, open security doors, etc.
without having to go to all the "difficultly" of taking a card out of
their pocket / lanyard or using a smartwatch.

When our workplace went to prox cards instead of punch-in combos, I
found that, if my wallet was oriented properly in my back pocket, I
could open the door by getting my butt close enough to it.

To amazed onlookers, I explained that I had had the prox card
surgically implanted. None of them reacted to the joke.

Tax collectors, of course, are not noted for their sense of humor.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:14:35 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-04 03:14:42 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:

<snippo mucho>
<Musk is being attacked, and this brings out a defender>

Musk is the most successful rocket launcher ever. He just had his
first failure in over several years of weekly launches.

Musk's rocket and cars work despite him, not because of him. They are
the work of hundreds of people - he does nothing except supply the
money and spout off his big mouth.

So it's a personal beef you have with him.

He has sold almost ten million electric cars. Find me a single person
or country that even meets ten percent of his records.

Tesla cars are all horrible and unreliable (with numerous recalls), and
the "self-driving" is a dangerous joke that should be banned from use
in any sensible country.

A recent article indicated that, in some areas, driving autonomously
with no human supervisor /is/ against the law. The idiot who was
failing to supervise his vehicle will be facing vehicular homicide
charges, apparently.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

On 2024-08-04 03:14:42 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:

Thomas Edison tried over 8,000 materials before he found the right
element for the first light bulb.

Edison didn't create the lightbulb. At best he used the work of others
before him, at worst he stole the idea. Nobody really know for sure.
What is known is that Edison's "demonstration" of his lightbulb is
known to be highly dubuious - he purposely ended the deomnstration just >before he knew the filament would burn out.

This is entirely true, and Edison was a marketing genius, but he still
deserves a lot of credit for the trial and error testing to find a way to
make a reliable carbon filament. Everybody knew carbon was a likely
material, lots of people had made short-lived lamps, but nobody had
figured out how to make a reliable carbon filament.

Joseph Swan may well be the real creator of the lightbulb we have used
in homes for years. He critised Edison's demonstration and eventually
the two "worked together".

Swan patented a carbon filament before Edison did, but his filament wasn't
as good as Edison's was.

Both the Edison and Swan lamps were very very expensive to make because of
the time involved in evacuating them, until an Italian fellow, whom I want
to call Malagnini, devised a method for largescale evacuation of a lot of
bulbs simultaneously.

Neither Edison nor Swan figured out about pressurizing the bulb with an
inert atmosphere, which leads to far more reliable bulbs. (And of course
forty years later folks worked out how to draw tungsten into wire and then everything changed completely, making the Ediswan patents meaningless.)

Musk is the most successful rocket launcher ever. He just had his
first failure in over several years of weekly launches.

Musk's rocket and cars work despite him, not because of him. They are
the work of hundreds of people - he does nothing except supply the
money and spout off his big mouth.

In some ways that's how Edison worked too. Edison was no engineer, and
he had minimal mathematical skills. But he knew what people needed and
he thought of ways to get them, and he got funding to develop them and to
hire people who could.

Musk is kind of an obnoxious bozo, but check out Edison's advertisements
for his "Tone tests" for his talking machines if you want to see something
even crazier than Musk's marketing. (And they are even crazier when you realize Edison was profoundly deaf and really had no idea how his machines sounded himself.)
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

In article <v8o4fl$3neof$2@dont-email.me>, vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> wrote: >Reminds me of someone I read about in my SF-reading youth:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delos_D._Harriman

Harriman is not Edison or Musk so much as Andrew Carnegie, I think.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 2024-08-04 15:54:51 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:14:35 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-04 03:14:42 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:

<snippo mucho>
<Musk is being attacked, and this brings out a defender>

Musk is the most successful rocket launcher ever. He just had his>>
first failure in over several years of weekly launches.

Musk's rocket and cars work despite him, not because of him. They

the work of hundreds of people - he does nothing except supply

money and spout off his big mouth.

So it's a personal beef you have with him.

He's a braindead, druggy, lunatic, plain and simple. He's known as Elon
Muskrat for a reason. :-p

He has sold almost ten million electric cars. Find me a single
person>> or country that even meets ten percent of his records.

Tesla cars are all horrible and unreliable (with numerous recalls),

the "self-driving" is a dangerous joke that should be banned from

in any sensible country.

A recent article indicated that, in some areas, driving autonomously
with no human supervisor /is/ against the law. The idiot who was
failing to supervise his vehicle will be facing vehicular homicide
charges, apparently.

Being illegal to use silly "self-driving" while not still paying
attention / being in control, that does not stop idiots not paying
attention and doesn't stop accidents happening. Only a coupe of days
ago a motorcyclist was killed thanks to some idiot using Tesla's
"auto-pilot".

Much of the blame also should go to the moron Elon Muskrat, who keeps
telling everyone it is "self-driving" when it is definitely NOT! Even
his own Tesla emplyees tell him it's crap. He also insists that the
Tesla cars only use cameras while every other company is using things
like lidar too (not that it makes their self-driving any better either).

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:

On 8/3/2024 6:18 PM, Your Name wrote:

On 2024-08-03 17:41:44 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:26:19 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 8/2/2024 12:13 PM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:46:39 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-01 07:58:16 +0000, BCFD 36 said:

On 7/23/24 00:56, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike >>>>>>>>>
Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

We were on a river cruise on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. We were >>>>>>> about 2 hours late leaving from one port because of the problem. It >>>>>>> makes no sense why this should be so.

Various possibilities. For example, the Crowdstrike glitch could have >>>>>> affected the boat's navigation computers, the company's ticket buying >>>>>> and checking system, etc.

Just wait till we all have chips in our heads that can be disabled (by >>>>> disabling a server they must connect to) by something like this. Won't >>>>> /that/ be fun!

You first !  I will be the last and they will have to catch me first.

I don't really expect to see that day, being 77 and all.
Well, unless it's part of Project 2025 and a certain D Trump gets
elected.

The awesome "The Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047" by Lionel Shriver

the entire population in the USA getting a money transaction chip at >>>> the>base of their skull connected to Starlink in 2040 and cash money

outlawed.

https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/

I haven't read that, but that doesn't mean I didn't encounter the
concept of embedded chips somewhere -- oh, wait: /The President's
Analyst/ had it.

There are quite a few fools who have had chips implanted into their arms so >> they can do checkout tap-n-pay, open security doors, etc. without having to >> go to all the "difficultly" of taking a card out of their pocket / lanyard >> or using a smartwatch.

There have also been a few people with disabilities that have trialed brain >> implant chips to allow them to regain some abilities. I don't think any
have been fully successful, but some have worked better than others (Elon
Musk's Neuralink trial "malfunctioned" ... unsurprisingly, just look at his >> failures with his rockets, his Tesla cars, etc. to know how much of an
idiot he is and rushes things out to suit his own looney ideals).

Only by failing can one find the right path to success. Nothing was ever invented without failures leading the path to it.

Thomas Edison tried over 8,000 materials before he found the right element for the first light bulb.

Musk is the most successful rocket launcher ever. He just had his first failure in over several years of weekly launches. He has sold almost ten million electric cars. Find me a single person or country that even meets ten percent of his records.

Lynn

I find it interesting how many people complain about Elons incompetence,
yet, they have not managed to create several billion dollars companies themselves.

One might agree with his ideology and ideas, but one thing he is not, and
that is incompetent and stupid.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Mon, 5 Aug 2024 09:02:17 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-04 15:54:51 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:14:35 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-04 03:14:42 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:

<snippo mucho>
<Musk is being attacked, and this brings out a defender>

Musk is the most successful rocket launcher ever. He just had his>>
first failure in over several years of weekly launches.

Musk's rocket and cars work despite him, not because of him. They

the work of hundreds of people - he does nothing except supply

money and spout off his big mouth.

So it's a personal beef you have with him.

He's a braindead, druggy, lunatic, plain and simple. He's known as Elon >Muskrat for a reason. :-p

He has sold almost ten million electric cars. Find me a single
person>> or country that even meets ten percent of his records.

Tesla cars are all horrible and unreliable (with numerous recalls),

the "self-driving" is a dangerous joke that should be banned from

in any sensible country.

A recent article indicated that, in some areas, driving autonomously
with no human supervisor /is/ against the law. The idiot who was
failing to supervise his vehicle will be facing vehicular homicide
charges, apparently.

Being illegal to use silly "self-driving" while not still paying
attention / being in control, that does not stop idiots not paying
attention and doesn't stop accidents happening. Only a coupe of days
ago a motorcyclist was killed thanks to some idiot using Tesla's >"auto-pilot".

