Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
PSA - wall warts using power when they're not being used (still plugged in)
7 views
Skip to first unread message
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 5, 2019, 1:23:09 PM11/5/19
to
PSA - wall warts using power when they're not being used (still plugged in)
This report is from the government on energy used by wall warts:
<http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/prod_development/downloads/power_supplies/powersupplyreport.pdf>
Check out "Figure 2" on page 5 in the section titled
o "How much energy is wasted by power supplies?"
The left side is the specific wall wart (by brand & model).
o The chart shows the standby power usage (black squares)
o And then the chart shows a green line of active power ranges.
Note the HUGE differences, where...
o Some use nothing at standby
o But others use MORE POWER at standby than while in use! (???)
o Some have a power line close to the standby point
o Others, the power line is nowhere near the standby point
o While others have a huge range of powers, & others, not so much
The problem with such things is that your particular wall wart model might
not be on there, where the range is wide (depending on your accuracy needs)
- so let us know if your particular wall wart is represented.
Also note "power supply efficiency" (on the next page) varies widely by
brand and model, from less than 50% to almost 90% (most in the middle).
See also:
<https://blog.lastinfirstout.net/2008/09/unplug-your-wall-warts-and-save-planet.html>
<https://www.howtogeek.com/231886/tested-should-you-unplug-chargers-when-youre-not-using-them/>
<https://www.electronicsweekly.com/blogs/electro-ramblings/weird-wireless/weird-wireless-does-unplugging-all-your-wall-warts-really-matter-2009-08/>
--
Hope this helps.
This report is from the government on energy used by wall warts:
<http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/prod_development/downloads/power_supplies/powersupplyreport.pdf>
Check out "Figure 2" on page 5 in the section titled
o "How much energy is wasted by power supplies?"
The left side is the specific wall wart (by brand & model).
o The chart shows the standby power usage (black squares)
o And then the chart shows a green line of active power ranges.
Note the HUGE differences, where...
o Some use nothing at standby
o But others use MORE POWER at standby than while in use! (???)
o Some have a power line close to the standby point
o Others, the power line is nowhere near the standby point
o While others have a huge range of powers, & others, not so much
The problem with such things is that your particular wall wart model might
not be on there, where the range is wide (depending on your accuracy needs)
- so let us know if your particular wall wart is represented.
Also note "power supply efficiency" (on the next page) varies widely by
brand and model, from less than 50% to almost 90% (most in the middle).
See also:
<https://blog.lastinfirstout.net/2008/09/unplug-your-wall-warts-and-save-planet.html>
<https://www.howtogeek.com/231886/tested-should-you-unplug-chargers-when-youre-not-using-them/>
<https://www.electronicsweekly.com/blogs/electro-ramblings/weird-wireless/weird-wireless-does-unplugging-all-your-wall-warts-really-matter-2009-08/>
--
Hope this helps.
John McGaw
Nov 5, 2019, 3:26:49 PM11/5/19
to
transformer inside like the ancient Netgear 12V units) and/or is warm to
the touch when there is no load (again, like the ancient Netgear 12V units)
then it it is using power inefficiently. Most of the lightweight warts
using switching supplies are relatively efficient when there is no load. If
the unit is warm when unloaded that is a dead giveaway of power waste since
heat has to come from somewhere.
My biggest gripe is the vast number of different voltage/connector
combinations in the wild. I've got at least four different sorts which have
multi-pin connectors, all incompatible either physically or by voltage
ratings, which I've got in a box in the closet of computer shame in the
basement. When I do need one of them to power an old external drive, for
example, it can take a half hour to find the right unit and even then it is
sometimes guesswork. Of course with the rest of them it is a matter of
voltage/current/inside diameter/outside diameter...
Theo
Nov 7, 2019, 7:21:20 AM11/7/19
to
Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen....@halder.edu> wrote:
> PSA - wall warts using power when they're not being used (still plugged in)
>
> This report is from the government on energy used by wall warts:
> <http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/prod_development/downloads/power_supplies/powersupplyreport.pdf>
This report is 17 years old.
> PSA - wall warts using power when they're not being used (still plugged in)
>
> This report is from the government on energy used by wall warts:
> <http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/prod_development/downloads/power_supplies/powersupplyreport.pdf>
David Higton
Nov 7, 2019, 9:48:10 AM11/7/19
to
In message <qpsemb$t1f$1...@news.mixmin.net>
then. (The report references analogue TVs and CRT monitors.)
The information is so far out of date as to be inapplicable today.
David
>PSA - wall warts using power when they're not being used (still plugged in)
>
>This report is from the government on energy used by wall warts:
><http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/prod_development/downloads/power_supplies/powersupplyreport.pdf>
That report is from 2002. Technology has changed a great deal since
>
>This report is from the government on energy used by wall warts:
><http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/prod_development/downloads/power_supplies/powersupplyreport.pdf>
then. (The report references analogue TVs and CRT monitors.)
The information is so far out of date as to be inapplicable today.
David
Allodoxaphobia
Nov 7, 2019, 12:09:03 PM11/7/19
to
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 7, 2019, 1:35:01 PM11/7/19
to
On Thu, 07 Nov 2019 14:47:58 GMT, David Higton wrote:
> That report is from 2002. Technology has changed a great deal since
> then. (The report references analogue TVs and CRT monitors.)
>
> The information is so far out of date as to be inapplicable today.
As always, the child-like trolls have given their absolute best.
> That report is from 2002. Technology has changed a great deal since
> then. (The report references analogue TVs and CRT monitors.)
>
> The information is so far out of date as to be inapplicable today.
o Which added _nothing_ of any added value whatsoever.
No problem with your assessment of the fact.
o My problem is that NONE of you common trolls posted a *better* report.
It's cowardly easy for common trolls to denigrate the efforts of others...
Without having ANY capability to add value on what was already listed.
Where is the report you and the other common trolls think is better?
Ed Pawlowski
Nov 7, 2019, 4:10:37 PM11/7/19
to
about others. You want to sit your ass on a pedestal and be adored for
you knowledge but you really just have a superiority complex.
I told you before how to eliminate most all the trolls. STFU and ignore
them but you choose to be a senile old fool and bring it up every time.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 7, 2019, 5:08:45 PM11/7/19
to
On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 16:10:37 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> I told you before how to eliminate most all the trolls. STFU and ignore
> them but you choose to be a senile old fool and bring it up every time.
Ed Pawlowski,
> I told you before how to eliminate most all the trolls. STFU and ignore
> them but you choose to be a senile old fool and bring it up every time.
Have you _ever_ once added an adult comment to _any_ Usenet post?
Never?
Not even once?
Really?
Think about that.
If you've _ever_ added an adult on-topic value to any post, simply name the
post so we can _look_ at what you claim is _adult_ on topic added technical
value, Ed Pawlowski.
This is the basic test that every child gets when they make your claims:
o Name just one
Let me be clear, Ed Pawlowski, name just one post on Usenet, in your
_entire life_, where you claim to have added on topic added technical
value.
Here are the groups where you may search for your reference:
<http://tinyurl.com/alt-home-repair>
<http://tinyurl.com/comp-mobile-android>
Note: When/if you post a _single_ thread, of what you claim is on-topic
technical added value, then I will post TEN TIMES THAT, in response, of
what I claim, in these very two newsgroups, that is mine.
You trolls, Ed Pawlowski, are all just childish cowardly bullies.
o That's why I speak to you like you are a child, Ed Pawlowski.
Because everything you write, proves, for me, that you are a child.
Now, either run along, or post the thread PROVING that you "can" add on
topic value Ed Pawlowski.
Here's the adult challenge for you to prove, Ed Pawlowski.
o Name just one thread, in your entire life, to either of these two
newsgroups, where you claim to have added on topic added technical value.
Name just one.
--
Once the trolls like Ed Pawlowski infest a thread, it's already ruined.
Carlos E. R.
Nov 7, 2019, 5:30:43 PM11/7/19
to
Your OP post is useless, to start with, because the information in which
it is based is ancient - and telling the rest of us that it is ancient
is actually useful. Now, you go and find a modern one and post that one.
But instead of saying, sorry, mistake, I posted old info, you get angry
with people and call everyone else a troll, when it is your fault for
posting old useless information.
And now you will get angry at me. Fine.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 7, 2019, 5:50:52 PM11/7/19
to
On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 23:30:41 +0100, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> Here you go out again fighting those that do not agree with your post.
> Your OP post is useless, to start with, because the information in which
> it is based is ancient
Carlos,
> Here you go out again fighting those that do not agree with your post.
> Your OP post is useless, to start with, because the information in which
> it is based is ancient
The only thing I ask of you ... is for you to act like an adult.
Name something better, Carlos, if you feel you are an adult.
o Name just one
If you fail the simplest of adult tests, Carlos, don't blame me.
o Name just one
Roger Blake
Nov 7, 2019, 6:32:16 PM11/7/19
to
On 2019-11-07, Carlos E. R. <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:
> And now you will get angry at me. Fine.
He'll probably get angrier at me because I really don't give a rat's ass
> And now you will get angry at me. Fine.
whether my plugged-in but otherwise unused wall warts are using power.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Posts from Google Groups killfiled due to excess spam.)
NSA sedition and treason -- http://www.DeathToNSAthugs.com
Don't talk to cops! -- http://www.DontTalkToCops.com
Badges don't grant extra rights -- http://www.CopBlock.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carlos E. R.
Nov 7, 2019, 6:33:25 PM11/7/19
to
Please ask pardon, forget posting, and take that time to find another
source with a current report on "wall warts using power when they're not
being used".
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
Ed Pawlowski
Nov 7, 2019, 7:10:01 PM11/7/19
to
On 11/7/2019 5:08 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 16:10:37 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> I told you before how to eliminate most all the trolls. STFU and ignore
>> them but you choose to be a senile old fool and bring it up every time.
>
> Ed Pawlowski,
> Have you _ever_ once added an adult comment to _any_ Usenet post?
>
> Never?
>
> Not even once?
>
> Really?
>
> Think about that.
>
> If you've _ever_ added an adult on-topic value to any post, simply name the
> post so we can _look_ at what you claim is _adult_ on topic added technical
> value, Ed Pawlowski.
>
> This is the basic test that every child gets when they make your claims:
> o Name just one
>
> Let me be clear, Ed Pawlowski, name just one post on Usenet, in your
> _entire life_, where you claim to have added on topic added technical
> value.
