The Big Cat Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Because we all know that Twitter and blogs are great and reliable places to get the news. Depends on who you get it from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Hey it's not my fault you don't know how to !@#$ing express yourself. .nac uoy noitacretla yna pu egdurd ll'ouy tluaf gnikcuf ym ton s'tI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 .nac uoy noitacretla yna pu egdurd ll'ouy tluaf gnikcuf ym ton s'tI. Sorry sonny but you said people your age are more tech savvy than people my age and older. You're a twit if you feel that way. Yeah I'm an uninformed tech retarted old geezer because I read three papers every day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Lieutenant Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Buddy this debate was over when you re-posted my quote from 10(at least) days ago. You can't get over it, just as I intended. I wrote that specifically to have it bounce around in your skull and challenge your thinking. I also wrote it because I knew it would stick in your craw(and Big Cat is welcome to join you) as it so obviously has. The only obvious question left is why does it bother you so? I think I have already answered that in my post above. But yeah, I'm not a principal consultant to the Fortune 500 and I can't think/type fast enough to create 500 word posts, because I am posting on a Bills message board, just like you said. LOL! Like I said, idiots. If you spent more time here reading, instead of correcting grammar, you would quickly learn that I am not alone on this board in terms of personal success, not by a long shot, that many of us here are far and away smarter than you are, and that we have been subtly making fun of you for some time, as I did with the post you can't get over. And finally, you know damn well that I wasn't referring to Democrats or Obama, don't be lame. I am referring to far-left, so-called intellectual(but can't actually live up to that description and have no published material to back up that claim) socialists who hide behind the very economic/political power that capitalism provides them, but attack it because they lack the talent and/or motivation to be successful in the very system that supports and protects their weak asses. In a word, I am referring to: you. Do realize that this morning alone you devoted over 2,700 words to your shrill paranoid ramblings on a Buffalo Bills message board? Are you really suggesting that the Michael Moore's and the Keith Olbermann's are contemplating killing you? Agreed. And, this is also why we should resist, violently if necessary, all attempts to impose said cadre upon us, this right being specifically guaranteed to us by the founding principles/documents of our country. Look I am in the first group of people they have to kill in order gain/keep their power: people that can build things from scratch without any help from the government or inheritance. My very existence proves their ideology to be the BS that it is, because, according to them, I don't exist. I do, so they have to get rid of me. I look at resisting them as self-defense, and so should every other small business owner, or independent contractor, or VC company founder, or inventor that wants to benefit from his/her own work. (Methinks OC's mom needs to take him to a shrink.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Do realize that this morning alone you devoted over 2,700 words to your shrill paranoid ramblings on a Buffalo Bills message board? I don't think I'm alone in considering his typing 2700 words less insane than you counting them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Do realize that this morning alone you devoted over 2,700 words to your shrill paranoid ramblings on a Buffalo Bills message board? Just when I thought your drive-by grammar classes couldn't be more ridiculous, NOW you're counting words? Holy crap, man. You are in DIRE need of a break from your computer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Just when I thought your drive-by grammar classes couldn't be more ridiculous, NOW you're counting words? Holy crap, man. You are in DIRE need of a break from your computer. I can't believe you just wasted 30 words on this subject. Or maybe 31. BadLooie...how many words is "drive-by"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Lieutenant Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Just when I thought your drive-by grammar classes couldn't be more ridiculous, NOW you're counting words? Holy crap, man. You are in DIRE need of a break from your computer. Ahem http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?act=Stats cough cough http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?act=M...&filter=ALL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 I don't think I'm alone in considering his typing 2700 words less insane than you counting them. Today's word processors have this function called "copy/paste." Once text has been placed in a word processor's field there's this thing called "word count." Sheesh, you Old Balls don't know d-ck about technology! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Today's word processors have this function called "copy/paste." Once text has been placed in a word processor's field there's this thing called "word count." Sheesh, you Old Balls don't know d-ck about technology! Uh, we were using word processing word counts before your mother was old enough to drink. The fact that he even did that shows how much of an idiot he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Ahem http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?act=Stats cough cough http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?act=M...&filter=ALL Only 435 more posts to go, and Thailog is my B word. Thanks for paying attention, Leftenant. It's a fresh break from your grammar lessons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Only 435 more posts to go, and Thailog is my B word. Thanks for paying attention, Leftenant. It's a fresh break from your grammar lessons. Thailog, now that's a name I haven't heard in awhile. Dude doesn't hang around here anymore does he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Today's word processors have this function called "copy/paste." Once text has been placed in a word processor's field there's this thing called "word count." Sheesh, you Old Balls don't know d-ck about technology! Yes, and cutting and pasting multiple posts into a word processor to get a word count isn't completely pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Yes, and cutting and pasting multiple posts into a word processor to get a word count isn't completely pathetic. Careful. It's a slow day. Leftenant may link to your profile. THEN you'll be in trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Lieutenant Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Only 435 more posts to go, and Thailog is my B word. Thanks for paying attention, Leftenant. It's a fresh break from your grammar lessons. How clever, you figured out that both "left" and "lieutenant" start with "L". Hilarious! How about "Bad Lib-Tenet"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Lieutenant Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Yes, and cutting and pasting multiple posts into a word processor to get a word count isn't completely pathetic. Is it as pathetic as being the 8th most active poster on a message board? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Is it as pathetic as beeing the 8th most active poster on a message board? Beeing? Does that have something to do with honey production? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typical TBD Guy Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Thailog, now that's a name I haven't heard in awhile. Dude doesn't hang around here anymore does he? Nope, he's too busy getting anally raped by demons in the afterlife to have time posting about the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 How clever, you figured out that both "left" and "lieutenant" start with "L". Hilarious! How about "Bad Lib-Tenet"? Lefty, these kinds of discussions pollute the board and take away from the discussion. I got baited by you, and that was unfortunate, so if it's just the same, I'm going to limit my conversations with you to the topics at hand. If you care to do the same, it would be appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Hey now, don't pick on this kid, please. We were having a perfectly rational discussion until I had to go actually do my job-->interestingly enough, it was regarding this very issue = trusting/not trusting technology based on incomplete facts bad perceptions = handheld devices are better for this client, but their perception is that wall mounted are better because they don't trust the handheld technology(breaks, gets stolen, etc). Their people need their own gear because of the heavy individual data transactions of their business process and wall units will have their people standing in lines-->which costs 5x per minute what another $200 device does, but they don't know that...yet, and, they have to dump about $200k into this equipment plus maintain it...etc. I concede that the kid here doesn't know much about how technology is perceived by users, regardless of age(wait until we get to women, that will be fun, I can't wait for somebody to call me a misogynist for simply telling the truth, again), but that's no reason to wail on him. Ok, back on track: I understand your point(s), but I think it/they're lacking validity. Nobody trusts the technology? Therein lies the age divide that I originally brought up. For better or worse, tech savvy is universal among people my age (24) and younger. It's nearly universal in people 25-35, wide spread for people 35-55, limited among people 55-65, and virtually non-existent among people 65+. What personal experience do you have that would suggest otherwise? Read the above again. I didn't say nobody trusts technology, I said if nobody trusts whatever specific technology we are talking about....in this case personal email in England...then all you have done is a kill usage of perfectly good system by spreading F.U.D.(Fear Uncertainty Doubt) and gained nothing in return. The bad guys are as equally unlikely to trust it as the good guys. My personal experience has everything to do with this, as evidenced above. And yes, you will find 90 yr old people in nursing homes who know how to use a computer better than your friend who isn't that into it. You will find 55 year old Division Presidents who create their own universes in Cognos(because she is either a secret nerd or a power freak) sitting a few doors down from the 35 year old Director of Blah, who barely knows how to use his email. This isn't uncommon, in fact it's typical, because the 55 year old was at one point threatened by the technology, adapted, and now owns it, while the 35 year old takes it for granted and nonchalantly expects to make service calls to the corporate IT "janitors" whenever he makes a mess. The only relevant, and CONCLUSIVE, work that I know of wrt age is brain reaction time in 24-29 year-olds is almost 5.5 seconds faster when they are writing code than people "my age" And that I lose more reaction time every damn year. Hope you are happy. You make the point that it's an easy hoop to jump through, and by making the point that the fringe of non-tech savvy individuals is ever dissolving, I've all but rendered the hoop nonexistent. Okay, but that doesn't eliminate the fact that it IS a hoop. Something tells me not every person today in 2009 with nefarious connections/intentions will know enough to bypass the otherwise porous barriers this creates. Something tells me that all I need is a simple web page with instructions, and those that can read English will now know what to do, step by step. Unless you are hoping for security by obscurity...on the...um...Internet...this point is a non-starter for you. We're getting into the hot issue of legislating digital communication, an un-explored frontier. I don't know what you do for a living, perhaps you have a insider's perspective into these types of proceedings, but I'm curious how you think law enforcement officials should/could/would stay ahead of the ever expanding curve, knowing that savvy users will be forever one step ahead of the game. First of all: I was going to refer you to my response to the Elliot Spitzer "I just got elected and now I'm going to tax the Internet" thread, in which I called that he would say that today, and then two days later have some staffer come out and say that "it requires more study", but I can't find it. Politicians would love to f with us in terms of taxes and regulation, but some are too stupid to mess with anyone, some know better, some have to learn the hard way. I think that my job is to create schit from scratch, so until the cops can read my mind ahead of time, and prepare for all the eventualities of whatever crazy nonsense I think up next, they will always be behind. I think that I am certainly not alone in the come up with new crazy schit department, and I think that there's kids doing stuff that I won't get right away, and that I am doing stuff that they won't get right away. In all cases, it will require all of us, 3 years, 30 million dollars, and a bunch of press releases in CIO Magazine for government employees to get any of it, and even then it will have to be spoon fed to them by SAIC and/or Lockheed Martin. And that's the truth, period. 1. I think that in all cases any law that successfully grabs a piece of the internet and taxes it drives business immediately overseas that same day, which is stupid. 2. This would cause us to attack it, circumvent it, whatever, which means we are breaking/avoiding laws we wouldn't otherwise need to deal with, thereby perpetuating disrespect for the law for no good reason other than getting a lame-ass politician some headlines, which is stupid. 3. I think the the law will eventually become unenforceable/irrelevant, which is stupid. 4. I think that no matter how they might try to change the law 1-3 will occur, again, which is stupid. 5. I think that anybody who can't understand that 1-4 are absolute, and will still remain so whenever they get done talking, no matter if they like it or not, is stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts