Choice as a mantra
Snit
<http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html>
There are down sides... how many in COLA understand this?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
TomB
> Should we have it as one:
>
><http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html>
>
> There are down sides... how many in COLA understand this?
The right question is: how many in COLA care?
--
BOFH excuse #120:
we just switched to FDDI.
Snit
AM:
> On 2010-05-10, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> Should we have it as one:
>>
>> <http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html>
>>
>> There are down sides... how many in COLA understand this?
>
> The right question is: how many in COLA care?
Good question - even though many use it as a mantra, I suspect most who do
so do not care if it is accurate or not. It is just accepted "wisdom",
something they do not think about but belittle others when this "wisdom" is
questioned or it is pointed out that evidence shows there are downsides to
choice.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Chris Ahlstrom
> On 2010-05-10, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> Should we have it as one:
>>
>><http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html>
Psychologist Barry Schwartz takes aim at a central tenet of western
societies: freedom of choice. In Schwartz's estimation, choice has made
us not freer but more paralyzed, not happier but more dissatisfied.
>> There are down sides... how many in COLA understand this?
>
> The right question is: how many in COLA care?
Why would we care about yet another pop-psych pundit?
--
A Tale of Two Cities LITE(tm)
-- by Charles Dickens
Snit
5/10/10 10:59 AM:
So you have *any* contrary evidence? Any at all?
It amazes me how often the "advocates" in COLA just shun evidence. A *sure*
sign of extreme bias.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Hadron
You must remember that Creepy bases all his "Linux advocacy" knowledge
on what his Master Roy posts here in COLA. And facts from outside of
COLA he refuses to look at. And he wonders why he is such a laughing
stock?
Hadron
Fukaduk, you're an idiot. Did you even TRY to understand what he said?
Snit
11:16 AM:
He is showing off his bias. I am not surprised.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Peter Köhlmann
Sure he did. Snit Micahel Glasser started his next attempt at doing a Snit
Circus.
That cretinous twit never stops squandering his wifes hard earned money in
order to troll usenet 24/7
And *you* naturally support that dreck
--
Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats
you with experience...
Snit
12:28 PM:
See how you cannot help but prove me right about you.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
chrisv
>>>> The right question is: how many in COLA care?
>>>
>>> Why would we care about yet another pop-psych pundit?
>>
>> Fukaduk, you're an idiot. Did you even TRY to understand what he said?
>
>Sure he did.
There's always going to be those who advocate control. There's always
going to be those to seek power.
A case can be made for totalitarianism. A biased argument can "seem"
to make sense.
Nikita Khrushchev was sure that he would "bury" us, with the
"efficiency" of his command economy.
Snit
12:49 PM:
> Peter K�hlmann wrote:
>
>>>>> The right question is: how many in COLA care?
>>>>
>>>> Why would we care about yet another pop-psych pundit?
>>>
>>> Fukaduk, you're an idiot. Did you even TRY to understand what he said?
>>
>> Sure he did.
>
> There's always going to be those who advocate control. There's always
> going to be those to seek power.
Who said anything about control or power?
> A case can be made for totalitarianism. A biased argument can "seem"
> to make sense.
Are you trying to make one?
> Nikita Khrushchev was sure that he would "bury" us, with the
> "efficiency" of his command economy.
And now you want the same type of control over the thinking of Linux users?
Not sure what you are getting at.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Clogwog
news:4fogu5lrf27vlq9je...@4ax.com...
It might land on your tiny cretinous head (wih no brain inside)
http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l172/kanawa/Khrushchev_shoeBarrycopy.jpg
Rick
> On 2010-05-10, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> Should we have it as one:
>>
>><http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html>
>>
>> There are down sides... how many in COLA understand this?
>
> The right question is: how many in COLA care?
How many is too many?
How few is too few?
3,468,128 is probably too many.
1 is probably too few.
--
Rick
JEDIDIAH
He gets it. Some people are just prone to covet and be miserable and
fixate on what they could have had rather than what they do have. A lack
of choice won't help those people. I know people like that that had this
exact same mental issue behind the Iron Curtain. A 3rd World standard of
living doesn't help this mentality.
Also, Schwartz doesn't argue against choice at all.
He argues against the "oppression of 100+ types of salad dressing".
Nevermind that you can eliminate 90% of the choices by slicing them
along one axis or another depending upon what your requirements or
preferences are.
A "jeans salesman" that doesn't know about the classic product should
be fired. Although he probably saw this guy coming and decided to milk him
for all he was worth.
It helps to be an informed consumer no matter how many choices there are.
--
On the subject of kilobyte being "redefined" to mean 1000 bytes...
When I was a wee lad, I was taught that SI units were |||
meant to be computationally convenient rather than just / | \
arbitrarily assigned.
Snit
PM:
I would love to see you work to show understanding and actually gain some
evidence to back up your views. It would be great!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Hadron
> On 2010-05-10, Hadron <hadro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Chris Ahlstrom <ahls...@launchmodem.com> writes:
>>
>>> TomB pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>
>>>> On 2010-05-10, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>>>> Should we have it as one:
>>>>>
>>>>><http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html>
>>>
>>> Psychologist Barry Schwartz takes aim at a central tenet of western
>>> societies: freedom of choice. In Schwartz's estimation, choice has made
>>> us not freer but more paralyzed, not happier but more dissatisfied.
>>>
>>>>> There are down sides... how many in COLA understand this?
>>>>
>>>> The right question is: how many in COLA care?
>>>
>>> Why would we care about yet another pop-psych pundit?
>>
>> Fukaduk, you're an idiot. Did you even TRY to understand what he said?
>
> He gets it. Some people are just prone to covet and be miserable and
> fixate on what they could have had rather than what they do have. A lack
> of choice won't help those people. I know people like that that had this
> exact same mental issue behind the Iron Curtain. A 3rd World standard of
> living doesn't help this mentality.
Who ever talked about a lack of choice? What on earth are you talking
about?
>
> Also, Schwartz doesn't argue against choice at all.
>
> He argues against the "oppression of 100+ types of salad dressing".
>
> Nevermind that you can eliminate 90% of the choices by slicing them
> along one axis or another depending upon what your requirements or
> preferences are.
>
> A "jeans salesman" that doesn't know about the classic product should
> be fired. Although he probably saw this guy coming and decided to milk him
> for all he was worth.
>
> It helps to be an informed consumer no matter how many choices there are.
Err, yes. Who ever said any different. And surely even you can see how
thousands of choices make it hard to be "informed"?
Jed, you and Raytard seem to be on the silly pills today.
TomB
> TomB stated in post 20100510...@usenet.drumscum.be on 5/10/10 10:45
> AM:
>
>> On 2010-05-10, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>> Should we have it as one:
>>>
>>> <http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html>
>>>
>>> There are down sides... how many in COLA understand this?
>>
>> The right question is: how many in COLA care?
>
> Good question
It is. Those in cola actually using GNU/Linux as their primary OS do
so because they conciously chose for it. These people are familiar
with the plethora of choices the F/OSS ecosystem offers, and embrace
this. The possibility that choice (or 'too much choice') has downsides
it irrelevant to them, as it is one of the reasons they chose for
GNU/Linux in the first place. These people can deal with choice.
> - even though many use it as a mantra, I suspect most who do so do
> not care if it is accurate or not.
What about you then? Do you still 'advocate choice'. Or has this work
made you see the light?
> It is just accepted "wisdom",
No, it's an /opinion/ shared by many if not all GNU/Linux users.
Choice is good.
> something they do not think about but belittle others when this
> "wisdom" is questioned or it is pointed out that evidence shows
> there are downsides to choice.
What this guy writes (I have read it before as I found it a catchy
title) is not at all relevant to how your average GNU/Linux user
(which is of a higher techinical calibre than your average Windows/Mac
user) experience the choice offered by F/OSS and GNU/Linux. These
people chose for more choice.
--
BOFH excuse #410:
Electrical conduits in machine room are melting.
Chris Ahlstrom
I watched the first minute, then lost interest -- video is such a *slow*
communications medium.
What I saw made me think "pop-psych pundit".
"Takes aim at a central tenet of western societies: freedom of choice."
I smell hype.
--
Just to have it is enough.
Chris Ahlstrom
> On 2010-05-10, Hadron <hadro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Chris Ahlstrom <ahls...@launchmodem.com> writes:
>>
>>>>><http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html>
>>>
>>> Why would we care about yet another pop-psych pundit?
>>
>> Fukaduk, you're an idiot. Did you even TRY to understand what he said?
>
> Also, Schwartz doesn't argue against choice at all.
>
> He argues against the "oppression of 100+ types of salad dressing".
*guffaw*
Is that the kind of talk that impresses "Hadron"? What a (salad) tosser.
The fact is that, in the real world, things happen that quickly shed the
vast range of potential choices. This is why people can quickly settle on
which particular car they want to buy.
--
Everything's all for the best in this best of all possible worlds.
-- Pangloss or Leibnitz, I always forget which....
Snit
5/11/10 3:50 AM:
You run from data you do not like. A sign of your bias.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
chrisv
>I watched the first minute, then lost interest -- video is such a *slow*
>communications medium.
That's exactly what I did, too. Some idiot speaking as though we were
toddlers who needed to be spoon-fed.
Almost as bad as a power-point presentation, where they feel the need
to read each point to the audience. Sheesh, print it out and I'll
read in 5 minutes what would take you an hour.
>What I saw made me think "pop-psych pundit".
>
>"Takes aim at a central tenet of western societies: freedom of choice."
>
>I smell hype.
And a slimey Wintroll named Larry, who attacks us for not wasting time
watching and contemplating such stuff.
As if we haven't already thought-about and figured-out the "choice
thing".
--
"By the way... do you still think that Hadron Quark is me???" -
Larry "message ID" Qualig, January 2007
DFS
> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> I watched the first minute, then lost interest -- video is such a *slow*
>> communications medium.
>
> That's exactly what I did, too. Some idiot speaking as though we were
> toddlers who needed to be spoon-fed.
>
> Almost as bad as a power-point presentation, where they feel the need
> to read each point to the audience. Sheesh, print it out and I'll
> read in 5 minutes what would take you an hour.
>
>> What I saw made me think "pop-psych pundit".
>>
>> "Takes aim at a central tenet of western societies: freedom of choice."
>>
>> I smell hype.
>
> And a slimey Wintroll named Larry, who attacks us for not wasting time
> watching and contemplating such stuff.
>
> As if we haven't already thought-about and figured-out the "choice
> thing".
Clearly you (as in Linux "advocates") haven't, shitbird, seeing as how
1/2 of all Linux sheeple users immediately run to Ubuntu.
Peter Köhlmann
They do?
--
You are a shining example for the advances in artificial stupidity
Snit
AM:
> On 2010-05-10, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> TomB stated in post 20100510...@usenet.drumscum.be on 5/10/10 10:45
>> AM:
>>
>>> On 2010-05-10, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>>> Should we have it as one:
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html>
>>>>
>>>> There are down sides... how many in COLA understand this?
>>>
>>> The right question is: how many in COLA care?
>>
>> Good question
>
> It is. Those in cola actually using GNU/Linux as their primary OS do
> so because they conciously chose for it. These people are familiar
> with the plethora of choices the F/OSS ecosystem offers, and embrace
> this. The possibility that choice (or 'too much choice') has downsides
> it irrelevant to them, as it is one of the reasons they chose for
> GNU/Linux in the first place. These people can deal with choice.
It is not supported that it has no downside for them. Where did you get
that idea?
>> - even though many use it as a mantra, I suspect most who do so do
>> not care if it is accurate or not.
>
> What about you then? Do you still 'advocate choice'. Or has this work
> made you see the light?
I do advocate choice. The choices I advocate, though, would largely be made
by distro managers - end users would have fewer choices they need to make
(though they are there if they want them).
>> It is just accepted "wisdom",
>
> No, it's an /opinion/ shared by many if not all GNU/Linux users.
> Choice is good.
It is an unsupported opinion. And there is contrary evidence that is
ignored.
>> something they do not think about but belittle others when this
>> "wisdom" is questioned or it is pointed out that evidence shows
>> there are downsides to choice.
>
> What this guy writes (I have read it before as I found it a catchy
> title) is not at all relevant to how your average GNU/Linux user
> (which is of a higher techinical calibre than your average Windows/Mac
> user) experience the choice offered by F/OSS and GNU/Linux. These
> people chose for more choice.
How is it not relevant?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
chrisv
>>
>> 1/2 of all Linux sheeple users immediately run to Ubuntu.
Even *if* that was true, so? The existance of all of those other
distros didn't harm anyone, did it?