>
> Here are the groups where you may search for your reference:
> <http://tinyurl.com/alt-home-repair>
> <http://tinyurl.com/comp-mobile-android>
>
I'm sorry you are too stupid to look yourself. I've posted hundreds
> On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 16:10:37 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> I told you before how to eliminate most all the trolls. STFU and ignore
>> them but you choose to be a senile old fool and bring it up every time.
>
> Ed Pawlowski,
> Have you _ever_ once added an adult comment to _any_ Usenet post?
>
> Never?
>
> Not even once?
>
> Really?
>
> Think about that.
>
> If you've _ever_ added an adult on-topic value to any post, simply name the
> post so we can _look_ at what you claim is _adult_ on topic added technical
> value, Ed Pawlowski.
>
> This is the basic test that every child gets when they make your claims:
> o Name just one
>
> Let me be clear, Ed Pawlowski, name just one post on Usenet, in your
> _entire life_, where you claim to have added on topic added technical
> value.
>
> Here are the groups where you may search for your reference:
> <http://tinyurl.com/alt-home-repair>
> <http://tinyurl.com/comp-mobile-android>
>
here over many years. You are just a senile old fool that enjoys the
trolls more than actual content.
FYI. as much as you enjoy denigrating others, you are not bothering me
with you childish rant, I just laugh at them. But you have to react
making you the reason for so many trolls. I told you how to eliminate
them but you choose not to follow my suggestion.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 7, 2019, 8:50:32 PM11/7/19
to
On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 23:32:14 -0000 (UTC), Roger Blake wrote:
> He'll probably get angrier at me because I really don't give a rat's ass
> whether my plugged-in but otherwise unused wall warts are using power.
Ken,
> He'll probably get angrier at me because I really don't give a rat's ass
> whether my plugged-in but otherwise unused wall warts are using power.
All I have to do is POINT to your own post.
o And you'd consider that to be "getting angry" with you.
The fact your post is worthless is all I need to point to.
o You can consider that "getting angry".
I consider it the fact that this group below can only troll.
o Alan Baker <nu...@ness.biz>
o Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com>
o Andreas Rutishauser <and...@macandreas.ch>
o B...@Onramp.net
o Beedle <Bee...@dont-email.me>
o "Boris T." <b...@lsd.invalid> (a common troll)
o Carlos E.R. <robin_...@es.invalid> (it's a crap shoot with Carlos)
o Char Jackson <no...@none.invalid> (never posts as an adult)
o Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
o Cindy Hamilton <angelica...@yahoo.com> (never posts any value)
o "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid> (always a child)
o Dan Purgert <d...@djph.net> (sometimes, but only rarely posts as an adult)
o David Catterall <djc...@eircom.net> (a common troll)
o Davoud <st...@sky.net>
o Diesel <m...@privacy.net> (aka Dustin Cook, mentally scary)
o Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> (poser, makes believe he has knowledge)
o Elden <use...@moondog.org>
o Elfin <elfi...@gmail.com> (aka Lloyd, aka Lloyd Parsons)
o Fox's Mercantile <jda...@att.net> Jeff (devoid of redeemable value)
o "G. B" <g...@gb.com>
o Hemidactylus <ecph...@allspamis.invalid>
o Idaho Homo Joe <dick...@aol.com> (worthless common moron troll)
o Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> (mostly is an adult but often is a child)
o John Gabriel <NoS...@nospam.net> (can only troll)
o joe <no...@domain.invalid> (rarely, but sometimes posts as an adult would)
o Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch>
o Johan <JH...@nospam.invalid>
o John Doe <alway...@message.header> worthless posts always
o John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net>
o John-Del <ohg...@gmail.com>
o Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com>
o Ken Blake <k...@invalidemail.com>
o Ken Hart <kwh...@frontier.com> (sometimes posts on linux as an adult)
o Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies>
o Lloyd <elfi...@gmail.com> (aka "Elfin")
o Lloyd Parsons <lloy...@gmail.com> (aka "Elfin")
o Lucifer <LuciferMo...@bigpond.com> (plays silly semantic games)
o Meanie <M...@gmail.com>
o micky <NONONOa...@rushpost.com>
o Shemp14 <she...@outlook.com>
o nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> (bullshitter par excellence)
o Nil <redn...@REMOVETHIScomcast.net>
o Panthera Tigris Altaica <northe...@outlook.com>
o Paul Raymond (aka porn king) <arling...@nospam.net> (porn obsessed)
o "pf...@aol.com" <peterw...@gmail.com> Peter Wieck, Melrose Park, PA
o Rene Lamontagne <rla...@shaw.ca> (always posts as a child would post)
o Roger Blake <rogb...@iname.invalid> wholly immune to basic facts
o "R.Wieser" <add...@not.available> (aka Rudy Wieser) (always a child)
o Sam E <why.sho...@be.email.invalid>
o Sandman <m...@sandman.net> (hates facts)
o Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
o Shadow <S...@dow.br>
o she...@outlook.com
o Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> (aka Michael Glasser, troll's troll)
o Tim Streater <timst...@greenbee.net>
o Tim Taylor <t...@binford-tool.edu>
o trader_4 <tra...@optonline.net> (pretends to know things)
o Wade Garrett <wa...@cooler.net>
o Wolffan <akwo...@zoho.com> (can only post childish remarks, ~BD~ sock)
o Wolf K <wol...@sympatico.ca> (always posts as a child)
o Your Name <Your...@YourISP.com>
o Zaghadka <zagh...@hotmail.com>
o % <per...@gmail.com> (always worthless posts)
o et al.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 7, 2019, 8:50:33 PM11/7/19
to
On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 00:33:24 +0100, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> See? There you go, attacking the messenger :-P
>
> Please ask pardon, forget posting, and take that time to find another
> source with a current report on "wall warts using power when they're not
> being used".
Carlos,
> See? There you go, attacking the messenger :-P
>
> Please ask pardon, forget posting, and take that time to find another
> source with a current report on "wall warts using power when they're not
> being used".
I love that I simply point to what _you_ wrote.
o And you call that "attacking the messenger".
All I pointed out was that what _you wrote_
o Added absolutely _zero_ value.
You _hate_ this fact that what _you_ wrote
o Added zero adult value
You keep proving this fact for me every time you post.
What's funny, is that you actually consider the fact I simply pointed out
what _you wrote_, to be an "attack".
You have to admit, that's kind of funny Carlos.
o If it wasn't so sad.
--
Once these trolls have infested a thread, the topic is ruined.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 7, 2019, 8:50:34 PM11/7/19
to
On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 19:10:00 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> I'm sorry you are too stupid to look yourself. I've posted hundreds
> here over many years. You are just a senile old fool that enjoys the
> trolls more than actual content.
>
> FYI. as much as you enjoy denigrating others, you are not bothering me
> with you childish rant, I just laugh at them. But you have to react
> making you the reason for so many trolls. I told you how to eliminate
> them but you choose not to follow my suggestion.
Hi Ed Pawlowski,
> I'm sorry you are too stupid to look yourself. I've posted hundreds
> here over many years. You are just a senile old fool that enjoys the
> trolls more than actual content.
>
> FYI. as much as you enjoy denigrating others, you are not bothering me
> with you childish rant, I just laugh at them. But you have to react
> making you the reason for so many trolls. I told you how to eliminate
> them but you choose not to follow my suggestion.
As always, the cowardly bullies like you fail the simple adult test:
o Name just one.
It's a fact that, in your _entire life_, Ed Pawlowski, you haven't authored
a _single_ thread in these two newsgroups you are currently trolling, that
added any adult on-topic technical value.
Not even once.
o In your _entire_ life!
If you did, even _once_ in your life, add on-topic adult technical value
o Name just one.
--
The cowardly bullies always fail this, the simplest test, of their beliefs.
Ed Pawlowski
Nov 7, 2019, 10:29:08 PM11/7/19
to
day meditating and reviewing my life and what a waste it has been. A
few hours of yoga a day will help too. I'll look good in yoga pants.
I hope it is not too late to turn my life around and become a
contributing member of society. From now on, my life will be devoted to
prayer, meditation, reading specifications sheets for wi-fi routers.
Ed Pawlowski
Nov 7, 2019, 10:32:38 PM11/7/19
to
On 11/7/2019 8:50 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
> --
> Once these trolls have infested a thread, the topic is ruined.
> o Alan Baker<nu...@ness.biz>
> o Alan Browne<bitb...@blackhole.com>
> o Andreas Rutishauser<and...@macandreas.ch>
> o...@Onramp.net
> Once these trolls have infested a thread, the topic is ruined.
> o Alan Baker<nu...@ness.biz>
> o Alan Browne<bitb...@blackhole.com>
> o Andreas Rutishauser<and...@macandreas.ch>
hard to do. You said it, you own it.
It takes a sick mind to enumerate a list like that.
Idlehands
Nov 7, 2019, 10:53:05 PM11/7/19
to
--
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not to their own facts."
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
An opinion without 3.14 is an onion.
Anon
devnull
Nov 8, 2019, 7:10:39 AM11/8/19
to
On 11/7/2019 8:50 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
He_4 seems confused about trumpolitics but otherwise seems very untelligent.
Carlos E.R.
Nov 8, 2019, 8:12:07 AM11/8/19
to
A requirement for one to be a troll, is that at least several people
agree on that. If only one says "Troll!", then he should have himself
examined.
One hint that one is a troll, is that he changes the name or address
often - usually to avoid the filters. I have a filter on Arlen (just to
colour them differently, so that I know it is him), and I see 9 names
and 11 addresses (others have more). It is just a hint, but significant.
Arlen against the world.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
Roger Blake
Nov 8, 2019, 9:12:42 AM11/8/19
to
On 2019-11-08, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:
> It takes a sick mind to enumerate a list like that.
Considering the source I take it as a badge of honor to be included, and
> It takes a sick mind to enumerate a list like that.
would have felt shortchanged had I been omitted.
Frank Slootweg
Nov 8, 2019, 11:50:54 AM11/8/19
to
Roger Blake <rogb...@iname.invalid> wrote:
> On 2019-11-08, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:
> > It takes a sick mind to enumerate a list like that.
>
> Considering the source I take it as a badge of honor to be included, and
> would have felt shortchanged had I been omitted.
I've been on/off/on his list and am currently - already for a rather
> On 2019-11-08, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:
> > It takes a sick mind to enumerate a list like that.
>
> Considering the source I take it as a badge of honor to be included, and
> would have felt shortchanged had I been omitted.
long time - off it. What am I doing wrong!?
BTW, it's kind of funny - in a sad, pathetic way - that some of the
real trolls (/creeps) are not on his list. Something about keeping
company?
