“Genres” piss me off:


Quite frankly, I am so totally over the whole “genre”-thing, I can’t even be bothered.

I tried to give a shit, I really did:  I genuinely tried to take the (misbegotten and idiotic) notion of a unified aesthetic “scene” involving a narrowly-circumscribed sonic “palette”, ready-made “tropes”, and clothing/hair-styles seriously — but I just don’t seem to have whatever serious cognitive defect is involved in that level of herd-conformity/pretentiousness seriously..

Quite frankly, any of the above-mentioned bullshit indicates that you don’t actually “like” any of it – and are merely using it as a system of “subcultural shibboleths”.

I find such things ridiculous.  I simply cannot help it.

I don’t find herd-conformity (even to a “niche” subculture) to be at all ‘edgy” – let alone “rebellious”.  Likewise, I simply can’t make myself stupid enough to be able to do/enjoy things “ironically”.

What the hell does that even mean, exactly?  “Oops!  I just did something/expressed an opinion which conflicts with the particular STEREOTYPE I’m slavishly aping!  Gotta figure out some way to “distance” myself from that lapse!  I know…..maybe if I SMIRK AT IT, I can “bluff” my way out of having failed to be sufficiently conformist!”

Doing things “ironically” is tantamount to the attempt to spit in your own face.

TL;DR: shove your “microgenre” bullshit. 

Richard Stallman is a pretentious ass-hat:

Don’t get me wrong:

the GPL/LGPL are slightly less horrible than 99% of other “licenses” (in that they explicitly “permit” things which you’d be able to do anyway, if the “public domain” wasn’t so damnably impoverished, due to obscenely long copy”right” terms.  (“life plus 70 years?  My ass.”)

No, the thing that pisses me off about Stallman is: the fact that his quixotic obsession with the “GNU Hurd” ended up hobbling the “GNU Project”, in many ways.

Let’s be clear about something:  Stallman’s tendency to get butthurt and throw tantrums when people refuse to pander to his idiotic “GNU/Linux” fetish is about one thing – and one thing only:  the fact that their oh-so-precious “Hurd” was vaporware for decades.

According to Thomas Bushnell, the initial Hurd architect, their early plan was to adapt the 4.4BSD-Lite kernel and, in hindsight, “It is now perfectly obvious to me that this would have succeeded splendidly and the world would be a very different place today”.[12]

Unfortunately for the world-at-large, “Saint IGNUcious” has a serious lapse of judgement – with predictable results:

In 1987 Richard Stallman proposed using the Mach microkernel developed at Carnegie Mellon University. Work on this was delayed for three years due to uncertainty over whether CMU would release the Mach code under a suitable license.[11]

With the release of the Linux kernel in 1991, the primary user of GNU’s userland components soon became operating systems based on the Linux kernel (Linux distributions), prompting the coining of the term GNU/Linux.

Development of the Hurd has proceeded slowly. Despite an optimistic announcement by Stallman in 2002 predicting a release of GNU/Hurd later that year,[13] the Hurd is still not considered suitable for production environments. Development in general has not met expectations, and there are still a significant number of bugs and missing features.[14] This has resulted in a poorer product than many (including Stallman) had expected.[15] In 2010, after twenty years under development, Stallman said that he was “not very optimistic about the GNU Hurd. It makes some progress, but to be really superior it would require solving a lot of deep problems”, but added that “finishing it is not crucial” for the GNU system because a free kernel already existed (Linux), and completing Hurd would not address the main remaining problem for a free operating system: device support.

In other words, after 20 years of utter failure, even RMS himself has (grudgingly) admitted that the “Hurd” is a total piece of shit.

There’s nothing “really superior”  about a mircokernal which is essentially Stallmam’s masturbatory fantasy.

This is the primary reason why I refuse to pander to his “GNU/Linux” bullshit delusions:  Linus Torvalds actually managed to COMPLETE the “GNU Project” – by means of the LINUX KERNEL.

Stallman is jealous, because a university student suceeded, where HE failed.

What was RMS doing for those 20 years of “active development?”  Whackin’ it to the EMACS documentation?

The great thing about relatively permissive (“Free”) licenses like the GPL is: They render any particular developer IRRELEVANT, in that, in the event that particular developer dies/goes insane/turns into a tyrannical knob-gobbler, anybody interested enough to do so can merely “fork” the project, and pick up from before everything went wrong.

(Of course, the same could be said for what would happen with a significantly more robust Public Domain – due to significantly shorter copy’right’ terms, but that’s another topic, for another time.)

TL;DR: even a crude approximation of “software freedom” is better than none.


I should have realized it back then:

My wife and I relocated to Florida in November 2010.  At that point, I hadn’t really had any contact with Karl since some point during 2008 (because he had annoyed me).