(Que "Hadron" lying about developers "working against each other".)
There is no such thing as "too much choice" in a free market.
--
'too much "choice" is a bad thing.' - "True Linux advocate" Hadron
Quark
DFS
Peter Köhlmann
Did you read how that data was calculated?
They might have used ExCel instead, maybe the stats would not have been
/quite/ as crappy then.
As they are, they are next to completely useless
--
"Last I checked, it wasn't the power cord for the Clue Generator that
was sticking up your ass." - John Novak, rasfwrj
DFS
Of course they're useless; they don't say what you want them to say.
I guess I can't blame you for being embarrassed that Linux users are
quickly turning into mindless Ubuntu sheeple. The whole "Isn't choice
great?!" thing is a joke, anyway.
DFS
> What this guy writes (I have read it before as I found it a catchy
> title) is not at all relevant to how your average GNU/Linux user
> (which is of a higher techinical calibre than your average Windows/Mac
> user) experience the choice offered by F/OSS and GNU/Linux.
What choice? 65% of all Linux users are now Ubuntu sheeple
http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportOperatingSystems.htm
These "higher technical calibre" Linux users are flocking to Ubuntu
because it's supposedly easier to use. Or maybe it's herd mentality?
Lloyd Parsons
DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> wrote:
I'm not sure what your point is. Who cares which distro is the most
popular? Is there some reason you think it is important?
--
Lloyd
Peter Köhlmann
You might have taken a look at distrowatch first, before embarrassing
yourself
--
Any idiot can run XP. And usually does.
Chris Ahlstrom
> DFS wrote:
>
>> I guess I can't blame you for being embarrassed that Linux users are
>> quickly turning into mindless Ubuntu sheeple. The whole "Isn't choice
>> great?!" thing is a joke, anyway.
>
> You might have taken a look at distrowatch first, before embarrassing
> yourself
You can't win with DFS, anyway. If there were an even distribution of distros,
he'd be yammering about "fragmentation".
Since Ubuntu is the most popular (but not even close to 50% if you rely on
distrowatch) distro, it is obvious that it is most familiar to noobies.
And noobies would tend to follow the herd a little more -- after all, Linux is
unfamiliar territory to them.
My take? It is *all* Linux, 95% the same from distro to distro. If somebody
(e.g. "Hadron") put a gun to my head and forced me to use some distro besides
Debian, I would have no problem getting used to that distro.
Luckily, we don't even have to put up with the flecks of spittle from the insane
rhetoric of "Hadron" and DFS.
--
Are you making all this up as you go along?
Snit
5/11/10 10:25 AM:
95% the same.
There goes the claim about any real choice.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
chrisv
>Peter K�hlmann wrote:
>
>> Dumfsck wrote:
>>
>>> I guess I can't blame you for being embarrassed that Linux users are
>>> quickly turning into mindless Ubuntu sheeple. The whole "Isn't choice
>>> great?!" thing is a joke, anyway.
>>
>> You might have taken a look at distrowatch first, before embarrassing
>> yourself
>
>You can't win with DFS, anyway. If there were an even distribution of distros,
>he'd be yammering about "fragmentation".
*Exactly*
Just like "Hadron", who defends Dumfsck, does all the time.
>Since Ubuntu is the most popular (but not even close to 50% if you rely on
>distrowatch) distro, it is obvious that it is most familiar to noobies.
>And noobies would tend to follow the herd a little more -- after all, Linux is
>unfamiliar territory to them.
A company puts years into a concerted effort into making a modern,
easy-to-use, and free distro. The hard work pays-off and attracts a
lot of users. Therefore those users are "mindless sheeple".
Yeah, Right.
I suppose it would be somehow better if, instead of users selecting a
"top" distro of their own free will, users allowed their choices to be
controlled by Hadron Quark's "OSS Culling Committee".
>Luckily, we don't even have to put up with the flecks of spittle from the insane
>rhetoric of "Hadron" and DFS.
They are nothing but trolling shit. Absolute scum of the Earth.
And proud of it, apparently.
--
"There is so much dross that after Redhat, Fedora and Debian, which
copy cat half arsed junk would you like to represent desktop Linux?"
TomB
First of all I'm sure those stats are not accurate. I know Ubuntu is
doing *very* well, but 65% overall? Not by far.
Herd mentality? Sure. For desktops Ubuntu is pretty popular, and a
certain amount of herd mentality is involved. I know that a lot of
seasoned GNU/Linux users suggest Ubuntu to newbies. I do so myself. In
the end Ubuntu *is* one of the most noob-friendly distros around. I
installed it on a Samsung N150 netbook today, and after the install
absolutely no configuration was required. Resolution was fine (native
1024x600, wireless worked out of the box, and it was very 'snappy' to
use. For the record: I installed W7 Starter on the same netbook, and
after installation I had only 800x600 resolution and no wireless
(Windows update gave me the wireless driver, but I had to go to the
Samsung website to fetch the display driver). It also didn't run as
smooth as Ubuntu, I couldn't change the wallpaper, and running more
than a few apps simultaneaously was not possible.
--
BOFH excuse #226:
A star wars satellite accidently blew up the WAN.
chrisv
>Herd mentality? Sure. For desktops Ubuntu is pretty popular, and a
>certain amount of herd mentality is involved. I know that a lot of
>seasoned GNU/Linux users suggest Ubuntu to newbies. I do so myself. In
>the end Ubuntu *is* one of the most noob-friendly distros around.
Exactly. The Ubuntu folks really targeted "the masses" more than any
previous distro, it seems to me. They had a simple but great plan -
start with Debian, arguably the best "base" Linux, and make it easier.
It's popularity is no surprise.
--
"Yes, theres choice alright - that buggy heap of shit, or that one, or
that one.... etc etc etc." - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark
JEDIDIAH
>
>
> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>
>>>>> The right question is: how many in COLA care?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Fukaduk, you're an idiot. Did you even TRY to understand what he said?
>>
>>Sure he did.
>
> going to be those to seek power.
...you missed the punchline if you didn't watch the video all the way to the
end. This guy thinks we are too well off and that the solution is to get rid
of some of our weath and "spread it around" to the 3rd world so that they have
more choices and we have less choices and in the end we have a shared level
of mediocrity.
--
Apple: because you really don't want to take any more video |||
than your camera can hold. Really. / | \
JEDIDIAH
>
>
> JEDIDIAH pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> On 2010-05-10, Hadron <hadro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Chris Ahlstrom <ahls...@launchmodem.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>>><http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html>
>>>>
>>>> Why would we care about yet another pop-psych pundit?
>>>
>>> Fukaduk, you're an idiot. Did you even TRY to understand what he said?
>>
>> Also, Schwartz doesn't argue against choice at all.
>>
>> He argues against the "oppression of 100+ types of salad dressing".
>
> *guffaw*
>
> Is that the kind of talk that impresses "Hadron"? What a (salad) tosser.
>
> The fact is that, in the real world, things happen that quickly shed the
> vast range of potential choices. This is why people can quickly settle on
> which particular car they want to buy.
>
A wide array of choices is the result of liberty.
"choice" is not the valued commodity, liberty is.
A lack of choice is simply a good indicator that there is a lack of
liberty. Somewhere along the line there is something that is preventing
producers and consumers from doing what they like.
JEDIDIAH
>
>
> JEDIDIAH <je...@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>
>> On 2010-05-10, Hadron <hadro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris Ahlstrom <ahls...@launchmodem.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> TomB pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2010-05-10, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>>>>> Should we have it as one:
>>>>>>
>>>>>><http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html>
>>>>
>>>> Psychologist Barry Schwartz takes aim at a central tenet of western
>>>> societies: freedom of choice. In Schwartz's estimation, choice has made
>>>> us not freer but more paralyzed, not happier but more dissatisfied.
>>>>
>>>>>> There are down sides... how many in COLA understand this?
>>>>>
>>>>> The right question is: how many in COLA care?
>>>>
>>>> Why would we care about yet another pop-psych pundit?
>>>
>>> Fukaduk, you're an idiot. Did you even TRY to understand what he said?
>>
>> He gets it. Some people are just prone to covet and be miserable and
>> fixate on what they could have had rather than what they do have. A lack
>> of choice won't help those people. I know people like that that had this
>> exact same mental issue behind the Iron Curtain. A 3rd World standard of
>> living doesn't help this mentality.
>
> Who ever talked about a lack of choice? What on earth are you talking
> about?
Apparently you didn't actually watch that video.
>
>>
>> Also, Schwartz doesn't argue against choice at all.
>>
>> He argues against the "oppression of 100+ types of salad dressing".
>>
>> Nevermind that you can eliminate 90% of the choices by slicing them
>> along one axis or another depending upon what your requirements or
>> preferences are.
>>
>> A "jeans salesman" that doesn't know about the classic product should
>> be fired. Although he probably saw this guy coming and decided to milk him
>> for all he was worth.
>>
>> It helps to be an informed consumer no matter how many choices there are.
>
> Err, yes. Who ever said any different. And surely even you can see how
> thousands of choices make it hard to be "informed"?
Nope. Not really. Just read the label. It's not hard.
Perhaps, if you are feeling overwhelmed then read a review or seek the
advice of an expert.
If all else fails, just make a random selection.
If you are dealing with any sort of free market, then you will be
free to choose something else next time.
Occassionaly, Madison Avenue will even manage to cater to you with their
ads. I can't imagine how this idiot managed to get into the 21st century
without seeing one of those Levi ads for their "original" jeans.
He's not the first guy to pine for some guilded golden age.
You can find similar examples from the 1600s.
[deletia]
Some people are just intent to be miserable.
OTOH, some want to make weak excuses for drastic weath redistribution.
I'm surprised you missed that part. It would probably impact you
signficantly if people actually bought into this guy's ideas for anything
outside the scope of your attempts to find any means to slander Linux.
Morons like you latching onto ideas like these for some strange
alternative purpose is how really bad ideas end up implemented on a grand
scale.
chrisv
> Hadron quacked:
>>
>> And surely even you can see how
>> thousands of choices make it hard to be "informed"?
You are a dumbshit, Larry. Most of the choices need not be considered
or even known-about. If something is not worth the money to you, you
don't buy it. If there are better options in the market, they tend to
grow and spread until more people know of them and try them and talk
about them.
> Nope. Not really. Just read the label. It's not hard.
>
> Perhaps, if you are feeling overwhelmed then read a review or seek the
>advice of an expert.
>
> If all else fails, just make a random selection.
>
> If you are dealing with any sort of free market, then you will be
>free to choose something else next time.
>
> Occassionaly, Madison Avenue will even manage to cater to you with their
>ads.
Poor "Hadron". One wonders how he ever gets out of the grocery store,
with dozens of different brands and types of milk, bread, cereal,
meats, coffees, snacks, pizzas, sodas, cheeses, etc, etc, etc.
DFS
>> Dumfsck wrote:
>>>
>>> 1/2 of all Linux sheeple users immediately run to Ubuntu.
>
> Even *if* that was true, so?
So all the Linux assholes insulting the "Windows monoculture" and
"Windows isn't good because it's popular" and "Windows drones" and
"Windows lemmings" and so on can kiss my ass.
> The existance of all of those other
> distros didn't harm anyone, did it?
existance = existence
Except for wasting time that was probably better spent on OpenOffice
development, or kdenlive development, no one was harmed in the making of
this distro.
Linux needs better apps and games, not more distros.
> (Que "Hadron" lying about developers "working against each other".)
que = cue
> There is no such thing as "too much choice" in a free market.
Yes there is.
Go to www.newegg.com and build a new computer:
CPU
mobo
memory
SSD or hard drives
video card
power supply
monitor
case
That's 8 pieces. For each component, explain how and why you chose one
part over another. You won't be able to. There are so many choices
that are so close in price and specs and reputation (within and across
vendors) that it's a nightmare to pick one.
DFS
Why?
The distrowatch Page Hit Ranking tells how many views a single web page
on distrowatch gets, not what OS or distro is being used to view it.
You're fairly moronic, Kohlmann. You must be an Ubu-user.
Peter Köhlmann
Because it would give *lots* better indication of user preferences than
your mindless "getclicky" stats. Those are so insanely stupid they simply
have to be taken seriously by cretins like you
> The distrowatch Page Hit Ranking tells how many views a single web page
> on distrowatch gets, not what OS or distro is being used to view it.
Well, naturally most people will read about a linux distro they dopn't
intend to use.
Thats what you are implying, DumbFullShit
> You're fairly moronic, Kohlmann. You must be an Ubu-user.