This may be what I was referring to. Or not, as the case may be.

With any luck and a good prosecutor, that idiot will be in the
Greybar Hotel and so unable to use Tesla's anything for the forseeable
future.

Maybe a law requiring "auto-pilot" to activate flashing green lights
and have a top speed of, say, 5 MPH would help. Mostly by driving it
off the market. I've /never/ been a fan of this sort of thing unless,
of course, the vehicle is firmly attached to the ground by a rail and
under the control of a centralized system not connected to the
Internet.

Much of the blame also should go to the moron Elon Muskrat, who keeps >telling everyone it is "self-driving" when it is definitely NOT! Even
his own Tesla emplyees tell him it's crap. He also insists that the
Tesla cars only use cameras while every other company is using things
like lidar too (not that it makes their self-driving any better either).

The same could be said of using "3D" for "stereoscopy" when they are
clearly distinguishable.

I realize that the terminology here is very confused: I am using "3D"
here to refer to what we (well, most of us) see with our own eyes when
we look around as opposed to stereoscopy and also to 3D animation
which produces some fine effects but is not stereoscopy. My favorite illustration of the difference is this:

if you watch a stereoscopic film in which, say, a paddle-ball ball is
sent directly into your face "out of the screen", it will be aimed at
your face no matter where you are sitting

if a /real/ paddle-ball ball were sent out to the audience, some would
see it coming at them, others along side them, and some above (or,
when balconies existed, below) them -- you would see different things
depending on where you are sitting

Another difference, of course, is that just seeing the world in 3D
doesn't make most people throw up. Sterescopic films are known the do
that. Although, to be some Cinerama/Cinemiracle films did as well, at
least when projected so that all you saw was the film (no screen
boundaries visible).
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 2024-08-05 16:19:41 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Mon, 5 Aug 2024 09:02:17 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-04 15:54:51 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:14:35 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-04 03:14:42 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:

<snip>

Much of the blame also should go to the moron Elon Muskrat, who
keeps>telling everyone it is "self-driving" when it is definitely NOT!
Even>his own Tesla emplyees tell him it's crap. He also insists that

Tesla cars only use cameras while every other company is using

things>like lidar too (not that it makes their self-driving any better
either).

The same could be said of using "3D" for "stereoscopy" when they are
clearly distinguishable.
I realize that the terminology here is very confused: I am using "3D"
here to refer to what we (well, most of us) see with our own eyes when
we look around as opposed to stereoscopy and also to 3D animation
which produces some fine effects but is not stereoscopy. My favorite illustration of the difference is this:

if you watch a stereoscopic film in which, say, a paddle-ball ball is
sent directly into your face "out of the screen", it will be aimed at
your face no matter where you are sitting

if a /real/ paddle-ball ball were sent out to the audience, some would
see it coming at them, others along side them, and some above (or,
when balconies existed, below) them -- you would see different things depending on where you are sitting

That is partly done on purpose to make *you* feel you're in the film,
rather than the cinema, but of course technical limitations play the
biggest part ... currently.

No doubt some cinema will use AR/VR-style headsets to give the audience different viewpoints depending on where they are sitting. Could be good
for those watching something like a sports event or music concert, but
it doesn't really work for a normal movie since it is irrelevant where
you are in relation to others watching.

Another difference, of course, is that just seeing the world in 3D
doesn't make most people throw up. Sterescopic films are known the do
that. Although, to be some Cinerama/Cinemiracle films did as well, at
least when projected so that all you saw was the film (no screen
boundaries visible).

I can only play 3D computer games for a few minutes before I start
getting motion sick. If I continue to play, I end up with an extremely
bad headache and bad nausea. Even just watching gameplay trailers
starts making me feeling sick too.

Same if I try to read books or maps (as a passenger of course) in a moving car.

I've never bothered trying to watch a 3D movie.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 6/08/24 13:27, Your Name wrote:

Same if I try to read books or maps (as a passenger of course) in a
moving car.

Ah. There's your problem. You need a decent car, like a Tesla. :p

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 2024-08-06 03:46:13 +0000, Titus G said:

On 6/08/24 13:27, Your Name wrote:

Same if I try to read books or maps (as a passenger of course) in a
moving car.

Ah. There's your problem. You need a decent car, like a Tesla. :p

Awful Tesla cars make me feel incredibly sick just looking at them from
the outside standing still ... I wouldn't be seen dead inside one. :op

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

On 2024-08-05 16:19:41 +0000, Paul S Person said:

if a /real/ paddle-ball ball were sent out to the audience, some would
see it coming at them, others along side them, and some above (or,
when balconies existed, below) them -- you would see different things
depending on where you are sitting

This is the Emergo process, and it is patented by William Castle.

No doubt some cinema will use AR/VR-style headsets to give the audience >different viewpoints depending on where they are sitting. Could be good
for those watching something like a sports event or music concert, but
it doesn't really work for a normal movie since it is irrelevant where
you are in relation to others watching.

This would fail badly because everyone would be jostling for the best view.
I could imagine this could be useful for museum reproductions of historical events, though.

I can only play 3D computer games for a few minutes before I start
getting motion sick. If I continue to play, I end up with an extremely
bad headache and bad nausea. Even just watching gameplay trailers
starts making me feeling sick too.

Same if I try to read books or maps (as a passenger of course) in a moving car.

Same problem. Your vestibular system is saying one thing and your visual system is saying another thing and they conflict and your brain doesn't know what to do about it.

I've never bothered trying to watch a 3D movie.

I have no stereoscopic depth perception because I could only see out of one
eye until I was twelve. My wife's ex had none because his brother poked his eye out with a stick when he was at about the same age. The two of us set
up 3-D films at Arisia several years running, both dual-projector with chains to synchronize and Swinging Stewardesses with the mirror box system. We
lined everything up on the test films so the marks were all in the right
place on the screen and then we'd have to get her to put on the polarized glasses and tell us if everything looked right.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 13:27:49 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-05 16:19:41 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Mon, 5 Aug 2024 09:02:17 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-04 15:54:51 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:14:35 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-04 03:14:42 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:

<snip>

Much of the blame also should go to the moron Elon Muskrat, who
keeps>telling everyone it is "self-driving" when it is definitely NOT!
Even>his own Tesla emplyees tell him it's crap. He also insists that

Tesla cars only use cameras while every other company is using

things>like lidar too (not that it makes their self-driving any better
either).

The same could be said of using "3D" for "stereoscopy" when they are
clearly distinguishable.
I realize that the terminology here is very confused: I am using "3D"
here to refer to what we (well, most of us) see with our own eyes when
we look around as opposed to stereoscopy and also to 3D animation
which produces some fine effects but is not stereoscopy. My favorite
illustration of the difference is this:

if you watch a stereoscopic film in which, say, a paddle-ball ball is
sent directly into your face "out of the screen", it will be aimed at
your face no matter where you are sitting

if a /real/ paddle-ball ball were sent out to the audience, some would
see it coming at them, others along side them, and some above (or,
when balconies existed, below) them -- you would see different things
depending on where you are sitting

That is partly done on purpose to make *you* feel you're in the film,
rather than the cinema, but of course technical limitations play the
biggest part ... currently.

No doubt some cinema will use AR/VR-style headsets to give the audience >different viewpoints depending on where they are sitting. Could be good
for those watching something like a sports event or music concert, but
it doesn't really work for a normal movie since it is irrelevant where
you are in relation to others watching.

Another difference, of course, is that just seeing the world in 3D
doesn't make most people throw up. Sterescopic films are known the do
that. Although, to be some Cinerama/Cinemiracle films did as well, at
least when projected so that all you saw was the film (no screen
boundaries visible).

I can only play 3D computer games for a few minutes before I start
getting motion sick. If I continue to play, I end up with an extremely
bad headache and bad nausea. Even just watching gameplay trailers
starts making me feeling sick too.

Same if I try to read books or maps (as a passenger of course) in a moving car.

I've never bothered trying to watch a 3D movie.

Neither have I ... in the sense I suspect you intended: as a 3D movie.

I've seen (and own) several that were released as "3D" movies.
/Creature from the Black Lagoon/ comes with a trailer proudly
proclaiming it as the first 3D movie to be filmed underwater. /Dial
"M" for Murder/ is (AFAIK) Hitchcock's one and only forey into
"3D" (that's why the image has the woman's hand pointing at you: it no
doubt extends from the screen in "3D"). /Coraline/ is not only "3D";
the DVD comes with a packet of "red/blue" paper eyeglasses and has two
sides: one "3D" and the other the side I watch. And of course
Argento's /Dracula/ and /Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2/
are "3D". And there are many many others.

But I watch none of them in 3D. I have my own glasses and don't need a
second pair to fix the blurriness of the film. (I am relying here on a
scene in /The A-Team/ which depicts what a "3D" film looks like
without the glasses.)

/Coraline/ is interesting because it points out the /real/ purpose of
"home 3D": to make money by requiring a new, special BD player and a
new, special TV set -- neither of which was necessary, just a
properly-prepared disk. But that's just how it goes nowadays.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 2024-08-06 16:18:38 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 13:27:49 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-05 16:19:41 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Mon, 5 Aug 2024 09:02:17 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-04 15:54:51 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:14:35 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-04 03:14:42 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:

<snip>

Much of the blame also should go to the moron Elon Muskrat, who>>>
keeps>telling everyone it is "self-driving" when it is definitely
NOT!>>> Even>his own Tesla emplyees tell him it's crap. He also insists >>>> that>>> the>Tesla cars only use cameras while every other company is
using>>> things>like lidar too (not that it makes their self-driving
any better>>> either).

The same could be said of using "3D" for "stereoscopy" when they are
clearly distinguishable.
I realize that the terminology here is very confused: I am using "3D"
here to refer to what we (well, most of us) see with our own eyes when
we look around as opposed to stereoscopy and also to 3D animation
which produces some fine effects but is not stereoscopy. My favorite
illustration of the difference is this:

if you watch a stereoscopic film in which, say, a paddle-ball ball is
sent directly into your face "out of the screen", it will be aimed at
your face no matter where you are sitting

if a /real/ paddle-ball ball were sent out to the audience, some would
see it coming at them, others along side them, and some above (or,
when balconies existed, below) them -- you would see different things
depending on where you are sitting

That is partly done on purpose to make *you* feel you're in the
film,>rather than the cinema, but of course technical limitations play

biggest part ... currently.

No doubt some cinema will use AR/VR-style headsets to give the
audience>different viewpoints depending on where they are sitting.
Could be good>for those watching something like a sports event or music
concert, but>it doesn't really work for a normal movie since it is
irrelevant where>you are in relation to others watching.

Another difference, of course, is that just seeing the world in 3D
doesn't make most people throw up. Sterescopic films are known the do
that. Although, to be some Cinerama/Cinemiracle films did as well, at
least when projected so that all you saw was the film (no screen
boundaries visible).

I can only play 3D computer games for a few minutes before I
start>getting motion sick. If I continue to play, I end up with an
extremely>bad headache and bad nausea. Even just watching gameplay
trailers>starts making me feeling sick too.

Same if I try to read books or maps (as a passenger of course) in a moving car.

I've never bothered trying to watch a 3D movie.

Neither have I ... in the sense I suspect you intended: as a 3D movie.

I've seen (and own) several that were released as "3D" movies.
/Creature from the Black Lagoon/ comes with a trailer proudly
proclaiming it as the first 3D movie to be filmed underwater. /Dial
"M" for Murder/ is (AFAIK) Hitchcock's one and only forey into"3D"
(that's why the image has the woman's hand pointing at you: it no
doubt extends from the screen in "3D"). /Coraline/ is not only "3D";
the DVD comes with a packet of "red/blue" paper eyeglasses and has two
sides: one "3D" and the other the side I watch. And of course
Argento's /Dracula/ and /Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2/
are "3D". And there are many many others.

But I watch none of them in 3D. I have my own glasses and don't need a
second pair to fix the blurriness of the film. (I am relying here on a
scene in /The A-Team/ which depicts what a "3D" film looks like
without the glasses.)

/Coraline/ is interesting because it points out the /real/ purpose of
"home 3D": to make money by requiring a new, special BD player and a
new, special TV set -- neither of which was necessary, just a properly-prepared disk. But that's just how it goes nowadays.

Our main TV does have a setting for 3D (despite being too small a
screen size for it to be remotely useful), but I've never even bothered
to look at what it does, let alone use it. It probably uses some
gimmickry to turn normal 2D shows / movies into pseudo-3D, which would
be even worse than those filmed as 3D.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 09:22:33 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-06 16:18:38 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 13:27:49 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-05 16:19:41 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Mon, 5 Aug 2024 09:02:17 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-04 15:54:51 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:14:35 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> >>>>>> wrote:

On 2024-08-04 03:14:42 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:

<snip>

Much of the blame also should go to the moron Elon Muskrat, who>>>
keeps>telling everyone it is "self-driving" when it is definitely
NOT!>>> Even>his own Tesla emplyees tell him it's crap. He also insists >>>>> that>>> the>Tesla cars only use cameras while every other company is >>>>> using>>> things>like lidar too (not that it makes their self-driving >>>>> any better>>> either).

The same could be said of using "3D" for "stereoscopy" when they are
clearly distinguishable.
I realize that the terminology here is very confused: I am using "3D"
here to refer to what we (well, most of us) see with our own eyes when >>>> we look around as opposed to stereoscopy and also to 3D animation
which produces some fine effects but is not stereoscopy. My favorite
illustration of the difference is this:

if you watch a stereoscopic film in which, say, a paddle-ball ball is
sent directly into your face "out of the screen", it will be aimed at
your face no matter where you are sitting

if a /real/ paddle-ball ball were sent out to the audience, some would >>>> see it coming at them, others along side them, and some above (or,
when balconies existed, below) them -- you would see different things
depending on where you are sitting

That is partly done on purpose to make *you* feel you're in the
film,>rather than the cinema, but of course technical limitations play

biggest part ... currently.

No doubt some cinema will use AR/VR-style headsets to give the
audience>different viewpoints depending on where they are sitting.
Could be good>for those watching something like a sports event or music >>> concert, but>it doesn't really work for a normal movie since it is
irrelevant where>you are in relation to others watching.

Another difference, of course, is that just seeing the world in 3D
doesn't make most people throw up. Sterescopic films are known the do
that. Although, to be some Cinerama/Cinemiracle films did as well, at
least when projected so that all you saw was the film (no screen
boundaries visible).

I can only play 3D computer games for a few minutes before I
start>getting motion sick. If I continue to play, I end up with an
extremely>bad headache and bad nausea. Even just watching gameplay
trailers>starts making me feeling sick too.

Same if I try to read books or maps (as a passenger of course) in a moving car.

I've never bothered trying to watch a 3D movie.

Neither have I ... in the sense I suspect you intended: as a 3D movie.

I've seen (and own) several that were released as "3D" movies.
/Creature from the Black Lagoon/ comes with a trailer proudly
proclaiming it as the first 3D movie to be filmed underwater. /Dial
"M" for Murder/ is (AFAIK) Hitchcock's one and only forey into"3D"
(that's why the image has the woman's hand pointing at you: it no
doubt extends from the screen in "3D"). /Coraline/ is not only "3D";
the DVD comes with a packet of "red/blue" paper eyeglasses and has two
sides: one "3D" and the other the side I watch. And of course
Argento's /Dracula/ and /Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2/
are "3D". And there are many many others.

But I watch none of them in 3D. I have my own glasses and don't need a
second pair to fix the blurriness of the film. (I am relying here on a
scene in /The A-Team/ which depicts what a "3D" film looks like
without the glasses.)

/Coraline/ is interesting because it points out the /real/ purpose of
"home 3D": to make money by requiring a new, special BD player and a
new, special TV set -- neither of which was necessary, just a
properly-prepared disk. But that's just how it goes nowadays.

Our main TV does have a setting for 3D (despite being too small a
screen size for it to be remotely useful), but I've never even bothered
to look at what it does, let alone use it. It probably uses some
gimmickry to turn normal 2D shows / movies into pseudo-3D, which would
be even worse than those filmed as 3D.

Or it allows you to feed it a "3D" signal and have it display as "2D"
(I prefer "flat" for this myself). The manual might tell you [1].

An early review in /Consumer Reports/ when "3D" TVs first came out
talked about a system where the two images were interlaced on the same
screen. Which, of course, halves the vertical resolution. I don't
recall them mentioning glasses, and, since this reads a lot like
interlacing, perhaps not.

The review had something to say about the glasses that came with most
of those sets -- the ones costing $150 or so 24 years or so ago,
exactly one of which came with each set. In addition to the cost and
the need to buy more if you wanted to share the experience, they noted
that the little flaps that moved up and down to control which eye
could see the screen sometimes froze, producing imperfections.

This was /not/, apparently, what was used in theaters; there,
polarized glasses were used. But those cost a lot less than the
"flicker glasses" (my name, I don't recall what the official name was)
and would work with any "3D" TV, not just the one it came with. So
those were clearly out as far as home use was concerned.

