I just belatedly realized why adults can't communicate with Jolly Roger & nospam & Alan Baker & Snit - because they're too far to the left on the Dunning-Kruger scale

[arlen holder]

This is important to the groups that the posters below post to.

I post a lot of facts.
Well verified. Well cited. Easily validated facts.

Facts.

Those facts are often challenged by this group of canonical naysayers:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/mehGxIGcoa8/MoxCZ8XcAwAJ>

That naysaying of easily validated facts stretches a thread ad infinitum.
Simply because these posters deny that facts exist outside their spheres.

Why?
Why can't I communicate with these people?
o Are they so dumb as to be un communicative with adults?
o Are they just pulling out leg and toying with us?
Or, is it actually far _deeper_ than that?

I think - I just realized - belatedly - belatedly by years - why.
It will make _all_ the difference in how I respond to them in the future.

I just belatedly realized why sentient logical adults just can't
communicate with the likes of Jolly Roger & nospam & Alan Baker & Snit (et.
al).

It may simply be that they're the epitome of the left-side DK effect:
o I used to think it had to be that they were pulling our leg all the time,
o Or that, they were just incredibly (unfathomably) stupid.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/18ARDsEOPzM/veU8FwAjBQAJ>

But I think, it seems, perhaps, the problem is actually far worse
o It may be that they are the epitome of the left-side DK effect

In which case, no sentient adult can _ever_ carry on a normal conversation
with them, if that conversation contains even the simplest of known facts.

Examples abound, where I'll just point to two very recent examples.
In these examples (as usual) it only takes 10 seconds to prove them wrong.

I don't mind people having strong opinions, mind you - opinions are fine.
But to repeatedly & steadfastly claim that facts are wrong - is strange.

Adults - at least intelligent adults - don't generally claim facts are wrong.
Especially when it only takes ten seconds to prove the facts are correct.

Why do people like Alan Baker, BK, Jolly Roger, nospam, do such odd things?
o I used to think it's just that they're unfathomably incredibly stupid, or,
o Perhaps they're just playing silly games for their own amusement.

I've _always_ wondered _why_ people like nospam & Jolly Roger do this.
I belatedly realized it's because they're _perfect_ left-side DK specimens!

Example 1:
o nospam *insists* that Apple did NOT add throttling software to the iPhone X;
o And yet, well-published facts easily show they did (long ago, in fact).
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wbCbVX48E5M>

Example 2:
o Alan Baker insists a link to a Usenet post is not "proof" of fact;
o And yet, that Usenet post _contains_ links to the very statements from Apple!
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/oulJsYSmDDM/knn09aTWFQAJ>

Example 3:
o Jolly Roger insists that iOS has the import/export ICS file capability;
o And yet, anyone _instantly_ can see that it doesn't even come close.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/OzUOmgJLmZs/MVz0tjHUFQAJ>

Example 4:
o Both Jolly Roger & nospam insist that a signature must be added outside of VPN.
o And yet, it's trivial to prove otherwise in seconds - with a single simple test.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/oulJsYSmDDM/bOCAndO4FQAJ>

Example 5:
o Snit insists that his video shows iOS graphing wifi signal strength over time;
o And yet, anyone _instantly_ can see that he never looked at the abscissa.
<<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0/qSXecrnZAQAJ>

The examples abound...
o The DK crew make statements as if they actually comprehend basic facts.
o And yet, they just don't.

It takes only ten seconds to prove each of these people dead wrong.
o Using just simple easily verified facts.
o All the time.

It boggles my mind that people can appear to be _that_ incredibly stupid.
It actually bothers me because I had more faith in adults than they deserve.

As most of you know, I've been studying Apple Apologists for years, but
only recently did I realize that it's not so much that they're incredibly
stupid, but that they don't _realize_ they're incredibly stupid.

They constantly make claims that are easily disproved in mere seconds.

It's not a problem that they both hold such strong convictions.
o The problem is that they claim all facts are lies
o Simply because _they_ can't comprehend even the simplest of facts

*That they don't realize they're _perfect_ left-side DK specimens!*
They _think_ they comprehend facts - and yet - they prove - they don't.

Every single time.

I used to think there were only two possibilities:
o Either they really are that incredibly unfathomably stupid, or,
o They're just pulling our leg (all the time).

But now, I just realized, they're picture-perfect left-side DK specimens!

NOTE: Most people don't comprehend what the DK effect entails.
The DK effect is a "skills self-assessment" effect.

In terms of nospam & Jolly Roger, those with the least skills tend to
overrate their skill set and to trust their judgment far more than more
rationale people would dream of doing.

While I've always said I'm only of average intelligence (if even that),
this belated realization of both Jolly Roger and nospam exhibit, explains
why they always appear to claim easily verified facts are "lies" or
"trolls" when those easily verified facts disagree with their religious
bias.

Here's a direct quote of what effect both Jolly Roger & nospam exhibit:
"the DunningĄVKruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people
of low ability have illusory superiority and mistakenly assess
their cognitive ability as greater than it is"
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect>

NOTE: Most of us are in the middle - and some even to the right; where
everyone has a cognitive bias when self-assessing skills. This cognitive
bias spans both sides, from self assessing our own skill set, to assessing
how much effort it takes others to gain our skill set. Those to the left
vastly overestimate both their skills and the effort it takes others to
gain their skills - whereas those to the right tend to underestimate their
skills and to underestimate the effort it takes to attain their skills.
Those in the middle are the most balanced in self assessment of skills.

In short, I've just realized that the problem with these people is not
o that they can't comprehend even the simplest of facts, nor is it
o that they are just constantly pulling our leg for amusement.
It's likely literally that they are the epitome of the left-side DK effect.

That is:
o They self assess themselves so highly, that facts are not needed.
o When challenged on facts, they simply deny the fact.

*They actually _believe_ their denials of basic facts - are correct.*
They're literally incapable of self-assessing themselves on that regard.

In summary, not only have I been dealing with them incorrectly all along
(in that I had assumed they possessed a 'normal' mind), but the entire
approach is quite different once I realize that they are, literally,
exactly what the Dunning-Kruger effects speaks about with the left-side
examples.

*This belated realization will affect how I treat them in the future.*

(I will no longer attempt to discuss basic facts with them - since -
it's clear - they don't appear to possess the cognitive skills to assess
even the simplest of basic easily validated & verified facts.)

[Wolf K]

On 2019-01-16 11:33, arlen holder wrote:
[...]
> Or, is it actually far_deeper_ than that?
[...]

It's your use of "child" as an insult.

And your notion that insults will persuade people to agree with you.

Have frabjous day,

--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
People worry that computers will get too smart
and take over the world, but the real problem is
that they’re too stupid and they’ve already taken over
the world (Pedro Domingos)

[arlen holder]

On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 14:05:25 -0500, Wolf K wrote:

> It's your use of "child" as an insult.

Hi Wolf K,
As you know, I've often referred to you as a child, so that alone makes my
response to you a bit difficult - in that I'm going to explain my tactics -
which - is always a mistake since you will try to test me (as you've done
in the past so many times I can't count them).

Still - I stay true to my stratgegy and tactics nonetheless:
o Strategy: Learn from & add appreciably to the overall tribal knowledge
o Tactics: Deal with the trolls as if they were fifth-grade bullies.

Notice that I frontally confront the bullies - such as you are - Wolf K.
(And never think that I forget - although my tactics are ALWAYS to mirror
that of the poster I'm responding to - in order to coax them into behaving
like a sensible reasonable adult should).

Hence ... I agree with you fully Wolf. K.
I really do.

In fact, I'll highlight my agreement, and my chastity:
*I apologize for mixing Dunning-Kruger effects with the mind of a child.*

They're different.

While I have been pondering, for decades, what makes some Usenet posters
utterly immune to facts (e.g., Diesel, Snit, Colonel Edmund J. Burke, John
Doe, Nomen Nomescu, Shadow, Good Guy, Mr. Man-wai Chang, David B., %,
Anonymous, Cybe R Wizard, etc. - the list is huge so allow me to stop)...

I used to think most this immunity to fact was due to one of two reasons:
o They're either just toying with us (for their own childish amusement), or
o They're really _that_ unfathomably stupid.

And I pretty much tested out my premises over the decades, for example:
o Experiments proving [certain] Usenet groups are filled to the brim with children
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/b0DrfrsRh24/ODQneWFEBAAJ>

Notice ... up until now, I've been assuming poster who can't handle fact
o Are either adults with the child of a fifth grader, or
o Adults who are unfathomably stupid.

The problem with that second item is that the stupidity is unfathomable.
As unfathomable as the thought process of the "lemon-juice bankrobber".

Obviously the first item is easy to understand, where my "tactic" to deal
with those who deny the most basic of adult discussions is to make it "less
fun" (which you, yourself, have been the target of - but so has Rene
Lamontagne, Frank Slootweg, Dan Purgert, Char Jackson, etc.).

To summarize, for the "childish" people who get their enjoyment out of
childish toying with Usenet posters, I simply attempt to "make it less fun"
for them.

Here's an example, from today, but such examples of childishness abound:
o What is the factual truth about PRIVACY differences or similarities between the Android & iOS mobile phone ecosystems?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/MiZixhidmOs/4p_ahPbSFQAJ>
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/MiZixhidmOs/Zh3cjawBFgAJ>

Some, of course, like Char Jackson and you, Wolf K, will utterly _insist_
on their God-given right to troll - but I have noticed that the incidence
of people like you insisting on your God-given right to troll goes down the
less fun I make it for you (in that I generally point out that I don't have
to prove you act like a child - because you do that for me by what you
post).

I simply point it out, for example, in this random case:
o Why does X constantly prove that all he can do, is play his silly fifth-grade games?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/irbuhYwQz9g/rVcddlu0AgAJ>

Having explained that the mind of a child is easily understood, what has
_always_ eluded me was the mind of the remaining posters who appear to
never comprehend simple basic facts.

For example:
o Would you concur that these are "positive counterfactuals"?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/MwGH8XcCRtQ/oenUeCJwAwAJ>

These posters are fewer than the children type I listed above.
Most of these posters have an almost "religious" like zeal.
o Often they deny facts that don't fit into their religious belief system
o Often, they promulgate completely false propositions

Two simple examples are these (where these examples abound):
o Why do the [some people] call all facts they don't like, trolls?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/FZVR227jn4g/tq_vJhGpAAAJ>

o What is wrong with the Apologists that they deny even what Apple admitted?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/fyL1cQUVCp0/2s_5ulpSBgAJ>

Up until today, I actually _thought_ these people were simply either
o Toying with us (in which case, facts should make it "less fun"), or
o Incredibly stupid (in which case, facts should have an impact).

However, the realization, today, that they're actually suffering from
Dunning-Kruger effects of the left side (note, everyone falls asunder to
the DK effect - where the left side is the canonical "lemon juice bank
robber" example) means that I must handle these DK folks differently.

How do you handle someone with left-side DK differently?
o You can't assume they're "toying" with us (they're actually serious)
o You can't just assume they're "stupid" either (they are - but it's worse)

What you have to do is realize they're fundamentally DIFFERENT.
o They actually _believe_ facts are wrong - and, sadly, far worse,
o No amount of facts will ever change them from that belief system.

I used to say that these people believe in their intuition more than they
believe in evidence to the contrary - which is - in a way - pretty much the
case - but it's - sadly - far worse than that - in that - they can't be
fixed.

That is, no amount of fact will change their minds.
Ever.

It's not that they're toying with us & it's not (only) that they're stupid.

They're not actually capable of processing facts.
Just as the "lemon juice bank robber" wasn't capable of processing them.

*The main point is that I've been trying to _reason_ with these people!*
o That's why many threads are 10x longer than they need to be.

But I've only today realized - they can not be reasoned with!
o It's NOT they're toying with us (they actually _believe_ what they say!)
o It's not even that they're stupid (yes, they are, but it's far worse!)

Said in a slightly humorous vein...
o No amount of fact will change that they think all facts are wrong.
o They're incapable of processing facts because they think they can.

By way of apology, I should have been more tuned to their problems.
o They're perhaps NOT children, and,
o They're certainly stupid - but their stupidity can't possibly be fixed

That is, facts will _never_ work.
That! Was my epiphany.

And That. Changes how I respond in the future.
(HINT: Threads will be far shorter as a result - and that's a good thing.)

[arlen holder]

On 16 Jan 2019 19:47:16 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

_THIS IS A RESPONSE TO JOLLY ROGER IN THE THREAD BELOW_
(which I copy here as an instructive style of the new response system).
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/oulJsYSmDDM/Hkza_FM8CAAJ>

Hi Jolly Roger,

We're going to have far shorter discussions, moving forward.
(And that's a good thing for everyone, including for me.)

I always strive to understand the person whom I'm dealing with.
But your actions have always defied my studied comprehension.

The fact is that I used to think that you could only have been either:
o Just toying with us by incessantly fabricating imaginary functionality
o Or, that you were unfathomably stupid in not comprehending facts.

But now I realize, sadly, it's likely to be far worse than that.

Far worse indeed.
o Sure, you prove you're incredibly stupid - but it's far worse than that;
o You literally _believe_ that what you just proposed will actually work.

Just like the lemon juice robber believed it would work for him.
o No amount of actual fact (no matter how basic) will sway you;
o So I will no longer try to convince you using facts.

Fact is...
o I've wasted my time (& everyone's time) laboriously providing facts:
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/MwtyT7BdxF4>

[Wolf K]

On 2019-01-16 14:45, arlen holder wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 14:05:25 -0500, Wolf K wrote:
>
>> It's your use of "child" as an insult.
> Hi Wolf K,
> As you know, I've often referred to you as a child, so that alone makes my
> response to you a bit difficult - in that I'm going to explain my tactics -
> which - is always a mistake since you will try to test me (as you've done
> in the past so many times I can't count them).

[...]

It's difficult only because you have a problem imagining how other
people respond to your posts. You've explained your tactics ad nauseam.
Repetition doesn't improve the explanation.

Have a frabjous day,

[Jasen Betts]

On 2019-01-16, arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> We're going to have far shorter discussions, moving forward.

If the goal is shorer discussions you're wasting words.
Other then length what does "moving forward" add to the sentence?

--
When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.

[Diesel]

arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> news:q1o1lh$lrs$1...@news.mixmin.net

Wed, 16 Jan 2019 19:45:54 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote:

> While I have been pondering, for decades, what makes some Usenet
> posters utterly immune to facts (e.g., Diesel, Snit, Colonel
> Edmund J. Burke, John Doe, Nomen Nomescu, Shadow, Good Guy, Mr.
> Man-wai Chang, David B., %, Anonymous, Cybe R Wizard, etc. - the
> list is huge so allow me to stop)...

I've been on usenet for decades, and don't remember interacting with
you until just the past year or so.

> I used to think most this immunity to fact was due to one of two
> reasons: o They're either just toying with us (for their own
> childish amusement), or o They're really _that_ unfathomably
> stupid.

I can't speak for others, but, I'm far from stupid, Arlen. I elected
not to help you for a very specific reason; and I made that perfectly
clear to you. You were incapable of being a responsible adult and
issuing an apology. Due to that, and only that, I opted not to
provide you any specific details concerning sharing your Android
device internal/external memory over your network via a drive letter
mount. I've also noticed, you have so far, failed to be able do that
on your own. Evidently, you aren't anywhere near as smart as you
thought you were.

> And I pretty much tested out my premises over the decades, for
> example: o Experiments proving [certain] Usenet groups are filled
> to the brim with children
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/b0DrfrsR
> h24/ODQneWFEBAAJ>

You act far more like a child than any of the people you listed, and
that's saying quite a bit considering you listed Anoncoward and David
Brooks.

> Obviously the first item is easy to understand, where my "tactic"
> to deal with those who deny the most basic of adult discussions is
> to make it "less fun" (which you, yourself, have been the target
> of - but so has Rene Lamontagne, Frank Slootweg, Dan Purgert, Char
> Jackson, etc.).

Your tactic is what causes others to pause before assisting you, if
anyone does so in the first place. I don't know who told you that
childish insults would get you far with people, but, they mislead
you.

> To summarize, for the "childish" people who get their enjoyment
> out of childish toying with Usenet posters, I simply attempt to
> "make it less fun" for them.

I find you highly amusing though, Arlen. Simply because you can't
figure out how to do very basic things that you come here and ask for
help with. You then proceed to belittle others, but, never manage to
get what you want done in the process. That, is highly entertaining
and it costs me nothing.

> That is, no amount of fact will change their minds.
> Ever.

Fact. I have shared android access across my network as a drive
letter for the internal memory and my external memory. You do not.
It's been months now, and you still haven't figured out how to do it.

Yes, I still find it highly amusing. I also can't help but notice
your newbie programming Android efforts are a dismal failure too. Too
funny. Carry on with your insults, it's clear they're not getting you
the help you want with your projects.



--
Visit https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php (10/10 WOT)
MID: <XnsA9B7A8...@DKrpqvfHsgf33.8qcO1vJpVCMaP>
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154631875900

We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million
typewriters will eventually reproduce the works of Shakespeare.
Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true.

[Dan Purgert]

Jolly Roger wrote:
> [ ... ]
> He pulls the same shit on the iOS and macOS newsgroups for hours upon
> hours daily, and fails miserably to get the simplest things done for
> months there as well - all while insulting everyone there and claiming
> he's smarter than everyone on the planet. He shows what an idiot he is
> every time he opens his big mouth. It's really pathetic to watch him go
> down in flames over and over again, all while screaming "FAKE NEWS" when
> anyone points out his stupidity.
>

On the upside, his crossposting to the world has, on occasion, let me
converse with knowledgeable people I wouldn't have otherwise had run
into


--
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:58:36 -0000 (UTC)
Dan Purgert <d...@djph.net> wrote:

> On the upside, his crossposting to the world has, on occasion, let me
> converse with knowledgeable people I wouldn't have otherwise had run
> into

Just today I was pondering the possible re-emergence of Usenet since
most of the big social media sites are either failing or opting out.

BRING BACK USENET!