Even *if* I were fairly moronic, I would still be a genius compared to you
And no, I am not a Ubuntu user
You see, choice is good. I chose *not* to use ubuntu, after I tried it for
some time
--
I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.
Snit
AM:
> On 2010-05-10, Hadron <hadro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> JEDIDIAH <je...@nomad.mishnet> writes:
>>
>>> On 2010-05-10, Hadron <hadro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Chris Ahlstrom <ahls...@launchmodem.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> TomB pulled this Usenet boner:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2010-05-10, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>>>>>> Should we have it as one:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html>
>>>>>
>>>>> Psychologist Barry Schwartz takes aim at a central tenet of western
>>>>> societies: freedom of choice. In Schwartz's estimation, choice has made
>>>>> us not freer but more paralyzed, not happier but more dissatisfied.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> There are down sides... how many in COLA understand this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The right question is: how many in COLA care?
>>>>>
>>>>> Why would we care about yet another pop-psych pundit?
>>>>
>>>> Fukaduk, you're an idiot. Did you even TRY to understand what he said?
>>>
>>> He gets it. Some people are just prone to covet and be miserable and
>>> fixate on what they could have had rather than what they do have. A lack
>>> of choice won't help those people. I know people like that that had this
>>> exact same mental issue behind the Iron Curtain. A 3rd World standard of
>>> living doesn't help this mentality.
>>
>> Who ever talked about a lack of choice? What on earth are you talking
>> about?
>
> Apparently you didn't actually watch that video.
And you base this on...? Of course, you will not answer or dodge if you do.
You just made it up is the real answer.
You show *no* understanding of his claims, and have no counter to the
evidence.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
DFS
You know Ubuntu is the large majority of Linux users, and I know it, and
everyone else knows it.
It sure didn't take long for Linux users to show how mindless and
"technically superior to Windows users" they really are. Years of
insulting Windows users, but the minute an easy-to-use distro appeared,
the asshole hypocrites flocked to it.
>> The distrowatch Page Hit Ranking tells how many views a single web page
>> on distrowatch gets, not what OS or distro is being used to view it.
>
> Well, naturally most people will read about a linux distro they dopn't
> intend to use.
> Thats what you are implying, DumbFullShit
By your moronic reasoning I would never go to a website and read about
Ferraris, since I don't intend to buy one. Or space flights, since I
don't plan on walking on the moon. etc.
You're a real dumbkopf, dumbkopf.
>> You're fairly moronic, Kohlmann. You must be an Ubu-user.
>
> Even *if* I were fairly moronic, I would still be a genius compared to you
> And no, I am not a Ubuntu user
>
> You see, choice is good. I chose *not* to use ubuntu, after I tried it for
> some time
heh... "for some time".
Another Ubuntu sheeple right here in the flesh.
Snit
AM:
Again: you show no understanding of the evidence.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
JEDIDIAH
>
>
> On 5/11/2010 11:33 AM, chrisv wrote:
>>> Dumfsck wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 1/2 of all Linux sheeple users immediately run to Ubuntu.
>>
>> Even *if* that was true, so?
>
> So all the Linux assholes insulting the "Windows monoculture" and
The predominance of Ubuntu doesn't keep anyone from running anything
else. That is a key difference here. It's much like how the market leadership
does not prevent me from buying a Keg of Virgils Root Beer. The alternative
is available and my choices yesterday don't effectively force me to keep on
buying whatever it was I bought yesterday.
> "Windows isn't good because it's popular" and "Windows drones" and
> "Windows lemmings" and so on can kiss my ass.
>
>
>
>
>> The existance of all of those other
>> distros didn't harm anyone, did it?
>
> existance = existence
>
> Except for wasting time that was probably better spent on OpenOffice
> development, or kdenlive development, no one was harmed in the making of
> this distro.
>
> Linux needs better apps and games, not more distros.
It's a big wide world out there.
Individuals are free to do what they like.
Some will write games. Others will create distributions.
Others will brew Ginger Beer that gets mistaken for Jack Daniels.
That's just the way of the world. You don't get to be Commisar.
[deletia]
>> There is no such thing as "too much choice" in a free market.
>
> Yes there is.
>
> Go to www.newegg.com and build a new computer:
They've got lots of search options. You can narrow down to just about
anything you could possibly want. You can narrow it down based on multiple
items.
Newegg really isn't the place to be making this sort of argument.
It's like the antithesis of your argument.
[deletia]
You just have to know what your requirements really are.
TomB
>>>>>
>>>>> There are down sides... how many in COLA understand this?
>>>>
>>>> The right question is: how many in COLA care?
>>>
>>> Good question
>>
>> It is. Those in cola actually using GNU/Linux as their primary OS
>> do so because they conciously chose for it. These people are
>> familiar with the plethora of choices the F/OSS ecosystem offers,
>> and embrace this. The possibility that choice (or 'too much
>> choice') has downsides it irrelevant to them, as it is one of the
>> reasons they chose for GNU/Linux in the first place. These people
>> can deal with choice.
>
> It is not supported that it has no downside for them. Where did you
> get that idea?
Who talked about 'no downsides'? I know I didn't. All I'm saying is
that GNU/Linux users chose to have the choices, and that they can deal
with those choices and the possibility of making poor choices along
the way.
It's clear that having lots of choice increases the 'risk' of making a
wrong choice. That's evident, and I don't need a book or studies to
tell me that.
The alternative is having no or limited choice, and be stuck with
that. I'd rather be able to think for myself, including any mistakes I
may make when doing so.
>>> - even though many use it as a mantra, I suspect most who do so do
>>> not care if it is accurate or not.
>>
>> What about you then? Do you still 'advocate choice'. Or has this
>> work made you see the light?
>
> I do advocate choice. The choices I advocate, though, would largely
> be made by distro managers - end users would have fewer choices they
> need to make (though they are there if they want them).
And that's exactly how it works today. Good.
>>> It is just accepted "wisdom",
>>
>> No, it's an /opinion/ shared by many if not all GNU/Linux users.
>> Choice is good.
>
> It is an unsupported opinion. And there is contrary evidence that
> is ignored.
What evidence? That increased choice increases the possibility of
making the wrong choice, or may even cause someone to block and not
make a choice at all.
Well duh, nice evidence. I guess one has to be a really smart guy to
figure that much out.
From where I am standing, choice is good, even if it means making the
wrong one once in a while.
>>> something they do not think about but belittle others when this
>>> "wisdom" is questioned or it is pointed out that evidence shows
>>> there are downsides to choice.
>>
>> What this guy writes (I have read it before as I found it a catchy
>> title) is not at all relevant to how your average GNU/Linux user
>> (which is of a higher techinical calibre than your average
>> Windows/Mac user) experience the choice offered by F/OSS and
>> GNU/Linux. These people chose for more choice.
>
> How is it not relevant?
Because we choose for it. Whatever this Barry dude thinks, it doesn't
apply when one chooses for choice, nor does it apply to those with a
clear idea of how, what, why and when.
--
BOFH excuse #88:
Boss' kid fucked up the machine
TomB
> on 5/11/2010 11:33 am, chrisv wrote:
>
>> There is no such thing as "too much choice" in a free market.
>
> Yes there is.
No there isn't.
> Go to www.newegg.com and build a new computer:
Okay. Without even *visiting* the site I can tell you the following:
> CPU
I want an AMD with 4 cores. Should be
fairly easy.
> mobo
Something by Gigabyte and with a socket that takes my brand new AMD
CPU. Should have an AMD/ATI chipset too.
> memory
4GB of whatever, as long as it fits my motherboard. Don't care about
the brand.
> SSD or hard drives
Classic hard drives please. Smallest one available for OS; 1TB for
data. WD or Samsung please. SATA-II will do just fine.
> video card
I'll use the onboard, thanks.
> power supply
Whatever's in the case.
> monitor
Samsung syncmaster, 20-ish.
> case
The least expensive, square case. As black as possible.
> That's 8 pieces. For each component, explain how and why you chose one
> part over another. You won't be able to. There are so many choices
> that are so close in price and specs and reputation (within and across
> vendors) that it's a nightmare to pick one.
Not to me. Armoured with the above, I will have my PC put together in
no time. And be very pleased with it for the next couple of years.
--
BOFH excuse #271:
The kernel license has expired
Snit
PM:
> On 2010-05-11, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> TomB stated in post 201005110...@usenet.drumscum.be on 5/11/10 12:44
>> AM:
>>
>>>>>> <http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are down sides... how many in COLA understand this?
>>>>>
>>>>> The right question is: how many in COLA care?
>>>>
>>>> Good question
>>>
>>> It is. Those in cola actually using GNU/Linux as their primary OS
>>> do so because they conciously chose for it. These people are
>>> familiar with the plethora of choices the F/OSS ecosystem offers,
>>> and embrace this. The possibility that choice (or 'too much
>>> choice') has downsides it irrelevant to them, as it is one of the
>>> reasons they chose for GNU/Linux in the first place. These people
>>> can deal with choice.
>>
>> It is not supported that it has no downside for them. Where did you
>> get that idea?
>
> Who talked about 'no downsides'? I know I didn't. All I'm saying is
> that GNU/Linux users chose to have the choices, and that they can deal
> with those choices and the possibility of making poor choices along
> the way.
Hey, as long as you are not pretending there are no downsides I have no
problem with that.
> It's clear that having lots of choice increases the 'risk' of making a
> wrong choice. That's evident, and I don't need a book or studies to
> tell me that.
There is that, but there is also not being as satisfied with the choice even
when you make the "right" choice.
> The alternative is having no or limited choice, and be stuck with
> that. I'd rather be able to think for myself, including any mistakes I
> may make when doing so.
I agree in some areas... but I also see the downsides it has on people in
the society (and I do not exclude myself, though understanding the problem
reasonably well might mitigate the effects to some extent)
>>>> - even though many use it as a mantra, I suspect most who do so do
>>>> not care if it is accurate or not.
>>>
>>> What about you then? Do you still 'advocate choice'. Or has this
>>> work made you see the light?
>>
>> I do advocate choice. The choices I advocate, though, would largely
>> be made by distro managers - end users would have fewer choices they
>> need to make (though they are there if they want them).
>
> And that's exactly how it works today. Good.
Right: except I want to *increase* the choices to distro managers (and,
really, to end users). I see the downside of some of the types of choices
to desktop Linux but it is not as though I advocate any outside group trying
to "fix" it.
>>>> It is just accepted "wisdom",
>>>
>>> No, it's an /opinion/ shared by many if not all GNU/Linux users.
>>> Choice is good.
>>
>> It is an unsupported opinion. And there is contrary evidence that
>> is ignored.
>
> What evidence? That increased choice increases the possibility of
> making the wrong choice, or may even cause someone to block and not
> make a choice at all.
And can lead to people having less satisfaction with the choice they make...
even if it is not "wrong". So they move from distro to distro looking for
the "right" one, when none will be perfect. And in many ways the same
problems will exist in most if not all.
> Well duh, nice evidence. I guess one has to be a really smart guy to
> figure that much out.
>
> From where I am standing, choice is good, even if it means making the
> wrong one once in a while.
And it means having fewer desktop Linux users. Again, I am not saying I
want anyone to stop this - but it should be understood.
>>>> something they do not think about but belittle others when this
>>>> "wisdom" is questioned or it is pointed out that evidence shows
>>>> there are downsides to choice.
>>>
>>> What this guy writes (I have read it before as I found it a catchy
>>> title) is not at all relevant to how your average GNU/Linux user
>>> (which is of a higher techinical calibre than your average
>>> Windows/Mac user) experience the choice offered by F/OSS and
>>> GNU/Linux. These people chose for more choice.
>>
>> How is it not relevant?
>
> Because we choose for it. Whatever this Barry dude thinks, it doesn't
> apply when one chooses for choice, nor does it apply to those with a
> clear idea of how, what, why and when.
How do you prevent the psychological effects that are common to most if not
all humans? That, really, is the question. And the answer is you do not -
hence it is relevant.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
TomB
> TomB stated in post 201005112...@usenet.drumscum.be on 5/11/10 3:52
> PM:
>
>> wrong choice. That's evident, and I don't need a book or studies to
>> tell me that.
>
> There is that, but there is also not being as satisfied with the choice even
> when you make the "right" choice.
Typical psych/filo nonsense. If one's not satisfied with the choice
they made, it was the wrong choice.
>> The alternative is having no or limited choice, and be stuck with
>> that. I'd rather be able to think for myself, including any mistakes I
>> may make when doing so.