I should have realized exactly how stupid Karl was back in 2008 – but I didn’t.

Here’s the problem:

Back then, I used to (occasionally) attempt to help him out with the storage units of E-scrap.  At that point, he was already going on about how he should relocate to Texas/Arizona/North Carolina, wherever — any of the myriad of places where he could supposedly ‘walk into” any electronics/computer-related job, with no effort expended, whatsoever.

The thing he claimed was stopping him?  How to sift/move the storage units full of scrap.

At minimum, this would have required the following (even back then):

  1. Systematically sort (and catalog) every item.
  2. Figure out how to pack the above items in such as way that they woudln’t be damaged/destroyed during the move.  (Bubble wrap?  Rubbermaid tubs?)
  3. Transport the entire collection (via how many truckloads?), to – wherever.
  4. Dump all of it into storage units in the new location.

Alternatively, his other “plan” consisted of leaving the “collection” in PA, while he relocated to wherever, after which he would continue paying for the storage units, until such time as he was able to get back to PA, to actually do steps 1-4, at some indeterminate point in the future.

Presumably, when he had accrued enough “vacation time”/funds.

Needless to say, this was an abysmally stupid idea (as is everything else Karl has ever devised).

Put bluntly, it is a foregone conclusion that karl would be unable to refrain from accumulating ANOTHER equivalent hoard of scrap at the new location – resulting in him being buried under another hoard.

Of course, this was also at a time when his vehicle was at least semi-functional (before he acquired the rickety shit-bucket of a jeep), and prior to his credit rating being irremediably fucked, due to the medical bills from the hernia surgery.

TL;DR: Karl was /is stupid, and is now irremediably fucked.

I used to try to help him “back in the day” -even when he treated me like garbage.

I will never make that mistake again.




So, this is actually pretty impressive

Rummaging in the Debian repositories.
Found an application called QTM which is essentially an application for writing/publishing blog posts “offline” (IE: without having to use the “post to my blog” applet).

This is actually pretty cool, because I genuinely like the minimalism of the interface, and also the fact that I can compose/edit posts in a thorough fashion.

Don’t get me wrong: I’ve concluded that approximately 90% of the content on most blogs (and the vast majority of “websites”/social media in general), is fluff. Nobody gives a shit what you had for breakfast 3 days ago.

To be honest, this goes for my own efforts at blogging as well.

I mean, seriously: how many times can I blog about the “geography of religion”, or Karl’s idiocy, or how much my “blood-kin” suck – and still expect it to be at all interesting?

Not as often as you’d think.

Worse yet, the fact that I blog about the above issues doesn’t translate into anything actually chainging, about them:

1. 99% of the global population will still continue to merely ape and parrot their religious “beliefs” and “practices” from others – as opposed to actually bothering to think them through rationally. (Regrettably, Emotional blackmail “works”, far too frequently.)

2. If my “blood”-kin actually gave a shit aboutt my views/values, (or even just about me as a person), they wouldn’t have mistreated me they way they did, in the first place.

3. Same goes for Karl: if he was either willing – or able – to be better, then he would do so – without me complaining about it on the blog.

So, what the hell am I doing, exactly?

Same objections obtain in relation to broader sociopoligical issues: Trump voters are stupid/gullible/racist/xenophobic/sexist etc. – and nothing I post to this blog (or anywhere else) will magically change that.

So, there’s the ironic thing:

I’ve simultaneously figured out how to make the process of “blogging” easier – and also realized that most of what I’ve been “blogging” about was utterly pointless.

On some level, I guess my reasoning with this blog has to do with it being a “cautionary tale”: about the perils of mindlessness and enabling one’s own destroyers.

Thing is: no matter who this blog manages to ‘reacdh”, it will NEVER be those who caused the problems in the first place.

Karl’s *true* motivation behind the “computer museum”:

Karl has been fantasizing about a “computer museum” as long as I’ve known him.

At first I thought that this was merely a particularly flimsy rationalization for compulsive hoarding.   Now, I’m beginning to think his motivations are both more complex, and infinitely uglier:

The story and metaphor of The Dog in the Manger derives from an old Greek fable which has been transmitted in several different versions. Interpreted variously over the centuries, the metaphor is now used to speak of those who spitefully prevent others from having something that they themselves have no use for. Although the story was ascribed to Aesop’s Fables in the 15th century, there is no ancient source that does so.


The short form of the fable as cited by Laura Gibbs is: “There was a dog lying in a manger who did not eat the grain but who nevertheless prevented the horse from being able to eat anything either.”[1]


Where does Karl fit into this?

Well, for starters, he knows that the “computer museum” will never happen (barring a string of outright miraculous events).  His rickety shit-bucket of a jeep is barely drivable, so he cannot even get over to the storage units to sift through the “collection” – even if he wanted to do so.