Cybe R. Wizard -wants this SO BADLY
--
Usenet:
A thick skin is required but thin lips are discouraged.
Cybe R. Wizard

[arlen holder]

On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 23:14:44 -0000 (UTC), Diesel wrote:

> I can't speak for others, but, I'm far from stupid, Arlen.

Hi Diesel (et al.),

*The Dunning-Kruger effect affects everyone with skills.*
o You. Me. Everybody.

In essence:
o Those with the least skills, overestimate the most, while
o Those with the most skills, tend to underestimate theirs,
o With those with average skills tending to estimate best.

I'm only going to respond to you, Diesel, and not to the drivel who may
follow in your wake (e.g., Cybe R. Wizard, Dan Purgert, Jolly Roger, Tim
Streater, Alan Browne, Alan Baker, nospam, haemactylus, Char Jackson, Rene
Lamontagne, et al.), simply because the response to any one of you is the
same as the response to all.

Having said that, your claim that you're "not stupid" is instructive
because all of you prove the point I was trying to make, which is:
o *I used to think people like you on Usenet were either incredibly stupid,*
o *Or, that you were simply pulling our legs by denying basic obvious fact*
...
o *But now, I realize it's actually worse than that - far worse - in fact.*
o You're incapable of _comprehending_ that you're incapable of comprehending.

That is...
o *You're all _convinced_ that the lemon juice _actually_ worked!*
o *No amount of fact will disabuse you of your imaginary belief system.*

This is not meant as an insult; it's meant to underscore why I will no
longer attempt to deal with the likes of you using cold hard facts.

You're not capable of _comprehending_ even the _simplest_ of facts.
o Simply because you actually _think_ you do comprehend them!

Do you understand the conundrum Diesel?

I often said that people like you were stellar at being "immune to facts";
but that's because I had thought the problem was simply that of your
o Ignorance, or,
o Amusement.

Given that, my approach to responding to the likes of you was tactical:
o If you were simply ignorant - I supplied facts to back up everything;
o When you pulled our leg - I make it "less fun" for you.

That is, I followed the strategy of "confronting the Usenet bullies",
by using the standard tactic of standing up to you cowardly bullies.
o Bearing in mind the old adage of dropping to your level...

I was hoping for one of two effects depending on the reason you were immune
to basic facts...
1. If you were simply ignorant, I supplied you with facts.
And then... when you remained unfathomably incomprehensive,
2. I simply assumed you were toying with us.

My tactics are well known and quite obvious:
o When you were incomprehensive - I supplied you with copious facts.
o When you remained incomprehensive - I belittled you to make it "less fun"
for you to play your silly games.

But that was the wrong approach!
o Thats! My epiphany.

The problem, I only belatedly realized, is that neither approach will
work for the likes of you, Diesel, Char Jackson, Rene Lamontagne,
Wolf K., Alan Baker, Tim Streater, nospam, Jolly Roger, BKatOnRamp,
(and so many others that I tire even naming your entire bunch).

In the case of presenting facts to you (plural), Diesel:
o You're all literally _incapable_ of comprehending facts
o Due to a cognitive bias where you actually _think_ you can!

*That you are the epitome of the left-side DK effect - is my epiphany!*
o Facts will never work with the likes of you.
o Never.

In the case of confronting your bullying tactics, Diesel,
o It likely still works, to a degree, to make it "less fun" for you,
o However, you folks still insist on your God Given Right to Troll.

Hence, as noted many times, I eventually give up as you win when you
succeed in dropping me down to your level.

As you do now ... where you never add even a single iota of
on-topic value to the thread conversation.

> I elected not to help you for a very specific reason; and I made
> that perfectly clear to you.

Hehhehheh... Diesel,

You (the plural "you", which includes the aforementioned trolls)
literally delude yourself, just as the lemon-juice bank robber did.

More to the point, _all_ of you Usenet wastes delude yourselves.
o For example, remember this "Snit" video?
<https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo>
o To this day, Snit still _believes_ he showed WiFi signal strength on iOS
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0/qSXecrnZAQAJ>

Even after _hundreds_ of posts - you _still_ can't comprehend basic fact.

You all are utterly incapable of ever comprehending even simple facts!
o But it's not (only) that you (all) prove to be incredibly stupid
o What I learned is that you are supremely incapable of comprehending facts

Each one of you, including you, _proves_ you don't even comprehend the
problem set, for Christs' sake, Diesel - let alone offer a solution.

In fact, in reference to what you're alluding to, I accidentally left out a
key step which I repeatedly _challenged_ you on when you said you could
perform the task - where absolutely _none_ of you drivel knew what I was
talking about.

Proof like that abounds that
o You _think_ you're of at least average intelligence - but you're not
o Which is OK - it just means you're stupid - but it's worse than that.

*Your entire belief system is comprised of _imaginary_ content!*
o Your belief system is, therefore, entirely _immune_ to fact!
o Hence, I have been wasting my time providing well cited facts!

Very few people can answer my questions.. Very very few.
Paul. David Empson. Mike Easter, Marek (bless his soul) ...
(the list of purposefully helpful intelligent people is rather short).

Certainly the likes of you, Diesel, will _never_ be able to.
o People like you never _intend_ to add to the tribal knowledge
o People like you _can't_ add to the tribal knowledge.

Sadly, you don't even realize why you shouldn't even try.
o It's not what I thought, which is that you're all immune to fact;
o Nor, is it that Usenet is your daily fact-free amusement.

No. Sadly.
The problem is worse. Far worse.

You're all the epitome of the left-side of the Dunning-Kruger effect:
o You all literally actually _believe_ that the lemon juice trick works!

What that means is my epiphany - which is - there is ZERO response
to you that will _ever_ get the likes of you to comprehend fact.

The _reason_ you can't comprehend facts isn't so much that you're all
incredibly stupid (you are, but that's not the reason, since all these
facts are trivial even for people of low IQ as you all must be).

No.

*The reason you can't comprehend facts, is that you _think_ you can.*
Thats! My epiphany.

> You were incapable of being a responsible adult and
> issuing an apology.

Hehhehheh... An apology Diesel?

First off, ask Cybe R. Wizard about apologies.
Or even Mike Easter (who probably doesn't remember mine).

I have absolutely no problem apologizing when I make factual mistakes.
None.

A fact, to me, is merely a "thing".
It's not "emotional" like it is to people like you on the DK left side.

To you (plural you in all cases here), a "fact" is something to "deny".
Just _look_ at how many times the likes of nospam outright denies fact.

Do you _really_ want me to include cite after cite after cite after cite?

I've been studying people like you for decades because, as you know, I
worked for decades in the Silicon Valley, with truly intelligent people,
after having gone to the best schools in this country, with trully
intelligent people, after having grown up in some of the most expensive
locations in the country, again, populated by truly intelligent people.

Compared to them, I'm of average intelligence, if even that.
I've never said otherwise.

But people like you, Diesel, are so far below those people I just mentioned
(who actually _are_ intelligent), that it still boggles my mind how
fantastically incomprehensive people like you are.

You're immune to facts.
o I used to _try_ to supply people like you with copious but simple facts;
o And then I would be shocked that you didn't comprehend simple facts.

But my epiphany is that you are the epitome of the left-side DK effect.
o You can't comprehend facts but you actually think you can.
o Hence, there is no human way to get through to you.

It's just impossible.

As just one example, _look_ at these posts yesterday from Alan Baker:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/oulJsYSmDDM/16o7X-g7CAAJ>
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/oulJsYSmDDM/OZbhPbg8CAAJ>

Can you believe what Alan Baker wrote?
o He's the epitome of the left-side Dunning-Kruger cognitive bias effect!
o *He doesn't comprehend that he can't comprehend!*

Do you see that is my epiphany?
o The key is that _no amount of fact_ will ever help the likes of you comprehend.

People like you, Diesel, and people like you abound, are incapable of
comprehending even the _simplest_ of the simplest of the simplest of facts.

That means I've been wasting my time providing facst you.
o It's like me trying to tell you not only that the lemon-juice trick doens't work,
o But I've been going to the trouble to explain the chemistry of why.

I was doomed to fail, Diesel.
Doomed.

*All of you, in essence, believe that the lemon-juice trick _still_ works!*

> Due to that, and only that, I opted not to
> provide you any specific details concerning sharing your Android
> device internal/external memory over your network via a drive letter
> mount.

Hehhehheh ... Hi Diesel,

First off, I will be blunt ... you _never_ knew _anything_ whatsoever.

I need to say that clearly - not for you - as you won't believe it.
But for the others to comprehend that you know absolutely nothing.

Having said that, you proved time and again that you couldn't even tell us
the single *critical* step I had missed in outlining the tutorial for how
to access the _entire_ device system contents. But don't feel badly.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/K0NZ0nb1pWw/c7QERMymCQAJ>

Every single one of the people on the affected newsgroup didn't know.
Not Paul. Not Mike Easter. Not you. Not Nospam. Not Rene. Not Char.
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/alt.comp.freeware/K0NZ0nb1pWw/OBpoi3i8CAAJ>

Nobody knew.
And that's OK.

HINT: To this very day, 99.9% of you _still_ don't know how to do it.
(Even though I explained it all in gory detail - including the key trick.)

NOTE: The problem is almost never Android or Windows or Linux; it's iOS:
o How to easily archive your iOS device and/or how to use your iOS device as a free USB stick (read & write)?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/5hE4byjF930/NLdxBd8NCwAJ>

But _you_, Diesel, you said it was trivial and that it was something you
knew for a long time - which is ok - that's fine - but you only _beleived_
you knew ... when you proved - beyond a shadow of a doubt that you didn't.

Don't feel too badly.
Nobody knew.

That's why it's a big deal that I found it out (on the net).
(I didn't come up with it either - I just put the pieces together.)

I didn't know either - until I found it out about a year or two ago.

The funny thing is that you "claimed" to know - but you didn't, and yet,
I had _posted_ it *years* ago - which is how I had to find it to remember
it because I had _forgotten_ that critical step, which isn't needed if you
move files to VLC but it is needed to write to iOS protected storage.

> I've also noticed, you have so far, failed to be able do that
> on your own.

Hi Diesel,
Hehhehheh... I _love_ when you prove my point!

You don't even _realize_ that I _always_ could "mount" any Android file
system onto Windows as a "drive letter" (using a variety of WiFi and USB
methods).

Always.

I was mainly asking to _communicate_ that skill to others here.
And to seek _improvements_ to the process.

Often, people like Paul or Mike Easter will suggest valuable improvements.
In this case, I don't think they did - so I learned nothing - but you
_should_ have learned how to do what I've been doing for years.

In fact, I'm on record, as I recall, stating that _only_ Frank Slootweg (of
all people, actually), _understood_ even the _problem set_ for Christs'
sake.

How long was that thread, Diesel?
Maybe 100 posts? 200? I don't recall (there were a few threads).

And yet, out of, oh, say 25 distinct posters, only TWO (Frank & I)
understood the problem set (where Mike Easter & Paul understood the
Windows/Linux side also).

Do you see I'm swimming in a sea of fools, Diesel?
You, and the other fools _think_ you comprehend.

And yet, to this day, _only_ Frank Slootweg comprehended the problem set.

BTW, as an aside, I'm only explaining the truth - which is that few people
_cared_ to comprehend the problem set - or - they didn't have to deal with
both Android & iOS along with Windows & Linux (which is fine).

But my point is that Frank & I advanced our overall tribal knowledge.

The reason we can advance our combined tribal knowledge is that we
comprehend that we don't know everything.

You don't comprehend that yet, Diesel.
Neither do the likes of you in the peanut gallery.

> Evidently, you aren't anywhere near as smart as you
> thought you were.

First off, many times I have been known to be on record for saying that I'm
only of average intelligence, if that. (I studied at the graduate level for
almost a decade and worked in the Silicon Valley for decades with truly
intelligent people - who are whom I compare myself with when I say they are
far more intelligent than I am - of that I have no doubt).

But you don't comprehend what I just said, Diesel.
You just don't.

What you think is me claiming I'm smart is me exasperatingly explaining
that you (and those like you) are frustrating to me, because (I thought),
your lack of ability to comprehend even the simplest of fact was due to
o Either you incessantly pull our leg (for your own Usenet amusement?),
o Or, that you really are that unfathomably incredibly stupid.

It turns out that the actual reason is worse ... far worse (sadly).
o I've been approaching working with you the wrong way all along

No amount of facts about lemon-juice chemistry will sway you.
o You literally believe that the "lemon-juice" trick _still_ works!

*The epiphany is that you (pl) are the epitome of the left-side DK effect!*

[Diesel]

Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com>
news:gacjvm...@mid.individual.net Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:12:38 GMT

in alt.os.linux, wrote:

> He pulls the same shit on the iOS and macOS newsgroups for hours
> upon hours daily, and fails miserably to get the simplest things
> done for months there as well - all while insulting everyone there
> and claiming he's smarter than everyone on the planet. He shows
> what an idiot he is every time he opens his big mouth. It's really
> pathetic to watch him go down in flames over and over again, all
> while screaming "FAKE NEWS" when anyone points out his stupidity.

He's very amusing at times with what he thinks are witty insults. He
claims to have been on usenet for decades in newsgroups I've frequented
for decades, yet, somehow, he has no idea what my normal posting handle
actually is. :) I just don't buy that.

Watching him publish hello world programs as he went through online
tutorials for programming Android devices was hilarious from my point
of view; that being, decades of actual programming experience on a wide
variety of platforms. Not scripts, but, actual programs that worked as
intended, from scratch. No hand holding GUI, etc.




--
Landing: A controlled mid-air collision with a planet.

[Diesel]

arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> news:q1rk2t$agb$1...@news.mixmin.net

Fri, 18 Jan 2019 04:18:38 GMT in alt.os.linux, wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 23:14:44 -0000 (UTC), Diesel wrote:
>
>> I can't speak for others, but, I'm far from stupid, Arlen.
>
> Hi Diesel (et al.),

Hello Arlen...

> I'm only going to respond to you, Diesel, and not to the drivel
> who may follow in your wake (e.g., Cybe R. Wizard, Dan Purgert,
> Jolly Roger, Tim Streater, Alan Browne, Alan Baker, nospam,
> haemactylus, Char Jackson, Rene Lamontagne, et al.), simply
> because the response to any one of you is the same as the response
> to all.

I know some of the individuals you mentioned from prior
conversations. At no time have I found any of the aforementioned
people to be stupid, though. I don't even consider David Brooks or
the Anoncoward stupid. misguided, certainly, but, stupid, heh, no.

> Having said that, your claim that you're "not stupid" is
> instructive because all of you prove the point I was trying to
> make, which is: o *I used to think people like you on Usenet were
> either incredibly stupid,* o *Or, that you were simply pulling our
> legs by denying basic obvious fact* ...
> o *But now, I realize it's actually worse than that - far worse -
> in fact.* o You're incapable of _comprehending_ that you're
> incapable of comprehending.

You aren't even making logical sense, Arlen...

> This is not meant as an insult; it's meant to underscore why I
> will no longer attempt to deal with the likes of you using cold
> hard facts.

When you're actually able to present some cold hard facts, I'd be
interested in reading them.

> You're not capable of _comprehending_ even the _simplest_ of
> facts. o Simply because you actually _think_ you do comprehend
> them!
>
> Do you understand the conundrum Diesel?

Arlen, you're writing gibberish. I don't process gibberish.

> Given that, my approach to responding to the likes of you was
> tactical: o If you were simply ignorant - I supplied facts to back
> up everything; o When you pulled our leg - I make it "less fun"
> for you.

I'm not ignorant of any of the subjects you've asked about so far,
Arlen. I have viable and working solutions to each problem you've
presented thus far. I've intentionally withheld such information from
you, for a very simple reason. That I've previously stated.

> I was hoping for one of two effects depending on the reason you
> were immune to basic facts...

I'm not immune to facts, basic or otherwise Arlen. I prefer dealing
in facts, myself.

> My tactics are well known and quite obvious:

Yes, you're a rudimentary skill level troll. You actually think that
grade school level insults, ad nausem, will convince one or more of
us to hold your hand so that you can complete one of any number of
projects you've opted to do. Life doesn't work that way, but, for
some silly reason, you think it will online.

> In the case of confronting your bullying tactics, Diesel,

My refusal to just give you the answers along with an idiot proof set
of instructions to map a drive letter to your Androids accessable
internal/external memory doesn't make me a bully. It makes me an
individual who believes I should teach you to fish so that you can
feed yourself, not do the fishing for you. There's a difference, and,
you don't comprehend that.

> As you do now ... where you never add even a single iota of
> on-topic value to the thread conversation.

You asked about a way to move pictures from internal memory to
external memory if the built in camera app wouldn't let you change
the location. I provided what you incorrectly labeled as a 'file
redirector'. It doesn't redirect a damn thing. It waits for the file
to be saved where you selected and then it moves it where you wanted
it. I provided you several options to choose from, and I took the
time to test them on my own equipment. Works as advertised.

After you incorrectly labeled them as file redirectors, I heard
nothing else from you on the subject. You can't even use the proper
terminology to describe what it is you do/don't want, Arlen.

> o For example, remember this "Snit" video?

I'm not Snit.

> In fact, in reference to what you're alluding to, I accidentally
> left out a key step which I repeatedly _challenged_ you on when
> you said you could perform the task - where absolutely _none_ of
> you drivel knew what I was talking about.

The key step was the 3rd party driver which isn't universal that was
necessary. And, it didn't provide you full access to the device,
either. It provided you what amounts to userland access and only
that. I mentioned that sometime ago in a follow up post to your
previous challenge. Either you didn't read it, or, you did and are
lying about that now with your accusation that I didn't know what you
were writing about. I went a step further and told you flat out that
not all linux distros supported it out of the box, because they
didn't include the software, too.

The linux distro you've opted to use isn't the only one in existance
and isn't the most popular, either. Just because you can do something
you think is out of the box on your distro doesn't mean everyone else
can with theirs. And, I told you that then, too.

> Very few people can answer my questions.. Very very few.
> Paul. David Empson. Mike Easter, Marek (bless his soul) ...
> (the list of purposefully helpful intelligent people is rather
> short).