Add to those the red/green glasses DVD version, and we have no less
than /3/ ways to see "3D" movies -- and the only one that is the same
in the home as it is in the theater is the red/green version from the
50s [2]. This is progress?

[1] Or not. My current TV (a digital Toshiba from 20+ years ago with
one tube: the picture tube) has a "DTV" option and the manual defines
it as "Digital TV" but says nothing else about it, so I have no idea
at all what it is supposed to connect to despite reading the manual.

[2] Unless, of course, current "3D" TVs are using polarized glasses.
Or other changes have occurred that I am happily ignorant of.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 2024-08-07 15:46:58 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 09:22:33 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-06 16:18:38 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 13:27:49 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-05 16:19:41 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Mon, 5 Aug 2024 09:02:17 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-04 15:54:51 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:14:35 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> >>>>>>> wrote:

On 2024-08-04 03:14:42 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:

<snip>

Much of the blame also should go to the moron Elon Muskrat, who>>>>>>>> >>>>>> keeps>telling everyone it is "self-driving" when it is definitely>>>>> >>>>>> NOT!>>> Even>his own Tesla emplyees tell him it's crap. He also
insists>>>>> that>>> the>Tesla cars only use cameras while every other >>>>>> company is>>>>> using>>> things>like lidar too (not that it makes their >>>>>> self-driving>>>>> any better>>> either).

The same could be said of using "3D" for "stereoscopy" when they are >>>>> clearly distinguishable.
I realize that the terminology here is very confused: I am using "3D" >>>>> here to refer to what we (well, most of us) see with our own eyes when >>>>> we look around as opposed to stereoscopy and also to 3D animation
which produces some fine effects but is not stereoscopy. My favorite >>>>> illustration of the difference is this:

if you watch a stereoscopic film in which, say, a paddle-ball ball is >>>>> sent directly into your face "out of the screen", it will be aimed at >>>>> your face no matter where you are sitting

if a /real/ paddle-ball ball were sent out to the audience, some would >>>>> see it coming at them, others along side them, and some above (or,
when balconies existed, below) them -- you would see different things >>>>> depending on where you are sitting

That is partly done on purpose to make *you* feel you're in the>>>
film,>rather than the cinema, but of course technical limitations
play>>> the>biggest part ... currently.

No doubt some cinema will use AR/VR-style headsets to give the>>>
audience>different viewpoints depending on where they are sitting.>>>
Could be good>for those watching something like a sports event or
music>>> concert, but>it doesn't really work for a normal movie since
it is>>> irrelevant where>you are in relation to others watching.

Another difference, of course, is that just seeing the world in 3D
doesn't make most people throw up. Sterescopic films are known the do >>>>> that. Although, to be some Cinerama/Cinemiracle films did as well, at >>>>> least when projected so that all you saw was the film (no screen
boundaries visible).

I can only play 3D computer games for a few minutes before I>>>
start>getting motion sick. If I continue to play, I end up with an>>>
extremely>bad headache and bad nausea. Even just watching gameplay>>>
trailers>starts making me feeling sick too.

Same if I try to read books or maps (as a passenger of course) in a moving car.

I've never bothered trying to watch a 3D movie.

Neither have I ... in the sense I suspect you intended: as a 3D movie.

I've seen (and own) several that were released as "3D" movies.
/Creature from the Black Lagoon/ comes with a trailer proudly
proclaiming it as the first 3D movie to be filmed underwater. /Dial
"M" for Murder/ is (AFAIK) Hitchcock's one and only forey into"3D">>
(that's why the image has the woman's hand pointing at you: it no
doubt extends from the screen in "3D"). /Coraline/ is not only "3D";
the DVD comes with a packet of "red/blue" paper eyeglasses and has two
sides: one "3D" and the other the side I watch. And of course
Argento's /Dracula/ and /Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2/
are "3D". And there are many many others.

But I watch none of them in 3D. I have my own glasses and don't need a
second pair to fix the blurriness of the film. (I am relying here on a
scene in /The A-Team/ which depicts what a "3D" film looks like
without the glasses.)

/Coraline/ is interesting because it points out the /real/ purpose of
"home 3D": to make money by requiring a new, special BD player and a
new, special TV set -- neither of which was necessary, just a
properly-prepared disk. But that's just how it goes nowadays.

Our main TV does have a setting for 3D (despite being too small

screen size for it to be remotely useful), but I've never even

bothered>to look at what it does, let alone use it. It probably uses
some>gimmickry to turn normal 2D shows / movies into pseudo-3D, which
would>be even worse than those filmed as 3D.

Or it allows you to feed it a "3D" signal and have it display as "2D"
(I prefer "flat" for this myself). The manual might tell you [1].

I vaguely remember accidentally going into 3D mode via the remote, and
the screen went into the "fuzzy" look you see when watching 3D movies
without glasses. But I really can't be bothered with 3D nonsense - it's
always been nothing more than a pointless gimmick.

An early review in /Consumer Reports/ when "3D" TVs first came out
talked about a system where the two images were interlaced on the same screen. Which, of course, halves the vertical resolution. I don't
recall them mentioning glasses, and, since this reads a lot like
interlacing, perhaps not.

The review had something to say about the glasses that came with most
of those sets -- the ones costing $150 or so 24 years or so ago,
exactly one of which came with each set. In addition to the cost and
the need to buy more if you wanted to share the experience, they noted
that the little flaps that moved up and down to control which eye
could see the screen sometimes froze, producing imperfections.

This was /not/, apparently, what was used in theaters; there,
polarized glasses were used. But those cost a lot less than the
"flicker glasses" (my name, I don't recall what the official name was)
and would work with any "3D" TV, not just the one it came with. So
those were clearly out as far as home use was concerned.

Add to those the red/green glasses DVD version, and we have no less
than /3/ ways to see "3D" movies -- and the only one that is the same
in the home as it is in the theater is the red/green version from the
50s [2]. This is progress?

[1] Or not. My current TV (a digital Toshiba from 20+ years ago with
one tube: the picture tube) has a "DTV" option and the manual defines
it as "Digital TV" but says nothing else about it, so I have no idea
at all what it is supposed to connect to despite reading the manual.

[2] Unless, of course, current "3D" TVs are using polarized glasses.
Or other changes have occurred that I am happily ignorant of.

There were TVs that had a no-glasses 3D feature, but like all 3D, it's
become a fad that has pretty much disappeared for watching and has now
shifted to 3D audio instead.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Thu, 8 Aug 2024 11:44:43 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-07 15:46:58 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 09:22:33 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-06 16:18:38 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 13:27:49 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-05 16:19:41 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Mon, 5 Aug 2024 09:02:17 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> >>>>>> wrote:

On 2024-08-04 15:54:51 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:14:35 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:

On 2024-08-04 03:14:42 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:

<snip>

Much of the blame also should go to the moron Elon Muskrat, who>>>>>>>>
keeps>telling everyone it is "self-driving" when it is definitely>>>>> >>>>>>> NOT!>>> Even>his own Tesla emplyees tell him it's crap. He also >>>>>>> insists>>>>> that>>> the>Tesla cars only use cameras while every other >>>>>>> company is>>>>> using>>> things>like lidar too (not that it makes their
self-driving>>>>> any better>>> either).

The same could be said of using "3D" for "stereoscopy" when they are >>>>>> clearly distinguishable.
I realize that the terminology here is very confused: I am using "3D" >>>>>> here to refer to what we (well, most of us) see with our own eyes when >>>>>> we look around as opposed to stereoscopy and also to 3D animation
which produces some fine effects but is not stereoscopy. My favorite >>>>>> illustration of the difference is this:

if you watch a stereoscopic film in which, say, a paddle-ball ball is >>>>>> sent directly into your face "out of the screen", it will be aimed at >>>>>> your face no matter where you are sitting

if a /real/ paddle-ball ball were sent out to the audience, some would >>>>>> see it coming at them, others along side them, and some above (or, >>>>>> when balconies existed, below) them -- you would see different things >>>>>> depending on where you are sitting

That is partly done on purpose to make *you* feel you're in the>>>
film,>rather than the cinema, but of course technical limitations
play>>> the>biggest part ... currently.

No doubt some cinema will use AR/VR-style headsets to give the>>>
audience>different viewpoints depending on where they are sitting.>>> >>>>> Could be good>for those watching something like a sports event or
music>>> concert, but>it doesn't really work for a normal movie since >>>>> it is>>> irrelevant where>you are in relation to others watching.