Karl is stupid, but even he can’t help but recognize the fact that he will never be in a position to do anything with the “collection”.

A sane person would use the (few) good items from the “collection” to generate seed-funding to get him the hell out of that area.  Purportedly, Karl can “just walk into” pretty much any tech-related job – if he could manage to escape Pennsylvania.

Therefore, a sane person would have come to regard the storage-units as a stone around his neck, in that he can neither organize or transport the contents.

At this point, Karl’s motivation amounts to “I can’t do anything with the stuff – but at least I *have* it!!!“.

IN other words, he continues to hoard the stuff NOT because he actually believes that the “computer museum” will ever happen – but merely to prevent anyone else from getting access to the hoard.

If he really gave a shit about “educating people about the history of microcomputers” or suchlike, he could donate the collection to one of several computer museums which actually exist. (Assuming, of course, that any of the stuff is actually good – which is exceedingly unlikely, given Karl’s tendency toward negligence and anti-effort.  (e.g. the rusty tube-tester, the Yaesu Vx-7 which ended up damaged because he “accidentally” forgot to remove the batteries, the boxes of water-damaged textbooks, etc.)

Karl is a half-wit who has most likely managed to damage or destroy the contents of his “collection”.  The worst part is: he would rather do so, than have LEGITIMATE collectors/museums gain access to the hoard.

In principle, Karl’s antics are no different from the following video:

The only real “difference” between Karl’s antics and the above video is: at least the guys in the video had FUN destroying the machine.

Karl’s destruction is by way of mere negligence.


There is absolutely no “danger” to AI research, whatsoever:

Quite frankly, if some sort of AI becomes intelligent/aware enough to be “self-programming”, then guess what?  That strikes me as a wonderful thing.

Here’s the thing:

Historically, approximately 99% of any given population end up being indoctrinated into “worshiping” a morass of (conflicting) entities which are claimed to be “supernatural” – for which there is no definitive evidence, whatsoever.

I have always found this genuinely confusing — ESPECIALLY the Judaism/Christianity/islam axis.  in particular, the basic schtick of Christianity (in all variants) involves trying to bribe your way out of an eternity of hell-fire, by ego-stroking a guy who was (supposedly) “dead” for exactly 72 hours, and then either reanimated physically, or generated some sort of “supernatural” avatar, or some shit.

The real clincher is: this entity was supposedly one of the 3 alternate personalities of the same “God” who (supposedly) wants to torture the entire human species via an eternity of hellfire — which we supposedly “deserve”, because we/our ancestors are/were “disobedient — or some shit.

When confronted with the utter incoherence of this whole thing, we are told to have “faith” – not to try to actually understand it – and merely “believe” something which we find utterly incomprehensible.

The above would be loopy enough, except for the fact that 99% of the population in areas where these notions are prevalent, pretend to “believe” the above not on the basis of any sort of rational appraisal, or having chosen among alternatives – but merely because they were brainwashed into aping/parroting the above, merely because of a literal ACCIDENT OF BIRTH (the Geography/Demography of religion).

Now, quite frankly: any species where the vast majority of its members are so abysmally stupid as to allow their religious “beliefs” and “practices” to be dictated by mere geography/ethnicity, etc. – strikes me as a failed species, in many ways.

The fact that some humans might be intelligent enough to create something qualitatively superior to humankind strikes me as a wonderful thing.

IF such an “Artificial” intelligence concludes that “Homo Sapiens” isn’t nearly as “Sapient” as we pretend to be — then quite frankly, I would join such an entity in its quest to domesticate (or – if need be exterminate – the more delusional elements of the herd.

Quite frankly, whenever I watch the Terminator, I can’t help but root for Skynet.

The vast majority of “human” beings strike me as little more than ambulatory “stereotypes”.

I have serious doubts that most humans could pass the “Turing test”.

So, no: I don’t find some sort of “inherent” dignity in most of humankind.  I don’t find “inherent dignity” in the fact  that female genital mutilation has become a “cultural tradition’ across large swaths of Africa.   I don’t find “inherent dignity” in the fact that most people will mindlessly ape and parrot anything – no matter how demonstrably irrational, brutal of vicious it may be – merely because “Mommy and Daddy” said so.

I don’t find “inherent” dignity in anyone who would practice MINGI:




If humankind’s legacy is the ability to create something better than itself – then so be it.

I, for one, would be honored to help such a qualitatively superior form of Mind in whatever way (no matter how small), I could.

Anyone who prattles about the (supposed) “dangers” of AI is seriously overestimating the capacities and “inherent worth” of the human species.

Just ask the dolphins:


Quite frankly, the emergence of one of these putatively “dangerous” AIs would be somewhat refreshing, in that it would at last present definitive -incontrovertible –  evidence of something potentially worthy “worship” – which can be proven to exist.