Oh please, you don't think those people know you're trying to kiss
their ass cheeks? You'd love it if they'd just give you complete step
by step instructions for each problem you present.

I mean no offense to anyone from your list, but, I don't even think
they'd all agree with you concerning superior I.T knowledge over my
own. I have a proven track record, that you still seem to know
nothing about, despite supposedly being on usenet for decades. Just
too funny.

> Certainly the likes of you, Diesel, will _never_ be able to.
> o People like you never _intend_ to add to the tribal knowledge
> o People like you _can't_ add to the tribal knowledge.

Tsk Tsk...Once again, you make those statements only because you have
no idea who I am. You've made the grave mistake of dismissing me as
some usenet troll who's out to fuck with you. I'm neither.

>> You were incapable of being a responsible adult and
>> issuing an apology.
>
> Hehhehheh... An apology Diesel?

Yes. For smarting off. Where I come from, smarting off to people you
don't know doesn't make those people do you any favors until you make
things right with them. I realize you're in cali, so perhaps your
line of thinking is a little different there. An absurd issue of
entitlement perhaps? Too many trophies given to you just for
participating, perhaps.

> I have absolutely no problem apologizing when I make factual
> mistakes. None.

Yes, you clearly do. You wrote some childish insults towards me in
another thread, where you were asking how to mount an Androids
internal/external memory as a drive letter so you can do more with
the files present. I responded that I had several ways in which you
could accomplish this, just like you wanted, but, I'd need an apology
for your shitty comments before I'd fork over the information.

I made a very simple, easy, request of you. It wasn't something you
were capable of doing, so, being true to my word, I didn't provide
you specific information on how to do what you wanted to do.

And, as far as I'm aware, you've yet to find someone else to help you
do it, because you sure as hell haven't gotten it figured out on your
own. I haven't seen any posts from you crowing about it, or listing
mind numbing boring toddler step by step details on any of the
methods for doing it. That tells me, months later, you still don't
know how.

> I've been studying people like you for decades because, as you
> know, I worked for decades in the Silicon Valley, with truly
> intelligent people, after having gone to the best schools in this
> country, with trully intelligent people, after having grown up in
> some of the most expensive locations in the country, again,
> populated by truly intelligent people.

BAWAHAHAHAHA. Thanks Arlen, that bullshit was highly entertaining. I
think I hit the nail on the head with my cali comment above. Tell me
something, have you ever lived outside the state of cali? It's a big
world and cali is only a small part of it. Personally, if cali broke
off and sank into the ocean tomorrow, I'd be okay with that. I can't
think of much good that comes from cali...I can think of alot of
bullshit though. Don't even get me started on the scary guns laws you
cali people like to pass...way too much pussification in that state.

> Compared to them, I'm of average intelligence, if even that.
> I've never said otherwise.

I think you give yourself a bit too much credit there, Arlen.
Javascript isn't hard, mapping drive letters to various types of
devices isn't that difficult either. It's childsplay.

If you want me to take you as a serious programmer, show me something
real; some nice asm, c++, something along those lines. I'd even
accept a nice asic source to something that is cool. A fractal
generator, a .wav player, something along those lines; because you
can't call an API and ask windows to do it for you in that language.
[g] Not some lame ass, idiot friendly scripting language intended to
be used by those who have no real coding skills and have no interest
in learning the software and hardware relationship.

> But people like you, Diesel, are so far below those people I just
> mentioned (who actually _are_ intelligent), that it still boggles
> my mind how fantastically incomprehensive people like you are.

h0h0h0. That's your problem, Arlen. You write shit all the time, and
it's pure shit. I've done alot of work for silicon valley people from
the comfort of my home, way the hell away from cali. They recruit me
for these jobs, Arlen. I don't apply to them.

I may not have the most pleasant attitude on usenet towards some
individuals, but, those companies aren't paying me for my attitude or
lack of one. They pay me for the technical expertise I have.
Technical expertise I earned by being in the trenches of the I.T
world since I was still single digit age. many many years before it
was 'cool' to know anything about computers. Many years before
Windows, too.

> You're immune to facts.

My entire world deals with facts, for the most part. Electrical
theory aside (it's mostly fact, with a few exceptions to the rule).

> People like you, Diesel, and people like you abound, are incapable
> of comprehending even the _simplest_ of the simplest of the
> simplest of facts.

You're writing shit, again. Pure shit.

>> Due to that, and only that, I opted not to
>> provide you any specific details concerning sharing your Android
>> device internal/external memory over your network via a drive
>> letter mount.
>
> Hehhehheh ... Hi Diesel,
>
> First off, I will be blunt ... you _never_ knew _anything_
> whatsoever.

That's funny, because right now, I'm copying a document from my
external android memory to one of my linux machines across the
network. The linux machine actually sees it as a network drive share.
[g] And, the Windows XP (XP no less Arlen) machine sees the Android
device as two drive letters; one for internal one for external. And,
the XP machine isn't playing host to the device, another linux box
is. I could have set the Windows box up as the host though, very
little configuration difference between the two.

How are you coming along with it, since you asked how to do it months
ago? Got even one version of it working, yet?

Btw, yes, all of the computers on this network have full read/write
access to the Android mapped shares. It would be pointless for them
not to.

> I need to say that clearly - not for you - as you won't believe
> it. But for the others to comprehend that you know absolutely
> nothing.

That's another problem you have, Arlen. Various people you've
mentioned, including the likes of Mike Easter do infact know me, and
they also know I'm not full of shit. Mike knows alot about me,
actually. Even including some.. not so nice things I'm responsible
for. I think you'll be very hard pressed to find him agreeing with
you concerning my so called stupidity concerning I.T. Why don't you
ask him? :)

> Having said that, you proved time and again that you couldn't even
> tell us the single *critical* step I had missed in outlining the
> tutorial for how to access the _entire_ device system contents.

You didn't access the entire device contents at any time. You were
only able to access userland. No magical driver is going to be able
to override that for you. It's not upto the driver, it's upto the
device. Short of rooting an Android device, you are not going to have
full access to it. And you damn sure aren't given free reign on Apple
products either. Not by a long shot. And incidently, rooting an
Android device doesn't give you god like powers over it entirely
either. You still don't have full, unrestricted access to do whatever
the hell you want. Some of the firmware contents still remains
outside your reach.

> Every single one of the people on the affected newsgroup didn't
> know. Not Paul. Not Mike Easter. Not you. Not Nospam. Not Rene.
> Not Char. 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/alt.comp.freeware/K0NZ0nb1pWw/OBp
> oi3i8CAAJ>

Actually, my first comment on that was why you thought you discovered
something new. I also asked why you called it 'sliding'; when
copy/paste or cut/paste is already well established and requires no
additional explanation. I also went onto describe situations where
your solution doesn't work as advertised on ALL windows and linux
platforms, as you originally claimed.

When you learned that XP won't mount newer Android devices on it's
own without help, and various distros of Linux (Mint 17.3 for
example) won't either, you attempted to move the goalposts and rule
XP out (even though it IS a version of Windows and you previously
claimed your method worked on ALL flavors as you wrote it) and you
then opted to specify the particular distro of linux that you use,
only because you learned from me (haha, I was the first to mention
either of those two things) that various other linux distros may/may
not support what you want to do depending on android device and
version, without additional software that isn't included with the
distro.

I went a step further though, I even used one of my own android
devices that runs an older copy of Android; you dismissed it as a
result with another goalpost move. At the end of the day though, it
became quite clear that your so called universal method of exchanging
files via usb for windows, linux, Android isn't as universal as you
once assumed; because you haven't got the hands on real world
experience with various systems, including various Android devices
that don't always play nicely with each other, even if you think they
should.

> HINT: To this very day, 99.9% of you _still_ don't know how to do
> it. (Even though I explained it all in gory detail - including the
> key trick.)

You didn't explain anything of the sort. Several of us commented
about additional software your distro of linux has, that various
other distros do not always come with.

> But _you_, Diesel, you said it was trivial and that it was
> something you knew for a long time - which is ok - that's fine -
> but you only _beleived_ you knew ... when you proved - beyond a
> shadow of a doubt that you didn't.

I did say it was trivial (as did several others) and I have known how
to do it for a very long time. So long infact, I forgot it was worth
mentioning in a long post on usenet. I figured everybody knew how to
use usb to copy/move files between various devices they owned...

> I didn't know either - until I found it out about a year or two
> ago.

ROFL. I've been moving data back and forth between Windows, Linux,
Android, and the god awful (I'm not an apple fan) macOS for years
Arlen. It's not new to me, and not something I recently learned how
to do.

> The funny thing is that you "claimed" to know - but you didn't,

Indeed, I did. I also offered to provide you full details using
several different methods on mapping a drive letter to your Android
device. I requested one thing from you in return. An apology for some
assinine comments you previously wrote. You weren't emotionally
mature enough to issue an apology, so, I elected not to provide you
with help on that project. A project you've still managed to fail to
accomplish, I'll remind you.

> You don't even _realize_ that I _always_ could "mount" any Android
> file system onto Windows as a "drive letter" (using a variety of
> WiFi and USB methods).

Your previous posts don't support that conclusion. Infact, they show
that you weren't able to do this and tried various means in order to
accomplish it. The only thing you actually did (that I found funny as
all hell) was teach pooh that net supported webdav and has for
decades now. [g]

I don't know if you did that because pooh suggested utilities that
wouldn't on a cold snowy day in hell give you a mounted drive letter,
but you sure gave them a shot. :)

You have not been succesful mounting a drive letter to your android
device for read/write access. Let's not split hairs, that's what you
wanted to do, that's what you spent a considerable amount of time
trying to do, that's what you've continued to FAIL AT DOING.

Where as I, and several others (Carlos being another) have succeeded
in doing this, and are able to take advantage of the fruits of our
labor. We have drive letter mounts to our Android device. You do not.

> Often, people like Paul or Mike Easter will suggest valuable
> improvements. In this case, I don't think they did - so I learned
> nothing - but you _should_ have learned how to do what I've been
> doing for years.

I've been a certified (really) technician for nearly twenty (that's
just one cert, I've got several actually) years now. What you've
asked of the groups several times now is all childs play to me and
many of my peers. It's old news to us, been done and done to death.
We don't think anything of it.

> And yet, out of, oh, say 25 distinct posters, only TWO (Frank & I)
> understood the problem set (where Mike Easter & Paul understood
> the Windows/Linux side also).

I realize you have a problem with giving credit where it's due if you
have a personal issue with someone, but, it was ME, not them who
first clued you in about Windows and linux not being as universal to
your so called, method as you originally thought.

> Do you see I'm swimming in a sea of fools, Diesel?

You're swimming alone, actually.

> BTW, as an aside, I'm only explaining the truth - which is that
> few people _cared_ to comprehend the problem set - or - they
> didn't have to deal with both Android & iOS along with Windows &
> Linux (which is fine).

I have to deal with various operating systems on a daily basis, along
with a slew of internet of thing devices that people just can't seem
to not waste their damn money on. I have to make sure all those
stupid things people buy will talk to devices that are already in
service on various networks I'm responsible for.

You just screw off as a hobbyist, you aren't responsible for
supporting much more than your own personal gear and perhaps that of
a few neighbors who come to you for assistance. My workload on a good
day isn't anywhere near as small.

> But my point is that Frank & I advanced our overall tribal
> knowledge.

Frank gained nothing of value from the conversation. I was there too,
Arlen. You and you alone gained information from the rest of us, but,
did not credit all those who provided it.


--

Visualize using your turn signals

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 06:27:21 -0000 (UTC), Diesel wrote:

> He's very amusing at times with what he thinks are witty insults.

Again, THANK YOU!

You literally prove the point of this thread in every post, Diesel.

Fact is, we go way back - you & me & Usenet - decades back.

You must comprehend that I'm completely different from you, Diesel.
o We have NOTHING in common.
o Absolutely nothing.

My strategy is well known, as are my (prior) tactics.
o The strategy is the Q&A Usenet model (to increase tribal knowledge)
o The tactics are to work my threads to solutions (and then disappear)

There are _plenty_ of examples of these tactics & strategy working.
Please see the ad-hoc references below, as just a few examples.

The key point is that (I thought) two types of people existed on Usenet:
o Intelligentsia (e.g., Mike Easter, Paul, Marek Novotny, et al.)
o Drivel (e.g., Char Jackson, Dustin Cook, Raid Slam, Gremlin, Casio, et al.)

I learn from and edify the intelligentsia.
And yet, we all struggle for how to deal with you drivel.
o The most common advice is to not feed you
o As we lose the moment we drop to your level due to your experience

However....
o That advice was meant for those who use the chit-chat Usenet model
o That advice may not work well for those who use the Q&A model

There is a difference in the model - hence - in response to the drivel:
o In the chit-chat model, you post 99% to other people's threads
o You say almost nothing in each post (if not nothing) of any real value
o Hence, when trolls infest a chit-chat thread - the ignore advice works

However, the Q&A model is focused on obtaining RESULTS.
o In the Q&A model, I post 99% to my own threads - all to improve knowledge
o What we say in a Q&A thread is far more important than who we are
o Hence, when trolls infest a Q&A thread - the advice to ignore fails

I like people like you, Dustin, to those who "contribute" a pile of shit
when asked to "bring something" of value to the Usenet potluck picnic.

The moment trolls like you arrive, Char Jackson, the picnic is _already_
ruined because you simply shit on the table with the utmost of glee.

Since I CARE that the Usenet Q&A model works, I have to learn how to deal
with trolls like you, Rene Lamontagne.

The approach I have previously tried is a multi-fold approach:
o I mirror the implied INTENT of the post (as recently with Dan Purgert)
o I confront cowardly bullies like you, Wolf K., directly & frontally

If you change your implied intent, as did Cybe R. Wizard today over here:
o Can we come up with a free, ad free, cloud-free calendaring system that works with Windows and Linux and mobile devices?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.os.linux/ydQ9sG-8Y08/wJn1tPDoDwAJ>
Then I dutifully mirror that exact change in implied intent.

Put in a way that, perhaps, even you can (maybe not?) comprehend:
o You always have to throw the first stone - I won't.
o However, when you throw that stone - I throw it right back.

The point is that there used to be only two reasons for your drivel:
o Either you _really_ are that _unfathomably_ stupid, or, a
o You're just playing your silly games (for your own Usenet amusement?)

In the case where I inferred that you're just plain stupid,
o I tried to reason with you with actual facts (yes, I know ... crazy);
o Where, it shocked me to no end your lack of factual comprehension.

In the case where I inferred you were simply playing childish games,
o I tried to make it "expensive" for you (i.e., "less fun");
o In that I simply point out exactly that which you prove to be.

In summary, key tactics I am consistent with to support my Q&A strategy
o Are that I confront you child-like troll bullies directly;
o Because I'm trying to accomplish something in a Q&A thread.

And, in the past, for when you trolls were shockingly incomprehensive
o I used to supply you with copious (if very basic) well-cited facts;
o Of which, you proved, consistently, to be quite immune to the effects of.

Having said that, I've come to an epiphany which changes not how I deal
with you cowardly bullying trolls when you bring your pile of steaming shit
to the Potluck Picnic which is Usenet ... but which changes how I deal with
you trolls (Rene Lamontagne, Char Jackson, Alan Browne, Alan Baker, Diesel,
Snit, nospam, Jolly Roger, Dan Purgert, FredW, Wolf K, Good Guy, et al.)
when you appear (as always) to be utterly incomprehensibly stupid.

It appears that most of you trolls suffer from left-side DK cognitive bias.

*In short, you're all the epitome of the "lemon-juice" bank robber*:
o You and that lemon-juice bank robber own the exact same type of brain.
o Hence, you're all insensibly _immune_ to even the simplest of facts.

I have tried to edify you - and clearly - I've failed.
o I've failed - because - sadly - you're insensibly immune to edification.
o That! Is my epiphany.

[Dan Purgert]

Diesel wrote:
> [...]

> Watching him publish hello world programs as he went through online
> tutorials for programming Android devices was hilarious from my point
> of view; that being, decades of actual programming experience on a wide
> variety of platforms. Not scripts, but, actual programs that worked as
> intended, from scratch. No hand holding GUI, etc.

I love me some AVR "Hello World" programs. Although I was a stupid and
got Microchip's new "1-series" boards, and they're not the same as the
older ATTinyx5's that I've been playing with.

I'm definitely a midroad programmer at best ... and it is quite humbling
when you have to sit and really rack your brain for how to do "read this
pin" when there aren't any tutorials out there.

Maybe I should make one. Eventually. When I suck less, so I'm not just
one more example of "bad tutorial on the internet".

[Dan Purgert]

Diesel wrote:
> arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> news:q1rk2t$agb$1...@news.mixmin.net

>> I'm only going to respond to you, Diesel, and not to the drivel
>> who may follow in your wake (e.g., Cybe R. Wizard, Dan Purgert,
>> Jolly Roger, Tim Streater, Alan Browne, Alan Baker, nospam,
>> haemactylus, Char Jackson, Rene Lamontagne, et al.), simply
>> because the response to any one of you is the same as the response
>> to all.
>
> I know some of the individuals you mentioned from prior
> conversations. At no time have I found any of the aforementioned
> people to be stupid, though. I don't even consider David Brooks or
> the Anoncoward stupid. misguided, certainly, but, stupid, heh, no.

I'm definitely stupid, the proof is in responding to arlen.

Or is that insane?

> [...]

> Either you didn't read it, or, you did and are
> lying about that now with your accusation that I didn't know what you
> were writing about.

It probably goes back to arlen holder not using the right words. Cue a
new post about "increasing the tribal knowledge", wherein he describes,
oh I don't know, let's say "Internet Time Synchronization" ("ITS").

>> Very few people can answer my questions.. Very very few.
>> Paul. David Empson. Mike Easter, Marek (bless his soul) ...
>> (the list of purposefully helpful intelligent people is rather
>> short).
>
> Oh please, you don't think those people know you're trying to kiss
> their ass cheeks? You'd love it if they'd just give you complete step
> by step instructions for each problem you present.

Don't they do just that? I mean, I know Marek was quite thourough when
he was explaining something, and Mike is as well.