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 8, 2019, 12:38:25 PM11/8/19
to
On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 14:11:21 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> A requirement for one to be a troll, is that at least several people
> agree on that. If only one says "Troll!", then he should have himself
> examined.
>
> One hint that one is a troll, is that he changes the name or address
> often - usually to avoid the filters. I have a filter on Arlen (just to
> colour them differently, so that I know it is him), and I see 9 names
> and 11 addresses (others have more). It is just a hint, but significant.
>
> Arlen against the world.
Hi Carlos,
> A requirement for one to be a troll, is that at least several people
> agree on that. If only one says "Troll!", then he should have himself
> examined.
>
> One hint that one is a troll, is that he changes the name or address
> often - usually to avoid the filters. I have a filter on Arlen (just to
> colour them differently, so that I know it is him), and I see 9 names
> and 11 addresses (others have more). It is just a hint, but significant.
>
> Arlen against the world.
At the risk of feeding you common trolls, I will assume you own an adult
mind, where the trolls like you post _zero_ value.
All I have to do is point to the posts in this thread from you, and the
other common trolls, which prove that fact.
All you _can_ do, Carlos, is post worthless drivel of no adult value.
o You prove it EVERY time you posted in this thread, Carlos.
Every single time.
And you _continue_ to prove you can't add any adult value to this thread.
Of course, the fact I simply point to your own words, you consider an
"attack", which, you have to admit, is how your sick brain works.
a. I post something of potential value
b. You post nothing of any value (you actually can't post any value!)
c. You trolls outnumber the adults 100 to 1.
The good news is that I never feed you trolls in threads that I don't care
about coming to any adult useful valuable conclusion, so you worthless
common trolls are free to troll the world.
Why do you troll, Carlos?
I don't know why.
I think there may be two reasons:
a. You don't have the mental capability to add any technical value, and,
b. You post on Usenet merely for your own personal amusement.
Certainly you've proven me correct in this thread on both counts.
The good news is that responding to you common trolls in _this_ thread,
doesn't really ruin the thread any more than you common worthless trolls
listed below have already ruined the thread.
It's like you're all fifth grade boys who plop your poop in the floor of
the girls bathroom as your shining contribution to Usenet of your actual
value.
You enjoy the attention.
--
These, for posterity, for their grandkids, perhaps, are worthless trolls:
o Alan Baker <nu...@ness.biz>
o Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com>
o Andreas Rutishauser <and...@macandreas.ch>
o B...@Onramp.net
o Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com>
o Andreas Rutishauser <and...@macandreas.ch>
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 8, 2019, 12:44:06 PM11/8/19
to
On 8 Nov 2019 16:50:52 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> I've been on/off/on his list and am currently - already for a rather
> long time - off it. What am I doing wrong!?
>
> BTW, it's kind of funny - in a sad, pathetic way - that some of the
> real trolls (/creeps) are not on his list. Something about keeping
> company?
Hi Frank,
> I've been on/off/on his list and am currently - already for a rather
> long time - off it. What am I doing wrong!?
>
> BTW, it's kind of funny - in a sad, pathetic way - that some of the
> real trolls (/creeps) are not on his list. Something about keeping
> company?
You and Carlos and nospam are all in the same category.
o Even Dan Purgert is in the category that you share with them.
All of you sometimes (but very rarely) act like adults on Usenet.
o Most of the time all of you act like children on Usenet.
The post I'm responding to of yours, for example...
o Was clearly written by a fifth grader.
I'm not sure yet where all you guys come from, but I wonder if the
educational system where you come from is _different_ somehow, from our
American system.
In the USA, if you go to a class or if you work in a company (not the
government, but a startup in the Silicon Valley), trolls like Ed Pawlowski
wouldn't last, oh, a couple days.
They'd be wrong EVERY SINGLE TIME (they can't ever add value).
o Most of the listed trolls are like Ed Pawlowski - devoid of any value.
But the four of you are in a _different_ category, Frank:
o Frank Slootweg
o nospam
o Carlos
o Dan Purgert
Sometimes, you actually do add value.
o But most of the time, what you write is of negative value.
Hence, the handful of you would _still_ never make it in any graduate
school (that's how I know you all lack formal education), and certainly,
none of you would survive the first week in a Silicon Valley startup.
Its shocking, but worthless trolls like you, Frank, can actually add value
(e.g., as you did with the Samba/CIFS & FTP & WebDAV discussions).
What's sad is you play silly semantic games (as you did with Usenet
headers, Frank).
And, what's interesting, actually, is the trolls below are clearly trolls
simply proven by pointing to what they themselves wrote in this very
thread, and yet, you trolls call EVERYONE ELSE the trolls.
I find that kind of amusing.
o If it wasn't so sad.
--
--
o Alan Baker <nu...@ness.biz>
o Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com>
o Andreas Rutishauser <and...@macandreas.ch>
o B...@Onramp.net
o Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com>
o Andreas Rutishauser <and...@macandreas.ch>
Frank Slootweg
Nov 8, 2019, 1:35:11 PM11/8/19
to
Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen....@halder.edu> wrote:
> On 8 Nov 2019 16:50:52 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
> > I've been on/off/on his list and am currently - already for a rather
> > long time - off it. What am I doing wrong!?
> >
> > BTW, it's kind of funny - in a sad, pathetic way - that some of the
> > real trolls (/creeps) are not on his list. Something about keeping
> > company?
[About me and some others:]
>
> > I've been on/off/on his list and am currently - already for a rather
> > long time - off it. What am I doing wrong!?
> >
> > BTW, it's kind of funny - in a sad, pathetic way - that some of the
> > real trolls (/creeps) are not on his list. Something about keeping
> > company?
> I'm not sure yet where all you guys come from, but I wonder if the
> educational system where you come from is _different_ somehow, from our
> American system.
>
> In the USA, if you go to a class or if you work in a company (not the
> government, but a startup in the Silicon Valley), trolls like Ed Pawlowski
> wouldn't last, oh, a couple days.
company for 35 years, so there you go!
After those years, I was so filthy rich that I could and did retire.
Must have been a bunch of morons, paying me all that money for my
incompetency!
I'm sure they're so disappointed about their stupidity, now you've set
them straight about what a loser I *really* am/was!
So apparently your "American [educational] system" creates morons who
hire incompetent losers! You said it, not me.
[...]
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 8, 2019, 2:17:45 PM11/8/19
to
On 8 Nov 2019 18:35:10 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> I don't want to rain on your parade, but I worked for a Silicon Valley
> company for 35 years, so there you go!
Hi Frank,
> I don't want to rain on your parade, but I worked for a Silicon Valley
> company for 35 years, so there you go!
You own an imaginary belief system if you fail this simplest test of facts
o Name just one
You can 'say' you worked for a Silicon Valley company, Frank, but the fact
you didn't add _any_ value in this thread is still a fact I can point to.
And I can point to _plenty_ of threads, Frank, where you added zero value.
o In fact, I can't find a _single_ thread you authored Frank, where you
added value to either of these two newsgroups, Frank.
Let's see if that's a fact, Frank, that you _never_ authored a single
thread in either of these two newsgroups, Frank, that added any value.
Can you point to _any_ thread, Frank, where you authored it, and it
contained any on-topic technical value in either of these two newsgroups?
<http://tinyurl.com/comp-mobile-android>
<http://tinyurl.com/alt-home-repair>
If you can't point to even a _single_ thread you've authored, in your
entire life, Frank, that added on-topic technical value, then what does
that make of your claim that you actually are smart enough to work at a
Silicon Valley company Frank?
Here, in San Jose, people like you wouldn't last a week, Frank.
o All I have to do is point to _your_ posts, to prove you can't add value.
Name a _single_ thread you've authored, Frank, in these ngs, in your life,
o That added any on-topic technical value to the newsgroup.
Name just one.
--
The thing with these cowardly trolls like Frank, is they claim to be far
smarter than anything they write proves them, easily, to be.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 8, 2019, 2:23:46 PM11/8/19
to
On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 22:29:08 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> I hope it is not too late to turn my life around and become a
> contributing member of society. From now on, my life will be devoted to
> prayer, meditation, reading specifications sheets for wi-fi routers.
Hi Ed Pawlowski,
> I hope it is not too late to turn my life around and become a
> contributing member of society. From now on, my life will be devoted to
> prayer, meditation, reading specifications sheets for wi-fi routers.
You common cowardly trolls don't appear to be educated in the least, such
that you will fail this simplest of all basic tests of adult belief
systems, Ed Pawlowski.
All I have to do is point to what _you_ write, to prove that a fact.
o But, I'll ask anyway - since your answer will prove the point more so.
Name a _single_ thread you've authored, Ed Pawlowski, in these two ngs, in
your _entire_ life, that added _any_ on-topic technical value?
In your _entire life_ Ed, name a thread you authored that added value.
Name just one.
--
Cowardly bully trolls instantly fail this simplest of all value tests.
Frank Slootweg
Nov 8, 2019, 3:06:14 PM11/8/19
to
Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen....@halder.edu> wrote:
> On 8 Nov 2019 18:35:10 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
> > I don't want to rain on your parade, but I worked for a Silicon Valley
> > company for 35 years, so there you go!
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> You own an imaginary belief system if you fail this simplest test of facts
> o Name just one
Can you please cut the booze!?
>
> > I don't want to rain on your parade, but I worked for a Silicon Valley
> > company for 35 years, so there you go!
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> You own an imaginary belief system if you fail this simplest test of facts
> o Name just one
Name just one *what*?
Don't answer that one. It's one of them rethorical thingies. I/we know
full well that - as usual - you dodge and deflect, because that's all
you (can) do.
So we see once more that one of your non-arguments - this time about
(y)our educational systems - falls flat on its face. What's new!? :-(
> You can 'say' you worked for a Silicon Valley company, Frank
[More dodging, deflecting and dishonest silent snipping deleted.]
> Here, in San Jose, people like you wouldn't last a week, Frank.
(that's were I took our company jet) -, the Bay Area and the US.
AFAIK, 35 years is a tad over "a week", but being an incompetent
loser, what do *I* know!?
> o All I have to do is point to _your_ posts, to prove you can't add value.
they can do with a laugh. Especially now there's rumour they (well,
part of 'they') might be taken over.
[More dodging, deflecting and dishonest silent snipping deleted.]
Oops! Nothing left!
I'm so sorry that me working for 35 years for a Silicon Valley company
causes you so much distress. But I always post facts, so it can't be
helped.
What about you? Are you ever truthful without dodging and diverting?
If so, just cite one such event.
o Name just one
Ed Pawlowski
Nov 8, 2019, 3:31:05 PM11/8/19
to
you what will make me stop. Just stop denigrating others. Just STFU
about people you consider inferior. You can't do it. You have to show
off your perceived superiority and what you think is knowledge others do
not have.