>
> I agree in some areas... but I also see the downsides it has on people in
> the society (and I do not exclude myself, though understanding the problem
> reasonably well might mitigate the effects to some extent)
Well, I *do* exclude myself.
>>>>> It is just accepted "wisdom",
>>>>
>>>> No, it's an /opinion/ shared by many if not all GNU/Linux users.
>>>> Choice is good.
>>>
>>> It is an unsupported opinion. And there is contrary evidence that
>>> is ignored.
>>
>> What evidence? That increased choice increases the possibility of
>> making the wrong choice, or may even cause someone to block and not
>> make a choice at all.
>
> And can lead to people having less satisfaction with the choice they make...
> even if it is not "wrong".
Those people have weak minds. I know the type.
> So they move from distro to distro looking for
> the "right" one, when none will be perfect. And in many ways the same
> problems will exist in most if not all.
Well, I have had no problem settling on Debian as my primary distro a
few years ago, or on settling on awesome as my window manager. And
there's nothing I regret about it. And why would I. If I am no longer
pleased with it, I move on.
>> Well duh, nice evidence. I guess one has to be a really smart guy to
>> figure that much out.
>>
>> From where I am standing, choice is good, even if it means making the
>> wrong one once in a while.
>
> And it means having fewer desktop Linux users.
Like I care.
> Again, I am not saying I
> want anyone to stop this - but it should be understood.
>
>>>>> something they do not think about but belittle others when this
>>>>> "wisdom" is questioned or it is pointed out that evidence shows
>>>>> there are downsides to choice.
>>>>
>>>> What this guy writes (I have read it before as I found it a catchy
>>>> title) is not at all relevant to how your average GNU/Linux user
>>>> (which is of a higher techinical calibre than your average
>>>> Windows/Mac user) experience the choice offered by F/OSS and
>>>> GNU/Linux. These people chose for more choice.
>>>
>>> How is it not relevant?
>>
>> Because we choose for it. Whatever this Barry dude thinks, it doesn't
>> apply when one chooses for choice, nor does it apply to those with a
>> clear idea of how, what, why and when.
>
> How do you prevent the psychological effects that are common to most if not
> all humans? That, really, is the question. And the answer is you do not -
> hence it is relevant.
So you think you know me better than I do myself, isn't it? Clue: you
don't. And neither does "Barry".
--
BOFH excuse #388:
Bad user karma.
chrisv
> Shit wrote:
>>
>> It is not supported that it has no downside for them.
>
>Who talked about 'no downsides'? I know I didn't. All I'm saying is
>that GNU/Linux users chose to have the choices, and that they can deal
>with those choices and the possibility of making poor choices along
>the way.
The trolling dumbshits often trot-out this nonsense, that we "don't
understand the advantages of limited choice". Of course we do. The
advantages are *obvious*. Less design costs, increased efficiences of
scale, reduced inventory...
It's just that the advantages are outweighed by the disadvantages.
>It's clear that having lots of choice increases the 'risk' of making a
>wrong choice. That's evident, and I don't need a book or studies to
>tell me that.
>
>The alternative is having no or limited choice, and be stuck with
>that. I'd rather be able to think for myself, including any mistakes I
>may make when doing so.
Well, you'll sure as fsck get the "wrong choice" if someone else makes
it for you, unless your extremely fortunate to be ideally served by
the "compromise solution".
>From where I am standing, choice is good, even if it means making the
>wrong one once in a while.
*Every* product market on the planet proves that the consumer is best
served by choice, despite any inefficiencies. Why these stupid trolls
think that they can convince anyone that computer software is any
different, is beyond me.
chrisv
>>
>> chrisv wrote:
>>
>> So all the Linux assholes (snip lies)
We do not insult the typical Windows user for his or her choice. We
understand their fear, uncertainty, and doubt of choosing an "obscure"
alternative that most people haven't even heard about. We acknowledge
that for many people Windows is the best choice, at this point in
time.
We just think that, in a more fair and well-informed market, many more
people would choose Linux than do today, and the world would be
better-off. That's why we advocate.
By the way, I'm certain that, out of the tens of thousands of posts
made by advocates, one could find some loosely-worded posts that seem
to say "Windows users are stupid". But that does not mean that anyone
here thinks "Windows users are stupid". *Obviously*
>>> There is no such thing as "too much choice" in a free market.
>>
>> Yes there is.
Nope. No such thing. A free market self-regulates and achieves an
equilibrium.
>> Go to www.newegg.com and build a new computer:
Huh? I've done it many times, and will do it again.
Because of the massive amount of choice, I end-up with a PC which is
more optimized for what a want, compared to if I had to choose from
the packages provided by computer OEM's.
chrisv
>>> Go to www.newegg.com and build a new computer:
>
>Huh? I've done it many times, and will do it again.
>
>Because of the massive amount of choice, I end-up with a PC which is
>more optimized for what a want, compared to if I had to choose from
>the packages provided by computer OEM's.
Of course, I would not deny anyone the choice of selecting a product
from an OEM who has narrowed-down the choices for them.
The fact that both business models exist and are economically viable
is proof positive that both are needed to optimally serve the market.
Snit
> On 2010-05-11, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> TomB stated in post 201005112...@usenet.drumscum.be on 5/11/10 3:52
>> PM:
>>
>>> It's clear that having lots of choice increases the 'risk' of making a
>>> wrong choice. That's evident, and I don't need a book or studies to
>>> tell me that.
>>
>> There is that, but there is also not being as satisfied with the choice even
>> when you make the "right" choice.
>
> Typical psych/filo nonsense. If one's not satisfied with the choice
> they made, it was the wrong choice.
You claim it is "nonsense", but show no counter-reasoning... nothing to
explain why you think the studies are wrong. In other words, you use your
own version of baseless "wisdom" to counter scientific studies.
>>> The alternative is having no or limited choice, and be stuck with
>>> that. I'd rather be able to think for myself, including any mistakes I
>>> may make when doing so.
>>
>> I agree in some areas... but I also see the downsides it has on people in
>> the society (and I do not exclude myself, though understanding the problem
>> reasonably well might mitigate the effects to some extent)
>
> Well, I *do* exclude myself.
And I certainly cannot prove you wrong, any more than you can prove yourself
right. The studies do show trends in people, though, and it is possible it
does not apply to every single person. The fact you do not agree with the
studies, though, and just use your own feelings to "counter" them does not
lead to much faith in your self assessment here. But, again, I cannot prove
you are wrong.
>>>>>> It is just accepted "wisdom",
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it's an /opinion/ shared by many if not all GNU/Linux users.
>>>>> Choice is good.
>>>>
>>>> It is an unsupported opinion. And there is contrary evidence that
>>>> is ignored.
>>>
>>> What evidence? That increased choice increases the possibility of
>>> making the wrong choice, or may even cause someone to block and not
>>> make a choice at all.
>>
>> And can lead to people having less satisfaction with the choice they make...
>> even if it is not "wrong".
>
> Those people have weak minds. I know the type.
See: your own feelings are setting what you believe here. Nothing in the
evidence says these people have "weak minds".
>> So they move from distro to distro looking for
>> the "right" one, when none will be perfect. And in many ways the same
>> problems will exist in most if not all.
>
> Well, I have had no problem settling on Debian as my primary distro a
> few years ago, or on settling on awesome as my window manager. And
> there's nothing I regret about it. And why would I. If I am no longer
> pleased with it, I move on.
Lovely.
>>> Well duh, nice evidence. I guess one has to be a really smart guy to
>>> figure that much out.
>>>
>>> From where I am standing, choice is good, even if it means making the
>>> wrong one once in a while.
>>
>> And it means having fewer desktop Linux users.
>
> Like I care.
So why talk about things you do not care about?
>> Again, I am not saying I
>> want anyone to stop this - but it should be understood.
>>
>>>>>> something they do not think about but belittle others when this
>>>>>> "wisdom" is questioned or it is pointed out that evidence shows
>>>>>> there are downsides to choice.
>>>>>
>>>>> What this guy writes (I have read it before as I found it a catchy
>>>>> title) is not at all relevant to how your average GNU/Linux user
>>>>> (which is of a higher techinical calibre than your average
>>>>> Windows/Mac user) experience the choice offered by F/OSS and
>>>>> GNU/Linux. These people chose for more choice.
>>>>
>>>> How is it not relevant?
>>>
>>> Because we choose for it. Whatever this Barry dude thinks, it doesn't
>>> apply when one chooses for choice, nor does it apply to those with a
>>> clear idea of how, what, why and when.
>>
>> How do you prevent the psychological effects that are common to most if not
>> all humans? That, really, is the question. And the answer is you do not -
>> hence it is relevant.
>
> So you think you know me better than I do myself, isn't it? Clue: you
> don't. And neither does "Barry".
As I have said, I cannot prove things about yourself - but neither can you.
The discussion, of course, is not about you. You change it to being about
you and then say I cannot prove things about you. Lovely. You might be an
exception... though there is no reason to think so. So?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
One Shot, One Kill
"chrisv" <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:tjelu5ljdcl3vl79h...@4ax.com...
chrisv is a liar. chrisv is a stupid piece of shit.
DFS
> On 2010-05-11, the following emerged from the brain of DFS:
>> on 5/11/2010 11:33 am, chrisv wrote:
>>
>>> There is no such thing as "too much choice" in a free market.
>>
>> Yes there is.
>
> No there isn't.
>
>> Go to www.newegg.com and build a new computer:
>
> Okay. Without even *visiting* the site I can tell you the following:
>
>> CPU
>
> I want an AMD with 4 cores. Should be
> fairly easy.
Why AMD?
Why quad-core? Almost no software takes advantage of more than 2 cores.
AMD sells 12 quad-core models (across the Phenom and Phenom 2 lines).
Which chip do you want and why?
>> mobo
>
> Something by Gigabyte
Why Gigabyte?
Why not Asus or Intel or MSI or Foxconn?
> and with a socket that takes my brand new AMD
> CPU. Should have an AMD/ATI chipset too.
Gigabyte sells 22 AMD mobos.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010200022%2050001314&name=GIGABYTE
Which do you want and why?
>> memory
>
> 4GB of whatever, as long as it fits my motherboard. Don't care about
> the brand.
"whatever"? "don't care"?
Too much choice already defeated you, and you haven't even *visited* the
website.
/eom
TomB
>>>> making a wrong choice. That's evident, and I don't need a book or
>>>> studies to tell me that.
>>>
>>> There is that, but there is also not being as satisfied with the
>>> choice even when you make the "right" choice.
>>
>> Typical psych/filo nonsense. If one's not satisfied with the choice
>> they made, it was the wrong choice.
>
> You claim it is "nonsense", but show no counter-reasoning... nothing
> to explain why you think the studies are wrong. In other words, you
> use your own version of baseless "wisdom" to counter scientific
> studies.
How about logic? Not being satified by the choice you made, means you
made the wrong choice. Not 'baseless wisdom'. Just logic. Saying that
one may not be satisfied after making the right choice, is nonsense.
>>>>>>> It is just accepted "wisdom",
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, it's an /opinion/ shared by many if not all GNU/Linux
>>>>>> users. Choice is good.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is an unsupported opinion. And there is contrary evidence
>>>>> that is ignored.
>>>>
>>>> What evidence? That increased choice increases the possibility of
>>>> making the wrong choice, or may even cause someone to block and
>>>> not make a choice at all.
>>>
>>> And can lead to people having less satisfaction with the choice
>>> they make... even if it is not "wrong".
>>
>> Those people have weak minds. I know the type.
>
> See: your own feelings are setting what you believe here. Nothing
> in the evidence says these people have "weak minds".
Neither does it say otherwise.
>>>> Well duh, nice evidence. I guess one has to be a really smart guy
>>>> to figure that much out.
>>>>
>>>> From where I am standing, choice is good, even if it means making
>>>> the wrong one once in a while.
>>>
>>> And it means having fewer desktop Linux users.
>>
>> Like I care.
>
> So why talk about things you do not care about?
I rarely talk about user share. See, I'm not talking about it again!
>>> Again, I am not saying I want anyone to stop this - but it should
>>> be understood.
>>>
>>>>>>> something they do not think about but belittle others when
>>>>>>> this "wisdom" is questioned or it is pointed out that evidence
>>>>>>> shows there are downsides to choice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What this guy writes (I have read it before as I found it a
>>>>>> catchy title) is not at all relevant to how your average
>>>>>> GNU/Linux user (which is of a higher techinical calibre than
>>>>>> your average Windows/Mac user) experience the choice offered by
>>>>>> F/OSS and GNU/Linux. These people chose for more choice.
>>>>>
>>>>> How is it not relevant?