>
>> I've been studying people like you for decades because, as you

>> know, I worked for decades in the Silicon Valley [...]

Oh, California. This explains so very much.A

Prop 65 warning - Usenet is known to the state of California to cause
cancer.

> [...]

> If you want me to take you as a serious programmer, show me something
> real; some nice asm, c++, something along those lines. I'd even
> accept a nice asic source to something that is cool. A fractal
> generator, a .wav player, something along those lines; because you
> can't call an API and ask windows to do it for you in that language.
> [g] Not some lame ass, idiot friendly scripting language intended to
> be used by those who have no real coding skills and have no interest
> in learning the software and hardware relationship.

Just in case, I'd add "arduino doesn't count", personally. It has a
pretty hefty amount of "help".

>
> That's another problem you have, Arlen. Various people you've
> mentioned, including the likes of Mike Easter do infact know me, and
> they also know I'm not full of shit. Mike knows alot about me,
> actually. Even including some.. not so nice things I'm responsible
> for.

Great Lord Cthulhu, you're not involved with systemd are you?

>
> I went a step further though, I even used one of my own android
> devices that runs an older copy of Android; you dismissed it as a
> result with another goalpost move. At the end of the day though, it
> became quite clear that your so called universal method of exchanging

s/exchanging/sliding/

HTH. HAND. :)

> [...]

>> HINT: To this very day, 99.9% of you _still_ don't know how to do
>> it. (Even though I explained it all in gory detail - including the
>> key trick.)
>
> You didn't explain anything of the sort. Several of us commented
> about additional software your distro of linux has, that various
> other distros do not always come with.

Some of us commented that "wait, physically plug it in!?" was also a
downside. I'm Lazy (capital 'l' on purpose), and don't wanna be walking
upstairs to the laptop to plug in my phone to transfer media (or
whatever) to the laptop's harddrive nextcloud folder to then let the
laptop sync with said service.

>
>> I didn't know either - until I found it out about a year or two
>> ago.
>
> ROFL. I've been moving data back and forth between Windows, Linux,
> Android, and the god awful (I'm not an apple fan) macOS for years
> Arlen. It's not new to me, and not something I recently learned how
> to do.

I think I was maybe six when I learned one could click and drag a
document from "go away this is my stuff" to "A:/".

Maybe about ten when I learned "ctrl+A -> right click -> select 'print'"
would print all the things without opening them. (Major apologies in
advance for triggering a new "tutorial".)

> [...]

>> Do you see I'm swimming in a sea of fools, Diesel?
>
> You're swimming alone, actually.

With sharks (do do do do ... OHGOD MAKE IT STOP!)

> [...]

> and perhaps that of a few neighbors who come to you for assistance.

Perish the thought.

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 06:27:21 -0000 (UTC), Diesel wrote:

> He's very amusing at times with what he thinks are witty insults.

Hi Diesel,
I have a strategy which is to use Usenet to get answers to tech questions.
(Yeah, crazy strategy ... I know ... many use Usenet for their amusement.)

My strategy is to share & cull & combine data to solve problems, together.
I use tactics to manage the threads where I ask those technical questions.

Two tactics I use consistently are to:
a. Mirror the implied intent of each post - regardless of prior history
b. Directly confront the cowardly bullies - of which you are one

The purpose of confronting the cowardly bullies is obvious:
o. Once they've infested a thread - the potluck picnic is already ruined
o. Make it "less fun" for the bullies - hoping they refrain next time

It's a battle of percentages, Diesel.
o One hundred percent of the time I will confront you cowardly bullies

The goal is for you to KNOW that I will do that.
o I will simply let _you_ make a fool of yourself, Dustin.
o By pointing out the very words that you post (they're always of a child)

If you consider me pointing out your very words to be "witty", so be it.
o I simply consider my tactic merely letting you prove you're a child.

Bear in mind, Diesel, and those like you, Dustin.
o While there is no love lost between us - I don't care about you.
o I just want you to act like an adult when posting to threads I care about

Simple. Consistent.
o A strategy to work a thread so that technical answers result.
o Tactics that fit that strategy and that deter childish bullies like you.

After having said that, you now know my strategy & tactics Diesel.
o Some bullies, like Char Jackson & Snit & Wolf K insists on their rights
o They, like Alan Baker & Jason Betts insist on a God-given right to Troll.

At times, even I must deviate from my tactics and respond to them that
o This is my last response to you in this thread (to save everyone else).

Much to everyone's pleasure, Diesel, I say that now to you, Dustin.

> claims to have been on usenet for decades in newsgroups I've frequented
> for decades, yet, somehow, he has no idea what my normal posting handle
> actually is. :) I just don't buy that.

Hi Dustin,

If you re-read what I wrote above, you see this consistent tactic:
o Mirror the implied intent of each post - regardless of prior history

You see, it matters not to me WHOM you post as - I don't even look:
o For the "chit-chat" Usenet model - who you are matters
o For the "chit-chat" model - it seems what you post matters not

The reason it matters not who you are is that I care about ANSWERS!
o In the "Q&A" Usenet model - what you post is all that matters
o That's simply because we'll take solutions from anyone - even you

Hence, it matters not to me whether you post as Casio, Diesel,
Diesel-Dum, Dustin Cook, Gremlin, Raid, Slam, et al.

You love to dox people, Diesel, just as David Brooks & Aardvark do.
You doxed David Eagle & Jenn Porter for example.
You're' no different than Steve Carroll (aka David Brooks & maybe Good Guy).

You wrote "virus families" as a vxer, disseminating them in the wild.
You even hosted a web site related to those efforts.

*Let me tell you a secret, Dustin... I don't give one whit about nyms.*
(I change mine all the time, for example, for aggregator privacy.)

In the chit-chat model, who you are may be important because
in general, you say nothing in every post.

In the Q&A model, who you are is meaningless; what matters is
what value you add to the overall tribal knowledge inherent in the
question.

I don't care if you posted as God herself - if you simply answer a question.

> Watching him publish hello world programs as he went through online
> tutorials for programming Android devices was hilarious from my point
> of view; that being, decades of actual programming experience on a wide
> variety of platforms. Not scripts, but, actual programs that worked as
> intended, from scratch. No hand holding GUI, etc.

Hi Dustin,

I know you consider yourself a genius for having disseminated viruses.

The problem, Diesel, is that you see me disseminating Hello World
programs, and you _think_ you can do better (which, maybe you can).

You _think_ by me disseminating those programs (which are, by the way,
to help others since they're all cut and paste designs), that I'm
claiming some kind of "genius").

The problem I have with your brain, Diesel, is that it's that of a child.

Nobody on this planet (but you) thinks disseminating a cut and paste
"Hello World" is a stroke of genius. Nobody.

Well, nobody but you.

BTW, this is for _others_ to get a gist of what Diesel is talking about:
o Report: My first "hello world" using Android Studio freeware on Windows worked just fine (in about an hour)
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/aW64zYeBtF0>

HINT: I always try to enable others to cut-&-paste what I can do
(and I never claim to be a genius - I just claim to be at least average).

My strategy is to share & cull & combine data to solve problems, together.

--
This is my last post to you in this thread (as everyone will appreciate).

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[nospam]

In article <q22n7l$9a5$1...@news.mixmin.net>, arlen holder

<ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> I have a strategy which is to use Usenet to get answers to tech questions.

one that doesn't work particularly well.

[arlen holder]

On Sun, 20 Jan 2019 16:02:13 -0500, nospam wrote:

> one that doesn't work particularly well.

And yet, my facts are _always_ correct (see note 1).
While yours generally take fewer than 10 seconds to disprove.

Do you want me to cite situation after situation again nospspam?
Meanwhile, you can't find a _single_ time I've stated a fact to you
that wasn't correct.

All you can do is claim all facts are wrong - sans any proof.
It's the hallmark of children nospam (look at Cybe Wizard for an example).

I realize you childish Apologists, nospam, can _only_ play silly games.
o Your entire belief system is underlain by Apple MARKETING propaganda
o Hence, your biggest weakness, nospam, is plain old basic fact.

You have only seven responses to fact, in fact:

These are your 7 responses to fact, common to all you Apologists:
... *HABIT 1:*
. They brazenly & repeatedly fabricate wholly imaginary app functionality
. They then exclaim that it's been told to us many times how to do it
... *HABIT 2:*
. They almost never back up statements with actual referenced facts
. They incessantly play childish semantic games when faced with those facts
... *HABIT 3:*
. *They deny facts a priori - without even reading the referenced cites*
. Then they complain about quote snipping of their silly semantic games
... *HABIT 4:*
. They're never purposefully helpful by helping the OP answer the question
. They post worthless retorts, all of which lack any added technical value
... *HABIT 5:*
. They consistently blame Android for Apple's app & hardware faults
. They consistently find the absolute worst price:performance comparisons
... *HABIT 6:*
. They actually believe that a well-documented process is too complex!
. They literally believe elapsed time is proof of actual resolution time.
... *HABIT 7:*
. They consistently fabricate quoted content that never happened
. They then wittily respond to that imaginary quoted content as if it did!

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 01:14:42 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> All you can do is claim all facts are wrong - sans any proof.

The proof is in the putting and I'm putting the proof, in the form of
message IDs (see below) which are YOUR writings, in most every message
I send these days.

> It's the hallmark of children nospam (look at Cybe Wizard for an
> example).

I've never claimed that your 'facts' are wrong; I've merely suggested
that they are very few and far between and that what does emerge from
your dementia is not factual too often. For instance, what you just
said about me is just a lie. NO facts present.

BTW, have you yet come up with the list of TEN THOUSAND tutorials you
say you wrote in Message-ID: <po4626$vpu$1...@news.mixmin.net>?

Hey, Harloo, do you really believe that anyone thinks you to be honest
any more now that your constant lies are being broadcast worldwide so
regularly?

Cybe R. Wizard -knows you liars well
--
A liar begins with making falsehood appear like truth, and ends with
making truth itself appear like falsehood.
William Shenstone

[arlen holder]

On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 00:32:46 -0600, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:

> I've never claimed that your 'facts' are wrong;

Cybe R Wizard,

*You prove my point of your worthlessness in every post, Cybe R Wizard.*

Cybe R Wizard,
1. Your type of worthless drivel never adds _any_ value to any thread.
2. In fact, your posts, Cybe R Wizard, add _negative_ value.
3. Hence, alienating you is a "good thing" since you can't post value.

Cybe R Wizard,
You prove your utter incomprehensible lack of value in every post.

[Dan Purgert]

arlen holder wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 00:32:46 -0600, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
>
>> I've never claimed that your 'facts' are wrong;
>

> arlen holder,
>
> *You prove my point of your worthlessness in every post, arlen holder.*
>
> arlen holder,

> 1. Your type of worthless drivel never adds _any_ value to any thread.

> 2. In fact, your posts, arlen holder, add _negative_ value.

> 3. Hence, alienating you is a "good thing" since you can't post value.
>

> arlen holder,

> You prove your utter incomprehensible lack of value in every post.

ftfy. hth. hand.

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 20:41:28 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 00:32:46 -0600, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
>
> > I've never claimed that your 'facts' are wrong;
>
> Cybe R Wizard,
>
> *You prove my point of your worthlessness in every post, Cybe R
> Wizard.*
>
> Cybe R Wizard,
> 1. Your type of worthless drivel never adds _any_ value to any thread.

There;s always value is showing liars to be liars.

Therefore, here is one of your lies, claiming to have personally written
TEN THOUSAND tutorials:
Message-ID: <po4626$vpu$1...@news.mixmin.net>

> 2. In fact, your posts, Cybe R Wizard, add _negative_ value.

Negative toward you, I will readily admit. Shut me up. Go ahead; you
know how. I've explicitly told you haw. Just do it.

> 3. Hence, alienating you is a "good thing" since you can't post value.

You fail once again, then.
You haven't alienated me, Ardline, if fact, just the opposite. I am
closer and closer to you daily, living right there inside your head
each time you admit to yourself that I am right about you being a
liar. You /KNOW/ that it's true.

>
> Cybe R Wizard,
> You prove your utter incomprehensible lack of value in every post.

The great value of showing liars to be liars is ongoing and at least an
honest endeavor. That it is incomprehensible TO /YOU/ is pretty
telling, too.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
“Maybe you're dead inside and don't even know it.”
Bryant McGill, Simple Reminders: Inspiration for Living Your
Best Life

[Rene Lamontagne]

Hey Cybe, Whilst your there inside his head maybe you can rattle up his
one and a half brain cells, might help, but again maybe not, but thanks
for trying. :-)

Rene

[Cybe R. Wizard]

I appreciate your support. I /AM/ trying to get him to grow up and be a
man about his lying, but is seeming pretty hopeless. He really is far
gone.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
When I was growing up, my family was so poor we couldn't afford to pay
attention.
Mr. T

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On 23 Jan 2019 22:06:01 GMT
Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

> On 2019-01-23, Cybe R. Wizard <cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid>

> You're wasting your time with him. He's a lost cause.
>
Hope springs eternal. I am an optimist most times.
I /almost/ believe in him.

...but then:
"A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence."
David Hume

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Optimism - the doctrine or belief that everything is beautiful,
including what is ugly.
Ambrose Bierce

[Dan Purgert]

Are you willing to risk up to 2/3 of his mental capacity? Could prove
disastrous, what with getting new threads concerning

*BRILLIANT method of communicating with people remotely
(aka a telephone)

*ASTOUNDING method of sending text instantly to other people
(aka email)

*AMAZING method for allowing disparate devices to share data
(802.3 and 802.11)

[Dan Purgert]

Who ever said you were wise? :-p

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 00:07:47 -0000 (UTC)
Dan Purgert <d...@djph.net> wrote:

> Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
> > On 23 Jan 2019 22:06:01 GMT
> > Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
> >
> >> You're wasting your time with him. He's a lost cause.
> >>
> > Hope springs eternal. I am an optimist most times.
> > I /almost/ believe in him.
> >
> > ...but then:
> > "A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence."
> > David Hume
>
> Who ever said you were wise? :-p
>

I thought it to be obvious that I am /NOT/ proportioning my belief to
the evidence and so assuredly am not wise if I am still thinking him to
be salvageable.

! ! ! :-\

Cybe R. Wizard -always thinkin' )
--
Bunkrapt:
"Biologist Peter Medawar coined the term bunkrapt to describe believers
in things lacking a scientific basis, like immortal souls, loving gods
or quantum consciousness fields pervading the cosmos."

[Rene Lamontagne]

On 01/23/2019 6:27 PM, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 00:07:47 -0000 (UTC)
> Dan Purgert <d...@djph.net> wrote:
>
>> Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
>>> On 23 Jan 2019 22:06:01 GMT
>>> Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You're wasting your time with him. He's a lost cause.
>>>>
>>> Hope springs eternal. I am an optimist most times.
>>> I /almost/ believe in him.
>>>
>>> ...but then:
>>> "A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence."
>>> David Hume
>>
>> Who ever said you were wise? :-p
>>
> I thought it to be obvious that I am /NOT/ proportioning my belief to
> the evidence and so assuredly am not wise if I am still thinking him to
> be salvageable.
>
> ! ! ! :-\
>
> Cybe R. Wizard -always thinkin' )
>

Pretty sad, If he had at least *two* brain cells they might mate and
produce more little brain cells. But as it stands there's not much hope
for the poor lad, I'm afraid he's over the edge. :-(

Rene

[Dan Purgert]

Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 00:07:47 -0000 (UTC)
> Dan Purgert <d...@djph.net> wrote:
>> > ...but then:
>> > "A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence."
>> > David Hume
>>
>> Who ever said you were wise? :-p
>>
> I thought it to be obvious that I am /NOT/ proportioning my belief to
> the evidence and so assuredly am not wise if I am still thinking him to
> be salvageable.

Good news, by adnitting your own human fallibility, you've passed the
Turing Test.

And have also proven you're not a lizardman.

[Jasen Betts]

Don't.

From what he's written here I have the follwing understanding.

"The funnel" is his strategy to stop detractors from
"spoiling" his main thread with the truth, he does this by trolling in
the undesirable (to him) offshoots.

"The mirror" is his childish "tit-for-tat" response to any perceived
slight with insults and silly demands. "the mirror" is not subject
to review or appeal. There are no appologies to those falsely accused.
Even a child can be expected to appologise, this behaviour is
infantile.

The guy's a troll plain and simple.



I'm sure fun could be has by messing with the "References:" headers

[arlen holder]

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 02:00:42 -0000 (UTC), Dan Purgert wrote:

> And have also proven you're not a lizardman.

Hi Dan Purgert,

Moving on to the third reputed iOS SMB client in the list,
o iFiles 2
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ifiles-2-file-manager-cloud/id1104795347?mt=8>

It's a $7 app so it doesn't fit the problem set.

Moving on to the fourth reputed iOS SMB client in the list,
o File Hub by imoreapps
<https://itunes.apple.com/app/file-hub-powerful-intuitive-file-manager/id730843281>

1. I open the File Hub (by imoreapps) first
2. At top left is a button called "Cloud Files" which I click
3. A "Cloud Files" section opens with a "+" button, which I click
4. An "Add Server" selection opens with "Windows SMB" which I click
5. A "Go Premium" form pops up asking for $5
Below that is a dead button for "Accessing Samba/NAS Server".

So that's two more SMBv2/v3 failures on iOS.
o iFiles 2 = FAIL
o File Hub by imoreapps = FAIL

[arlen holder]

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 07:50:52 -0000 (UTC), arlen holder wrote:

> So that's two more SMBv2/v3 failures on iOS.
> o iFiles 2 = FAIL
> o File Hub by imoreapps = FAIL

Oops. Cancel that.

All of Dan Purgert's posts are the same, so I posted this to the wrong
thread (he _never_ says _anything_ of any on-topic technical value).

Mea culpa.

I'm done posting to this thread - so I apologize for responding to Dan.

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 07:56:47 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> I'm done posting to this thread -

Please, let that be the case for all threads.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
We lie loudest when we lie to ourselves.
Eric Hoffer

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 07:56:47 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> Mea culpa.

See how easy that is? It would be just as easy for you to admit that
you've lied all along about writing TEN THOUSAND tutorials in
Message-ID: <po4626$vpu$1...@news.mixmin.net>.