I'm a pretty honest guy, really. I don't like your attitude. I don't
like the way you talk down to people. Stick to the subject, do not
criticize other and you won't hear a word from me. Simple. But you
don't have the will power. You get your rocks off keeping a spreadsheet
of those that question anything you say.
I've learned a lot from people here and I've contributed what I know to
help others. I'm not going to look up anything to satisfy your childish
demands. I'm secure about myself and don't have to prove myself like
you do.
Stop being a nasty old man and you won't hear from me.
Ed Pawlowski
Nov 8, 2019, 3:33:00 PM11/8/19
to
On 11/8/2019 12:38 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
> Hi Carlos,
> At the risk of feeding you common trolls, I will assume you own an adult
> mind, where the trolls like you post _zero_ value.
>
Yep, you took the risk and lost. Never assume. Smart people know that.
> Hi Carlos,
> At the risk of feeding you common trolls, I will assume you own an adult
> mind, where the trolls like you post _zero_ value.
>
Ed Pawlowski
Nov 8, 2019, 3:34:46 PM11/8/19
to
On 11/8/2019 12:44 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
> On 8 Nov 2019 16:50:52 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
>> I've been on/off/on his list and am currently - already for a rather
>> long time - off it. What am I doing wrong!?
>>
>> BTW, it's kind of funny - in a sad, pathetic way - that some of the
>> real trolls (/creeps) are not on his list. Something about keeping
>> company?
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> You and Carlos and nospam are all in the same category.
> o Even Dan Purgert is in the category that you share with them.
>
Who is whining like a fifth grader? Arlen G is. You just have to
> On 8 Nov 2019 16:50:52 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
>> I've been on/off/on his list and am currently - already for a rather
>> long time - off it. What am I doing wrong!?
>>
>> BTW, it's kind of funny - in a sad, pathetic way - that some of the
>> real trolls (/creeps) are not on his list. Something about keeping
>> company?
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> You and Carlos and nospam are all in the same category.
> o Even Dan Purgert is in the category that you share with them.
>
criticize others don't you?
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 8, 2019, 4:47:03 PM11/8/19
to
On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 15:32:59 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> Yep, you took the risk and lost. Never assume. Smart people know that.
Hi Ed Pawlowski & the other common trolls, who posted negative value.
> Yep, you took the risk and lost. Never assume. Smart people know that.
Like hoard of gnats, you descended upon this Usenet picnic, such that, it's
_already_ ruined, and was ruined, the instant you trolls showed up.
Nothing I could do could resurrect the value of the thread
o Once you common worthless trolls infested it.
This isn't my first rodeo with you common worthless trolls on Usenet.
o Normally I don't feed you so you troll threads all day every day
The fact is that I always ignore you when you troll other threads.
It's only when you troll threads that I care come to fruition that I have
to decide whether to point out that you trolls never add any value Ed
Pawlowski.
Obviously, you trolls who infested this thread _already_ ruined the
potluck, where my pointing out to you that you're utterly worthless as
human beings, doesn't add any additional value, I agree.
But once you infested any thread, it was _already_ ruined, Ed Pawlowski.
I point out, for the permanent Usenet record, and for your kids, grandkids,
and their kids to revel in, that you, Ed Pawlowski, failed the simplest
test of being an adult who "can" add value to _any_ Internet topic on these
newsgroups.
You failed this simple test, which posterity will permanently preserve:
o Ed Pawlowski - name once in your _entire_ life, where you've authored a
thread to this newsgroup that contained even a single iota of on-topic
technical value.
I asked you the simplest question of the simplests test, Ed Pawlowski...
o Name just one
You failed.
Which proves, beyond doubt, you are nothing but a worthless troll Ed
Pawlowski, who isn't an adult, and, worse, who has never in his entire life
opened a thread that added _any_ on-topic technical value to this ng.
All I need to do is point to exactly what you wrote in this thread
o To prove you are worthless and of absolutely zero value to Usenet
You somehow feel that's fact is a putdown - but - it's simply a basic fact.
o All I need to do is point to EXACTLY what you wrote Ed Pawlowski.
You consider what YOU WROTE to be a put down.
o Which, you have to admit, is pretty funny.
If it wasn't so sad.
o But the fact you hate that you're a troll, Ed Pawlowski
o Doesn't change the fact that we proved you're nothing but a common troll.
You don't have the education nor the brains to be able to add any value.
o You prove that is a fact ... every time you post, Ed Pawlowski.
I simply point the permanent Usenet record to EXACTLY what you post, Ed.
--
These cowardly trolls have never once added value in their entire lives.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 8, 2019, 4:51:32 PM11/8/19
to
On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 15:31:04 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> Stop being a nasty old man and you won't hear from me.
Hi Ed Pawlowski,
> Stop being a nasty old man and you won't hear from me.
You are a mere child, who has _never_ even once in your entire life,
authored a thread of any on-topic value on this newsgroup.
You call me a "nasty old man" simply for proving this is a fact
o Simply by pointing to EXACTLY WHAT YOU WROTE in this thread, Ed.
You'll note that I never confront you cowardly worthless trolls
o In threads that I don't author (where you troll away every day).
Notice, I don't feed you cowardly worthless trolls, Ed Pawlowski
o Until you infest a thread where I'm trying to be purposefully helpful
You seem to dislike that what you write proves that you are a worthless
common troll, and you seem to believe that the fact I simply point to
exactly what you write proves you are a common worthless troll, is,
somehow, an indiation of something.
It's not.
It's simply pointing to EXACTLY what you write, Ed Pawlowski
o That's all I need to do to prove you are a common worthless troll.
In your entire life, you've never even once added a thread of on-topic
technical value to either of these newsgroups, Ed Pawlowski.
That's a fact.
o You hate the fact you add zero value
o But the fact you hate that fact doesn't change that it's a fact.
--
The common worthless trolls _hate_ when I point to what they write!
Ed Pawlowski
Nov 8, 2019, 5:52:49 PM11/8/19
to
On 11/8/2019 4:47 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
>
> Like hoard of gnats, you descended upon this Usenet picnic, such that, it's
> _already_ ruined, and was ruined, the instant you trolls showed up.
>
> Nothing I could do could resurrect the value of the thread
> o Once you common worthless trolls infested it.
Very eloquently spoken.
>
> Like hoard of gnats, you descended upon this Usenet picnic, such that, it's
> _already_ ruined, and was ruined, the instant you trolls showed up.
>
> Nothing I could do could resurrect the value of the thread
> o Once you common worthless trolls infested it.
> The fact is that I always ignore you when you troll other threads.
>
> It's only when you troll threads that I care come to fruition that I have
> to decide whether to point out that you trolls never add any value Ed
> Pawlowski.
you when you show your bitter nasty side and denigrate others. I've
explained that to you often. If you stick to the subject I do not reply
to you. Simple.
>
> Obviously, you trolls who infested this thread _already_ ruined the
> potluck, where my pointing out to you that you're utterly worthless as
> human beings, doesn't add any additional value, I agree.
>
> But once you infested any thread, it was _already_ ruined, Ed Pawlowski.
>
> I point out, for the permanent Usenet record, and for your kids, grandkids,
> and their kids to revel in, that you, Ed Pawlowski, failed the simplest
> test of being an adult who "can" add value to _any_ Internet topic on these
> newsgroups.
have to clean it up to get an R rating.
> You failed.
>
> Which proves, beyond doubt, you are nothing but a worthless troll Ed
> Pawlowski, who isn't an adult, and, worse, who has never in his entire life
> opened a thread that added _any_ on-topic technical value to this ng.
therapy will help?
>
> All I need to do is point to exactly what you wrote in this thread
> o To prove you are worthless and of absolutely zero value to Usenet
>
> You somehow feel that's fact is a putdown - but - it's simply a basic fact.
> o All I need to do is point to EXACTLY what you wrote Ed Pawlowski.
>
> You consider what YOU WROTE to be a put down.
> o Which, you have to admit, is pretty funny.
>
> If it wasn't so sad.
>
> You hate the fact that you have never once added value, Ed Pawlowski.
> o But the fact you hate that you're a troll, Ed Pawlowski
> o Doesn't change the fact that we proved you're nothing but a common troll.
>
> You don't have the education nor the brains to be able to add any value.
> o You prove that is a fact ... every time you post, Ed Pawlowski.
>
> I simply point the permanent Usenet record to EXACTLY what you post, Ed.
>
self control to do so.
Ed Pawlowski
Nov 8, 2019, 5:57:24 PM11/8/19
to
On 11/8/2019 4:51 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
> You call me a "nasty old man" simply for proving this is a fact
> o Simply by pointing to EXACTLY WHAT YOU WROTE in this thread, Ed.
>
Check the mirror.
> You call me a "nasty old man" simply for proving this is a fact
> o Simply by pointing to EXACTLY WHAT YOU WROTE in this thread, Ed.
>
> You'll note that I never confront you cowardly worthless trolls
> o In threads that I don't author (where you troll away every day).
>
> Notice, I don't feed you cowardly worthless trolls, Ed Pawlowski
> o Until you infest a thread where I'm trying to be purposefully helpful
stop. You have to get the last word.
>
> It's simply pointing to EXACTLY what you write, Ed Pawlowski
> o That's all I need to do to prove you are a common worthless troll.
>
> In your entire life, you've never even once added a thread of on-topic
> technical value to either of these newsgroups, Ed Pawlowski.
>
> That's a fact.
> o You hate the fact you add zero value
> o But the fact you hate that fact doesn't change that it's a fact.
>
Well, gotta go, time for dinner and watch the news.
David Higton
Nov 8, 2019, 6:13:48 PM11/8/19
to
In message <qq1o4k$q5j$4...@news.mixmin.net>
>On Thu, 07 Nov 2019 14:47:58 GMT, David Higton wrote:
>
>> That report is from 2002. Technology has changed a great deal since
>> then. (The report references analogue TVs and CRT monitors.)
>>
>> The information is so far out of date as to be inapplicable today.
>
>As always, the child-like trolls have given their absolute best.
>o Which added _nothing_ of any added value whatsoever.
>
>No problem with your assessment of the fact.
>o My problem is that NONE of you common trolls posted a *better* report.
>
>It's cowardly easy for common trolls to denigrate the efforts of others...
>Without having ANY capability to add value on what was already listed.
>
>Where is the report you and the other common trolls think is better?
I'm not offering a more recent one. It would be handly if I knew one
to offer, but I don't. So you'll have to do your own homework. Sorry.