Another difference, of course, is that just seeing the world in 3D >>>>>> doesn't make most people throw up. Sterescopic films are known the do >>>>>> that. Although, to be some Cinerama/Cinemiracle films did as well, at >>>>>> least when projected so that all you saw was the film (no screen
boundaries visible).

I can only play 3D computer games for a few minutes before I>>>
start>getting motion sick. If I continue to play, I end up with an>>> >>>>> extremely>bad headache and bad nausea. Even just watching gameplay>>> >>>>> trailers>starts making me feeling sick too.

Same if I try to read books or maps (as a passenger of course) in a moving car.

I've never bothered trying to watch a 3D movie.

Neither have I ... in the sense I suspect you intended: as a 3D movie. >>>>
I've seen (and own) several that were released as "3D" movies.
/Creature from the Black Lagoon/ comes with a trailer proudly
proclaiming it as the first 3D movie to be filmed underwater. /Dial
"M" for Murder/ is (AFAIK) Hitchcock's one and only forey into"3D">>
(that's why the image has the woman's hand pointing at you: it no
doubt extends from the screen in "3D"). /Coraline/ is not only "3D";
the DVD comes with a packet of "red/blue" paper eyeglasses and has two >>>> sides: one "3D" and the other the side I watch. And of course
Argento's /Dracula/ and /Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2/
are "3D". And there are many many others.

But I watch none of them in 3D. I have my own glasses and don't need a >>>> second pair to fix the blurriness of the film. (I am relying here on a >>>> scene in /The A-Team/ which depicts what a "3D" film looks like
without the glasses.)

/Coraline/ is interesting because it points out the /real/ purpose of
"home 3D": to make money by requiring a new, special BD player and a
new, special TV set -- neither of which was necessary, just a
properly-prepared disk. But that's just how it goes nowadays.

Our main TV does have a setting for 3D (despite being too small

screen size for it to be remotely useful), but I've never even

bothered>to look at what it does, let alone use it. It probably uses
some>gimmickry to turn normal 2D shows / movies into pseudo-3D, which
would>be even worse than those filmed as 3D.

Or it allows you to feed it a "3D" signal and have it display as "2D"
(I prefer "flat" for this myself). The manual might tell you [1].

I vaguely remember accidentally going into 3D mode via the remote, and
the screen went into the "fuzzy" look you see when watching 3D movies >without glasses. But I really can't be bothered with 3D nonsense - it's >always been nothing more than a pointless gimmick.

The last time I accidently did something tomy TV with the remote, it
appeared to stop working and I bought one of these <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B076DVVBNR?psc=1&ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_product_details> (which I had been thinking about for some time) so fast it was here
the next day. Yes, I am on Prime. Of course, this depends on their
having one locally and a strong delivery presence, but I'm in Seattle,
so they do.

I managed to recover the TV set by figuring out what I had pressed.
The Naviskauto has been very useful when the weather gets up into the
80s, now that my laptop has reached a state where signing in locally
is not advisable (it still works as a file server over the WiFi,
however) and so is no longer available as a hot-weather player.

Since I don't watch films in "3D", I can't say if they are pointless
or not, but I would not be surprised if they were. There was one film
Ebert praised in a way that might suggest that, for that film, it was
not. I have no doubt that, in general, "pointless gimmick" is an
excellent description.

I feel the same way about those advanced sound systems ("pointless
gimmick") in theaters. I didn't hear the song Gandalf (I had, of
course, a pretty good idea of what it was) was singing to himself at
the start of the PJ /FOTR/ until I saw it in an auditorium with a
boring old-fashioned stereo system. There are other films were
especially cute things were done with the vocal track which obscured
them.

But there was one exception: when I saw /Kung Fu Panda 2/ in the
theater (did I mention recently that I really like animated films?).
There is a scene where our hero is saying goodbye to his father and a
team-mate speaks from behind. And from /behind/ the words came,
clearly and plainly from behind, in the theater! So those advanced
sound systems are not entirely pointless, just mostly so. IMHO, of
course.

An early review in /Consumer Reports/ when "3D" TVs first came out
talked about a system where the two images were interlaced on the same
screen. Which, of course, halves the vertical resolution. I don't
recall them mentioning glasses, and, since this reads a lot like
interlacing, perhaps not.

The review had something to say about the glasses that came with most
of those sets -- the ones costing $150 or so 24 years or so ago,
exactly one of which came with each set. In addition to the cost and
the need to buy more if you wanted to share the experience, they noted
that the little flaps that moved up and down to control which eye
could see the screen sometimes froze, producing imperfections.

This was /not/, apparently, what was used in theaters; there,
polarized glasses were used. But those cost a lot less than the
"flicker glasses" (my name, I don't recall what the official name was)
and would work with any "3D" TV, not just the one it came with. So
those were clearly out as far as home use was concerned.

Add to those the red/green glasses DVD version, and we have no less
than /3/ ways to see "3D" movies -- and the only one that is the same
in the home as it is in the theater is the red/green version from the
50s [2]. This is progress?

[1] Or not. My current TV (a digital Toshiba from 20+ years ago with
one tube: the picture tube) has a "DTV" option and the manual defines
it as "Digital TV" but says nothing else about it, so I have no idea
at all what it is supposed to connect to despite reading the manual.

[2] Unless, of course, current "3D" TVs are using polarized glasses.
Or other changes have occurred that I am happily ignorant of.

There were TVs that had a no-glasses 3D feature, but like all 3D, it's >become a fad that has pretty much disappeared for watching and has now >shifted to 3D audio instead.

Well, they tried anyway. It occurred to me eventually that, while
doing that with a 1920x1080 signal would produce a vertical resolution
of 540 [1], doing it with 4K (3840 � 2160) would produce a vertical
resolution of 1080, which might be more acceptable.

4K appears to be the new fad -- historically speaking, of course. I
couple of nights ago I watched a "trailer" at the start of a DVD
(probably a good 10 years old now) that compared a normal BD image
with a 4K image to show how much better (the number of colors
available was particularly stressed) the latter was. Of course, since
this was on a /DVD/ the alleged 4K image was, at best, at maximal DVD resolution/number of colors, and the so-called "normal BD" image was
simply the same image degraded. Why they would expect anyone to be
impressed by this I have no idea.

Of course, when the the same thing was done to show the superiority of
digital scanning, /that/ could well have been real (that is, had two
different images, one scanned one way, one another) because the
difference was in how the source was scanned, not what was displaying
it. OTOH, the VHS trailers touting the superiority of DVD were just as unimpressive as the BD/4K one referred to above.

I do not see anything intrinsically wrong with a player being able to
handle "3D" discs (either as "3D" or as flat or either at the user's
option) or a TV being able to process "3D" input as a change in how
things are made over time. Progress is one thing; nonsense is another.

[1] As usual, I can find info in the format desired by the author but
not by me. I am taking it for granted that, since 16:9, like 4:3,
specifies the width first and height second, that the smaller figure
is vertical (so that 1920x1080 has 1080 vertical lines).
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 2024-08-08 17:56:57 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Thu, 8 Aug 2024 11:44:43 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-07 15:46:58 +0000, Paul S Person said:

<snip>

An early review in /Consumer Reports/ when "3D" TVs first came out
talked about a system where the two images were interlaced on the same
screen. Which, of course, halves the vertical resolution. I don't
recall them mentioning glasses, and, since this reads a lot like
interlacing, perhaps not.

The review had something to say about the glasses that came with most
of those sets -- the ones costing $150 or so 24 years or so ago,
exactly one of which came with each set. In addition to the cost and
the need to buy more if you wanted to share the experience, they noted
that the little flaps that moved up and down to control which eye
could see the screen sometimes froze, producing imperfections.

This was /not/, apparently, what was used in theaters; there,
polarized glasses were used. But those cost a lot less than the
"flicker glasses" (my name, I don't recall what the official name was)
and would work with any "3D" TV, not just the one it came with. So
those were clearly out as far as home use was concerned.

Add to those the red/green glasses DVD version, and we have no less
than /3/ ways to see "3D" movies -- and the only one that is the same
in the home as it is in the theater is the red/green version from the
50s [2]. This is progress?

[1] Or not. My current TV (a digital Toshiba from 20+ years ago with
one tube: the picture tube) has a "DTV" option and the manual defines
it as "Digital TV" but says nothing else about it, so I have no idea
at all what it is supposed to connect to despite reading the manual.

[2] Unless, of course, current "3D" TVs are using polarized glasses.
Or other changes have occurred that I am happily ignorant of.

There were TVs that had a no-glasses 3D feature, but like all 3D, it's
become a fad that has pretty much disappeared for watching and has now
shifted to 3D audio instead.