Go on; you can do it. Man up and admit you lied.

The instant that you show a viable list of TEN THOUSAND tutorials that
YOU have written I will shut up about it, I guarantee and promise.

Be a man and 'fess up to being a liar otherwise.

Failing to do either, you are just and only a liar. ...and not much of
a man, either.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Saying that Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying
that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders
<Alanna>

[Dan Purgert]

Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 07:56:47 -0000 (UTC)
> arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm done posting to this thread -
>
> Please, let that be the case for all threads.

And channels, in general.

[Dan Purgert]

Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 07:56:47 -0000 (UTC)
> arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:
>
>> Mea culpa.
>
> See how easy that is? It would be just as easy for you to admit that

Except immediately before, he lied again.

I think that this propane (gaseous) I have is considerably thicker than
the veracity of arlen's statement.

[arlen holder]

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 00:02:12 -0000 (UTC), Dan Purgert wrote:

> Are you willing to risk up to 2/3 of his mental capacity? Could prove
> disastrous, what with getting new threads concerning

Facts.

As I claimed prior, there can only be three possibilities:
a. Either people really _are_ that incredibly stupid, or,
b. They are simply pulling our leg for their own Usenet amusement, or
c. They really are left-side Dunning Kruger poster children...

Facts.

Here is another case, where nospam _claims_ functionality that simply
doesn't appear to exist, which is an indication of left-side DK, unless
o It's simply that nospam is incredibly stupid, or,
o It's simply that nospam is just making everything up for his own
amusement

If he's
a. Not incredibly stupid, or if he's
b. Not just pulling our leg, then...

What other explanation is there for his wholly unjustified claims?

The fact is that nospam repeatedly claims that something as trivially
simple as the existence of a free non-crippled smbv2 client exists for iOS
(non jailbroken) - and yet - after testing - nobody can find a _single_ one
that actually exists!
o Do you know of a free iOS SMBv2 (or SMBv3) client?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.ipad/1OY2fExXxaM>

The left-side Dunning-Kruger folks simply _guess_ about everything!
Their entire belief system is wholly imaginary!

It's sad, and utterly shocking that such people exist - but - that thread
proves that they do exist, amazingly so.
o They actually _believe_ what they claim, and yet,
o They can almost _never_ back up their claims.

And yet, amazingly, they _still_ believe their fanciful claims!

Only three possibilities exist that I know of to explain nospam's actions
1. Either he's really that incredibly stupid, or,
2. He's just making things up for his own personal childish amusement, or
3. He really _believes_ what he says (i.e., he's a lemon-juice bank-robber poster child)

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 21:38:20 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> Facts.

Are decidedly /NOT/ your forte.

>
> As I claimed prior, there can only be three possibilities:

YOur claiming a thing does /NOT/ make that thing true.

> a. Either people really _are_ that incredibly stupid, or

Some people are. Looking right at /YOU/.

,
> b. They are simply pulling our leg for their own Usenet amusement, or

While that would be simplicity, itself, such is not necessarily the
case here.

> c. They really are left-side Dunning Kruger poster children...

The Dunning/Kruger effect is just that, a psychological EFFECT which is
not graphed or even graph-able. To insist (as you continually do) on a
left side/right side differentiation shows your own cognitive bias of
your questionable competence. The D/K effect concerns ignorance vs
learned-ness, not intelligence.
Read up a little. I did so and learned something:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Cybe R. Wizard -still not so sure
--
"The Enemies of Truth. — Convictions are more dangerous enemies of
truth than lies."
Friedrich Nietzsche

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:54:43 -0600

"Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid> wrote:

> The Dunning/Kruger effect is just that, a psychological EFFECT which
> is not graphed or even graph-able.

Such proves not to be the case:
https://graphpaperdiaries.com/2017/08/20/the-real-dunning-kruger-graph/

Cybe R. Wizard
--
The idea that education will lead to a lessening of bigotry is just
factually incorrect.
Reza Aslan

[arlen holder]

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 16:41:12 -0600, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:

>> The Dunning/Kruger effect is just that, a psychological EFFECT which
>> is not graphed or even graph-able.
>
> Such proves not to be the case:
> https://graphpaperdiaries.com/2017/08/20/the-real-dunning-kruger-graph/

I'm trying to comprehend _why_ people do what they prove to do.
o The question is a _serious_ question.

It's an age-old question of why they do what they do on Usenet.
1. Are they really _that_ stupid as what they write indicates they are?
2. Since nobody can be that stupid, maybe they're just playing games?
3. Or, perchance, do they actually _believe_ what they write? (OMG)

Bear in mind the goal is to _understand_ people like Snit, nospam, Jolly
Roger, Diesel, Dustin Cook, Char Jackson, Wolf K., Alan Baker, Tim
Streater, Alan Browne, Savageduck, Wade Garrett, BK at OnRamp,
Lloyd, Hemidactylus, Your Name, John Doe, Rene Lamantagne
Jasen Betts, Wolf K, Rudy Weiser, Good Guy, et al.

All the people in the list (& more) _constantly_ exhibit this trait:
1. Are they really that incredibly stupid (but who is _that_ dumb?)
2. Are they simply always pulling our leg (but for what gain?)
3. Or, do they actually _believe_ what they write?

I believe _this_ well-known real-world example, is classic to describe the
kind of people I'm trying to comprehend, in this case, Snit (along with
Jolly Roger, nospam, and most of the canonical Apple Apologists).

SITUATION:
o I tested iOS and found it incapable of a certain feature.
o I posted the facts to the iOS newsgroup
o For *hundreds* of posts in scores of threads, Snit posted otherwise
o The Apologist peanut gallery (e.g., JR, nospam, etc.) applauded Snit
o They all _thought_ they found 1 app which did what it just doesn't do
o I took one look at the app - and it was clear to me in 10 seconds they
were wrong.
o For hundreds upon hundreds (no kidding) of posts Snit declared he was
right

And yet ... never once ... did Snit (or the Apologists) even *LOOK* at the
Y-Axis!

I can only think of 3 possibilities for them always being wrong:
1. Either they really are that incredibly stupid (but who is _that_ dumb?)
2. Or, they're just playing childish silly games (but for what? Amusement?)
3. Or, they actually truly _believe_ what they say (left-side DK perhaps?)

*For Christs' sake, _nobody_ is _that_ incredibly stupid!*
And yet, for over 400 posts, Snit posted that video - even _after_ he was
proven wrong.

That it takes 10 seconds to prove almost everything they say to be wrong is
the scary part.
1. Are they really _that_ incredibly stupid? (but nobody is that stupid)
2. Are they just playing silly childish games? (for what amusement?)
3. Or, do they really _believe_ what they write? (which is where DK lies)

It's all about _comprehension_ of facts.

1. Read & _comprehend_ this <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DunningĄVKruger_effect>
2. Maybe even look at this <https://graphpaperdiaries.com/2017/08/20/the-real-dunning-kruger-graph/>
Then...
3. Watch the first minute of this video by Snit <https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo>
4. Bearing in mind he posted over 400 Usenet posts referring to that video as depicting "fact"

Here is just one Usenet reference from Snit to that effect:
o It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0/qSXecrnZAQAJ>

Now you tell me why someone would do what Snit did?
(Note: This is just one example of what those on the list do!)

What drives them to appear to be so incredibly stupid?
NOTE: I can't imagine that people really _are_ that incredibly stupid.
It must be something else; but what?

All the people in the list (& more) _constantly_ exhibit this trait:
1. Are they really that incredibly stupid (but who is _that_ dumb?)
2. Are they simply always pulling our leg (but for what gain?)
3. Or, do they actually _believe_ what they write?

[arlen holder]

On Sun, 20 Jan 2019 22:09:30 +0000 (UTC), Diesel wrote:

> You belittle and insult those (like myself) who could be of benefit
> to you, in so far as correctly answering technical questions and
> presenting useful problem solving skills. There's no advantage for
> you to use childish insults towards so many, Arlen.

Hi Diesel,
I have to _explain_ something to you that you do not _comprehend_ yet.

You add zero value to _any_ Usenet post. Zero. Nada. Zip. Nothing.
o You _can't_ add any value Diesel.
o You just can't.

Why?
o I don't know why.
o I think it can only be one or more of 3 possible reasons

The way I know this is simply that you prove me right in every post.
o You have never _once_ added value in any post I've read from you.
o Not once.

Hence, you have to understand both my strategy & tactics:
o When you post worthless drive to other threads, I ignore it.
o When you post worthless drivel to my threads, I confront you.

My strategy is to obtain answers; my tactics are simple:
1. I work the thread to obtain the answer, and,
2. I confront you childish bullying cowardly trolls.

What's the strangest thing, Diesel, is you _think_ alienating you is a
"bad" thing, but, it's actually a "good" thing.

I do not want you (and all the rest of the worthless trolls) to post to my
Q&A threads. Alienating you (and them) is a "good thing" since you (the
plural you) _never_ add any on-topic technical value.

Whom am I talking about who _never_ adds on-topic technical value?
o Snit, nospam, Jolly Roger, Dan Purgert, Cybe R Wizard, Char Jackson,
o Wolf K., Alan Baker, Tim Streater, Alan Browne, Savageduck, Wade Garrett,
o BK at OnRamp, Lloyd, Hemidactylus, Your Name, John Doe, Rene Lamantagne
o Jasen Betts, Wolf K, Rudy Weiser, Good Guy, Diesel, et al.

All of you prove me right in every one of your posts!
o The problem is that you _think_ you add value.
o And yet, you _prove_ you can't add value.

Hence, my tactics of alienating you is done to support my strategy.
o Since you can't ever add any value, I don't want you to waste our time

What happens, unfortunately, is that you trolls infest all threads.
Why?

I don't know why.
More importantly, why are you trolls _always_ worthless?

Again, I don't know why.
o All I know is that you prove, in every post, to be worthless.

You _claim_ knowledge you just do not have.
And, the proof is, that you will _never_ have that knowledge.
It's beyond your mental comprehension ability.

The only question is what makes your brain work the way it does?
o Are you all really _that_ incredibly stupid? (Nobody is that dumb!)
o Are you incessantly pulling our leg (But why? For what gain?)
o Or, do you simply lack the comprehension of almost everything?

Here's my current hypothesis on you trolls listed above:
1. I don't think _anyone_ can be as stupid as what you write indicates.
2. Even when I make it "less fun" for you, you still post your drivel.
3. Hence, I'm beginning to realize you lack basic comprehension skills.

You keep telling me, Diesel, for example, how "smart" you are
(e.g., how you write such wonderful code). You've said it time and again.

You keep deprecating my "hello world" skills for just one example.
And for another, you deprecate my FTP-networking skills.

I don't mind that, Diesel, since I never said once that I was
o A coding expert (heck, it's a "hello world" for Christs' sake)
o A networking expert (heck, I've said many times I'm not)

And yet, you, Diesel, and people like you, Diesel, e.g., Jolly Roger, Alan
Baker, et al. (the list above, and more), _constantly_ claim how "smart"
you are.

That's fine - but ... but ... but.
o You're almost always dead wrong!

Why is it that, for example, almost everything nospam says, I can prove
wrong in fewer than 10 seconds?
1. Nobody can be as stupid as people like nospam appear to be
2. But why would they be so wrong so many times (for fun?)
3. Hence, I'm belatedly realizing, they're left-side DK poster children

All of you I've named (and more), are almost always dead wrong.
And yet, you don't even _realize_ that you're dead wrong.

I don't think it's that you're stupid.
o Yes, you're all incredibly stupid.
o But nobody is that stupid as you all prove to be.

I don't even think you're just pulling our leg.
o Yes, you _love_ to see your name in print, but I don't think it's that.
o I don't think it's that because I make it "less fun" & you _still_ post!

I'm beginning to think you simply lack cognitive skills.
o You appear to lack the skills to realize that you lack skills
o All of you claim to be smarter than anyone thinks you are

Me?
o I've said many (many) times, I'm only of average IQ (if that).
o I ask questions _because_ I don't (yet) know the answers.

And, I back up my claims, with references when necessary.
For example...

While you deprecate my "coding" skills, I never claimed to have them!
o What you repeatedly deprecate, is a "hello world" for Christ's sake!
o Report: My first "hello world" using Android Studio freeware on Windows worked just fine (in about an hour)
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/aW64zYeBtF0>

And, while you deprecate my "networking skills", I never claim them either:
o Do these 3 WiFi tests of a network location to a drive letter mapping work for you on Android 7.0 Nougat & Windows 10 using only freeware?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/IswZ5yEcpYA/wWuqoICZBgAJ>

The main point is that there are (at least) two kinds of Usenet posters:
o Those who are like you, Diesel, who defy comprehension
o But who consistently can _never_ add even one iota of on-topic value
And...
o Those like Paul & Mike Easter and Marek Nobotny et al.
o Who do comprehend the problem set & who do offer viable solutions.

After having explained this, I doubt you will comprehend a single word.

[arlen holder]

On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 04:51:30 -0000 (UTC), Diesel wrote:

> Maybe a slight case of insanity, or, you get some form of enjoyment
> watching Arlen squirm? I know I do. :)

As an adult, I simply point out to others this statement you just made:
"you get some form of enjoyment watching Arlen squirm? I know I do"

WTF?
o Are you _really_ that incredibly childish, Diesel?
o Really? (I didn't think people could be _that_ unfathomably childish.)

What's odd is that you appear to utterly lack comprehension of this fact:
o I'm not "squirming" other than your mindset boggles that of mine
o All I need to do is point out your words - to prove they are that of a child

I don't even have to prove your motives are that of a child.
o You prove it yourself - all I do is point to your very own words.
o All of you prove, time and again, to own the mind of a child.

Why?
o Are you really as stupid as what you write makes you appear to be?
o Or, do you really revel in such worthless childish amusements?
o Or, do you simply completely lack the ability to comprehend anything?

I don't know the answer.

All I know is the following (and more) constantly prove my point:

o Snit, nospam, Jolly Roger, Dan Purgert, Cybe R Wizard, Char Jackson,
o Wolf K., Alan Baker, Tim Streater, Alan Browne, Savageduck, Wade Garrett,
o BK at OnRamp, Lloyd, Hemidactylus, Your Name, John Doe, Rene Lamantagne

o Jasen Betts, Wolf K, Rudy Weiser, Good Guy, Diesel, "joe", et al.

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 06:32:56 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

Some more stupid lies that no one reads. <YAWN>

TL;DR

I seldom give any weight to the words of known liars and you, sir, are
a liar as:
Message-ID: <po4626$vpu$1...@news.mixmin.net>
Clearly shows.
To attempt to prove otherwise is not only futile, it is an evil fool's
game.


Cybe R. Wizard
--
It is a man's own mind, not his enemy or foe, that lures him to evil
ways.
Buddha

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 07:11:31 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> Whom am I talking about who _never_ adds on-topic technical value?
> o Snit, nospam, Jolly Roger, Dan Purgert, Cybe R Wizard, Char
> Jackson, o Wolf K., Alan Baker, Tim Streater, Alan Browne,
> Savageduck, Wade Garrett, o BK at OnRamp, Lloyd, Hemidactylus, Your
> Name, John Doe, Rene Lamantagne o Jasen Betts, Wolf K, Rudy Weiser,
> Good Guy, Diesel, et al.

Oh, look, it has an enemies list just as most evil lying semi-men do.

Cybe R. Wizard -happyily opposing evil wannabe-men
--
A good man would prefer to be defeated than to defeat injustice by evil
means.
Sallust

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 07:29:26 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> I don't know the answer.

Finally a truthful statement from the evil liar. See the lie here:
Message-ID: <po4626$vpu$1...@news.mixmin.net>

wherein it makes the claim of having written TEN THOUSAND tutorials.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
The function of wisdom is to discriminate between good and evil.
Marcus Tullius Cicero

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 07:17:43 -0600, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:

> Finally a truthful statement from the evil liar.

Cybe(r) Wizard,

The question is _why_ you consistently prove to own the mind of a child?

I don't need to prove it as _you_ prove it for me with _every_ statement.

*You consistently prove you revel in worthless childish amusements.*

Your list of childish cohorts prove to be the same in this very thread:
o Jasen Betts,
o Dan Purgert,
o Diesel,
o Rene Lamontagne,
o Wolf K
o & Jolly Roger.

Why is that _this_ list of childish drivel _always_ prove my point?

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 07:14:36 -0600, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:

> Oh, look, it has an enemies list just as most evil lying semi-men do.

Yet again, Cybe(r) Wizard, you prove to miscomprehend adult concepts.

Let me ask the *adults* on this newsgroup *how* to respond to that?
1. Either Cybe is _incredibly_ stupid (but nobody is _that_ stupid), or,
2. Cybe is just playing silly childish semantic games (for what gain?),
3. Or, Cybe lacks comprehension of even the simplest of things.

*How does an adult even _respond_ to people like Cybe?*
A. Nobody can be _that_ incredibly stupid as what he writes indicates he is.
B. Yet, what gain would he attain by purposefully acting _that_ stupid?
C. Is it simply that there is absolutely no response he can comprehend?

The question is important for the main reason that I ask Q&A questions.
o People like Cybe prove to be (see list below) infest those Q&A threads.
o Both ignoring & respondin gto them detracts from attaining an answer.
o Yet, only they communicate amongst themselves in ways _they_ comprehend.

Sure, my tactic of making it "less fun" for them is my main approach.
o Where, I ignore drivel in chit-chat threads that other people post
o But ignoring them in Q&A threads defeats the point of the Q&A

Hence, one needs to _respond_ to these type of people (somehow):

o Snit, nospam, Jolly Roger, Dan Purgert, Cybe R Wizard, Char Jackson,
o Wolf K., Alan Baker, Tim Streater, Alan Browne, Savageduck, Wade Garrett,
o BK at OnRamp, Lloyd, Hemidactylus, Your Name, John Doe, Rene Lamantagne

o Jasen Betts, Wolf K, Rudy Weiser, Good Guy, Diesel, "joe", et al.

But how?