But it is correct and fair of me to point out that the report you cited
is too out of date to be applicable today, given the rate of technological
progress in that area.
Davie
>On Thu, 07 Nov 2019 14:47:58 GMT, David Higton wrote:
>
>> That report is from 2002. Technology has changed a great deal since
>> then. (The report references analogue TVs and CRT monitors.)
>>
>> The information is so far out of date as to be inapplicable today.
>
>As always, the child-like trolls have given their absolute best.
>o Which added _nothing_ of any added value whatsoever.
>
>No problem with your assessment of the fact.
>o My problem is that NONE of you common trolls posted a *better* report.
>
>It's cowardly easy for common trolls to denigrate the efforts of others...
>Without having ANY capability to add value on what was already listed.
>
>Where is the report you and the other common trolls think is better?
I'm not offering a more recent one. It would be handly if I knew one
to offer, but I don't. So you'll have to do your own homework. Sorry.
But it is correct and fair of me to point out that the report you cited
is too out of date to be applicable today, given the rate of technological
progress in that area.
Davie
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 8, 2019, 7:19:07 PM11/8/19
to
On 8 Nov 2019 20:06:13 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Can you please cut the booze!?
Hi Frank,
> Can you please cut the booze!?
Grow up.
I realize you're uneducated; so I can cut you some slack.
But the fact you have no education doesn't mean you have to always post
worthless off-topic drivel, where you've never even once added on-topic
technical value to any thread you've authored to this newsgroup in your
entire life, Frank.
You hate the fact that you add zero value.
o It's likely because you're uneducated.
But why do you insist on proving that with _every_ post, Frank Slootweg?
Notice the silly childish games _you_ just played Frank, not me.
o I posted something with the intention of being purposefully helpful.
o You trolled this thread with your incessant worthless trolls:
Message-ID: <qq49ti...@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
o I simply pointed to your own EXACT words, Frank Slootweg.
You argued that your worthless drivel was not a troll, Frank.
o And yet, it was.
Worse, you can't find a _single_ thread you've created in your entire life,
Frank Slooweg, on these two newsgroups, where you've _ever_ added adult
on-topic technical value.
You can hate the fact that it's trivial to prove all you _can_ do, Frank,
is troll, but it doesn't change the fact, Frank, that all you can do, is
troll.
You hate me simply for pointing to EXACTLY what YOU write, Frank.
o That's what is so sad about you common worthless trolls Frank Slootweg.
>
> Name just one *what*?
>
> Don't answer that one. It's one of them rethorical thingies. I/we know
> full well that - as usual - you dodge and deflect, because that's all
> you (can) do.
>
> So we see once more that one of your non-arguments - this time about
> (y)our educational systems - falls flat on its face. What's new!? :-(
Frank,
> Name just one *what*?
>
> Don't answer that one. It's one of them rethorical thingies. I/we know
> full well that - as usual - you dodge and deflect, because that's all
> you (can) do.
>
> So we see once more that one of your non-arguments - this time about
> (y)our educational systems - falls flat on its face. What's new!? :-(
The question was simple.
My premise is clear.
I should not need to repeat a premise that simple & obvious, Frank.
You have never once, in your _entire_ life Frank Slootweg, ever opened a
thread, like I did here, Frank, which is why it matters, that added even a
single iota of adult on-topic technical value to this newsgroup.
Because if you did, you'd be able to point to it, Frank.
o And you can't.
Because it doesn't exist, Frank.
I gave you the chance to prove you're not a worthless troll, Frank.
o And failed this simplest of basic tests, Frank, of an adult.
> What about you? Are you ever truthful without dodging and diverting?
> If so, just cite one such event.
> o Name just one
The _huge_ difference between me, and you worthless trolls...
o Is that my threads add on-topic technical value.
For example:
o Cut and paste Hello World tutorial for Android/Windows
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/aW64zYeBtF0/1b5h3r3PBAAJ>
o Genymotion Android emulator tutorial
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/ix9empN-mxg/07ZmH2AWAQAJ>
o How to use Windows to populate your Android phone with hundreds of apps
without ever enabling Google Play (or F-Droid)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/IUNBsY5F_Ho/KxjX1DL-AAAJ>
o Tutorial to run any Windows command directly on Android over either USB
or Wi-Fi
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/JrWLPRYO-TU/2gn6KqccBwAJ>
o Simultaneously slide Windows Linux iOS Android files back and forth over
USB at 7GB per minute speeds using 100% native devices (no proprietary
software needed)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/WohhLOTCYKw/n_ytNizaCAAJ>
o FYI ... it takes google only about 1.5 months to fix errors in their
online map routing directions
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/Gb1s44Hlhbo/fLak2Dl5BQAJ>
etc.
It takes me seconds to name those threads I authored, to this newsgroup,
which added on-topic technical value, Frank Slootweg.
And yet, in your _entire_ life, you can't name a single time when you have
posted a thread of on-topic technical value to this newsgroup.
Think about that, Frank Slootweg.
o Think about how that fact proves you're a worthless childish troll,
Frank. I suspect you never got your high school equivalency degree, but all
I really know is that what you write proves that is a distinct fact.
And yes, Frank, you incessantly trolled _those_ threads with your
incessantly worthless childish drivel, Frank Slootweg.
--
Trolls like Slootweg have never even once in their life added even a single
thread to this newsgroup of on topic technical value. All worthless trolls
like Frank Slootweg "can" do, is troll. (Claiming everyone else is the
troll, even as _nothing_ they've ever authored, has _any_ on topic value.)
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 8, 2019, 7:20:25 PM11/8/19
to
On Fri, 08 Nov 2019 23:13:38 GMT, David Higton wrote:
> But it is correct and fair of me to point out that the report you cited
> is too out of date to be applicable today, given the rate of technological
> progress in that area.
Thank you for reporting that information.
> But it is correct and fair of me to point out that the report you cited
> is too out of date to be applicable today, given the rate of technological
> progress in that area.
All I ask is that anyone with _better_ information, please post it.
It's what an adult would do.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 8, 2019, 7:23:04 PM11/8/19
to
On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 17:57:23 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> Well, gotta go, time for dinner and watch the news.
Ed Pawlowski,
> Well, gotta go, time for dinner and watch the news.
FACTS.
All I need to do is point to EXACTLY what you write
o To prove that all you _can_ do, is troll, Ed Pawlowski.
--
Ed Pawlowski has never once, in his entire life, authored a thread to this
newsgroup, that contained even an iota of on-topic technical value.
The good news is that the permanent Usenet record will show this for our
future grandchildren and their children to interpret decades from now.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 8, 2019, 7:25:49 PM11/8/19
to
On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 17:52:47 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> I don't troll other threads. I add value. I told you I only come after
> you when you show your bitter nasty side and denigrate others. I've
> explained that to you often. If you stick to the subject I do not reply
> to you. Simple.
Simple test of fact, Ed Pawlowski.
> I don't troll other threads. I add value. I told you I only come after
> you when you show your bitter nasty side and denigrate others. I've
> explained that to you often. If you stick to the subject I do not reply
> to you. Simple.
Point to _any_ post, in this thread, where you added on-topic technical
value.
Name just one.
--
That Ed Pawlowski instantly fails the simplest test of his incessant
Name just one.
--
trolling proves, beyond doubt, that Ed Pawloski can't ever add even a
single iota of on-topic technical value to this thread topic.
Since he can't find _any_ thread, in his _entire_ life, that he authored to
this ng that added on-topic technical value, we can just as easily prove
that Ed Pawlowski is utterly incapable of adding value to this Usenet
potluck.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 8, 2019, 7:27:51 PM11/8/19
to
On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 15:34:46 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> Who is whining like a fifth grader? Arlen G is. You just have to
> criticize others don't you?
I love that all you worthless trolls point to me as your problem set,
> Who is whining like a fifth grader? Arlen G is. You just have to
> criticize others don't you?
simply because I pointed to EXACTLY what YOU posted.
You have to admit, that's pretty funny.
o If it wasn't so sad.
The sad thing is that you're incapable of adding adult value.
o Everyone knows this, Ed Pawlowski ... except you.
--
The trolls feel that anyone who points to what THEY write, is "whining"
simply because what THEY write is always easily shown to be a troll.
Ed Pawlowski
Nov 8, 2019, 7:54:57 PM11/8/19
to
On 11/8/2019 7:27 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 15:34:46 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> Who is whining like a fifth grader? Arlen G is. You just have to
>> criticize others don't you?
>
> I love that all you worthless trolls point to me as your problem set,
> simply because I pointed to EXACTLY what YOU posted.
>
> You have to admit, that's pretty funny.
> o If it wasn't so sad.
>
> The sad thing is that you're incapable of adding adult value.
> o Everyone knows this, Ed Pawlowski ... except you.
>
You may be right. Those other people never took the time to tell me
> On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 15:34:46 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> Who is whining like a fifth grader? Arlen G is. You just have to
>> criticize others don't you?
>
> I love that all you worthless trolls point to me as your problem set,
> simply because I pointed to EXACTLY what YOU posted.
>
> You have to admit, that's pretty funny.
> o If it wasn't so sad.
>
> The sad thing is that you're incapable of adding adult value.
> o Everyone knows this, Ed Pawlowski ... except you.
>
though. Very thoughtful of you to point it out.
You are OK Arlen G, those other guys are jerks.
Ed Pawlowski
Nov 8, 2019, 7:56:39 PM11/8/19
to
On 11/8/2019 7:25 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 17:52:47 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> I don't troll other threads. I add value. I told you I only come after
>> you when you show your bitter nasty side and denigrate others. I've
>> explained that to you often. If you stick to the subject I do not reply
>> to you. Simple.
>
> Simple test of fact, Ed Pawlowski.
>
> Point to _any_ post, in this thread, where you added on-topic technical
> value.
>
> Name just one.
>
Just the value of pointing out what a nasty old man you are.
> On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 17:52:47 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> I don't troll other threads. I add value. I told you I only come after
>> you when you show your bitter nasty side and denigrate others. I've
>> explained that to you often. If you stick to the subject I do not reply
>> to you. Simple.
>
> Simple test of fact, Ed Pawlowski.
>
> Point to _any_ post, in this thread, where you added on-topic technical
> value.
>
> Name just one.