>>>>
>>>> Because we choose for it. Whatever this Barry dude thinks, it
>>>> doesn't apply when one chooses for choice, nor does it apply to
>>>> those with a clear idea of how, what, why and when.
>>>
>>> How do you prevent the psychological effects that are common to
>>> most if not all humans? That, really, is the question. And the
>>> answer is you do not - hence it is relevant.
>>
>> So you think you know me better than I do myself, isn't it? Clue:
>> you don't. And neither does "Barry".
>
> As I have said, I cannot prove things about yourself - but neither
> can you. The discussion, of course, is not about you. You change
> it to being about you and then say I cannot prove things about you.
Excuse me, but *you* changed to subject to me: "how do you prevent" &
"the answer is you do not". Before that I was talking in general
terms.
> Lovely.
Indeed. Lovely how you accuse me of your actions.
Now it's up to you to apologize, like a decent human being. The
problem is that you won't.
> You might be an exception... though there is no reason to think so.
> So?
Yeah, so? Like I initially said: it doesn't apply to those that chose
for choice. And that's more people than just me. All exceptions.
--
BOFH excuse #197:
I'm sorry a pentium won't do, you need an SGI to connect with us.
TomB
> On 5/11/2010 7:07 PM, TomB wrote:
>> On 2010-05-11, the following emerged from the brain of DFS:
>>> on 5/11/2010 11:33 am, chrisv wrote:
>>>
>>>> There is no such thing as "too much choice" in a free market.
>>>
>>> Yes there is.
>>
>> No there isn't.
>>
>>> Go to www.newegg.com and build a new computer:
>>
>> Okay. Without even *visiting* the site I can tell you the following:
>>
>>> CPU
>>
>> I want an AMD with 4 cores. Should be
>> fairly easy.
>
> Why AMD?
It's what I buy, for no particular reason.
> Why quad-core? Almost no software takes advantage of more than 2 cores.
Virtualization software does, and I use that a lot.
> AMD sells 12 quad-core models (across the Phenom and Phenom 2 lines).
> Which chip do you want and why?
>
> http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/processors/phenom/Pages/AMD-phenom-processor-model-numbers-feature-comparison.aspx
>
> http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/processors/phenom-ii/Pages/phenom-ii-model-number-comparison.aspx
First one under € 125,00. Don't care about any particular features. I
know they all support paravirtualization and that's all I really need.
>>> mobo
>>
>> Something by Gigabyte
>
> Why Gigabyte?
Same story as AMD. Added bonus: Gigabyte sounds cool.
> Why not Asus or Intel or MSI or Foxconn?
>
>
>
>> and with a socket that takes my brand new AMD
>> CPU. Should have an AMD/ATI chipset too.
>
> Gigabyte sells 22 AMD mobos.
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010200022%2050001314&name=GIGABYTE
>
> Which do you want and why?
After eliminating the small form factor boards and those without an
AMD/ATI chipset, I'm sure only a few will remain. I'll take the first
one under € 100.00.
>>> memory
>>
>> 4GB of whatever, as long as it fits my motherboard. Don't care about
>> the brand.
>
> "whatever"? "don't care"?
>
> Too much choice already defeated you, and you haven't even *visited* the
> website.
That's your interpretation. Mine is that I am the one that defeats
choice. I'll probably let the price be a deciding factor here.
--
BOFH excuse #445:
Browser's cookie is corrupted -- someone's been nibbling on it.
Snit
AM:
> On 2010-05-12, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> TomB stated in post 20100512...@usenet.drumscum.be on 5/12/10 1:51 AM:
>>
>>>>> It's clear that having lots of choice increases the 'risk' of
>>>>> making a wrong choice. That's evident, and I don't need a book or
>>>>> studies to tell me that.
>>>>
>>>> There is that, but there is also not being as satisfied with the
>>>> choice even when you make the "right" choice.
>>>
>>> Typical psych/filo nonsense. If one's not satisfied with the choice
>>> they made, it was the wrong choice.
>>
>> You claim it is "nonsense", but show no counter-reasoning... nothing
>> to explain why you think the studies are wrong. In other words, you
>> use your own version of baseless "wisdom" to counter scientific
>> studies.
>
> How about logic? Not being satified by the choice you made, means you
> made the wrong choice. Not 'baseless wisdom'. Just logic. Saying that
> one may not be satisfied after making the right choice, is nonsense.
You and I have different intuitions about this. Mine are supported by
research and evidence. Yours is not supported.
But let us look at things with your perspective: would you agree that if a
situation will lead to people being less satisfied with whatever choice they
have, then that situation leads to less valuable choices? If so, and if the
data is right (and there is no contrary data that has been posted), then
having more choices leads to *all* of the choices being less valuable. All.
You see, the question is not just the value of the choice, but the
*perceived* value. And more choices, the data shows, leads to a lower
perceived value of even the best choice.
Again, I am not saying this means we need to some how have some top-down
control of distros. That would not only be against the OSS philosophy but
would be impossible to control (unrealistic *and* undesirable). But let us
not pretend that the situation does not have downsides.
...
>>> Those people have weak minds. I know the type.
>>
>> See: your own feelings are setting what you believe here. Nothing
>> in the evidence says these people have "weak minds".
>
> Neither does it say otherwise.
Nor does it say they have wings and talons... but why would you postulate
that?
...
>> You might be an exception... though there is no reason to think so.
>> So?
>
> Yeah, so? Like I initially said: it doesn't apply to those that chose
> for choice. And that's more people than just me. All exceptions.
You *say* it does not apply to people who seek more choice - but you show no
evidence to support that. Do you have any?
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Snit
AM:
> On 2010-05-12, the following emerged from the brain of DFS:
>> On 5/11/2010 7:07 PM, TomB wrote:
>>> On 2010-05-11, the following emerged from the brain of DFS:
>>>> on 5/11/2010 11:33 am, chrisv wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There is no such thing as "too much choice" in a free market.
>>>>
>>>> Yes there is.
>>>
>>> No there isn't.
>>>
>>>> Go to www.newegg.com and build a new computer:
>>>
>>> Okay. Without even *visiting* the site I can tell you the following:
>>>
>>>> CPU
>>>
>>> I want an AMD with 4 cores. Should be
>>> fairly easy.
>>
>> Why AMD?
>
> It's what I buy, for no particular reason.
So you buy based on ignorance of the choices. OK.
>> Why quad-core? Almost no software takes advantage of more than 2 cores.
>
> Virtualization software does, and I use that a lot.
Agreed. I use it a lot as well... though am currently using just a dual
core.
>> AMD sells 12 quad-core models (across the Phenom and Phenom 2 lines).
>> Which chip do you want and why?
>>
>> http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/processors/phenom/Pages/AMD-phenom-pro
>> cessor-model-numbers-feature-comparison.aspx
>>
>> http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/processors/phenom-ii/Pages/phenom-ii-m
>> odel-number-comparison.aspx
>
> First one under € 125,00. Don't care about any particular features. I
> know they all support paravirtualization and that's all I really need.
Again: you are not really worried about choice - you are willing to let the
site pick for you based on the first one it showed you.
>>>> mobo
>>>
>>> Something by Gigabyte
>>
>> Why Gigabyte?
>
> Same story as AMD. Added bonus: Gigabyte sounds cool.
Again: no real choice being made. Just habit.
>> Why not Asus or Intel or MSI or Foxconn?
>>
>>
>>
>>> and with a socket that takes my brand new AMD
>>> CPU. Should have an AMD/ATI chipset too.
>>
>> Gigabyte sells 22 AMD mobos.
>>
>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010200022%205000
>> 1314&name=GIGABYTE
>>
>> Which do you want and why?
>
> After eliminating the small form factor boards and those without an
> AMD/ATI chipset, I'm sure only a few will remain. I'll take the first
> one under € 100.00.
So let the site chose for you. OK.
>>>> memory
>>>
>>> 4GB of whatever, as long as it fits my motherboard. Don't care about
>>> the brand.
>>
>> "whatever"? "don't care"?
>>
>> Too much choice already defeated you, and you haven't even *visited* the
>> website.
>
> That's your interpretation. Mine is that I am the one that defeats
> choice. I'll probably let the price be a deciding factor here.
You said you would let the site pick for you - first one it presents is fine
by you.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
JEDIDIAH
>
>
>> Dumfsck wrote:
>>>
>>> chrisv wrote:
>>>
>>> So all the Linux assholes (snip lies)
>
> We do not insult the typical Windows user for his or her choice. We
> understand their fear, uncertainty, and doubt of choosing an "obscure"
> alternative that most people haven't even heard about. We acknowledge
> that for many people Windows is the best choice, at this point in
> time.
The Lemming fear mongers have spent decades beating the drums and
trying to scare everyone away from alternative platforms and even
alternatives that exist within WinDOS itself.
[deletia]
--
These Mac Fanboys want vi imposed on everyone. |||
/ | \
DFS
>> Dumfsck wrote:
>>>
>>> chrisv wrote:
>>>
>>> So all the Linux assholes (snip lies)
Restore truth:
So all the Linux assholes insulting the "Windows monoculture" and
"Windows isn't good because it's popular" and "Windows drones" and
"Windows lemmings" and so on can kiss my ass.
> We do not insult the typical Windows user for his or her choice. We
> understand their fear, uncertainty, and doubt of choosing an "obscure"
> alternative that most people haven't even heard about.
How's that possible? Linux "advocate" Chris Hunter says it has 100% of
the desktops in China, and much of India. That's about 500 million
right there.
Local "advocate" 7 says Linux is used in 75% of all new software projects.
So how is it possible Linux is obscure?
> We acknowledge
> that for many people Windows is the best choice, at this point in
> time.
Not just for many people - for most people. Nearly all, in fact, given
that it offers by far the best combination of usability, apps, games,
and hardware support.
> We just think that, in a more fair and well-informed market,
> many more people would choose Linux than do today,
The weenie-ness of Linux "advocates" just comes drooling out everytime
your pieholes open.
The market has always been and [hopefully] will always be fair. Anybody
that wants to sell Linux OEM systems is free to do so, and always has
been. Dell was doing it back in 1999, but quit after a couple of years.
Dell and HP have been selling Linux systems for the last couple of
years at least. Some retailers have been selling Linux distros for at
least 13 years. BestBuy for about 10 years as I recall.
What you IDIOTS really mean by a "fair market" is one where you can
dictate that all existing large OEMS (such as Dell, HP, Acer, Lenovo)
preinstall and support Linux in all models in their entire product line,
and market it at parity alongside Windows.
Curiously (or not), you're not at all willing to risk your own money on
such a debacle. In fact, most of you won't even buy preinstalled Linux
systems (Homer claimed he was going to buy a Dell-Ubuntu system but when
they became available he started tossing out conditions).
And due to the Internet and tech sites and comparison and review tests
of all operating systems, the market is more "well-informed" than ever -
and that's exactly why they don't choose Linux.
> and the world would be
> better-off. That's why we advocate.
The world would be worse off, trying to migrate their lifetime of
Windows apps and docs and knowledge over to the Linux platform.
Have you kept your lame "advocate" eyes shut to the 6-year Linux
migration fiasco happening in Munich Germany?
> By the way, I'm certain that, out of the tens of thousands of posts
> made by advocates, one could find some loosely-worded posts that seem
> to say "Windows users are stupid".
There's no "seems to say" about it. It's easy to find Linux jerks
making identical or very similar claims.
> But that does not mean that anyone
> here thinks "Windows users are stupid". *Obviously*
Windummies, Winidiots, Windozers, etc.
>>>> There is no such thing as "too much choice" in a free market.
>>>
>>> Yes there is.
>
> Nope. No such thing. A free market self-regulates and achieves an
> equilibrium.
So you're saying the market is free, but you're also complaining that
it's not fair. Gotcha. Good "advocate".
The availability of 44 different ATX12V power supplies in the 501-600W
range is too many choices (in my opinion of course).
>>> Go to www.newegg.com and build a new computer:
>
> Huh?
huh? You snipped and ran from the request, exactly because you can't
explain why you chose each part over another.
I have TomB on the run as well.
Same thing happens when "advocates" are asked to explain why someone
should choose 1 of the 171 desktop distros listed here:
You can't say why - because so many are nearly identical in features and
functionality.
> I've done it many times, and will do it again.
>
> Because of the massive amount of choice, I end-up with a PC which is
> more optimized for what a want, compared to if I had to choose from
> the packages provided by computer OEM's.
I used to think that, too, but it turns out there's so many choices in
pre-built systems we would be perfectly happy with, for maybe less money
and definitely less hassle.
I recently built a system. The only thing it has that would be hard (or
impossible) to find in a prebuilt system is the very sweet Seasonic X650
power supply. Maybe I get Crucial RAM instead of Corsair, but 4gb of
DDR3 1333 is 4gb of DDR3 1333.
TomB
> TomB stated in post 20100512...@usenet.drumscum.be on 5/12/10 11:12
> AM:
>
>> On 2010-05-12, the following emerged from the brain of DFS:
>>> On 5/11/2010 7:07 PM, TomB wrote:
>>>> On 2010-05-11, the following emerged from the brain of DFS:
>>>>> on 5/11/2010 11:33 am, chrisv wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> There is no such thing as "too much choice" in a free market.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes there is.
>>>>
>>>> No there isn't.
>>>>
>>>>> Go to www.newegg.com and build a new computer:
>>>>
>>>> Okay. Without even *visiting* the site I can tell you the following:
>>>>
>>>>> CPU
>>>>
>>>> I want an AMD with 4 cores. Should be
>>>> fairly easy.
>>>
>>> Why AMD?
>>
>> It's what I buy, for no particular reason.
>
> So you buy based on ignorance of the choices. OK.
Yup. That's Snit, pulling baseless conclusions out of his arse again.
>>> Why quad-core? Almost no software takes advantage of more than 2 cores.
>>
>> Virtualization software does, and I use that a lot.
>
> Agreed. I use it a lot as well... though am currently using just a dual
> core.
As am I. But it's not enough anymore.
>>> AMD sells 12 quad-core models (across the Phenom and Phenom 2 lines).
>>> Which chip do you want and why?
>>>
>>> http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/processors/phenom/Pages/AMD-phenom-pro
>>> cessor-model-numbers-feature-comparison.aspx
>>>
>>> http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/processors/phenom-ii/Pages/phenom-ii-m
>>> odel-number-comparison.aspx
>>
>> First one under € 125,00. Don't care about any particular features. I
>> know they all support paravirtualization and that's all I really need.
>
> Again: you are not really worried about choice
Exactly.
> you are willing to let the
> site pick for you based on the first one it showed you.
No, *I* am picking it, based on *my* criteria, ie. it has to be AMD,
it must have 4 cores, and it must be under € 125. Very reasonable
criteria.
>>>>> mobo
>>>>
>>>> Something by Gigabyte
>>>
>>> Why Gigabyte?
>>
>> Same story as AMD. Added bonus: Gigabyte sounds cool.
>
> Again: no real choice being made. Just habit.
Never change a winning team.
>>> Why not Asus or Intel or MSI or Foxconn?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> and with a socket that takes my brand new AMD
>>>> CPU. Should have an AMD/ATI chipset too.
>>>
>>> Gigabyte sells 22 AMD mobos.
>>>
>>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010200022%205000
>>> 1314&name=GIGABYTE
>>>
>>> Which do you want and why?
>>
>> After eliminating the small form factor boards and those without an
>> AMD/ATI chipset, I'm sure only a few will remain. I'll take the first
>> one under € 100.00.
>
> So let the site chose for you. OK.
What the hell is wrong with you? Is it 'jump to random odd
conclusions day'?
*My* criteria: form factor, chipset (yes, I like ATI/AMD), AM3 socket,
and price.
>>>>> memory
>>>>
>>>> 4GB of whatever, as long as it fits my motherboard. Don't care about
>>>> the brand.
>>>
>>> "whatever"? "don't care"?
>>>
>>> Too much choice already defeated you, and you haven't even *visited* the
>>> website.
>>
>> That's your interpretation. Mine is that I am the one that defeats
>> choice. I'll probably let the price be a deciding factor here.
>
> You said you would let the site pick for you - first one it presents is fine
> by you.
Oh, it's also 'claim that someone said something he didn't say day'?
Thanks for letting me know!
--
BOFH excuse #60:
system has been recalled
TomB
> TomB wrote:
>
>> Shit wrote:
>>>
>>> It is not supported that it has no downside for them.
>>
>>Who talked about 'no downsides'? I know I didn't. All I'm saying is
>>that GNU/Linux users chose to have the choices, and that they can deal
>>with those choices and the possibility of making poor choices along
>>the way.
>
> The trolling dumbshits often trot-out this nonsense, that we "don't
> understand the advantages of limited choice". Of course we do. The
> advantages are *obvious*. Less design costs, increased efficiences of
> scale, reduced inventory...
>
> It's just that the advantages are outweighed by the disadvantages.
Well stated. And it's true for suppliers as well as customers.
>>It's clear that having lots of choice increases the 'risk' of making a
>>wrong choice. That's evident, and I don't need a book or studies to
>>tell me that.
>>
>>The alternative is having no or limited choice, and be stuck with
>>that. I'd rather be able to think for myself, including any mistakes I
>>may make when doing so.
>
> Well, you'll sure as fsck get the "wrong choice" if someone else makes
> it for you, unless your extremely fortunate to be ideally served by
> the "compromise solution".
And even then the other person will be very likely to get 'the wrong
choice'.
To return back to out beloved topic GNU/Linux distributions: image if
all distros were like Gentoo. All those in favor of rolling releases
and source based packaging would be very well served. All the rest
would be, well, fscked.
>>From where I am standing, choice is good, even if it means making the
>>wrong one once in a while.
>
> *Every* product market on the planet proves that the consumer is best
> served by choice, despite any inefficiencies. Why these stupid trolls
> think that they can convince anyone that computer software is any
> different, is beyond me.
Indeed. Hell, even our friends in Redmond realize this and offer
Windows 7 in 6 different versions.
--
BOFH excuse #415:
Maintenance window broken
Snit
PM:
...
>>>> Why AMD?
>>>
>>> It's what I buy, for no particular reason.
>>
>> So you buy based on ignorance of the choices. OK.
>
> Yup. That's Snit, pulling baseless conclusions out of his arse again.
You are not basing your choices on knowledge but on "no particular reason".
>>>> Why quad-core? Almost no software takes advantage of more than 2 cores.
>>>
>>> Virtualization software does, and I use that a lot.
>>
>> Agreed. I use it a lot as well... though am currently using just a dual
>> core.
>
> As am I. But it's not enough anymore.
>
>>>> AMD sells 12 quad-core models (across the Phenom and Phenom 2 lines).
>>>> Which chip do you want and why?
>>>>
>>>> http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/processors/phenom/Pages/AMD-phenom-p
>>>> ro
>>>> cessor-model-numbers-feature-comparison.aspx
>>>>
>>>> http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/processors/phenom-ii/Pages/phenom-ii
>>>> -m
>>>> odel-number-comparison.aspx
>>>
>>> First one under € 125,00. Don't care about any particular features. I
>>> know they all support paravirtualization and that's all I really need.
>>
>> Again: you are not really worried about choice
>
> Exactly.
>
>> you are willing to let the
>> site pick for you based on the first one it showed you.
>
> No, *I* am picking it, based on *my* criteria, ie. it has to be AMD,
> it must have 4 cores, and it must be under € 125. Very reasonable
> criteria.
You already said you just pick the "first one" that matches some criteria
you selected for "no particular reason".
>>>>>> mobo
>>>>>
>>>>> Something by Gigabyte
>>>>
>>>> Why Gigabyte?
>>>
>>> Same story as AMD. Added bonus: Gigabyte sounds cool.
>>
>> Again: no real choice being made. Just habit.
>
> Never change a winning team.
Pretty much just habit... much like "following a herd"
>>>> Why not Asus or Intel or MSI or Foxconn?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> and with a socket that takes my brand new AMD
>>>>> CPU. Should have an AMD/ATI chipset too.
>>>>
>>>> Gigabyte sells 22 AMD mobos.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010200022%2050
>>>> 00
>>>> 1314&name=GIGABYTE
>>>>
>>>> Which do you want and why?
>>>
>>> After eliminating the small form factor boards and those without an
>>> AMD/ATI chipset, I'm sure only a few will remain. I'll take the first
>>> one under € 100.00.
>>
>> So let the site chose for you. OK.
>
> What the hell is wrong with you? Is it 'jump to random odd
> conclusions day'?
>
> *My* criteria: form factor, chipset (yes, I like ATI/AMD), AM3 socket,
> and price.
You already said you just pick the "first one" that matches some criteria
you selected for "no particular reason".
But when I believe you I am jumping to a "random odd conclusion". Nope.
>>>>>> memory
>>>>>
>>>>> 4GB of whatever, as long as it fits my motherboard. Don't care about
>>>>> the brand.
>>>>
>>>> "whatever"? "don't care"?
>>>>
>>>> Too much choice already defeated you, and you haven't even *visited* the
>>>> website.
>>>
>>> That's your interpretation. Mine is that I am the one that defeats
>>> choice. I'll probably let the price be a deciding factor here.
>>
>> You said you would let the site pick for you - first one it presents is fine
>> by you.
>
> Oh, it's also 'claim that someone said something he didn't say day'?
> Thanks for letting me know!
You already said you just pick the "first one" that matches some criteria
you selected for "no particular reason".
Now you do not like it. Whatever.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
TomB
> PM:
>
> ...
>>>>> Why AMD?
>>>>
>>>> It's what I buy, for no particular reason.
>>>
>>> So you buy based on ignorance of the choices. OK.
>>
>> Yup. That's Snit, pulling baseless conclusions out of his arse again.
>
> You are not basing your choices on knowledge but on "no particular reason".
And since when does 'no particular reason' equals 'ignorance'? Since
when does not having a particular reason means lack of knowledge?
Did I really? Wanting 4 cores for better virtualization is 'no
particular reason'? Limiting my budget to € 125 is 'no particular
reason'?
Excuse me, I wasn't aware of that...
>>>>>>> mobo
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Something by Gigabyte
>>>>>
>>>>> Why Gigabyte?
>>>>
>>>> Same story as AMD. Added bonus: Gigabyte sounds cool.
>>>
>>> Again: no real choice being made. Just habit.
>>
>> Never change a winning team.
>
> Pretty much just habit... much like "following a herd"
Yeah, sure. *Everybody* buys Gigabyte motherboards!
>>>>> Why not Asus or Intel or MSI or Foxconn?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> and with a socket that takes my brand new AMD
>>>>>> CPU. Should have an AMD/ATI chipset too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gigabyte sells 22 AMD mobos.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010200022%2050
>>>>> 00
>>>>> 1314&name=GIGABYTE
>>>>>
>>>>> Which do you want and why?
>>>>
>>>> After eliminating the small form factor boards and those without
>>>> an AMD/ATI chipset, I'm sure only a few will remain. I'll take
>>>> the first one under € 100.00.
>>>
>>> So let the site chose for you. OK.
>>
>> What the hell is wrong with you? Is it 'jump to random odd
>> conclusions day'?
>>
>> *My* criteria: form factor, chipset (yes, I like ATI/AMD), AM3
>> socket, and price.
>
> You already said you just pick the "first one" that matches some
> criteria you selected for "no particular reason".
>
> But when I believe you I am jumping to a "random odd conclusion".
> Nope.
Right, because budget, form factor, socket type and chipset are 'no
particular reasons'.
I'm learning here!
>>>>>>> memory
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4GB of whatever, as long as it fits my motherboard. Don't care
>>>>>> about the brand.
>>>>>
>>>>> "whatever"? "don't care"?
>>>>>
>>>>> Too much choice already defeated you, and you haven't even
>>>>> *visited* the website.
>>>>
>>>> That's your interpretation. Mine is that I am the one that
>>>> defeats choice. I'll probably let the price be a deciding factor
>>>> here.
>>>
>>> You said you would let the site pick for you - first one it
>>> presents is fine by you.
>>
>> Oh, it's also 'claim that someone said something he didn't say
>> day'? Thanks for letting me know!
>
> You already said you just pick the "first one" that matches some
> criteria you selected for "no particular reason".
Still not 'letting the site pick for me', but yes, now that I know
that budget, chipset, form factor, socket type, and 4 cores for better
virtualization are 'no particular reasons', you are actually making
sense.
> Now you do not like it. Whatever.
Oh no, I do like it. I just didn't know about those criteria being 'no
particular reasons'!
--
BOFH excuse #90:
Budget cuts
Snit
PM:
You realize you said things that you do not like: that you just pick the
"first one" that matches some criteria you selected for "no particular
reason", and instead of rescinding your claim you are just playing games.
Nobody called you ignorant or said you lacked knowledge. But yet you
pretended someone did.
Nobody is denying you use some criteria... but you are pretending someone
did.
You are not being honest.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
TomB
>
> You realize you said things that you do not like: that you just pick the
> "first one" that matches some criteria you selected for "no particular
> reason", and instead of rescinding your claim you are just playing games.