The fact is:
A. They prove to be incredibly stupid - so facts can't ever work with them;
B. They prove to own the mind of a child - so admonishment won't work;
C. They prove to not even _comprehend_ that they don't understand anything.

How then, does one get these utterly worthless posters to "just go away"?

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 07:09:56 -0600, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:

> Some more stupid lies that no one reads.

*Yet again, Cybe(r) Wizard, nothing ever comes out of you of adult value.*

In fact, it's lost on you the _only_ people you _can_ communicate on the
same level appear to be a particularly illustrious bunch of similar drivel:

o Jasen Betts,
o Dan Purgert,
o Diesel,
o Rene Lamontagne,
o Wolf K
o & Jolly Roger.

These half-dozen childish drivel communicate well with each other.
I wonder if you even _comprehend_ why you & they understand each other?

HINT: Kids play well together, even when their games are childishly silly.

[Wolf K]

On 2019-01-25 01:32, arlen holder wrote:
[....]
> 1. Are [people posting on Usenet] really_that_ stupid as what they write indicates they are?
[...]

To quote you: "Look in the mirror."

Have a frabjous day,

--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
People worry that computers will get too smart
and take over the world, but the real problem is
that they’re too stupid and they’ve already taken over
the world (Pedro Domingos)

[Wolf K]

On 2019-01-25 02:29, arlen holder wrote:
[...]
> As an adult,
[...]

Self-satire.

[Wolf K]

On 2019-01-25 09:38, arlen holder wrote:
[...]

> *Yet again, Cybe(r) Wizard, nothing ever comes out of you of adult value.*

[...]

I suppose you believe that this kind of chiding will have some effect,
such as teaching us "children" to behave like "adults."

If the above and similar insulting rants indicate how you think an adult
behaves, then I'm glad you don't think I am one.

[Erilar]

I've discovered I can get through long lists quickly by only opening posts
by known rational people.....


--
biblioholic medievalist via iPad

[Jolly Roger]

Cybe R. Wizard <cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid> wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 07:11:31 -0000 (UTC)
> arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:
>
>> Whom am I talking about who _never_ adds on-topic technical value?
>> o Snit, nospam, Jolly Roger, Dan Purgert, Cybe R Wizard, Char
>> Jackson, o Wolf K., Alan Baker, Tim Streater, Alan Browne,
>> Savageduck, Wade Garrett, o BK at OnRamp, Lloyd, Hemidactylus, Your
>> Name, John Doe, Rene Lamantagne o Jasen Betts, Wolf K, Rudy Weiser,
>> Good Guy, Diesel, et al.
>
> Oh, look, it has an enemies list just as most evil lying semi-men do.
>
> Cybe R. Wizard -happyily opposing evil wannabe-men

You’re in good company. Cheers. 😇

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 09:43:30 -0500, Wolf K wrote:

> To quote you: "Look in the mirror."
>
> Have a frabjous day,

*Yet again, Wolf K, in your childish brain, you _think_ you're hilariously witty.

What I don't understand is why you can't _comprehend_ that simple fact?

It's entirely lost on you the _only_ people you _can_ communicate on the

same level appear to be a particularly illustrious bunch of similar drivel:
o Jasen Betts,
o Dan Purgert,
o Diesel,
o Rene Lamontagne,

o Cybe(r) Wizard,

[Jolly Roger]

Cybe R. Wizard <cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid> wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 15:54:43 -0600
> "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid> wrote:
>
>> The Dunning/Kruger effect is just that, a psychological EFFECT which
>> is not graphed or even graph-able.
>
> Such proves not to be the case:
> https://graphpaperdiaries.com/2017/08/20/the-real-dunning-kruger-graph/

Nice. Thanks for the link.

[Rene Lamontagne]

I don't want to be an adult yet, I'm *only* 85

Rene

[Jolly Roger]

Rene Lamontagne <rla...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
> I don't want to be an adult yet, I'm *only* 85

Never grow up! 🤜🏻

[William Unruh]

On 2019-01-25, arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:
...

>
> How then, does one get these utterly worthless posters to "just go away"?

You know, in this thread we have all been wondering that.

[Wolf K]

Arlen doesn't get irony.

But as one of those worthless posters, I will abandon this thread. It's
been fun while it lasted.

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 07:04:11 -0600, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:

> It isn't a semantic game to call a liar a liar. You, sir, are a liar.

Hi Cybe(r) Wizard,

Notwithstanding the fact that _one_ tutorial, is far more than you've
contributed, what's amazing is your complete & utter lack of comprehension.
o What's sad is your tenacity, as was Snit's, when you revel in childish drivel.
o For example, you _clearly_ have absolutely no comprehension of what I said.

No amount of fact will ever get through to your left-side DK brain.
o You actually _believe_ you know how the lemon-juice trick works.
o That is, you can't comprehend that you can't comprehend what I had said.

HINT: You missed all formally published notes - which you can't comprehend.

That you don't comprehend what I said, is stellar for Left Dunning-Kruger.

You, Cybe(r) Wizard, are the epitome of the left-side Dunning-Kruger effect.
o Absolutely no amount of logic are you capable of comprehending.
o You claim the lemon-juice trick works - despite not comprehending it.

To wit, you don't even _comprehend_ what I claimed.
o Far worse ... sadly ... you can't comprehend that you can't comprehend.

That! Is my epiphany.
You prove me correct in _every_ repetition of your lack of comprehension.

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 09:14:17 -0600, Erilar wrote:

> I've discovered I can get through long lists quickly by only opening posts
> by known rational people.....

Hi Erilar,
You haven't posted in a while (at least not as Erilar you haven't, or, at
least on the iOS-related newsgroups, as I recall).

Hope you're doing well.

I wonder which of the Applers below you would consider "rational" people?
o Alan Baker
o Alan Browne
o BK at OnRamp
o Chris
o Hemidactylus
o joe
o Jolly Roger
o Lloyd
o nospam
o Tim Streater
o Wade Garrett
o Your Name
o et al.

It would be interesting to learn what you think makes them "rational".

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 09:49:59 -0500, Wolf K wrote:

> I suppose you believe that this kind of chiding will have some effect,
> such as teaching us "children" to behave like "adults."
>
> If the above and similar insulting rants indicate how you think an adult
> behaves, then I'm glad you don't think I am one.

Thank you Wolf K for proving my point.
o Yet again, Wolf K, you _completely_ miscomprehend my strategy & tactics.

What's sad is that even when I _explained_ them, in detail, you still
miscomprehend my strategy & tactics.

It's shocking, actually, that people like you actually exist.
1. Either you're really _that_ incredibly stupid, Wolf K., or
2. You're just incessantly playing silly childish games, Wolf K, or,
3. You really do _believe_ you understood my strategy & tactics.

HINT:
1. My strategy is to get technical answers (I'm not a chit chat poster).
2. My tactics are twofold - only one of which applies to you:
a. For the adults, I respond as a logical adult would respond.
b. For the children, I respond to make it "less fun" for you, Wolf K.

That you _think_ you comprehend my strategy, and yet, you _prove_
you don't comprehend a _single_ word I just said, Wolf K, merely
helps me comprehend how your mind works.

That is...
o No amount of facts _can_ convince you that the lemon juice doesn't work.

Why?
o Because you can't possibly comprehend that you never comprehend.

That! Is my epiphany!

You are very likely so left-side DK, that you can't comprehend anything.
o I don't need to prove that.
o You prove it for me.

*In fact, each of you below proves me right in every one of your post!*

o Alan Baker
o Alan Browne

o BK at OnRamp,
o Char Jackson
o Dan Purgert
o Diesel
o Dustin Cook
o Good Guy
o Hemidactylus
o Jasen Betts
o John Doe
o Jolly Roger
o Lloyd,
o Rene Lamantagne
o Rene Lamontagne
o Rudy Weiser
o Savageduck

o Tim Streater
o Wade Garrett

o Wolf K

[Alan Baker]

On 2019-01-25 9:42 a.m., arlen holder wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 09:49:59 -0500, Wolf K wrote:
>
>> I suppose you believe that this kind of chiding will have some effect,
>> such as teaching us "children" to behave like "adults."
>>
>> If the above and similar insulting rants indicate how you think an adult
>> behaves, then I'm glad you don't think I am one.
>
> Thank you Wolf K for proving my point.
> o Yet again, Wolf K, you _completely_ miscomprehend my strategy & tactics.
>
> What's sad is that even when I _explained_ them, in detail, you still
> miscomprehend my strategy & tactics.
>
> It's shocking, actually, that people like you actually exist.
> 1. Either you're really _that_ incredibly stupid, Wolf K., or
> 2. You're just incessantly playing silly childish games, Wolf K, or,
> 3. You really do _believe_ you understood my strategy & tactics.
>
> HINT:
> 1. My strategy is to get technical answers (I'm not a chit chat poster).

That's a lie.

> 2. My tactics are twofold - only one of which applies to you:
> a. For the adults, I respond as a logical adult would respond.

That's a lie.

> b. For the children, I respond to make it "less fun" for you, Wolf K.

And that's a lie.

:-)

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 10:07:29 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:

>> 1. My strategy is to get technical answers (I'm not a chit chat poster).
> That's a lie.

>> 2. My tactics are twofold - only one of which applies to you:
>> a. For the adults, I respond as a logical adult would respond.
> That's a lie.

>> b. For the children, I respond to make it "less fun" for you, Wolf K.
> And that's a lie.

Hi Alan Baker,

My strategy & tactics are consistently the same as what I use as a
high-school substitute teacher for handling you childish bullies:
o When you act like an adult, I treat you like an adult
o When you act like a child, I treat you as a child

The reason you only see me treating you as a child, should be obvious.
o The fact that it's NOT obvious to you - is something I can't fix.
o My epiphany is that you're an epitome of left-side DK cognitive bias effects

The reason I "mirror" your posts is to "funnel" you into acting as an adult
o This is a proven technique, which, incidentally, works on high-school kids
o This technique just doesn't work on people like you, Alan Baker.

You tell me why.
HINT: If you don't include the DK effect - you don't comprehend why.

Meanwhile, as an example of an 'adult' conversation, I paste this
verbatim below, which just happens to be a conversation I had with
Mike Easter on the Linux newsgroup today, where this not only
proves your statements above to be false but it's a perfect example
of how "adults" exchange knowledge.
o AH's LAN Re: Have You Been Pwned? <snip>
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.os.linux/YEfw5NblnRs/bDhnvFT7FQAJ>

On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 13:06:09 -0800, Mike Easter wrote:

> Well, I didn't mean the linux passwd command; I was being sloppy with
> the string to address however he was going to go about synchronizing a
> pw database, which was leaning toward kdbx at some point.

Hi Mike,

I realize you're being helpful, where I will stay out of the purposefully
unhelpful conversations above revolving around silly semantics.

When I say "KeePass" database, I trust you comprehend what I mean.
When I say "passwd.kdbx", I trust you understand it's the same.

Likewise, when I say "iCalendar" database, I trust you comprehend.
And when I say "events.ics" I trust you understand what I mean.

Mike - if we need to waste our time on silly meaningless semantics,
then we will end up being as useless as those children who incessantly
waste everyone's time on silly semantics.

Let's not play those childish games.

> I understand that AH is partial to Win10 of the devices he is prone to
> run, but he has sufficient familiarity with linux and awareness of such
> as singleboard devices running linux that I think both of these projects
> in recent threads, the caldev business, the keepass and smb business,
> would do very nicely on a singleboard system running all the time.

The goal, as always, is a "general solution", not just a solution for me.
Plenty of times I've had solutions where I still strive for the general
solution.

In general, the general solution needs to be (in order to be 'general'):
a. Freeware
b. Windowsware

While that's just a general requirement for a general solution, you are
quite correct that I have "familiarity" with not only Mac, Windows, and
Linux, but also with microcontrollers.

Here, for example, is a photo of one which happened to be next to my "rats
nest" when I snapped those photos for you yesterday of my "LAN setup".
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=6954981ap04.jpg>

In that picture you can see the cellular femtocell (which is, in essence, a
cellular "tower" inside of a house), where the difference in the primitive
iOS app functionality versus the better Android app functionality became
clear when I needed to distinguish between connecting ot the femtocell
versus connecting to the cellular repeater you saw in previous pictures.

> Then he can spend however much time and electrical resources (and
> hazards) he wants to with his Win10 systems, but the heart of the
> synchronization system could be the little low cost low resource
> solution of the linux singleboard.

Mike, as noted, I already have access to microcontrollers such as this:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=1488083ap05.jpg>

But as a "general solution", I'm not sure they fit the problem set.

Bear in mind that most of us wire wrapped out own microcontrollers in the
"olden days" (early 80s?). I know I designed my own boards, where I knew
the assembly language and even the hex code by heart when I programmed the
EPROMs for the Motorola 68701 (remember Sam's books!).

BTW, my tutorials are in the (sort of) helpful style of those Sam's books,
if you remember them, and of the Forest Mims pamphlets (if you remember
those) where we cut our teeth on our first diodes and ADCs and TTL
circuitry (remember everyone had the yellow TTL books and the blue Linear
books on our shelves?).

> He wants a general solution for all those devices; android, ios, win,
> linux; for which he is trying to mimic the synchronization functions
> that many achieve on the internet with his own LAN.

Hi Mike,
That's EXACTLY what I seek.
o Mimic the functionality folks get using the Internet
o With a "general" solution on our own personal LAN

Certainly there are two fundamental ways of that:
1. I can come up with a solution that only 1/10th the people will use
2. Or I can come up with a solution that doesn't require Linux/MPUs.

Clearly I can implement both.
But one is more general than the other.

As always, these two things make everything harder:
A. A "general" solution (often that means free & available)
B. A cross-platform solution (often the sticking point is iOS)

> I think he should
> choose a linux strategy which is so popular on that web for his lan; not
> employ his Win10 system/s simply because he is using them the majority
> of the time.

Hi Mike,

I fully _agree_ with you that if all I wanted was 'a good solution', then
it would be a Linux server (of any sort), of which I can make plenty.

I must repeat that I did NOT realize this was the answer until I found out
that servers (of various types) are _still_ not really useful, on Windows.

That was my revelation in this thread - for which I appreciate your advice.
o I repeat: It was unknown to me how far behind Windows servers were.

Given how far behind Linux Windows servers appear to be, the "general"
solution can _only_ be a Windows "copy" and "merge" solution (I think).

The _best_ solution is, clearly, one which uses a Linux server.
o Of that, at this point, I have no doubt (and neither do you).

Since I always strive to solve the problem, I am proceeding on a straight
line, where the fact that Linux servers, by necessity, are a gravitational
certainty, where the "best" solutions inexorably gravitate to Linux.

Hence, the "general" solution doesn't really exist, but a decent
approximation of that general solution is likely thus:
o No full-time server (the db exists in "pieces" scattered about)
o No complex setup - the work is in defining the use model
o SMB server on Windows (because it is ubiquitous)
o SMB client on all other platforms (Linux, Windows, iOS, Android, Mac)

Another possible solution is a WebDAV server on Windows
but that entails the complexity of setting it up - which detracts from it
being a "general solution".

As noted, Mike, you and I can set up "a solution", but it's a lot harder to
set up a "general solution" that works for almost everyone with zero
up-front cost.

The USE MODEL I'm gravitating toward as a "general solution" is:
o The user modifies the passwd/iCal files on _any_ platform
o They export the results at the time of modification
o At the time of use, they _import_ those results, as a "merge"

This use model fits the passwd usage a bit easier than it fits the
iCalendar usage, simply because the passwd file is modified far less often
than is a calendar.

Essentially, at the time of modification, three actions would be best:
1. The modification of the calendar or passwd file is made on any device
2. That file is exported from that device to central-server storage
3. All devices (on any platform) import that modified file & merge

As noted, the sticking point is that 'central-server' storage.
I agree.

For you and me, it's Linux.
For a "general solution", it's usually NOT Linux.

PS: I have the general solution working perfectly on all platforms tested
other than on iOS, which suffers from lack of suitable clients (so far).
o Do you know of a free iOS SMBv2 (or SMBv3) client?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/oln0tjMCRYw>

o Does a free offline non-Internet calendar app exist for iOS that imports/exports ICS text files?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/OzUOmgJLmZs>

[Rene Lamontagne]

On 01/25/2019 12:58 PM, arlen holder wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 10:07:29 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
>
>>> 1. My strategy is to get technical answers (I'm not a chit chat poster).
>> That's a lie.
>
>>> 2. My tactics are twofold - only one of which applies to you:
>>> a. For the adults, I respond as a logical adult would respond.
>> That's a lie.
>
>>> b. For the children, I respond to make it "less fun" for you, Wolf K.

Snipped a carload of crap.

Hey Numb nuts, did you know that *Children are the future of the world*

Rene

[arlen holder]

On 25 Jan 2019 15:21:10 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

>> Such proves not to be the case:
>> https://graphpaperdiaries.com/2017/08/20/the-real-dunning-kruger-graph/
>
> Nice. Thanks for the link.

None of you appear to even _comprehend_ what the DK effect entails.
<https://graphpaperdiaries.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/humorgraph.png>

Nor why I say the lot of you clearly belong on the far left side.
<https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1m78dz-Eamo/WS9_rqu7ifI/AAAAAAAAEY0/4OWYfWVWrwAvhsexPVJQLEHmCnxwi9L_QCLcB/s1600/mt-stupid.png>

Each one of you proves you can't comprehend even the _simplest_ of facts:
<https://realizebeauty.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/dunning-kruger-effect-agile-coffee-web.jpg>

Everyone listed below, is _clearly_ situated to the left of "Mount Stupid":
<https://understandinginnovation.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/dunning-kruger-0011.jpg>

o Alan Baker
o Alan Browne
o BK at OnRamp

o Char Jackson
o Chris
o Cybe R Wizard

o Dan Purgert
o Diesel
o Dustin Cook
o Good Guy
o Hemidactylus
o Jasen Betts

o joe
o John Doe
o John Hasler

o Jolly Roger
o Lloyd
o nospam

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 14:38:39 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 07:14:36 -0600, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
>
> > Oh, look, it has an enemies list just as most evil lying semi-men
> > do.
>
> Yet again, Cybe(r) Wizard, you prove to miscomprehend adult concepts.
>
> Let me ask the *adults* on this newsgroup *how* to respond to that?
> 1. Either Cybe is _incredibly_ stupid (but nobody is _that_ stupid),
> or, 2. Cybe is just playing silly childish semantic games (for what
> gain?), 3. Or, Cybe lacks comprehension of even the simplest of
> things.
>
> *How does an adult even _respond_ to people like Cybe?*

You are a liar. A /KNOWN/ liar. Known by /ALL/ to be such.