>
sms
Nov 9, 2019, 10:57:38 AM11/9/19
to
On 11/5/2019 12:26 PM, John McGaw wrote:
<snip>
> Very simplistic test: if the wall wart is heavy (i.e. has a big iron
> transformer inside like the ancient Netgear 12V units) and/or is warm to
> the touch when there is no load (again, like the ancient Netgear 12V
> units) then it it is using power inefficiently. Most of the lightweight
> warts using switching supplies are relatively efficient when there is no
> load. If the unit is warm when unloaded that is a dead giveaway of power
> waste since heat has to come from somewhere.
Read page 68 of
<http://www.inference.org.uk/sustainable/book/tex/sewtha.pdf>
--------------------------------------------------
"The truth about chargers
Modern phone chargers, when left plugged in with no phone attached, use
about half a watt. In our preferred units, this is a power consumption
of about 0.01 kWh per day. For anyone whose consumption stack is over
100 kWh per day, the BBC’s advice, always unplug the phone charger,
could potentially reduce their energy consumption by one hundredth of
one percent (if only they would do it). Every little helps!
I don’t think so. Obsessively switching off the phone-charger is like
bailing the Titanic with a teaspoon. Do switch it off, but please be
aware how tiny a gesture it is."
--------------------------------------------------
There are power strips with individual switches for those really
obsessive about that 0.01KWH per day, i.e.
<https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32884477960.html>.
Also consider that in cold weather that 0.01KWH is not really wasted,
it's heating your home, but in hot weather your air-conditioner is
working harder (except in the U.K. where they have not yet discovered
air-conditioning).
Also read <https://michaelbluejay.com/electricity/vampire.html>
He mentions set-top boxes. I decided to measure my Comcast set-top box
vampire power. Indeed he is correct. My set-top box (no DVR) draws 11.3W
when off, and 11.9W when on. That's 1KWH every four days or so, or
about 100KWH/year. At 25¢/KWH that's $25 per year.
Plugging in phone charges to measure standby power is difficult. While
that book mentions 0.5W standby, my Ubio inductive charger draws 0.0W on
standby, about 6.5W when charging my iPhone with its Qi case (my iPhone
doesn't have built-in inductive charging). Obviously it's drawing
something when the phone isn't being charged, but my "Kill A Watt"
device only measures down to 1/10 of a watt.
> My biggest gripe is the vast number of different voltage/connector
> combinations in the wild. I've got at least four different sorts which
> have multi-pin connectors, all incompatible either physically or by
> voltage ratings, which I've got in a box in the closet of computer shame
> in the basement. When I do need one of them to power an old external
> drive, for example, it can take a half hour to find the right unit and
> even then it is sometimes guesswork. Of course with the rest of them it
> is a matter of voltage/current/inside diameter/outside diameter...
When I take new device out of the box I immediately attach a tag
indicating what it's for.
We have another issue in California now. Because solar has become so
popular, at peak production time houses are feeding more power back onto
the grid than the grid can handle plus there's no good way to store the
vast amounts of excess electricity being generated. The grid was not
designed for two-way transmission of electricity, nor was it designed
for storage. The utilities are changing the payment structure, moving
the peak payments you get for solar to discourage too much power from
being fed back onto the grid at peak production time.
It used to be that it was really stupid to have batteries like a Tesla
Powerwall if you had solar because you didn't want to be using your
valuable KWH to charge a battery, you wanted to be selling them back to
the utility (in California we get the RETAIL value of KWH as credit, not
the wholesale value). But now it's beginning to make sense to have
batteries for financial reasons, as well as to deal with the PSPS
(Public Safety Power Shutoffs). What you're not allowed to do is to
charge your batteries with solar during peak solar production time then
feed that electricity back onto the grid during peak value time.
<snip>
> Very simplistic test: if the wall wart is heavy (i.e. has a big iron
> transformer inside like the ancient Netgear 12V units) and/or is warm to
> the touch when there is no load (again, like the ancient Netgear 12V
> units) then it it is using power inefficiently. Most of the lightweight
> warts using switching supplies are relatively efficient when there is no
> load. If the unit is warm when unloaded that is a dead giveaway of power
> waste since heat has to come from somewhere.
Read page 68 of
<http://www.inference.org.uk/sustainable/book/tex/sewtha.pdf>
--------------------------------------------------
"The truth about chargers
Modern phone chargers, when left plugged in with no phone attached, use
about half a watt. In our preferred units, this is a power consumption
of about 0.01 kWh per day. For anyone whose consumption stack is over
100 kWh per day, the BBC’s advice, always unplug the phone charger,
could potentially reduce their energy consumption by one hundredth of
one percent (if only they would do it). Every little helps!
I don’t think so. Obsessively switching off the phone-charger is like
bailing the Titanic with a teaspoon. Do switch it off, but please be
aware how tiny a gesture it is."
--------------------------------------------------
There are power strips with individual switches for those really
obsessive about that 0.01KWH per day, i.e.
<https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32884477960.html>.
Also consider that in cold weather that 0.01KWH is not really wasted,
it's heating your home, but in hot weather your air-conditioner is
working harder (except in the U.K. where they have not yet discovered
air-conditioning).
Also read <https://michaelbluejay.com/electricity/vampire.html>
He mentions set-top boxes. I decided to measure my Comcast set-top box
vampire power. Indeed he is correct. My set-top box (no DVR) draws 11.3W
when off, and 11.9W when on. That's 1KWH every four days or so, or
about 100KWH/year. At 25¢/KWH that's $25 per year.
Plugging in phone charges to measure standby power is difficult. While
that book mentions 0.5W standby, my Ubio inductive charger draws 0.0W on
standby, about 6.5W when charging my iPhone with its Qi case (my iPhone
doesn't have built-in inductive charging). Obviously it's drawing
something when the phone isn't being charged, but my "Kill A Watt"
device only measures down to 1/10 of a watt.
> My biggest gripe is the vast number of different voltage/connector
> combinations in the wild. I've got at least four different sorts which
> have multi-pin connectors, all incompatible either physically or by
> voltage ratings, which I've got in a box in the closet of computer shame
> in the basement. When I do need one of them to power an old external
> drive, for example, it can take a half hour to find the right unit and
> even then it is sometimes guesswork. Of course with the rest of them it
> is a matter of voltage/current/inside diameter/outside diameter...
When I take new device out of the box I immediately attach a tag
indicating what it's for.
We have another issue in California now. Because solar has become so
popular, at peak production time houses are feeding more power back onto
the grid than the grid can handle plus there's no good way to store the
vast amounts of excess electricity being generated. The grid was not
designed for two-way transmission of electricity, nor was it designed
for storage. The utilities are changing the payment structure, moving
the peak payments you get for solar to discourage too much power from
being fed back onto the grid at peak production time.
It used to be that it was really stupid to have batteries like a Tesla
Powerwall if you had solar because you didn't want to be using your
valuable KWH to charge a battery, you wanted to be selling them back to
the utility (in California we get the RETAIL value of KWH as credit, not
the wholesale value). But now it's beginning to make sense to have
batteries for financial reasons, as well as to deal with the PSPS
(Public Safety Power Shutoffs). What you're not allowed to do is to
charge your batteries with solar during peak solar production time then
feed that electricity back onto the grid during peak value time.
Frank Slootweg
Nov 9, 2019, 10:57:41 AM11/9/19
to
Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen....@halder.edu> wrote:
> On 8 Nov 2019 20:06:13 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
> > Can you please cut the booze!?
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> Grow up.
> I realize you're uneducated; so I can cut you some slack.
'uneducated"? *That* must be why my Silicon Valley employer paid me
>
> > Can you please cut the booze!?
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> Grow up.
> I realize you're uneducated; so I can cut you some slack.
all that money, so I could retire at an very early age!
Hint: That was in yet another part which you cowardly silently snipped
and dodged.
[More dodging and deflecting deleted.]
> Notice the silly childish games _you_ just played Frank, not me.
> o I posted something with the intention of being purposefully helpful.
because it was 17 years old, totally outdated and therefor irrelevant,
you rewarded them with your usual vitriol and childish personal attacks.
So - as usual - *you* *did* play silly childish games and - as usual -
*you* drew first blood.
> o You trolled this thread with your incessant worthless trolls:
> Message-ID: <qq49ti...@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
doesn't make them any less facts, nor does it make them "incessant
worthless trolls".
> o I simply pointed to your own EXACT words, Frank Slootweg.
on your usual dodge and divert spiel, drew in all kinds of totally
irrelevant nonsense and - as usual - *never commented on what I actually
wrote*.
> You argued that your worthless drivel was not a troll, Frank.
> o And yet, it was.
[More dodging and deflecting deleted.]
> > What about you? Are you ever truthful without dodging and diverting?
> > If so, just cite one such event.
> > o Name just one
the goods duly noted.
[More dodging and deflecting deleted.]
QED.
HTH. HAND. EOD. NL.
BTW, I advise you to get your money back on your DSM qualification/
diagnosis. Yes, you exhibit one of the symptoms, total lack of social
skills. But you do not exhibit any of the 'positive' symptoms. So get a
second opinion.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 9, 2019, 10:58:33 AM11/9/19
to
On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 19:54:55 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> You may be right. Those other people never took the time to tell me
> though. Very thoughtful of you to point it out.
>
> You are OK Arlen G, those other guys are jerks.
Hi Ed Pawlowski,
> You may be right. Those other people never took the time to tell me
> though. Very thoughtful of you to point it out.
>
> You are OK Arlen G, those other guys are jerks.
This post is probably the best post that you trolls will ever read.
This post assumes you own a mind that comprehends an adult topic.
o Bear in mind this isn't my first rodeo with you worthless trolls.
FACT:
o We proved you've never, in your entire life, ever authored a thread, to
this newsgroup, that added on-topic value.
o We proved (simply by pointing to your own posts), that you trolled mine.
ASSESSMENT:
As I see it, Ed Pawlowski, you only have two choices, since you're actually
incapable of ever authoring a thread of any on-topic value to this
newsgroup (which, if you could, would have been your third option).
OPTION 1:
o You, Ed Pawlowski, can _continue_ to incessantly troll threads other than
those I author, and I will not feed you in the least (it's what I do now).
OPTION 2:
o You, Ed Pawlowski, can continue to troll threads that I author in order
to ask a question or provide on topic value, in which case, I will simply
point out, as I did in this thread, that everyone you post is worthless.
You see, Ed Pawlowski, Carlos ER, Roger Blake, Frank Slootweg, et al.,
the decision _you_ need to make, is whether you will troll threads which I
author in an attempt to ask for value or share value on the Usenet potluck.
Your choice, Frank, Carlos, Roger, and Ed Pawlowski.
o Long ago, I made my decision on how I would respond to worthless trolls.
When you infest other threads than ones I care come to fruition
o I ignore your worthless trolls.