Well, they tried anyway.

There are small companies still working on 3D devices, including the
Proto "holographic" box, but the big TV companies gave up on 3D a few
years ago. You might still get the occasional 3D DVD / Blu-ray being
released and many player boxes can play them on any regular high
resolution TV set or computer screen.

It occurred to me eventually that, while doing that with a 1920x1080
signal would produce a vertical resolution of 540 [1], doing it with 4K
(3840 � 2160) would produce a vertical resolution of 1080, which might
be more acceptable.

4K appears to be the new fad

4K is ancient tech.

8K is now the main fad for manufacturers with 16K TV sets now
appearing, and 32K ones are in the prototyping stage. But such super
high resolutions are mostly just another gimmick trying to con people
into buying yet another new TV set they do not need since few networks broadcast / stream in even 4K and nobody does higher. Plus 4K
resolution is more than enough unless you've got a massive TV or
projector screen.

-- historically speaking, of course. I couple of nights ago I watched a "trailer" at the start of a DVD (probably a good 10 years old now) that compared a normal BD image with a 4K image to show how much better (the number of colors available was particularly stressed) the latter was.
Of course, since this was on a /DVD/ the alleged 4K image was, at best,
at maximal DVD
resolution/number of colors, and the so-called "normal BD" image was
simply the same image degraded. Why they would expect anyone to be
impressed by this I have no idea.

Of course, when the the same thing was done to show the superiority of digital scanning, /that/ could well have been real (that is, had two different images, one scanned one way, one another) because the
difference was in how the source was scanned, not what was displaying
it. OTOH, the VHS trailers touting the superiority of DVD were just as unimpressive as the BD/4K one referred to above.

I do not see anything intrinsically wrong with a player being able to
handle "3D" discs (either as "3D" or as flat or either at the user's
option) or a TV being able to process "3D" input as a change in how
things are made over time. Progress is one thing; nonsense is another.

[1] As usual, I can find info in the format desired by the author but
not by me. I am taking it for granted that, since 16:9, like 4:3,
specifies the width first and height second, that the smaller figure
is vertical (so that 1920x1080 has 1080 vertical lines).

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 9/08/24 16:16, Robert Carnegie wrote:

Also this happens: <https://spectrum.ieee.org/retina-implant-pixium-sa-receivership>

You don't want "retinal implants" and
"resorted to home repairs" in one news article.

None So Blind. Joe Haldeman. Hugo short story winner.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 2024-08-09 03:53:17 +0000, Robert Carnegie said:

On 05/08/2024 12:02, D wrote:

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:

On 8/3/2024 6:18 PM, Your Name wrote:

On 2024-08-03 17:41:44 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:26:19 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 8/2/2024 12:13 PM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:46:39 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> >>>>>>> wrote:

On 2024-08-01 07:58:16 +0000, BCFD 36 said:

On 7/23/24 00:56, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike >>>>>>>>>>>
Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

We were on a river cruise on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. We were >>>>>>>>> about 2 hours late leaving from one port because of the problem. It >>>>>>>>> makes no sense why this should be so.

Various possibilities. For example, the Crowdstrike glitch could have >>>>>>>> affected the boat's navigation computers, the company's ticket buying >>>>>>>> and checking system, etc.

Just wait till we all have chips in our heads that can be disabled (by >>>>>>> disabling a server they must connect to) by something like this. Won't >>>>>>> /that/ be fun!

You first !� I will be the last and they will have to catch me first. >>>>>

I don't really expect to see that day, being 77 and all.
Well, unless it's part of Project 2025 and a certain D Trump gets
elected.

The awesome "The Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047" by Lionel Shriver >>>>>> has>the entire population in the USA getting a money transaction chip >>>>>> at the>base of their skull connected to Starlink in 2040 and cash money >>>>>> is>outlawed.

https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/

I haven't read that, but that doesn't mean I didn't encounter the
concept of embedded chips somewhere -- oh, wait: /The President's
Analyst/ had it.

There are quite a few fools who have had chips implanted into their
arms so they can do checkout tap-n-pay, open security doors, etc.
without having to go to all the "difficultly" of taking a card out of
their pocket / lanyard or using a smartwatch.

There have also been a few people with disabilities that have trialed
brain implant chips to allow them to regain some abilities. I don't
think any have been fully successful, but some have worked better than >>>> others (Elon Musk's Neuralink trial "malfunctioned" ... unsurprisingly, >>>> just look at his failures with his rockets, his Tesla cars, etc. to
know how much of an idiot he is and rushes things out to suit his own
looney ideals).

Only by failing can one find the right path to success.� Nothing was
ever invented without failures leading the path to it.

Thomas Edison tried over 8,000 materials before he found the right
element for the first light bulb.

Musk is the most successful rocket launcher ever.� He just had his
first failure in over several years of weekly launches.� He has sold
almost ten million electric cars.� Find me a single person or country
that even meets ten percent of his records.

Lynn

I find it interesting how many people complain about Elons
incompetence, yet, they have not managed to create several billion
dollars companies themselves.

He hasn't. He invested money in existing businesses.

And some of them want to get rid of the drugged-out idiot, or at least
wish he'd keep his big mouth shut.

One might agree with his ideology and ideas, but one thing he is not,
and that is incompetent and stupid.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

On Fri, 9 Aug 2024, Robert Carnegie wrote:

On 05/08/2024 12:02, D wrote:

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:

On 8/3/2024 6:18 PM, Your Name wrote:

On 2024-08-03 17:41:44 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:26:19 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 8/2/2024 12:13 PM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:46:39 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> >>>>>>> wrote:

On 2024-08-01 07:58:16 +0000, BCFD 36 said:

On 7/23/24 00:56, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote:

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike >>>>>>>>>>>
Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident.

We were on a river cruise on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. We were >>>>>>>>> about 2 hours late leaving from one port because of the problem. It >>>>>>>>> makes no sense why this should be so.

Various possibilities. For example, the Crowdstrike glitch could have >>>>>>>> affected the boat's navigation computers, the company's ticket buying >>>>>>>> and checking system, etc.

Just wait till we all have chips in our heads that can be disabled (by >>>>>>> disabling a server they must connect to) by something like this. Won't >>>>>>> /that/ be fun!

You first !  I will be the last and they will have to catch me first. >>>>>

I don't really expect to see that day, being 77 and all.
Well, unless it's part of Project 2025 and a certain D Trump gets
elected.

The awesome "The Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047" by Lionel Shriver >>>>>> has>the entire population in the USA getting a money transaction chip >>>>>> at the>base of their skull connected to Starlink in 2040 and cash money >>>>>> is>outlawed.

https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/

I haven't read that, but that doesn't mean I didn't encounter the
concept of embedded chips somewhere -- oh, wait: /The President's
Analyst/ had it.

There are quite a few fools who have had chips implanted into their arms >>>> so they can do checkout tap-n-pay, open security doors, etc. without
having to go to all the "difficultly" of taking a card out of their
pocket / lanyard or using a smartwatch.

There have also been a few people with disabilities that have trialed
brain implant chips to allow them to regain some abilities. I don't think >>>> any have been fully successful, but some have worked better than others >>>> (Elon Musk's Neuralink trial "malfunctioned" ... unsurprisingly, just
look at his failures with his rockets, his Tesla cars, etc. to know how >>>> much of an idiot he is and rushes things out to suit his own looney
ideals).

Only by failing can one find the right path to success.  Nothing was ever >>> invented without failures leading the path to it.

Thomas Edison tried over 8,000 materials before he found the right element >>> for the first light bulb.

Musk is the most successful rocket launcher ever.  He just had his first >>> failure in over several years of weekly launches.  He has sold almost ten >>> million electric cars.  Find me a single person or country that even meets >>> ten percent of his records.

Lynn

I find it interesting how many people complain about Elons incompetence,
yet, they have not managed to create several billion dollars companies
themselves.

He hasn't. He invested money in existing
businesses.

You are incorrect.

From leftist wikipedia:

_Founder_, CEO, and chief engineer of SpaceX, valued at 180 billion.
CEO and product architect of Tesla, Inc.
Owner, CTO and Executive Chairman of X (formerly Twitter)
President of the Musk Foundation
Founder of The Boring Company, X Corp., and xAI
Co-founder of Neuralink, OpenAI (valued at 80 billion) Zip2, and X.com
(part of PayPal) (value 61 billion)

Now... what did you do?

One might agree with his ideology and ideas, but one thing he is not, and
that is incompetent and stupid.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@gmail.com> writes:

On 05/08/2024 12:02, D wrote:

I find it interesting how many people complain about Elons incompetence,
yet, they have not managed to create several billion dollars companies
themselves.

He hasn't. He invested money in existing
businesses.

Exactly. His original company X couldn't survive, so he
sold it to PayPal. The dot-com bubble made him rich, with
no need for him to actually build anything.

Then he bought tesla, and later space-x.

The one company he actually started, the Boring Company, well,
need we say more?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Fri, 9 Aug 2024, Scott Lurndal wrote:

Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@gmail.com> writes:

On 05/08/2024 12:02, D wrote:

I find it interesting how many people complain about Elons incompetence, >>> yet, they have not managed to create several billion dollars companies
themselves.

He hasn't. He invested money in existing
businesses.

Exactly. His original company X couldn't survive, so he
sold it to PayPal. The dot-com bubble made him rich, with
no need for him to actually build anything.

Then he bought tesla, and later space-x.

The one company he actually started, the Boring Company, well,
need we say more?

From leftist wikipedia:

_Founder_, CEO, and chief engineer of SpaceX, valued at 180 billion. CEO
and product architect of Tesla, Inc. Owner, CTO and
Executive Chairman of X (formerly Twitter)
President of the Musk Foundation
Founder of The Boring Company, X Corp., and xAI
Co-founder of Neuralink, OpenAI (valued at 80 billion) Zip2, and X.com
(part of PayPal) (value 61 billion)

That's several companies and about 321 billion according to leftist
wikipedia.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On Fri, 9 Aug 2024 09:10:00 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

On 2024-08-08 17:56:57 +0000, Paul S Person said:

<snippo mucho>

There are small companies still working on 3D devices, including the
Proto "holographic" box, but the big TV companies gave up on 3D a few
years ago. You might still get the occasional 3D DVD / Blu-ray being >released and many player boxes can play them on any regular high
resolution TV set or computer screen.

That's interesting.

It occurred to me eventually that, while doing that with a 1920x1080
signal would produce a vertical resolution of 540 [1], doing it with 4K
(3840 � 2160) would produce a vertical resolution of 1080, which might
be more acceptable.

4K appears to be the new fad

4K is ancient tech.

Oh, well.

8K is now the main fad for manufacturers with 16K TV sets now
appearing, and 32K ones are in the prototyping stage. But such super
high resolutions are mostly just another gimmick trying to con people
into buying yet another new TV set they do not need since few networks >broadcast / stream in even 4K and nobody does higher. Plus 4K
resolution is more than enough unless you've got a massive TV or
projector screen.

I'll tell you a secret ... I don't think it much matters when
streaming.

My primary streaming device, a Fire HD 6 (you say there aren't any?
there used to be), has an HD screen. I tested a movie by watching it
in each of HD and SD. This was done by capitalizing on the difference
between downloading it and streaming it on the internet/WiFi I had
then, which restricted me to SD. I didn't notice any difference.
Nothing looked any sharper. I saw no additional colors.

With Prime, I currently download/stream at the rate my former
connection worked with (0.98 GB/hr vs 2.35 GB/hr). But I did this
after using the higher rate for a while. The only difference is that
now the streaming is much smoother. The image is perfectly fine.

I am being forced by Netflix to move to a new plan that is HD. How
that works remains to be seen. I may be back to the "download every
film" stage.

Maybe it's my eyes, maybe its the size of the screen, maybe it's just
that HD isn't as much an improvement on SD as the streaming services
would like us to believe. I did find out one interesting factoid about
SD/HD trailers on Apple: while each dimension had 1.5 more pixels for
HD than SD, the overall file size was also only 1.5 times larger for
HD compared with SD. Perhaps HD was using a more efficient compression standard, because the normal expectation would be that the file size
would be 2.25 (1.5 * 1.5) larger for HD.

OTOH, I can think of several films with scenes that might be clearer
in HD -- or rather, on a BD. These are mostly faces halfway in the
background that are close enough to be expected to be sharp but which
look fuzzy. It would not surprise me if that additional resolution
would help. It might even be possible to see the tears on Wormtongue's
face in PJ's /TT/. Or that might be an example of something that you
really /do/ need to be in a theater to see.

After all, moving to DVD and my current TV allowed me to see the
Wormsign in /Dune/ (the original) again.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 2024-08-09 09:05:52 +0000, D said:

On Fri, 9 Aug 2024, Robert Carnegie wrote:

On 05/08/2024 12:02, D wrote:

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:

On 8/3/2024 6:18 PM, Your Name wrote:

On 2024-08-03 17:41:44 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:26:19 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 8/2/2024 12:13 PM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:46:39 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:

On 2024-08-01 07:58:16 +0000, BCFD 36 said:

On 7/23/24 00:56, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike >>>>>>>>>>>>
Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident. >>>>>>>>>>

We were on a river cruise on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. We were >>>>>>>>>> about 2 hours late leaving from one port because of the problem. It >>>>>>>>>> makes no sense why this should be so.

Various possibilities. For example, the Crowdstrike glitch could have >>>>>>>>> affected the boat's navigation computers, the company's ticket buying >>>>>>>>> and checking system, etc.

Just wait till we all have chips in our heads that can be disabled (by >>>>>>>> disabling a server they must connect to) by something like this. Won't >>>>>>>> /that/ be fun!

You first !� I will be the last and they will have to catch me first. >>>>>>

I don't really expect to see that day, being 77 and all.
Well, unless it's part of Project 2025 and a certain D Trump gets
elected.

The awesome "The Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047" by Lionel Shriver >>>>>>> has the entire population in the USA getting a money transaction chip >>>>>>> at the base of their skull connected to Starlink in 2040 and cash money >>>>>>> isoutlawed.

https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/

I haven't read that, but that doesn't mean I didn't encounter the
concept of embedded chips somewhere -- oh, wait: /The President's
Analyst/ had it.

There are quite a few fools who have had chips implanted into their
arms so they can do checkout tap-n-pay, open security doors, etc.
without having to go to all the "difficultly" of taking a card out of >>>>> their pocket / lanyard or using a smartwatch.

There have also been a few people with disabilities that have trialed >>>>> brain implant chips to allow them to regain some abilities. I don't
think any have been fully successful, but some have worked better than >>>>> others (Elon Musk's Neuralink trial "malfunctioned" ... unsurprisingly, >>>>> just look at his failures with his rockets, his Tesla cars, etc. to
know how much of an idiot he is and rushes things out to suit his own >>>>> looney ideals).

Only by failing can one find the right path to success.� Nothing was ever >>>> invented without failures leading the path to it.

Thomas Edison tried over 8,000 materials before he found the right element >>>> for the first light bulb.

Musk is the most successful rocket launcher ever.� He just had his first >>>> failure in over several years of weekly launches.� He has sold almost ten >>>> million electric cars.� Find me a single person or country that even meets >>>> ten percent of his records.

Lynn

I find it interesting how many people complain about Elons incompetence, >>> yet, they have not managed to create several billion dollars companies
themselves.

He hasn't. He invested money in existing
businesses.

You are incorrect.

From leftist wikipedia:

_Founder_, CEO, and chief engineer of SpaceX, valued at 180 billion.
CEO and product architect of Tesla, Inc.
Owner, CTO and Executive Chairman of X (formerly Twitter)
President of the Musk Foundation
Founder of The Boring Company, X Corp., and xAI
Co-founder of Neuralink, OpenAI (valued at 80 billion) Zip2, and X.com
(part of PayPal) (value 61 billion)

Now... what did you do?

"Founder" means he invested his money creating the company in the hopes
of making more money. Despite his massively obscene self-imposed
"salary", he doesn't actually do anything useful there - the business' employees do all the work.

He invested in Tesla, then took over the company.

He bought X / Twitter ruined it ... well, ruined it even more than the
useless junk heap it was to begin with.

The Boring Company has failed miserably, as so far has Neuralink.

One might agree with his ideology and ideas, but one thing he is not, and >>> that is incompetent and stupid.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

On Sat, 10 Aug 2024, Your Name wrote:

On 2024-08-09 09:05:52 +0000, D said:

On Fri, 9 Aug 2024, Robert Carnegie wrote:

On 05/08/2024 12:02, D wrote:

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:

On 8/3/2024 6:18 PM, Your Name wrote:

On 2024-08-03 17:41:44 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:26:19 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 8/2/2024 12:13 PM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:46:39 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:

On 2024-08-01 07:58:16 +0000, BCFD 36 said:

On 7/23/24 00:56, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident. >>>>>>>>>>>

We were on a river cruise on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. We >>>>>>>>>>> were about 2 hours late leaving from one port because of the >>>>>>>>>>> problem. It makes no sense why this should be so.