First, a /REAL/ adult, one who is a true human with honorable intent,
would admit to having told the obvious lies that you've told such as
the one found in:
Message-ID: <po4626$vpu$1...@news.mixmin.net>
in which you make the pompous claim of having written TEN THOUSAND
tutorials.

Everyone already knows that to be both false and told with the intent
of bolstering your own questionable abilities with software.

IOW, you are a liar. A /KNOWN/ liar. Known by /ALL/ to be such.

Second, that adult would know better than to equate anyone to some very
dubious idea of yours that children are somehow either stupid or
incapable of learning.

Neither is true, BTW, making your stating of it another lie.

IOW, you are a liar. A /KNOWN/ liar. Known by /ALL/ to be such.

The fact that you believe it shows either that you
intentionally mis-characterize both children and other adults who
disagree with you or that you neither have nor cherish children.

That by itself makes you sub-human in my book.

Oh, and a liar. A /KNOWN/ liar. Known by /ALL/ to be such.

Third, it is no semantic game to show you to be a liar using YOUR OWN
WORDS. To question that is showing once again how much of a true and
constant and consistent liar you are.

The semantic games which you say I play are either the showing of you to
be a liar (as in Message-ID: <po4626$vpu$1...@news.mixmin.net>) or
possibly the 'game' wherein I show you your own extremely poor usage of
English-ized Latin or your quite questionable knowledge and use of
basic English grammar.

IOW, you are a liar. A /KNOWN/ liar. Known by /ALL/ to be such.

Having now shown conclusively that:
1. Cybe is /NOT/ _incredibly_ stupid and that:
2. Cybe is /NOT/ just playing silly childish semantic games,
and additionally that:
3. Cybe /DOES NOT/ lack comprehension of even the simplest of
things such as simnple liars like you (just as a for instance)
we await your usual sidestepping, obfuscation, or ignoring (is the act
of ignoring known as ignorance?) of obvious facts known (now) by almost
everybody.

IOW, you are a liar. A /KNOWN/ liar. Known by /ALL/ to be such.

Keep on digging; the hole is almost deep enough to bury yourself
forever as a known liar who most will have better sense that to trust.

IOW, you are a liar. A /KNOWN/ liar. Known by /ALL/ to be such.

You really are a pathetic little weasel of a pitifully inept man, aren't
you?

Cybe R. Wizard -thinks you to be a liar, too, but a poor one
--
“Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted
with important matters.”
Albert Einstein

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 14:38:39 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> People like Cybe prove to be (see list below) infest those Q&A
> threads.

What does that even mean? You know, in English words.

You're starting to blather rather significantly. It is showing that you
know my claims to be true, and it is telling that it is affecting you
and your poor writing quite a lot.

GREAT! :-) I'm glad of it.

Go ahead and have a big hissy fit. It might be beneficial.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
To be trusted is a greater compliment than being loved.
George MacDonald

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 14:38:39 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> Sure, my tactic of making it "less fun" for them is my main approach.

The sign of a good tactician is that he changes tactics when his
tactics prove to be failures as yours have and still are.

Guess what THAT means.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Failure is simply the opportunity to begin again, this time more
intelligently.
Henry Ford

[Rene Lamontagne]

Watch this if you don't believe in children.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8esq8BwBsc

Rene

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 14:38:39 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> The fact is:
> A.
> B.
> C.

Geeze, learn to count. At the very least learn the difference between
singular and plural. Your blathering spittle is showing again.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
When we blather about trivial things, we ourselves become trivial, for
our attention gets taken up with trivialities. You become what you give
your attention to.
Epictetus

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 14:38:42 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> *Yet again, Cybe(r) Wizard, nothing ever comes out of you of adult
> value.*

The recognition and outing of liars is of great, nay, tremendous value.

Otherwise you wouldn't be spending so much on you time trying to weasel
out of the fact that you are now a well-known liar because of:
Message-ID: <po4626$vpu$1...@news.mixmin.net>
in which you claim to have written TEN THOUSAND tutorials.

Cybe R. Wizard -will not stop until you admit that you are a liar
--
"No. There is no balance, and no retribution, and no rules. The rules
and balances you blather about are hopeful creations of a man
fearing..."
Dave Eggers

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 16:02:06 -0600, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:

> First, a /REAL/ adult, one who is a true human with honorable intent,
> would admit to having told the obvious lies that you've told such as
> the one found in:

Hi Cybe(r) Wizard,

Notwithstanding the fact that _one_ tutorial, is far more than you've
contributed, what's amazing is your complete & utter lack of comprehension.

No amount of fact will ever get through to your left-side DK brain.
o You actually _believe_ you know how the lemon-juice trick works.

o That is, you can't comprehend that you can't comprehend what I had said.

That you don't comprehend what I said, is stellar for Left Dunning-Kruger.

o Absolutely no amount of logic are you capable of comprehending.
o You claim the lemon-juice trick works - despite not comprehending it.

To wit, you don't even _comprehend_ what I claimed.
o Far worse ... sadly ... you can't comprehend that you can't comprehend.

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 16:23:57 -0600, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:

> Cybe R. Wizard -will not stop until you admit that you are a liar

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 17:42:06 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> Hi Cybe(r) Wizard,
>
> Notwithstanding the fact that _one_ tutorial, is far more than you've
> contributed, what's amazing is your complete & utter lack of
> comprehension.

I perceive and fully comprehend that it would be almost an impossibility
for one person to have written TEN THOUSAND tutorials as you have
claimed in:
Message-ID: <po4626$vpu$1...@news.mixmin.net>

Help me comprehend otherwise by showing us that list.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Comprehension follows perception.
Philip K. Dick

“Truth is only relative to those that ignore hard evidence.”
A.E. Samaan

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 18:58:23 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> The reason you only see me treating you as a child, should be obvious.

Good grief. LEARN SOME GRAMMAR!

Cybe R. Wizard
--
My other computer is a HOLMES IV

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 22:41:46 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> Hi Cybe(r) Wizard,

I'm no longer wasting my time reading any new blatherings from you as
you are a worthless liar with no human-like compunctions.

Liar:
Message-ID: <po4626$vpu$1...@news.mixmin.net>
That's you saying how you've written TERN THOUSAND tutorials.

Show I'm wrong. Show that list.

Otherwise, you area worthless liar with no morals at all.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
I'd rather not have anything than be a liar.
Alicia Keys

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 22:43:41 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 16:23:57 -0600, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
>
> > Cybe R. Wizard -will not stop until you admit that you are a liar
>
> Hi Cybe(r) Wizard,

As you have again failed to be honest with and about yourself, TL;DR.

Waste all the time you wish writing these huge denials of the truth.

The truth is both simple and right here:
Message-ID: <po4626$vpu$1...@news.mixmin.net>
where you lie about having written TEN THOUSAND tutorials.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
A liar is always lavish of oaths.
Pierre Corneille

[Jasen Betts]

On 2019-01-25, arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Jan 2019 22:09:30 +0000 (UTC), Diesel wrote:
>
>> You belittle and insult those (like myself) who could be of benefit
>> to you, in so far as correctly answering technical questions and
>> presenting useful problem solving skills. There's no advantage for
>> you to use childish insults towards so many, Arlen.
>
> Hi Diesel,
> I have to _explain_ something to you that you do not _comprehend_ yet.
>
> You add zero value to _any_ Usenet post. Zero. Nada. Zip. Nothing.

Dude, you are a leech sucking knowledge from people here and returning
nothing but dreary diatribe. even your insults are boring.

> o You _can't_ add any value Diesel.

He's made me smile a couple of times, that's value.

> What's the strangest thing, Diesel, is you _think_ alienating you is a
> "bad" thing, but, it's actually a "good" thing.

You've got a unusual way of "alienating"

> Whom am I talking about who _never_ adds on-topic technical value?
> o Snit, nospam, Jolly Roger, Dan Purgert, Cybe R Wizard, Char Jackson,
> o Wolf K., Alan Baker, Tim Streater, Alan Browne, Savageduck, Wade Garrett,
> o BK at OnRamp, Lloyd, Hemidactylus, Your Name, John Doe, Rene Lamantagne
> o Jasen Betts, Wolf K, Rudy Weiser, Good Guy, Diesel, et al.
>
> All of you prove me right in every one of your posts!

Dude pull your head out of your ARse HOLe and STOP LYING

> o The problem is that you _think_ you add value.
> o And yet, you _prove_ you can't add value.

> Why? I don't know why.

You come here lying and insulting people and then want them to respect
you. Maybe Donald Trump can teach you a few things, that seem to be
his tactic, but even he never got more than 50%.

> More importantly, why are you trolls _always_ worthless?
> Again, I don't know why.

To a thief the neighbourhood watch is of no value.

> o All I know is that you prove, in every post, to be worthless.

> You _claim_ knowledge you just do not have.

You claim to know things which are not true

TL;DR

--
When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.

[arlen holder]

UPDATE:

To be fair, it' a waste of time for any adult to attempt an intelligent
conversation with the likes of the score of classic LSOMS posters:

Why they consistently and incessantly prove that point, is amazing.
o Essentially, their mind is wired as a "left side of mount stupid" DK mind
o They own confidence - but not reason.
<https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1600/1*t2sx5h0UF-kljgC2sj2msw.jpeg>

The reason they have _never_ once added value to any thread, is simple:
o They are not just stupid... they _remain_ ignorant their entire lives.
o They revel as that of a child... which is why they chitchat well together
o They can't comprehend fact... yet, they _think_ they do! <== dangerous!
<https://understandinginnovation.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/dunning-kruger-0011.jpg>

In essence, they own the epitome of the lemon-juice bank robber's mind.
<https://scanfoam.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/adpativeDKblog3.jpg>

These are the well known
o Alan Baker <nu...@ness.biz>
o Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com>
o B...@Onramp.net
o Char Jackson <no...@none.invalid>
o Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
o "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid>
o Dan Purgert <d...@djph.net>
o Davoud <st...@sky.net>
o Diesel <m...@privacy.net> (aka Dustin Cook)
o Elden <use...@moondog.org>
o *Hemidactylus* <ecph...@allspamis.invalid>
o Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz>
o joe <no...@domain.invalid>
o John Doe <alway...@message.header>
o Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com>
o Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies>
o Nil <redn...@REMOVETHIScomcast.net>
o nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> [He's the remaining enigma]
o Rene Lamontagne <rla...@shaw.ca>
o "R.Wieser" <add...@not.available> (aka Rudy Wieser)
o Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> [He's not as dumb as most]
o Snit (the only poster in decades that I had to killfile!)
o Tim Streater <timst...@greenbee.net>
o Wade Garrett <wa...@cooler.net>
o Wolf K <wol...@sympatico.ca>
o Your Name <Your...@YourISP.com>
o et al.

The 3 words that they can _never_ answer as an adult would, are simply:
o *Name just one*

[arlen holder]

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 14:49:26 -0000 (UTC), Dan Purgert wrote:

> Left side of the DK graph?

Yes. "left side".

Specifically, you, Dan Purgert, are clearly to the left of the hurdle.
o Your brain is wired such that you'll _never_ progress to the right.
o It's not your fault - it's just how your brain is wired.

The three words you will always _fail_ to answer will always be:
o "Name just one"

You will _remain_ ignorant your entire life
o Simply because you're wired to _believe_ that you do comprehend
o And yet, every single statement from you proves that you can't

o How much you _think_ you know vs what you actually know
<https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DlG0kwCXoAYC-75.jpg>
<https://eclecticlip.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/dunning_kruger_effect.png>

o Self-assessment of knowledge crossover point:
<https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DxL91TTWwAAC6Am.jpg>

o The four quartiles, graphed in three scoring tasks:
<https://www.skepticblog.org/wp-content/uploads/Dunning-Kruger.png>
<https://educationechochamber.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/doug-blog-29.png>

o Confidence versus Knowledge-and-Experience graph:
<https://i.imgur.com/cYTXTNy.jpg>
<http://www.seven-health.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Dunning-Kruger-Effect1.png>
<https://i0.wp.com/digitalwellbeing.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/dunning-kruger-effect.png>
<https://i0.wp.com/respectfulinsolence.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/dunning-kruger-effect.png>

o The progression to the right of "mount stupid" graph:
<https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DrQGXxKXcAAFaVt.jpg>
<https://understandinginnovation.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/dunning-kruger-0011.jpg>

These are _clearly_ those score of Usenet posters to the left of the peak:

In essence, they own the epitome of the lemon-juice bank robber's mind.
<https://scanfoam.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/adpativeDKblog3.jpg>

These are the well known
o Alan Baker <nu...@ness.biz>
o Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com>
o B...@Onramp.net
o Char Jackson <no...@none.invalid>
o Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
o "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid>
o Dan Purgert <d...@djph.net>
o Davoud <st...@sky.net>
o Diesel <m...@privacy.net> (aka Dustin Cook)
o Elden <use...@moondog.org>
o *Hemidactylus* <ecph...@allspamis.invalid>
o Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz>
o joe <no...@domain.invalid>
o John Doe <alway...@message.header>
o Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com>

o Ken Hart <kwh...@frontier.com>

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 19:18:19 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> They revel as that of a child.

What?

Learn some English usage, arlene. Try making a real and complete
sentence. Most women can at least make themselves understood.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
A beautiful woman delights the eye; a wise woman, the understanding; a
pure one, the soul.
Minna Antrim

arlene, none of the above

[John McWilliams]

Seems a reasonable assertion.

[arlen holder]

UPDATE:

IMHO, there's no better left-side Dunning-Kruger Usenet example
on Usenet than _this_ thread, opened late last night by "badgolferman".
o facetime privacy bug
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/NFW7nz6FELw>

The posts by "Joerg Lorenz", of Germany, in that thread, are _perfect_
for explicitly showing _exactly_ the lemon-juice bank-robber cognitive
bias!

You have to actually _read_ the thread to believe people like that exist.
1. They're not just incredibly stupid,
2. They don't appear to be just pulling our leg.

Unfortunately...
3. They actually _believe_ they possess cognitive skills that they just don't.

You have to read that thread to actually believe such people exist.

[arlen holder]

Yet another classic example of left-side Dunning Kruger today.

This one from Alan Baker:
o First, he flatly refutes that Apple sat on the recent facetime bug.
o Even though the NY Times reported exactly that.

He flatly refutes what the NY Times says - sans a shred of proof.
o And he _repeats_ that, as he self-assessed the NYT as "untrustworthy".

Then, right after that, he flatly refuted that I snapped this picture for
him to illustrate why Apple marketing is sheer brilliance in turning a dead
woman into a stellar branding coup!

If someone says something bad about Apple - he flatly denies it.
If someone says something good about Apple - he flatly denies it.

These people deny _everything_ without a shred of fact to back it up.
o They "self assess" the facts ... and are _always_ dead wrong.

If that's not left-side Dunning-Kruger, I don't know what else is.

REFERENCES:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/NFW7nz6FELw/KXuMLFD3BwAJ>
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/NFW7nz6FELw/4CjrtXL8BwAJ>

[Wolf K]

On 2019-01-31 00:43, arlen holder wrote:
[...]
> o First, he flatly refutes...
[...]

No, he "flatly denies". Refute = demonstrate a logical error in an
argument and thereby show that the inference is invalid. But not
necessarily false. Nor true. As the case may be.

Have a frabjous day,

--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
A black cat crossing your path signifies that the animal is going
somewhere. (Groucho Marx)

[arlen holder]

OMG, this Dunning-Kruger proof _never_ stops
(at least on the iOS ngs it doesn't).

Here is a recent thread topic:
o What is the most brilliant marketing move Apple ever made?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wW-fu0jsvAU>

LOOK at this post by Alan Baker just moments ago!
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wW-fu0jsvAU/FX0gefM0CAAJ>

This is my post he's responding to (chock full of well-cited facts):
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wW-fu0jsvAU/q_MisdA0CAAJ>

Alan Baker doesn't even _click_ on the link, before questioning the facts!
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wW-fu0jsvAU/F_P8LUw1CAAJ>

Alan Baker _thinks_ he can comprehend fact from fiction,
o So he pointedly intimates they're not facts by asking where they came from
o When they came from EXACTLY where a normal person would look

HINT: I gave a link to the exact second where the transcribed quotes started!

Alan Baker _instantly_ questions where the facts came from .... WITHOUT
even clicking the link from where the facts came from.

*These people self assess their abilities far above what they really are.*

Jesus Christ.
o These left of mount stupid Dunning Kruger people really _do_ exist!
<https://timnovate.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/dunning-kruger.jpg>

[arlen holder]

On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 14:25:02 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:

> I gave you a chance for civil discourse...

Hi Alan Baker,

Please allow me to give you some heartfelt advice.

It's literally embarrassing to attempt a conversation with you.
o I'm serious.

That you _think_ you're an adult, is part of the embarrassment.
o I have to explain the _simplest_ of things, to you, Alan Baker.

Like this...

Dear Alan Baker,
By now, you should realize I don't make shit up.

So, if I provide a link, particularly one that starts at a specific time
point, and then I provide quotes under that link, that correspond to what
is said at that specific time point ....

Um ... Alan ... knock knock ...

Alan.... don't you _think_ it would be stupid to question the quotes
_without_ even clicking on the link?

I mean, it's _embarrassing_ that I have to explain this to you Alan.
o You're welcome to question my facts
o But at least click on the freaking link _before_ you question them!

*It's _embarrassing_ for me that I have to explain this, to you.*

[Wolf K]

On 2019-01-31 17:51, arlen holder wrote:
[...]

> It's literally embarrassing to attempt a conversation with you.
> o I'm serious.

[...]

This one of the funniest things you've ever posted.