When you infest a thread I author, which I care come to fruition:
o I will simply point out that all you _can_ do, Ed Pawlowski, is troll.
I do that simply by pointing to _your_ posts.
o Just as I proved all Frank Slootweg can do in this thread, is troll.
o Just as I proved all Carlos ER can do in this thread, is troll.
o Just as I proved all Roger Blake can do in this thread, is troll.
Stay out of my threads, trolls, and I will leave you along.
o I've been doing that for decades; you just never noticed it.
(because you're all too stupid to even realize this simple fact.)
--
The trolls are worthless people who add zero value to Usenet potlucks.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 9, 2019, 11:05:31 AM11/9/19
to
On 9 Nov 2019 15:57:39 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> [More dodging and deflecting deleted.]
Hi Frank Slootweg,
> [More dodging and deflecting deleted.]
This post is probably the most poignant post about you
o That you will ever read, in your entire life, Frank.
So listen well...
This post assumes you own a mind that comprehends an adult topic.
o Bear in mind this isn't my first rodeo with you worthless trolls.
FACT:
o We proved you've never, in your entire life, ever authored a thread, to
this newsgroup, that added on-topic value.
o We proved (simply by pointing to your own posts), that you trolled mine.
ASSESSMENT:
actually incapable of ever authoring a thread of any on-topic value to this
newsgroup (which, if you could, would have been your third option).
OPTION 1:
o You, Frank Slootweg, can _continue_ to incessantly troll threads other
newsgroup (which, if you could, would have been your third option).
OPTION 1:
than those I author, and I will not feed you in the least (it's what I do
now).
OPTION 2:
o You, Frank Slootweg, can continue to troll threads that I author in order
now).
OPTION 2:
to ask a question or provide on topic value, in which case, I will simply
point out, as I did in this thread, that everyone you post is worthless.
You see, Frank Slootweg, Carlos ER, Roger Blake, Ed Pawlowski, et al.,
point out, as I did in this thread, that everyone you post is worthless.
the decision _you_ need to make, is whether you will troll threads which I
author in an attempt to ask for value or share value on the Usenet potluck.
Your choice, Ed Pawlowski, Carlos, Roger, and Frank Slootweg.
author in an attempt to ask for value or share value on the Usenet potluck.
o Long ago, I made my decision on how I would respond to worthless trolls.
I have a strategy for dealing with you common worthless trolls, Frank.
o And I have tactics that fit that strategy to deal with your trolls.
STRATEGY
When you infest other threads than ones I care come to fruition
o I ignore your worthless trolls.
When you infest a thread I author, which I care come to fruition:
o I will simply point out that all you _can_ do, Frank Slootweg, is troll.
o I ignore your worthless trolls.
When you infest a thread I author, which I care come to fruition:
I do that simply by pointing to _your_ posts, Frank Slootweg.
o All I need to do is point to YOUR POSTS in this thread, Frank Slootweg.
o To prove that you are a worthless ignorant common troll, Frank Slootweg.
o Just as I proved all Ed Pawlowski can do in this thread, is troll.
o Just as I proved all Carlos ER can do in this thread, is troll.
o Just as I proved all Roger Blake can do in this thread, is troll.
Stay out of my threads, you worthless trolls, and I will leave you alone.
o Just as I proved all Roger Blake can do in this thread, is troll.
o I've been doing that for decades; you just never noticed it.
(because you're all too ignorant to even realize this simple fact.)
You can continue to troll everyone else; but if you troll threads that I
care come to fruition, then expect me to point out that you are a common
troll, Frank Slootweg - and - expect me to point to your own words, which
you will call "whining" - but which is simply pointing to your actions.
--
These trolls are worthless people who add zero value to Usenet potlucks.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 9, 2019, 11:15:15 AM11/9/19
to
On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 19:56:38 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> Just the value of pointing out what a nasty old man you are.
Ed Pawlowski,
> Just the value of pointing out what a nasty old man you are.
You have three choices, as I see your options, Ed Pawlowski:
a. Continue to prove you are a worthless common troll
b. Or go infest another thread, where I will leave you alone
c. Or, better yet, author a thread of on-topic value to share
We've already proven you're incapable of the third option
o As you've never once in your _entire_ life
o Authored a thread to this newgroup
o That added even a single iota of on-topic technical value
So, given that you're clearly ill educated, you have 2 options:
a. Continue to infest threads which I care come to fruition
(in which case, I will point to what _you_ write, as worthless)
b. Continue to infest threads which I don't care come to fruition
(in which case, you can happily troll as I will ignore you)
This isn't my first rodeo with you common worthless trolls, Ed.
o You're too stupid to comprehend my strategy & tactics
o So I outlined them, clearly, for you to possibly comprehend.
Hence, it's completely your choice, Ed Pawlowski (not mine).
o Every time you troll threads I care about - I'll point it out.
I point out your worthless trolls - simply by pointing to what you write.
--
The worthless trolls clearly do not have any education whatsoever.
Hence, they're all too stupid to realize that they are worthless trolls.
It literally has to be pointed out to them, by pointing to what they write.
sms
Nov 9, 2019, 11:51:16 AM11/9/19
to
On 11/9/2019 7:57 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
<sigh>
> I only posted facts. That you - apparently - don't *like* those facts,
> doesn't make them any less facts, nor does it make them "incessant
> worthless trolls".
Sigh.
"Arlen Holder" ignores facts when it doesn't suit his agenda, and cites
facts when it does. He is often correct but also often incorrect.
<sigh>
> I only posted facts. That you - apparently - don't *like* those facts,
> doesn't make them any less facts, nor does it make them "incessant
> worthless trolls".
"Arlen Holder" ignores facts when it doesn't suit his agenda, and cites
facts when it does. He is often correct but also often incorrect.
Ed Pawlowski
Nov 9, 2019, 11:51:31 AM11/9/19
to
On 11/9/2019 10:58 AM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
>
> Stay out of my threads, trolls, and I will leave you along.
> o I've been doing that for decades; you just never noticed it.
> (because you're all too stupid to even realize this simple fact.)
>
Stop denigrating others and you won't hear from me. You can't do that
>
> Stay out of my threads, trolls, and I will leave you along.
> o I've been doing that for decades; you just never noticed it.
> (because you're all too stupid to even realize this simple fact.)
>
though. You have to show you are superior.
Very simple if you never want to hear from me.
Ed Pawlowski
Nov 9, 2019, 11:58:19 AM11/9/19
to
On 11/9/2019 11:15 AM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
> We've already proven you're incapable of the third option
> o As you've never once in your _entire_ life
> o Authored a thread to this newgroup
> o That added even a single iota of on-topic technical value
In comp.mobile.android, no I do not participate except to show people
> We've already proven you're incapable of the third option
> o As you've never once in your _entire_ life
> o Authored a thread to this newgroup
> o That added even a single iota of on-topic technical value
what a jackass you can be. In AHR, many, but you won't look and I'm not
going to hand feed you.
>
> So, given that you're clearly ill educated, you have 2 options:
> a. Continue to infest threads which I care come to fruition
> (in which case, I will point to what _you_ write, as worthless)
> b. Continue to infest threads which I don't care come to fruition
> (in which case, you can happily troll as I will ignore you)
>
show how you are better than everyone.
> This isn't my first rodeo with you common worthless trolls, Ed.
> o You're too stupid to comprehend my strategy & tactics
> o So I outlined them, clearly, for you to possibly comprehend.
>
> Hence, it's completely your choice, Ed Pawlowski (not mine).
> o Every time you troll threads I care about - I'll point it out.
>
> I point out your worthless trolls - simply by pointing to what you write.
>
to any of you normal adult posts, only your childish senile rants about
all the trolls and how everyone but you is ignorant.
Play nice and I'm gone. See, very simple. I bet you were bullied as a
kid and this is your way to get back at the world.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 9, 2019, 12:20:52 PM11/9/19
to
On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 08:51:15 -0800, sms wrote:
> "Arlen Holder" ignores facts when it doesn't suit his agenda, and cites
> facts when it does. He is often correct but also often incorrect.
Steve,
> "Arlen Holder" ignores facts when it doesn't suit his agenda, and cites
> facts when it does. He is often correct but also often incorrect.
Grow up.
I ask you, of all people, to act like an adult.
o You just said I "ignored facts" in this thread.
If there is a post, in this thread, where I "ignored facts"
o Name just one
Yes, Steve, name just 1 post in this thread where I ignored facts.
o Name just one
Steve, if you can't "name just one" post in this thread where your claim
that I "ignored facts" shows to be true, what does that make you Steve?
Think about this, Steve.
o You claim I "ignored facts"
And yet, you will fail this simplest of simple tests, Steve:
o Name just one
I'm not afraid of facts like you proved to be in the Qualcomm case where
you misread the terms royally (pun intended), which scares me that you
didn't understand the most critical of the most important facts, Steve.
I easily proved you "ignored facts", Steve.
Again, I will prove you "ignored facts" Steve, if you can't "name just
one".
Steve,
Name just one post in this thread where you claim I "ignored facts".
o Name just one
--
The problem with cowards like Steve is they can't back up their words.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 9, 2019, 12:25:22 PM11/9/19
to
On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 11:51:31 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> Stop denigrating others and you won't hear from me. You can't do that
> though. You have to show you are superior.
>
> Very simple if you never want to hear from me.
I'm not afraid of facts, Ed Pawlowski.
> Stop denigrating others and you won't hear from me. You can't do that
> though. You have to show you are superior.
>
> Very simple if you never want to hear from me.
o This thread was ruined the moment you trolls infested it.
FACT:
I'm simply pointing you to EXACTLY what _you_ wrote, Ed Pawlowski.
FACT:
You consider me pointing to EXACTLY what you wrote, a 'denigration'.
The facts are clear when you infest other threads, I ignore you.
o When you infest threads I care about, I point to EXACTLY what you post.
You consider me pointing to EXACTLY what you post as "denigrating" you.
o Think about that fact.
--
The common ill-educated trolls hate what they, themselves, post to Usenet.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 9, 2019, 12:25:33 PM11/9/19
to
On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 11:58:19 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> In comp.mobile.android, no I do not participate except to show people
> what a jackass you can be. In AHR, many, but you won't look and I'm not
> going to hand feed you.
It's interesting you worthless ill-educated trolls consider me a "jackass"
> In comp.mobile.android, no I do not participate except to show people
> what a jackass you can be. In AHR, many, but you won't look and I'm not
> going to hand feed you.
simply for pointing out that what you post, Ed Pawlowski, lacks on-topic
value.