Another one of your oddball conclusions. AMD and Gigabyte are "my
brands". That's what I buy. The day these brands no longer please me,
I will move on to something else, but up to now I have always been
pleased with those brands, so I see no reason to even consider
something else. I have always been satisfied by that choice.
All my other criteria, including bugdet, are very sensible, and
memory, PSU and case I just don't care about, so those are mainly
selected based on their price.
You conclusing from that is that I 'let the site' choose. It's the
wrong conclusion.
> Nobody called you ignorant or said you lacked knowledge. But yet you
> pretended someone did.
You:
"So you buy based on ignorance of the choices. OK."
"You are not basing your choices on knowledge..."
> Nobody is denying you use some criteria... but you are pretending someone
> did.
You're the one who pretended they were all 'selected for no particular
reason', even in this last reply of yours. They aren't.
> You are not being honest.
Right back at ya!
--
BOFH excuse #72:
Satan did it
chrisv
> chrisv <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Dumfsck wrote:
>>>>
>>>> chrisv wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So all the Linux assholes (snip lies)
>>
>> We do not insult the typical Windows user for his or her choice. We
>> understand their fear, uncertainty, and doubt of choosing an "obscure"
>> alternative that most people haven't even heard about. We acknowledge
>> that for many people Windows is the best choice, at this point in
>> time.
>
> The Lemming fear mongers have spent decades beating the drums and
>trying to scare everyone away from alternative platforms and even
>alternatives that exist within WinDOS itself.
Of course. Micro$oft works hard to make it as difficult as possible
to "leave the fold" or to choose an alternate platform. They have
been very successful. Micro$oft is to blame for that, not Joe Average
User.
--
'Which "open standard" formats would these be? The ones that are still
non standard or the MS Office ones which are used in 95% or more of
businesses?' - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark
chrisv
>Not to me. Armoured with the above, I will have my PC put together in
>no time. And be very pleased with it for the next couple of years.
It's truly mind-boggling that the trolls, for an example of "to much
choice" making things a "nightmare", choose a very successful and
popular business.
Astonishing. Unbelievable.
chrisv
>Oh, it's also 'claim that someone said something he didn't say day'?
Shit doesn't do that all the time? Since when?
"Explain how you determined what bread to buy. What about your
ignorance of the other brands and types of bread? So you admit that
you sometimes don't check the bottom shelf? You bought a popular
brand, you mindless herd-follower. What if you make the 'wrong'
choice?"
Sheesh, why bother with such dishonest idiots?
Ezekiel
"TomB" <tommy.b...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:201005131...@usenet.drumscum.be...
> On 2010-05-13, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>
>> You realize you said things that you do not like: that you just pick the
>> "first one" that matches some criteria you selected for "no particular
>> reason", and instead of rescinding your claim you are just playing games.
>
> Another one of your oddball conclusions. AMD and Gigabyte are "my
> brands". That's what I buy. The day these brands no longer please me,
> I will move on to something else, but up to now I have always been
> pleased with those brands, so I see no reason to even consider
> something else. I have always been satisfied by that choice.
>
> All my other criteria, including bugdet, are very sensible, and
> memory, PSU and case I just don't care about, so those are mainly
> selected based on their price.
FWIW - based on my personal experience you should reconsider buying a PSU
based on price. I've owned a few name brand computers but I usually build my
own. A few years ago I built a decent machine with a cheapo PSU. The machine
ran fine for about 4-5 months until the PSU died and decided to take the
mobo and CPU with it. The RAM and peripherals survived but it wasn't fun
replacing both the mobo+cpu.
Since then I've been more selective about my PSU. I have no emperical
evidence but suspect that having a PSU that delivers clean and stable
voltages is both better for the long term health for the computer and helps
improve system stability.
TomB
Never had any problems with the PSUs that come with the case. Right
now I don't even know what brand the PSU in my main box has. I know it
has been running flawless for over 3 years now, and my previous one
did the same.
--
BOFH excuse #429:
Temporal anomaly
Snit
AM:
> On 2010-05-13, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>
>> You realize you said things that you do not like: that you just pick the
>> "first one" that matches some criteria you selected for "no particular
>> reason", and instead of rescinding your claim you are just playing games.
>
> Another one of your oddball conclusions. AMD and Gigabyte are "my
> brands". That's what I buy. The day these brands no longer please me,
> I will move on to something else, but up to now I have always been
> pleased with those brands, so I see no reason to even consider
> something else. I have always been satisfied by that choice.
>
> All my other criteria, including bugdet, are very sensible, and
> memory, PSU and case I just don't care about, so those are mainly
> selected based on their price.
>
> You conclusing from that is that I 'let the site' choose. It's the
> wrong conclusion.
Who, other than the site, is the one who picks the order of selections of
which you pick the "first one" of? I say it is the site... and thus you are
letting the site make the choice for you... but if you think someone else is
making the choice of the order who... and then you are letting that person
or group make the choice for you (you are not really picking among the
choices - just grabbing the first one... only making a "choice" by the
weakest view of the concept)
>> Nobody called you ignorant or said you lacked knowledge. But yet you
>> pretended someone did.
>
> You:
>
> "So you buy based on ignorance of the choices. OK."
> "You are not basing your choices on knowledge..."
And you base your decision on no knowledge - which does not mean you do not
have the knowledge. My first sentence there, though, is incorrect and I
stand corrected.
For what it is worth, I do what you do - I am not ignorant of how to change
my oil, but I let someone else do it and I let them decide how they want to
do it. I do not even watch.
>> Nobody is denying you use some criteria... but you are pretending someone
>> did.
>
> You're the one who pretended they were all 'selected for no particular
> reason', even in this last reply of yours. They aren't.
Read the whole phrase I have been using. Please. I am not saying you use no
criteria:
you just pick the "first one" that matches some criteria
you selected for "no particular reason"
And you do. Or so you say you do. But notice where I make it very clear
you have "some criteria". And you pretend I am saying you have none.
Now, you caught me in a mistake - I should not have said you base it on
ignorance... you might be very knowledgeable and just opt to not use that
knowledge in your choices... my wording did not indicate that (and is easily
interpreted to mean something very different). Can you admit to your
mistake here?
>> You are not being honest.
>
> Right back at ya!
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
DFS
I paid $170 for this power supply a few months ago:
chrisv
>>
>> FWIW - based on my personal experience
Why should we care about what you claim your experience is, you filthy
lying asshole?
--
"Somehow, it's always about the money with Linux/OSS greedy hypocrite
wackos." - trolling fsckwit Ezekiel
DFS
>> trolling fsckwit Ezekiel wrote:
>>>
>>> FWIW - based on my personal experience
>
> Why should we care about what you claim your experience is, you filthy
> lying asshole?
Because he's smarter than you, more experienced than you, and more
versed in technology than you.
That's why, turd.
One Shot, One Kill
"chrisv" <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
chrisv is a liar. chrisv is a useless piece of shit.
TomB
> TomB stated in post 201005131...@usenet.drumscum.be on 5/13/10 2:00
> AM:
>
>> On 2010-05-13, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>>
>>> You realize you said things that you do not like: that you just
>>> pick the "first one" that matches some criteria you selected for
>>> "no particular reason", and instead of rescinding your claim you
>>> are just playing games.
>>
>> Another one of your oddball conclusions. AMD and Gigabyte are "my
>> brands". That's what I buy. The day these brands no longer please
>> me, I will move on to something else, but up to now I have always
>> been pleased with those brands, so I see no reason to even consider
>> something else. I have always been satisfied by that choice.
>>
>> All my other criteria, including bugdet, are very sensible, and
>> memory, PSU and case I just don't care about, so those are mainly
>> selected based on their price.
>>
>> You conclusing from that is that I 'let the site' choose. It's the
>> wrong conclusion.
>
> Who, other than the site, is the one who picks the order of
> selections of which you pick the "first one" of?
That's not what I said. I said that I'll take the first one under €
125 from the few boards that remain after applying my criteria (ie.
AM3 socket, ATX form factor, Gigabyte and AMD/ATI chipset. It has
nothing to do with what order the site displays the boards in. First
read and understand. Then comment.
I just went to the site and after applying my criteria I have two
boards left to choose from. Both are under € 125, so I'd take the
'expensive' one.
>>> Nobody called you ignorant or said you lacked knowledge. But yet
>>> you pretended someone did.
>>
>> You:
>>
>> "So you buy based on ignorance of the choices. OK." "You are not
>> basing your choices on knowledge..."
>
> And you base your decision on no knowledge - which does not mean you
> do not have the knowledge.
Okay, fair enough.
> My first sentence there, though, is incorrect and I stand corrected.
No problem.
>>> Nobody is denying you use some criteria... but you are pretending
>>> someone did.
>>
>> You're the one who pretended they were all 'selected for no
>> particular reason', even in this last reply of yours. They aren't.
>
> Read the whole phrase I have been using. Please. I am not saying
> you use no criteria:
>
> you just pick the "first one" that matches some criteria you
> selected for "no particular reason"
>
> And you do. Or so you say you do.
You make it sound like *all* my criteria are selected without reason.
They aren't. Yes, the brand of the mobo and the cpu are (well,
actually the reason is that my experience with those brands is very
good - that's why I keep buying them), but wanting an AM3 socket, 4
cores and an AMD/ATI chipset (radeonhd!) aren't. Not is the price (I
always set a budget when I'm buying something, and I rarely go over
it).
> But notice where I make it very clear you have "some criteria". And
> you pretend I am saying you have none.
No, I'm noting that you pretend they're all without reason. But they
aren't.
--
BOFH excuse #202:
kernel panic: write-only-memory (/dev/wom0) capacity exceeded.
Snit
AM:
> On 2010-05-13, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> TomB stated in post 201005131...@usenet.drumscum.be on 5/13/10 2:00
>> AM:
>>
>>> On 2010-05-13, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>>>>
>>>> You realize you said things that you do not like: that you just
>>>> pick the "first one" that matches some criteria you selected for
>>>> "no particular reason", and instead of rescinding your claim you
>>>> are just playing games.
>>>
>>> Another one of your oddball conclusions. AMD and Gigabyte are "my
>>> brands". That's what I buy. The day these brands no longer please
>>> me, I will move on to something else, but up to now I have always
>>> been pleased with those brands, so I see no reason to even consider
>>> something else. I have always been satisfied by that choice.
>>>
>>> All my other criteria, including bugdet, are very sensible, and
>>> memory, PSU and case I just don't care about, so those are mainly
>>> selected based on their price.
>>>
>>> You conclusing from that is that I 'let the site' choose. It's the
>>> wrong conclusion.
>>
>> Who, other than the site, is the one who picks the order of
>> selections of which you pick the "first one" of?
>
> That's not what I said.
It is a question. Not a claim of what you said. What you said is not under
contention.
But you are not willing to answer the question.
Nope. You have criteria... you made that clear. But you pick the "first
one" that matches that criteria.
To quote you:
First read and understand. Then comment.
> They aren't. Yes, the brand of the mobo and the cpu are (well,
> actually the reason is that my experience with those brands is very
> good - that's why I keep buying them), but wanting an AM3 socket, 4
> cores and an AMD/ATI chipset (radeonhd!) aren't. Not is the price (I
> always set a budget when I'm buying something, and I rarely go over
> it).
>
>> But notice where I make it very clear you have "some criteria". And
>> you pretend I am saying you have none.
>
> No, I'm noting that you pretend they're all without reason. But they
> aren't.
First read and understand. Then comment.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
TomB
Oh, it is. I never said that I pick the first one from a listing. I
have said that I pick the first one below my budget out of the choices
that remain after applying my criteria.
Read. Understand.
> But you are not willing to answer the question.
Your question is silly. You're asking me about something I don't do. I
don't pick 'the first item from a listing'. That's what *you* made of
it.
Reread. Understand. Here:
>> You make it sound like *all* my criteria are selected without
>> reason.
>
> Nope. You have criteria... you made that clear.
Yes I did. And than you came and concluded that they are *all* without
a particular reason:
>>> you just pick the "first one" that matches some criteria you
>>> selected for "no particular reason"
This entire sentence is bullshit, and doesn't match what I said at
all. It's just another one of your twisted conclusions. The correct
summary would be:
From the few options (in case of the mobo: two) that remain after
applying my criteria, I pick the first one that's below my budget.
--
BOFH excuse #234:
Someone is broadcasting pygmy packets and the router doesn't know how
to deal with them.
Snit
PM:
...