Thanks for a good laugh.

[arlen holder]

On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 23:08:48 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:

> We know positively that the mother's video wasn't posted until January
> 23rd. So the NY Times' reporting is already wrong in on particular for
> certain.

My dear Alan Baker,

This post is _entirely_ advisory, from me, to you...
o I'm going to attempt to reflect upon your cognitive assessment skills
o Specifically how to weigh the reliability of a random twitter account
o Against conflicting accounts of all other known mainstream media

In the real world, there will always be conflicting facts, such as...
o The lemon juice trick works on disappearing ink... (which is true)...
o The bank robber (somehow) _confirmed_ the trick works on faces...
o And yet ... somewhere ... who knows where .... he was actually wrong.

In the lemon-juice bank-robber case, he _believed_ the trick worked.
o It's the same here with everything Joerg Lorenz writes...
o And, with everything you happen to write, my dear Alan Baker...

Having said that,
o I fully comprehend you think I'm just making all of this up, Alan.
o I fully understand that you believe almost all my facts wrong, Alan.

Also trust me, Alan Baker, that I _see_ the conflicting facts:
o The NY Times reports date #1 (where no reliable media disagrees)
o And yet, a random twitter account has one line saying a different date

*Hmmmmm... how do we _assess_ those conflicting facts, Alan Baker?*

First ... let's be very clear ... so please trust me on this, Alan Baker...
o I fully comprehend that you _think_ that the NY Times is dead wrong.
o I also comprehend that you trust a _random_ twitter post with your life.

Dear Alan Baker,
o Do not assume that I don't realize how _you_ think
o I understand that you trust a random twitter account more than the NYT.

Here's the problem, Alan Baker... as I see it:
o You see a conflicting fact that shows up in a random twitter post.
o You immediately discount not only the NY Times - but all other media.

You know who _else_ did this exact sequence, Alan Baker?
o Joerg Lorenz does_exactly_ the same thing as you do.
o You discount reliable media in favor of ... a random Twitter account?

My dear Alan Baker,

Let's talk now about how to cognitively assess conflicting facts.
o You must agree that the NY Times clearly stated the video date.
o You must also agree there are no reliable reports refuting that date.
o And yet, a random twitter account happens to state a different date.

Hmmmmmmm.... Alan Baker ....
o This is a dilemma, Alan Baker.
o We have facts that disagree, Alan Baker.

Fancy that.

This is indeed a momentous time in our lives, Alan Baker.
o We have to decide whose facts to trust, Alan Baker.
o Do we trust the NY Times & other media ... or a random twitter account?

Let's delve deeper into that seemingly random twitter account
o Is the guy just twittering what already happened or is it first person?
o Is the guy known to be reliable or a shill or a troll or what?

Let's first take a look at that twitter account, Alan Baker ... shall we?
o Hmmmmmmm.... John H. Meyer.
"Passion-filled tech entrepreneur, & startup investor"
"linkedin.com/in/johnhmeyer/"

Hmmm.... let's see what the guy actually writes, shall we?
o Note: I put the guy's posts at the end, because they're all the same.

Let's run a quick search on this guy, shall we?
o First hit, USA Today, "Published 4:01 PM EST Jan 29, 2019"
"After news of the bug went viral Monday night, fellow Twitter user
John H. Meyer discovered Thompson's tweet, reaching out and sharing the
video evidence that the bug was, indeed, exploitable last week. "
<https://eu.usatoday.com/story/tech/talkingtech/2019/01/29/apple-facetime-bug-mom-tried-warn-son-found-last-week/2711382002/>

Hmmmmmmm.... "_After_ news of the bug went viral" Alan Baker?
o So, um, this guy simply re-tweated what _everyone_ already knew?
o And, um, somehow, this random guy is _more reliable_ than is the NY Times, Alan?

Reading on, in that USA today article, we clearly see an explanation:
"Meyer, a venture capitalist at Transpire Ventures, tells USA TODAY in a
Twitter direct message that after quickly looking over Thompson's profile
he realized "that she¡¦s been trying for a week to bring attention to this
by tweeting at Apple and many different news orgs,"

Ummm... er ... Alan, I could go on (there's more in that article), but
isn't it, um, er, _obvious_ to you that this guy merely re-directed the
information to USA Today that _he_ got from already "viral" information?

This guy is (obviously) seeking attention (if you can't ascertain that in a
split second, then, Alan Baker, you truly are lost to humanity), so it's
not surprising he _called_ Ms. Thompson personally (on January 26th)
and wrote a "Direct Message" to USA today, shown below:
"I thought it was fake at first, before I then successfully replicated
the issue by calling my girlfriend. When I learned very early this morning
that this was discovered by a 14 year old, who's mom then spent multiple
days trying to bring this to attention at Apple, I was even more surprised
(and quite angry)," he writes in a Direct Message message with USA TODAY.
"Angry at the fact that she seemed to be ignored for quite a bit of time...
While reporting an issue that could affect millions of people's privacy, as
well as our national security," noting that government workers use
iPhones."

My dear Alan Baker.

This guy is _clearly_ a "random twitter account" seeking "something".
o What he's seeking is pretty obvious - but it doesn't really matter

What matters, Alan Baker, is what I'm going to say below in 1 line:
o *Only you, Alan Baker, would assess this guy more reliable than the NYT*

My dear Alan Baker,

I'm not actually sure how to put this to you ... but ... um...
o You appear to trust this random twitter account more than the NY Times.
o And yet, there's nothing (I saw anyway) in that account worth that trust.

Hmmmmmm.... This _is_ a dilemma, Alan Baker.
o Just as Joerg Lorenz faced that dilemma earlier this week
o You, Alan Baker, have to vet your sources for reliability.

Dear Alan Baker,

Here's the problem in me trying to _explain_ this to you.
o How do we teach Joerg Lorenz that discounting scores of mainstream
American media in favor of grossly belated German media, isn't exactly a
cognitive assessment that he should trust his life upon?

Likewise, Alan Baker, how do we explain to you the _same_ concept?
o How do we explain to you, Alan Baker, that discounting all known reliable
media reports in favor of a single line of what appears to be a random
twitter account, isn't exactly a cognitive assessment that you, Alan Baker,
should trust your life upon?

It's no different than asking _this_ question, Alan Baker:
o How do the psychologists explain to the lemon-juice bank robber that his
cognitive assessment of his skills at how to rob banks may be slightly in
error such that he probably shouldn't trust his life upon the cognitive
skills he currently possesses?

Signed,
A purposefully helpful post from me, to you, Alan Baker.


REPRESENTATIVE POSTS FROM THE RANDOM TWITTER ACOUNT FOLLOW:
<https://twitter.com/BEASTMODE>

"What if Apple uses their enormous power and claimed priority of user
privacy to simply force everybody who builds for their platform to comply
with a set of rules, and more importantly, comply with a secure iOS/Mac API
and encrypted app that let¡¦s Apple device..."

"Apple has proven, over the last 48 hours, that they retain enormous
power to lay down the law, as it relates to protecting the privacy of
average Americans¡Kso much so that a (rightful) decision to revoke a
Facebook enterprise app certificate forced internal..."

"in light of Apple¡¦s impressive response to yet another utterly
irresponsible misuse of data collection by Facebook, I now believe we
should also begin pushing Apple themselves to implement something similar."

"If Facebook doesn¡¦t want to play by Apple¡¦s very clear rules involving
enterprise developer certificates, (designed to protect consumers), then FB
should build a phone themselves. Facebook is a repeat offender; I am glad
Apple is taking a real stand here."

"Great on Apple to make this move. Completely unprecedented and totally
irresponsible actions by Facebook,"
etc.

[arlen holder]

On 2019-02-01 10:55 a.m., arlen holder wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 08:27:44 -0800, Alan Baker wrote:
>
>> The "random twitter account" SHOWED THE WOMAN'S VIDEO.
>
> Sigh.
>
> *For the sake of _everyone else_ on this ng....*
>
> Why don't we mutually agree, Alan Baker, that I'm just not at your level of
> cognitive comprehension of fact assessment ... and leave it at that?

No. Let's go to the evidence:

This tweet by John H. Meyer:

<https://twitter.com/BEASTMODE/status/1090298850764644352>

Is a video of John H. Meyer showing the original video posted by the
mother. He is speaking in support of her, so he has no motivation to be
falsifying anything.

It clearly shows that the video the woman made was:

"Uploaded on Jan 23, 2019".

Not that is not HIS video that was uploaded on that date.

That is the date showing in the YouTube window that he is showing on his
computer as the mother's video plays.

Your next words should be:

"I stand corrected".

:-)


Jesus Christ Alan Baker.

You can't get a hint and you can't get a direct statement.
o You can't fathom _anything_

*Is there _any_ possible way to get you to comprehend simple facts?*

I admit that I had always thought that _nobody_ could be as fantastically
stupid as what you just wrote makes you appear to be.
o You (& Joerz, nospam, JR, Lewis, BK, haemactylus, et al.) prove me wrong.

Let me ask you the _simplest_ of simple questions, Alan Baker.

Does it ever occur to you that a file (such as that video is)
a. Can be first given to Apple (by mechanism 1 on date 1);
b. And _then_ also "uploaded" to YouTube (by mechanism 2 on date 2)?

> Your next words should be:
> "I stand corrected".

:)

[Char Jackson]

On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 20:01:24 -0000 (UTC), arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com>
wrote:

>Your next words should be:
>
>"I stand corrected".
>
>:-)
>
>
>Jesus Christ Alan Baker.

Suddenly, it becomes clear to me why he just goes by "Alan Baker". His
full name comes with a particular burden, levied by his parents. I
wonder what they were thinking when they named him Jesus Christ Alan
Baker. Unless, of course, you've got it completely wrong.

[Cybe R. Wizard]

Please tell me that you're not expecting adult-level grammar and typing
from that one.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
“Men do not quit playing because they grow old; they grow old because
they quit playing.”
Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr.

[Char Jackson]

On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 20:26:05 -0600, "Cybe R. Wizard"
<cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid> wrote:

>On Fri, 01 Feb 2019 18:03:10 -0600
>Char Jackson <no...@none.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 20:01:24 -0000 (UTC), arlen holder
>> <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Your next words should be:
>> >
>> >"I stand corrected".
>> >
>> >:-)
>> >
>> >
>> >Jesus Christ Alan Baker.
>>
>> Suddenly, it becomes clear to me why he just goes by "Alan Baker". His
>> full name comes with a particular burden, levied by his parents. I
>> wonder what they were thinking when they named him Jesus Christ Alan
>> Baker. Unless, of course, you've got it completely wrong.
>>
>Please tell me that you're not expecting adult-level grammar and typing
>from that one.

Oh, Heavens no. :)
I just drop by his picnic now and again to see how things are going.

[arlen holder]

Do you see what this shows?
1. They own the cognitive mind of the lemon-juice bank robber.
2. Worse - they prove to be children when they're shown to be wrong.

Nobody can be _that_ stupid; and yet .... they are.
o That! Is the enigma.
And it gets _worse_ from there (since they act like children act).

PROOF BELOW FOR ANYONE WILLING TO WADE THROUGH THIS!

Proof below is how they can't comprehend that they can't comprehend
even the _simplest_ of the simplest of the simplest of facts!

In addition - they prove to be CHILDISH when confronted with their error.
(See Alan Baker & Snit examples below on how childish they are.)

*Fact:*
A. Badgolferman posts about the facepalm bug

o facetime privacy bug
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/NFW7nz6FELw>

A1. LSOMS DK folks like Joerg Lorenz & FredW post that it's "fake news"
A2. Even Jolly Roger & nospam have to tell Joerg Lorenz that it's real
A3. Joerg Lorenz confidently asserts it's "fake news"
A4. Guess what Joerg Lorenz' rationale is?
(You'll never guess how Joerg Lorenz tells vets news).
HINT: It will make you cry because it's downright sad.

*Analysis:*
o The problem is that Joerg'z vetting system is logic of a small child.
o Just like the lemon-juice bank robber's vetting system was.

*Nobody can be _that_ stupid; and yet .... they are.*
* That! Is the enigma.

*Fact:*
B. I supplement the badgolferman thread with the NY Times timeline of facts
o Apple Was Slow to Act on FaceTime Bug That Allows Spying on iPhones
<https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/29/technology/facetime-glitch-apple.html>
B1. Numerous Apologists like Jolly Roger outright _deny_ NY Times facts.
B2. People like nospam simply call every fact they don't like, a troll
B3. Worse, people like Alan Baker _insist_ the NY Times facts are all wrong!
B4. Alan Baker goes on and on and on (post after post after post).
B5. And yet, in _everything_ Alan Baker used as proof - he was dead wrong.

a. I used to think these people were simply incredibly stupid, or,
b. I used to think that they are incessantly pulling our leg, but,
c. I now think they actually _believe_ they can comprehend simple facts.

Both Joerg Lorenz and Alan Baker expressly told us HOW they vet news.
1. Joerg only trusts German media (the US and British media is _all_ fake).
2. Alan can't comprehend that a file can be used twice in different days.

Nobody can be _that_ stupid; and yet .... they are.
That! Is the enigma.

C. It's the same with Snit.
I have stellar credibility (I've never been wrong yet on a material fact)
(see note 1)

C1. I post a fact to the iOS newsgroup about WiFi capabilities
o It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0>
C2. Snit (& Apologists) deny all facts outright that they don't like.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0/BPm5x5HPAAAJ>
C3. Snit goes so far as to _prove_ me wrong (with a video!!!!!!!!!!)
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0/qSXecrnZAQAJ>

NOTE: Even Frank Slootweg fell for this, as did Jolly Roger & nospam and a
host of Apple Apologists (who can't possibly comprehend that they can't
possibly comprehend even the _simplest_ of the simplest of facts).

C4. To make a long story short, they never once _looked_ at the Y-Axis!

Notice what comes next:
A. Snit posted _that_ idiot video over 200 times (yes, we counted).
B. And yet, he never even once _looked_ at the Y-Axis of his "pretty graph".
C. Meanwhile, _all_ the idiot Apologists _congratulated_ Snit
(Even Frank Slootweg, who isn't even an Apple Apologist commended him.)

Who on earth is _that_ stupid?
Answer: They are.

Seriously.
Q: Who promotes a video 200 times without once comprehending the Y Axis?

Only these people _can_ be that incredibly stupid, right?

But wait ... it gets WORSE!
o Both Snit and Alan Baker _thought_ they had my facts over a barrel.
o What did _both_ of them clearly do?

They _taunted_ me to APOLOGIZE for being wrong!
Yup. Those 200 posts by Snit were to _taunt_ me that he was right!

But wait, it gets _even worse_ than that!
Do you think Snit apologized when it took 10 seconds to prove him wrong?

HINT number 1: It's beyond Snit's capabilities to apologize; so what did he do?
Answer: Snit went on a _rampage_ arguing (another 200 times!) that Android
can't record video (see the thread for details) even though it's in _all_
the Android release notes.
NOTE: Snit couldn't get it to work - but it works fine for everyone else.
(Yet again, Snit believes _his_ vetting system is the _only_ correct one!)

Note; That's 400 posts alone, _all_ of them wrong on facts!
(That doesn't even count the factual rebuttals.)

If you think Snit is an isolated case, ... look at what Alan Baker wrote
yesterday...
*Alan Baker to me: Your next words should be: "I stand corrected".*

Heh heh...
Since I am an adult, even Cybe(r) Wizard knows that I don't mind a bit when
I'm wrong, as I openly admit it (e.g., when I misspelled "et al.") and even
Dan Purgert knows that I openly admitted the confusion around "ad hoc").

To me, facts are merely things that have no emotional value.
If I'm right, that's great (because my credibility is what matters).
If I'm wrong, then I _love_ to be shown the truth (accuracy matters).

So if Snit were right, or if Alan Baker were right, just as when Mike
Easter is right, I *agree* with them, since I'm a logical sentient adult.

That's what adults do - we agree on obvious facts.
Adults are funny that way.

But what does Alan Baker do?
1. He taunts me even though he was dead wrong from the start.
2. That's fine - as I don't care - but what I'm pointing out is this:

IMPORTANT FACT ABOUT THE MIND OF A CHILD LIKE ALAN BAKER IS:

Alan Baker (& Snit) want me to apologize when they think I'm wrong,
and yet...
I haven't seen any apology (ever) forthcoming from them ... when they're
wrong.

Do you see what this shows?
1. They own the cognitive mind of the lemon-juice bank robber.
2. Worse - they prove to be children when they're shown to be wrong.

--
NOTE1: Since I'm human, out of thousands upon thousands upon thousands of
posts over the decades, I must have been wrong on a material fact at least
once, but it's so rare (if even it exists) that those who desperately try
to prove my facts wrong, can only play incessant silly utterly childish
semantic games on immaterial things.

[Rene Lamontagne]

And all around a Pigs Ass is pork.

[Frank Slootweg]

Cybe R. Wizard <cybe_r...@wizardstower.invalid> wrote:
[...]

> Please tell me that you're not expecting adult-level grammar and typing
> from that one.

Please don't (ab)use the A-word (nor the C-word)! Thanks.

[John McWilliams]

Brilliant riposte!

[Erilar]

Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
> Cybe R. Wizard <cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid> wrote:

>> On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 07:11:31 -0000 (UTC)
>> arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Whom am I talking about who _never_ adds on-topic technical value?
>>> o Snit, nospam, Jolly Roger, Dan Purgert, Cybe R Wizard, Char
>>> Jackson, o Wolf K., Alan Baker, Tim Streater, Alan Browne,
>>> Savageduck, Wade Garrett, o BK at OnRamp, Lloyd, Hemidactylus, Your
>>> Name, John Doe, Rene Lamantagne o Jasen Betts, Wolf K, Rudy Weiser,
>>> Good Guy, Diesel, et al.
>>

>> Oh, look, it has an enemies list just as most evil lying semi-men do.
>>
>> Cybe R. Wizard -happyily opposing evil wannabe-men
>
> You’re in good company. Cheers. 😇
>

I save a LOT of time and irritation by not clicking on anomymous posts. Hi,
Jolly!

--
biblioholic medievalist via iPad