I'd think that's kind of funny.
o If it wasn't so sad.
--
The worthless ill-educated trolls like Ed Pawlowski always act much like
hurt little fifth graders when you simply point to exactly what they write.
sms
Nov 9, 2019, 1:37:19 PM11/9/19
to
Filter him out and be done with it.
Frank Slootweg
Nov 9, 2019, 1:45:39 PM11/9/19
to
Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen....@halder.edu> wrote:
> On 9 Nov 2019 15:57:39 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
> > [More dodging and deflecting deleted.]
>
> Hi Frank Slootweg,
>
> This post is probably the most poignant post about you
> o That you will ever read, in your entire life, Frank.
FSESSVO "poignant".
>
> > [More dodging and deflecting deleted.]
>
> Hi Frank Slootweg,
>
> This post is probably the most poignant post about you
> o That you will ever read, in your entire life, Frank.
> So listen well...
[More dodging and deflecting deleted.]
'opponent' actually *wrote*, *not* just another repeat of your off-topic
irrelevat lunatic rants.
So here is another opportunity to finally do the *right* thing, use it
wisely:
[Rewind/repeat:]
Arlen _G_ Holder <_arlen....@halder.edu> wrote:
> On 8 Nov 2019 20:06:13 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
> > Can you please cut the booze!?
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> Grow up.
> I realize you're uneducated; so I can cut you some slack.
'uneducated"? *That* must be why my Silicon Valley employer paid me
all that money, so I could retire at an very early age!
Hint: That was in yet another part which you cowardly silently snipped
and dodged.
[More dodging and deflecting deleted.]
> Notice the silly childish games _you_ just played Frank, not me.
> o I posted something with the intention of being purposefully helpful.
Yes, and when people pointed out that your reference was not helpful
because it was 17 years old, totally outdated and therefor irrelevant,
you rewarded them with your usual vitriol and childish personal attacks.
So - as usual - *you* *did* play silly childish games and - as usual -
*you* drew first blood.
> o You trolled this thread with your incessant worthless trolls:
> Message-ID: <qq49ti...@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
I only posted facts. That you - apparently - don't *like* those facts,
doesn't make them any less facts, nor does it make them "incessant
worthless trolls".
> o I simply pointed to your own EXACT words, Frank Slootweg.
No, you did not *point* to my words, you *quoted* them and then went
on your usual dodge and divert spiel, drew in all kinds of totally
irrelevant nonsense and - as usual - *never commented on what I actually
wrote*.
> You argued that your worthless drivel was not a troll, Frank.
> o And yet, it was.
As I've proven above, it wasn't and yes *yours* was, like it always is.
> o I posted something with the intention of being purposefully helpful.
Yes, and when people pointed out that your reference was not helpful
because it was 17 years old, totally outdated and therefor irrelevant,
you rewarded them with your usual vitriol and childish personal attacks.
So - as usual - *you* *did* play silly childish games and - as usual -
*you* drew first blood.
> o You trolled this thread with your incessant worthless trolls:
> Message-ID: <qq49ti...@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
I only posted facts. That you - apparently - don't *like* those facts,
doesn't make them any less facts, nor does it make them "incessant
worthless trolls".
> o I simply pointed to your own EXACT words, Frank Slootweg.
No, you did not *point* to my words, you *quoted* them and then went
on your usual dodge and divert spiel, drew in all kinds of totally
irrelevant nonsense and - as usual - *never commented on what I actually
wrote*.
> You argued that your worthless drivel was not a troll, Frank.
> o And yet, it was.
As I've proven above, it wasn't and yes *yours* was, like it always is.
[More dodging and deflecting deleted.]
> > What about you? Are you ever truthful without dodging and diverting?
> > If so, just cite one such event.
> > o Name just one
Deafening silence duly noted. Implicit admission of failure to deliver
the goods duly noted.
> > If so, just cite one such event.
> > o Name just one
Deafening silence duly noted. Implicit admission of failure to deliver
the goods duly noted.
[More dodging and deflecting deleted.]
Ed Pawlowski
Nov 9, 2019, 2:03:09 PM11/9/19
to
what he is, he'd never have an orgasm. He'd having fun.
Arlen _G_ Holder
Nov 9, 2019, 4:23:58 PM11/9/19
to
On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 10:37:17 -0800, sms wrote:
> Filter him out and be done with it.
Steve Scharf, Mayor of Cupertino,
> Filter him out and be done with it.
Grow up.
The permanent record will show this to be a fact, Steve:
o You post exactly as a child posts, Steve Scharf.
Grow up.
Never once have you been able to base your claims on fact.
o Not even once.
Grow up.
David Lesher
Dec 22, 2019, 1:47:23 PM12/22/19
to
John McGaw <Nob...@Nowh.ere> writes:
>Very simplistic test: if the wall wart is heavy (i.e. has a big iron
>transformer inside like the ancient Netgear 12V units) and/or is warm to
>the touch when there is no load (again, like the ancient Netgear 12V units)
>then it it is using power inefficiently. Most of the lightweight warts
>using switching supplies are relatively efficient when there is no load. If
>the unit is warm when unloaded that is a dead giveaway of power waste since
>heat has to come from somewhere.
And/or look at the wallwart label. If it's "100-240VAC in" or such it's
>Very simplistic test: if the wall wart is heavy (i.e. has a big iron
>transformer inside like the ancient Netgear 12V units) and/or is warm to
>the touch when there is no load (again, like the ancient Netgear 12V units)
>then it it is using power inefficiently. Most of the lightweight warts
>using switching supplies are relatively efficient when there is no load. If
>the unit is warm when unloaded that is a dead giveaway of power waste since
>heat has to come from somewhere.
a switcher. Which does not say it draws zero with no load....
>My biggest gripe is the vast number of different voltage/connector
>combinations in the wild.
chargers in the trash, they mandated smart phones use microUSB,
now USB-C. The phone manufacturers pitched-a-bitch until they
realized this meant they didn't need to give you a charger.
Even Apple, the holdout, saw the light. I see new MacBooks use
USB C for charging.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close..........................
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
danny burstein
Dec 22, 2019, 2:05:26 PM12/22/19
to
In <qtodnq$56g$1...@reader2.panix.com> David Lesher <wb8...@panix.com> writes:
[snnniiipp]
>>My biggest gripe is the vast number of different voltage/connector
>>combinations in the wild.
>The EU gave us a big help on this. Tired of the 100E6/year old
>chargers in the trash, they mandated smart phones use microUSB,
>now USB-C. The phone manufacturers pitched-a-bitch until they
>realized this meant they didn't need to give you a charger.
>Even Apple, the holdout, saw the light. I see new MacBooks use
>USB C for charging.
And, you can turn them upside down!
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
[snnniiipp]
>>My biggest gripe is the vast number of different voltage/connector
>>combinations in the wild.
>The EU gave us a big help on this. Tired of the 100E6/year old
>chargers in the trash, they mandated smart phones use microUSB,
>now USB-C. The phone manufacturers pitched-a-bitch until they
>realized this meant they didn't need to give you a charger.
>Even Apple, the holdout, saw the light. I see new MacBooks use
>USB C for charging.
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dan...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
Ralph Mowery
Dec 22, 2019, 2:23:44 PM12/22/19
to
In article <qtodnq$56g$1...@reader2.panix.com>, wb8...@panix.com says...
are using the same size and poliarity of that coaxial plug. Used to be
almost every device had its own size or poliarity.
I don't know if that is one of the regulations or just companies finally
getting it together.
>
> The EU gave us a big help on this. Tired of the 100E6/year old
> chargers in the trash, they mandated smart phones use microUSB,
> now USB-C. The phone manufacturers pitched-a-bitch until they
> realized this meant they didn't need to give you a charger.
> Even Apple, the holdout, saw the light. I see new MacBooks use
> USB C for charging.
>
>
>
It seems that the round power plug at the end of some of the wall warts
> The EU gave us a big help on this. Tired of the 100E6/year old
> chargers in the trash, they mandated smart phones use microUSB,
> now USB-C. The phone manufacturers pitched-a-bitch until they
> realized this meant they didn't need to give you a charger.
> Even Apple, the holdout, saw the light. I see new MacBooks use
> USB C for charging.
>
>
>
are using the same size and poliarity of that coaxial plug. Used to be
almost every device had its own size or poliarity.
I don't know if that is one of the regulations or just companies finally
getting it together.
John McGaw
Dec 22, 2019, 4:18:42 PM12/22/19
to
old electronics I finally sorted out most of the power supplies and such.
At least now they are segregated (mostly) in their own labeled boxes. This
is no exaggeration: I found 35+ NEMA power cords and at least that many
wall wart and other equipment power supplies with voltages ranging from
3.5V to 26V with an assortment of connectors. I found quite a few round
(DIN?) connectors all of which varied in some way to make them
non-interchangeable. Of the coaxial connectors, there are some that look to
be maybe 2mm up to some big ones looking to be more standard but I have
found that even though many look identical the external diameters are
sometimes just off enough that they can't work in any given bit of
equipment. Worst of all sometimes the inner bore is sometimes different too
with no rhyme or reason. Oh, and then there are those that have reversed
polarity...
If I knew which ones are most likely to be used I'd take the worst of the
worst off to the recycling to join the hundreds of pounds of other stuff
that I hauled off earlier. Massive SCSI drives with a mile or so of
matching cables anybody?
On the other hand, I did find a relative new 1350VA UPS unit which had been
buried and, by coincidence, Cyberpower had shipped me two new batteries for
troubleshooting a different unit so I married them up and have a good spare
UPS now. Don't know if that is a win or not.
Almost forgot. I also found my oldest "good" motherboard vintage circa
1990(?). Made by Micronics it is amazing to look at, having seven EISA
connectors plus one ISA, 16 memory slots all filled with what I'm guessing
are 256mB sticks. Most obvious is that most of the functions that would be
handled today by a single chip are implemented in scores of others, some
TTL. Even the CPU cache seems to have been external and implemented in
single RAM DIPs. It has only a single connector on the back for a keyboard
and there are no IO connectors for drives and such since back then all of
that would have been on boards plugged into the MB. RTC and BIOS memory are
in separate Dallas Semiconductor modules and there are two potted clock
oscillators on the board and one other crystal. On one corner is a
fluorescent green tag saying "33MHZ" which I guess must be the bus clock
speed(?) I really should send it to the computer museum in Silicon Valley
along with the Periscope debugger found in the same box. Or I may build a
shadow box frame for it and hang it on my wall as a reminder of how far
we've come. This thing is, overall, probably slower than a Raspberry PI.
0 new messages