Various possibilities. For example, the Crowdstrike glitch could >>>>>>>>>> have affected the boat's navigation computers, the company's ticket >>>>>>>>>> buying and checking system, etc.

Just wait till we all have chips in our heads that can be disabled >>>>>>>>> (by disabling a server they must connect to) by something like this. >>>>>>>>> Won't /that/ be fun!

You first !� I will be the last and they will have to catch me first. >>>>>>>

I don't really expect to see that day, being 77 and all.
Well, unless it's part of Project 2025 and a certain D Trump gets >>>>>>> elected.

The awesome "The Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047" by Lionel Shriver >>>>>>>> has the entire population in the USA getting a money transaction chip >>>>>>>> at the base of their skull connected to Starlink in 2040 and cash >>>>>>>> money isoutlawed.

https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/

I haven't read that, but that doesn't mean I didn't encounter the >>>>>>> concept of embedded chips somewhere -- oh, wait: /The President's >>>>>>> Analyst/ had it.

There are quite a few fools who have had chips implanted into their >>>>>> arms so they can do checkout tap-n-pay, open security doors, etc.
without having to go to all the "difficultly" of taking a card out of >>>>>> their pocket / lanyard or using a smartwatch.

There have also been a few people with disabilities that have trialed >>>>>> brain implant chips to allow them to regain some abilities. I don't >>>>>> think any have been fully successful, but some have worked better than >>>>>> others (Elon Musk's Neuralink trial "malfunctioned" ... unsurprisingly, >>>>>> just look at his failures with his rockets, his Tesla cars, etc. to >>>>>> know how much of an idiot he is and rushes things out to suit his own >>>>>> looney ideals).

Only by failing can one find the right path to success.� Nothing was >>>>> ever
invented without failures leading the path to it.

Thomas Edison tried over 8,000 materials before he found the right
element
for the first light bulb.

Musk is the most successful rocket launcher ever.� He just had his first >>>>> failure in over several years of weekly launches.� He has sold almost >>>>> ten
million electric cars.� Find me a single person or country that even >>>>> meets
ten percent of his records.

Lynn

I find it interesting how many people complain about Elons incompetence, >>>> yet, they have not managed to create several billion dollars companies >>>> themselves.

He hasn't. He invested money in existing
businesses.

You are incorrect.

From leftist wikipedia:

_Founder_, CEO, and chief engineer of SpaceX, valued at 180 billion.
CEO and product architect of Tesla, Inc.
Owner, CTO and Executive Chairman of X (formerly Twitter)
President of the Musk Foundation
Founder of The Boring Company, X Corp., and xAI
Co-founder of Neuralink, OpenAI (valued at 80 billion) Zip2, and X.com
(part of PayPal) (value 61 billion)

Now... what did you do?

"Founder" means he invested his money creating the company in the hopes of making more money. Despite his massively obscene self-imposed "salary", he doesn't actually do anything useful there - the business' employees do all the work.

Ridiculous. I disagree with your definition of founder. Musk is very
involved in his companies and as the CEO crucial to their success.

He invested in Tesla, then took over the company.

He bought X / Twitter ruined it ... well, ruined it even more than the useless junk heap it was to begin with.

The Boring Company has failed miserably, as so far has Neuralink.

Which is why I left those out when it comes to valuation. Sorry, you lost.

One might agree with his ideology and ideas, but one thing he is not, and >>>> that is incompetent and stupid.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: rec.arts.sf.written

On 2024-08-10 09:22:56 +0000, D said:

On Sat, 10 Aug 2024, Your Name wrote:

On 2024-08-09 09:05:52 +0000, D said:

On Fri, 9 Aug 2024, Robert Carnegie wrote:

On 05/08/2024 12:02, D wrote:

On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:

On 8/3/2024 6:18 PM, Your Name wrote:

On 2024-08-03 17:41:44 +0000, Paul S Person said:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:26:19 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:

On 8/2/2024 12:13 PM, Paul S Person wrote:

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:46:39 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:

On 2024-08-01 07:58:16 +0000, BCFD 36 said:

On 7/23/24 00:56, Charles Packer wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 16:01:25 -0500, Lynn McGuire wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>

xkcd: CrowdStrike
https://www.xkcd.com/2961/

Make the best of bad times.

Explained at:
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2961:_CrowdStrike >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Lynn

Was anybody here affected by the CrowdStrike Thing?
My nephew's wife flew to Europe that day without incident. >>>>>>>>>>>>

We were on a river cruise on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. We were
about 2 hours late leaving from one port because of the problem. It
makes no sense why this should be so.

Various possibilities. For example, the Crowdstrike glitch could have
affected the boat's navigation computers, the company's ticket buying
and checking system, etc.

Just wait till we all have chips in our heads that can be disabled (by
disabling a server they must connect to) by something like this. Won't
/that/ be fun!

You first !� I will be the last and they will have to catch me first. >>>>>>>>

I don't really expect to see that day, being 77 and all.
Well, unless it's part of Project 2025 and a certain D Trump gets >>>>>>>> elected.

The awesome "The Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047" by Lionel Shriver has
the entire population in the USA getting a money transaction chip at >>>>>>>>> the base of their skull connected to Starlink in 2040 and cash money >>>>>>>>> isoutlawed.

https://www.amazon.com/Mandibles-Family-2029-2047-Lionel-Shriver/dp/006232828X/

I haven't read that, but that doesn't mean I didn't encounter the >>>>>>>> concept of embedded chips somewhere -- oh, wait: /The President's >>>>>>>> Analyst/ had it.

There are quite a few fools who have had chips implanted into their >>>>>>> arms so they can do checkout tap-n-pay, open security doors, etc. >>>>>>> without having to go to all the "difficultly" of taking a card out of >>>>>>> their pocket / lanyard or using a smartwatch.

There have also been a few people with disabilities that have trialed >>>>>>> brain implant chips to allow them to regain some abilities. I don't >>>>>>> think any have been fully successful, but some have worked better than >>>>>>> others (Elon Musk's Neuralink trial "malfunctioned" ... unsurprisingly, >>>>>>> just look at his failures with his rockets, his Tesla cars, etc. to >>>>>>> know how much of an idiot he is and rushes things out to suit his own >>>>>>> looney ideals).

Only by failing can one find the right path to success.� Nothing was >>>>>> ever invented without failures leading the path to it.

Thomas Edison tried over 8,000 materials before he found the right >>>>>> element for the first light bulb.

Musk is the most successful rocket launcher ever.� He just had his >>>>>> first failure in over several years of weekly launches.� He has sold >>>>>> almost ten million electric cars.� Find me a single person or country >>>>>> that even meets ten percent of his records.

Lynn

I find it interesting how many people complain about Elons
incompetence, yet, they have not managed to create several billion
dollars companies themselves.

He hasn't. He invested money in existing
businesses.

You are incorrect.

From leftist wikipedia:

_Founder_, CEO, and chief engineer of SpaceX, valued at 180 billion.
CEO and product architect of Tesla, Inc.
Owner, CTO and Executive Chairman of X (formerly Twitter)
President of the Musk Foundation
Founder of The Boring Company, X Corp., and xAI
Co-founder of Neuralink, OpenAI (valued at 80 billion) Zip2, and X.com
(part of PayPal) (value 61 billion)

Now... what did you do?

"Founder" means he invested his money creating the company in the hopes of >> making more money. Despite his massively obscene self-imposed "salary", he >> doesn't actually do anything useful there - the business' employees do all >> the work.

Ridiculous. I disagree with your definition of founder. Musk is very
involved in his companies and as the CEO crucial to their success.

CEOs and management in general are of very little actual use to a
business. All they do is siphon off huge amounts of money into their
own pockets and do very little actual work (too busy playing golf and
having long lunches). Most know nothing about the business they are
supposedly in charge of - one week they'll be "running" a business that
makes shoes, the next week electronics, and the week after that toilet
paper.

Lunatics like Musk are even less useful to a business since his
inability to keep his mouth shut causes them lots of problems. Same
with Donald Trump and to a lesser degree Bill Gates.

He invested in Tesla, then took over the company.

He bought X / Twitter ruined it ... well, ruined it even more than the
useless junk heap it was to begin with.

The Boring Company has failed miserably, as so far has Neuralink.

Which is why I left those out when it comes to valuation. Sorry, you lost.

Both are on the list you posted above, which is what I was replying to.

One might agree with his ideology and ideas, but one thing he is not, >>>>> and that is incompetent and stupid.

Even one of Muskrat's daughters has stated in court that she wants
nothing to do with him and has changed her name to try to escape his
looniness.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)