>>>> Who, other than the site, is the one who picks the order of
>>>> selections of which you pick the "first one" of?
>>>
>>> That's not what I said.
>>
>> It is a question. Not a claim of what you said. What you said is
>> not under contention.
>
> Oh, it is.
Not by me. If you wish to disagree with what you said then so be it.
> I never said that I pick the first one from a listing. I have said that I pick
> the first one below my budget out of the choices that remain after applying my
> criteria.
>
> Read. Understand.
You still are running from my question. You said:
I'll take the first one under € 100.00 [that fits my criteria]
and:
First one under € 125,00 [that fits my criteria].
In relation to those comments I asked:
Who, other than the site, is the one who picks the order
of selections of which you pick the "first one" of?
And you have no answer. You say it is not the site, but... well... who or
what?
...
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
TomB
Haha, indeed.
--
BOFH excuse #28:
CPU radiator broken
TomB
> PM:
>
> ...
>>>>> Who, other than the site, is the one who picks the order of
>>>>> selections of which you pick the "first one" of?
>>>>
>>>> That's not what I said.
>>>
>>> It is a question. Not a claim of what you said. What you said is
>>> not under contention.
>>
>> Oh, it is.
>
> Not by me. If you wish to disagree with what you said then so be
> it.
I never talked about an order of selections. That's something *you*
made up.
>> I never said that I pick the first one from a listing. I have said
>> that I pick the first one below my budget out of the choices that
>> remain after applying my criteria.
>>
>> Read. Understand.
>
> You still are running from my question. You said:
>
> I'll take the first one under € 100.00 [that fits my criteria]
>
> and:
>
> First one under € 125,00 [that fits my criteria].
>
> In relation to those comments I asked:
>
> Who, other than the site, is the one who picks the order of
> selections of which you pick the "first one" of?
>
> And you have no answer. You say it is not the site, but... well...
> who or what? ...
Are you really too dim to understand that I'm not talking about a
presented order? "Picking the first one" is not "picking the first one
from a list presented by a website". I am picking based on budget. It
has nothing to do with the order of presentation. You are making that
up.
To answer your question, silly as it may be: the order is set by me,
mentally, by price. I then discard anything above my budget. Then,
from the few remaining choices, I am likely to pick to one that's <=
my budget.
No use continuing here. This is too silly for words.
--
BOFH excuse #319:
Your computer hasn't been returning all the bits it gets from the Internet.
Snit
PM:
> On 2010-05-13, the following emerged from the brain of Snit:
>> TomB stated in post 201005132...@usenet.drumscum.be on 5/13/10 1:20
>> PM:
>>
>> ...
>>>>>> Who, other than the site, is the one who picks the order of
>>>>>> selections of which you pick the "first one" of?
>>>>>
>>>>> That's not what I said.
>>>>
>>>> It is a question. Not a claim of what you said. What you said is
>>>> not under contention.
>>>
>>> Oh, it is.
>>
>> Not by me. If you wish to disagree with what you said then so be
>> it.
>
> I never talked about an order of selections. That's something *you*
> made up.
What comment I said was from you was "made up" by me. Answer: none. But
have fun looking.
>>> I never said that I pick the first one from a listing. I have said
>>> that I pick the first one below my budget out of the choices that
>>> remain after applying my criteria.
>>>
>>> Read. Understand.
>>
>> You still are running from my question. You said:
>>
>> I'll take the first one under € 100.00 [that fits my criteria]
>>
>> and:
>>
>> First one under € 125,00 [that fits my criteria].
>>
>> In relation to those comments I asked:
>>
>> Who, other than the site, is the one who picks the order of
>> selections of which you pick the "first one" of?
>>
>> And you have no answer. You say it is not the site, but... well...
>> who or what? ...
>
> Are you really too dim to understand that I'm not talking about a
> presented order? "Picking the first one" is not "picking the first one
> from a list presented by a website". I am picking based on budget. It
> has nothing to do with the order of presentation. You are making that
> up.
So you picked the first one but not in order of presentation. Um, then in
what order?
> To answer your question, silly as it may be: the order is set by me,
> mentally, by price. I then discard anything above my budget. Then,
> from the few remaining choices, I am likely to pick to one that's <=
> my budget.
>
> No use continuing here. This is too silly for words.
You said you picked the first one that fit your criteria. Now you are
denying you do so. Yeah, this is silly.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
Hadron
TomB playing his dunderhead games again?
It was clear that he said he would pick the first one that met his
criteria regardless of others being potentially MORE suitable.
Its a bit like his squirm about leaving root windows open, compiling as
root, allowing ssh access or ./configure not being the norm.
I don't know why you bother.
TomB
Oh, look who felt the uncontrollable urge to make an amazing
contribution.
Eager to prove that you're at least as dim as Snit? Congratulations,
your support just did!
--
BOFH excuse #378:
Operators killed by year 2000 bug bite.
Hadron
Huh? What are you talking about? You do a lot of random waffling these
days. Yet never seem to answer the questions posed. Why is that?
>
> Eager to prove that you're at least as dim as Snit? Congratulations,
> your support just did!
Snit has rope-a-doped you quite thoroughly.
Considering that I have, on several times, pointed out your rather
amateurish and imbecilic disregard for proper practices when
administering Linux systems you should be thanking me, not riling me
into pointing out more of your bullshit and word games.
You DID say you picked the first one that met your criteria proving that
the rest of the "choices" were not even on your radar.
So why lie about it?
Ezekiel
Hopefully you'll be luckier than I was. I've never had a problem until that
one time but frying everything once was enough for me.
Ezekiel
"chrisv" <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:9ldou55hc92bi28oe...@4ax.com...
>> trolling fsckwit Ezekiel wrote:
>>>
>>> FWIW - based on my personal experience
>
> Why should we care about what you claim your experience is, you filthy
> lying asshole?
I wasn't talking to you dick breath. Stay in your sewer and mind your own
damn business.
Ezekiel
"DFS" <nospam@dfs_.com> wrote in message
news:hshbtf$5de$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
On sale now for $160. I also get my stuff from NewEgg. If it ships from New
Jersey (most of it does) then I'll get it next-day if I order by
mid-afternoon.
I don't remember which model I have but they almost always have some good
deals on PSU's. Personally I'm not looking for a $15 PSU that I can get for
$12. I'm more interested in $100-$150 unit that I can get for about half
price. My last couple of machines were built to be fast and quiet and a PSU
with a large low-RPM cooling fan makes a big difference keeping the noise
levels down.
Snit
4:18 PM:
>>> Are you really too dim to understand that I'm not talking about a
>>> presented order? "Picking the first one" is not "picking the first one
>>> from a list presented by a website". I am picking based on budget. It
>>> has nothing to do with the order of presentation. You are making that
>>> up.
>>
>> So you picked the first one but not in order of presentation. Um, then in
>> what order?
>
>
> TomB playing his dunderhead games again?
>
> It was clear that he said he would pick the first one that met his
> criteria regardless of others being potentially MORE suitable.
>
> Its a bit like his squirm about leaving root windows open, compiling as
> root, allowing ssh access or ./configure not being the norm.
>
> I don't know why you bother.
He *sometimes* tries to be reasonable.
--
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
DFS
Yet neither of you could even attempt to explain how and why you chose
the exact make and model of the 8 components I asked about (TomB gave up
after a half-ass attempt at 3 pieces, but he couldn't even adequately
explain why he wanted a certain CPU, and turd chrisv just slunk away
like the usual chickenshit he is).
And I know why you ran away: when you start digging into the vast
assortment of products at www.newegg.com you'll be overwhelmed and start
screaming to yourselves "There's too many choices!!!! Help me DFS!"
TomB
> On 5/13/2010 4:29 PM, TomB wrote:
>> On 2010-05-13, the following emerged from the brain of chrisv:
>>> TomB wrote:
>>>
>>>> Not to me. Armoured with the above, I will have my PC put together in
>>>> no time. And be very pleased with it for the next couple of years.
>>>
>>> It's truly mind-boggling that the trolls, for an example of "to much
>>> choice" making things a "nightmare", choose a very successful and
>>> popular business.
>>>
>>> Astonishing. Unbelievable.
>>
>> Haha, indeed.
>
>
> Yet neither of you could even attempt to explain how and why you chose
> the exact make and model of the 8 components I asked about (TomB gave up
> after a half-ass attempt at 3 pieces, but he couldn't even adequately
> explain why he wanted a certain CPU, and turd chrisv just slunk away
> like the usual chickenshit he is).
Is it so hard to imagine that at one point in time one decides that
AMD makes good processors, and then decides to stick with it?
Honestly, my only criteria for a CPU are that it's AMD, has 4 cores
(for virtualization), and that is's under EUR 125. When I picked my
current processor (an AMD X2 64 4400) I also had to make sure that it
had paravirtualization support and that it was 64 bit.
Choice is easy. If I were to buy at newegg (which I don't by the way - I buy
at the local computer shop), the only processor that meets my criteria
would be an Athlon II X4 at 105.99. This processor has all I need for
less than I was willing to pay. This makes me one happy consumer.
The great thing about the other options (of which I discard *a lot* up
front) is that I know they are there the day I am no longer pleased
with AMD.
> And I know why you ran away: when you start digging into the vast
> assortment of products at www.newegg.com you'll be overwhelmed and start
> screaming to yourselves "There's too many choices!!!! Help me DFS!"
Rofl. Instead we pick, buy and use. No big deal.
--
BOFH excuse #355:
Boredom in the Kernel.
TomB
>>
>> Eager to prove that you're at least as dim as Snit? Congratulations,
>> your support just did!
>
> Snit has rope-a-doped you quite thoroughly.
Yup. By pulling 'picking the first one' out of context and making it
mean something completely else. At this point there are two options:
* he really is as stupid as he comes accross
* he's willfully misinterpreting what I have said, and thus is just
trolling
With Snit it often boils down to these two options, and I suspect that
it is the second one each and every time.
Your support of that is just idiotic of course.
> Considering that I have, on several times, pointed out your rather
> amateurish and imbecilic disregard for proper practices when
> administering Linux systems you should be thanking me, not riling me
> into pointing out more of your bullshit and word games.
Should I also be thanking you for claiming that I said things I never
said?
> You DID say you picked the first one that met your criteria proving that
> the rest of the "choices" were not even on your radar.
Sure a lot of options aren't even on my radar. But they'll be there
once I no longer like the choices I'm making now. The fact that the
choices are there doesn't mean one has to consider them each and every
time.
> So why lie about it?
I don't. All the lies and twist are on Snit. It's he who claims that I
'let the site pick' when I say that *I* choose to buy according to *my
own* budget. For some reason he feels the need to twist my words into
meaning something completely else.
And you choose to support that. No surprise.
--
BOFH excuse #387:
Your computer's union contract is set to expire at midnight.
Chris Ahlstrom
> On 2010-05-13, the following emerged from the brain of Hadron:
>
>> TomB playing his dunderhead games again?
>>
>> It was clear that he said he would pick the first one that met his
>> criteria regardless of others being potentially MORE suitable.
>>
>> Its a bit like his squirm about leaving root windows open, compiling as
>> root, allowing ssh access or ./configure not being the norm.
>
> Oh, look who felt the uncontrollable urge to make an amazing
> contribution.
>
> Eager to prove that you're at least as dim as Snit? Congratulations,
> your support just did!
Snit is a genius compared to that box of rocks.
--
Truth is the most valuable thing we have -- so let us economize it.
-- Mark Twain
Hadron
> TomB wrote:
>
>>Not to me. Armoured with the above, I will have my PC put together in
>>no time. And be very pleased with it for the next couple of years.
>
> It's truly mind-boggling that the trolls, for an example of "to much
> choice" making things a "nightmare", choose a very successful and
> popular business.
>
> Astonishing. Unbelievable.
What is astonishing and unbelievable is that despite ALL the evidence
and research you still don't get it. While we all realise you're a foul
mouthed "Turd", I think it is DFS christened you, there really is no
reason to show your ignorance quite so often.
Hadron
Ha Ha indeed what? That you're both clueless? Try reading the research
or do your OWN. I realise giving something back or thinking for
yourselves is not on the agenda but do try.
Try thinking and not mindlessly believing every mantra that comes your
way.
Here's a simple thing : compare the menus in a TOP RATED
hotel/restaurant to that of some down town truckers hole. One will have
a few high quality items the other a plethora of unhealthy muck. Some places
even have zillions of similar items. Guess which is considered
better. Have you never heard someone say "There are too many things here
I cant decide"??!?!?
The FACTS are that Desktop Linux confuses people. Too many releases, too
many distros and too much diversion from the central core.