Yeah….I’m obviously “that guy”:

So, I’ve been rather intensively attempting to actually learn something about computers, by way of the following (rather circuitous) route

First, I’m running debian.  I am fully aware that there are petabytes worth of other Linux distribuitons around, but fundamentally,  all of those distros fall into one of the following broad categories:

Debian/Red-hat derivs.


In other words: there is Debian and Redhat (“Fedora” is not substantively different from redhat, except inasmuch as it is “community” driven, and lacks the “tech support” offered by Redhat corporation, itself.)

Those are the two primary “base”-distributions from which broad “families” of other distros ultimately derive.

A lot of these other “distros” either begin as somebody thinking “wow, I halfway like Debian/Redhat etc. — but I think such-and-such should be done differently.”

That’s what I’ve concluded: most other “distros” at least start out as “tweaked” versions of either Debian, or Redhat.  (Again, I can’t really bring myself to take the “Fedora vs. redhad” distinction seriously).

Now, I’ve used both “families” of distros in the past — Linux Mint, Ubuntu, “Scientific Linux” , MEPIS, etc.

So yeah, I did the (infamous) “distro-hopping” thing.

So, why did I settle on Debian, then?

Quite frankly, it wouldn’t be that difficult to base an entire “distro”  — at least the prototype version — by somebody “tweaking” their debian install the way they like it, and then creating an instal image from that.  It wouldn’t even ben difficult to continue using debian’s repositories, if you wanted to.

At any rate, yeah, I finally decided to stabilize on Debian, because it is basically the “base” distro from which a mind-bogglingly vast array of more specialized (or straight-out gimmicky?) distros derive.

In fact, that’s the first – and most fundamental — thing to understand if you’re going to go to a site like Distrowatch: probably the first thing to take note of when examining any “distro” is: what do project-leader/project-team regard as its ‘base”?

For example: both Ubuntu and Mepis began as “tweaked” versions of Debian, and — in fact — continue to use the Debian package management (.deb packages).

This is, of course, not to say that anything which began as (merely) a customized Debian variant/”unnoficial” fork etc., will continue to be fully compatible with Debian, itself.

Over time, the amount of “tweaks” done tend to – cumulatively — lead to what I can best describe as “subspecies” — the fact that something which began as essentially a “snapshot” of somebody’s dream version of Debian (or Red Hat) ends up being not entirely compatible (by “default”).

A great example of what can happen with this is even mentioned in Debian’s docs:

Now, here’s the thing:

Outside of the Debian/Redhat “famlies” of distros, there are weird things which I’m personally not interesting (at this time) in playing around with.

The two most obvious are Slackware and Gentoo.

As an added level of precaution/convenience, since my system has two physical hard drives installed, during the last installation, I decided to install the “home” directories on the 500 GB drive, and have all of the “system”-related stuff on the other.

That way, if something goes horribly wrong, I can simply reinstall without damaging my “home” directory, and suchlike.

At least, that’s the theory.  🙂

(Yes, I realize I need to do periodic backups — especially of stuff I don’t want to risk losing).

But yeah…it appears that I am (gradually) doing pretty much what everybody else does, when they leave the Micro$oft “playpen”.





Did you ever wonder what Karl would be like if he had actual skills?

He’d probably be somewhat like Richard Stallman.

Here is an off-site link to Stallman’s publicity-packet thingy:!msg/mysociety-community/zkyZpOXjgoQ/_8xyXSxv9zYJ

Richard Stallman is a very strange man.  Having said that, he has actually done an amazingly  valuable thing by springboarding both the FLOSS (Free, Libre, Open-source Software) and “Free culture” movements.  These have both  fueled the “IP Skeptic”/pro-public domain movement.

At any rate, Stallman’s personal idiosyncracies are actually pretty charming and “eccentric”, as compared to Karl (Ka3rcs).  Plus, he devised  the GNU variant of EMACS, which is just about the most convoluted and over-developed text editor in history. 🙂

Plus, the “Friendly parrot” thing is…..funny?  I dunno.


Another instance of mollycoddling hypocritical “subcultures”:

In some of the subcultures Ward studied, straight MSM were able to reinterpret homosexual identity as actually strengthening their heterosexual identities. So it was with Silva’s subjects as well — they found ways to cast their homosexual liaisons as reaffirming their rural masculinity. One way they did so was by seeking out partners who were similar to them. “This is a key element of bud-sex,” writes Silva. “Partnering with other men similarly privileged on several intersecting axes—gender, race, and sexual identity—allowed the participants to normalize and authenticate their sexual experiences as normatively masculine.” In other words: If you, a straight guy from the country, once in a while have sex with other straight guys from the country, it doesn’t threaten your straight, rural identity as much as it would if instead you, for example, traveled to the nearest major metro area and tried to pick up dudes at a gay bar.

TL;DR: Sometimes, stereotypical “redneck’ dudes/White Suburbanites  ass-fuck one another/suck one another off, etc.  Then they go home to their wives and children, and (most likely) bitch and whine  about the “gay agenda”.

Now, I’m definitely no fan of “gay-bashing”, but….I can’t help thinking that the world would be just a bit better if some of these slimy, hypocritical, closet-cases ended up dead, and stuffed into somebody’s crawlspace.

Well, ,maybe not that, but….in some ways, these “not-gay-but-sometimes-we-suck-each-other-off-out-in-the barn”-types are the most “faggy”, of all:

Used by J.D. Salinger, in the first chapter of ‘The Catcher in the Rye’ , roughly in the same sense of definition 5 by deniseitsdenise, i.e. weak, powerless
You couldn´t see the grandstand too hot, but you could hear them all yelling, deep and terrific on the Pencey side, because practically the whole school except me was there, and scrawny and FAGGY on the Saxon Hall side, beacuse the visiting team hardly ever brought many people with them


More thoughts on why Karl will always fail:

In  any given undertaking, it is helpful – actually, critically important – to ask oneself  a series of questions :

  1. What am I trying to do?
  2. Why do I want to do it?
  3. What physical resources does it require?
  4. What information do I need to know, in order to make this happen?
  5. How long is it likely to take?
  6. How much space will it require?
  7. What financial resources (if any) will this require?

You get the idea. The answers to the above questions (and many others) are crucial components of knowing what one is doing.

Predictably, Karl has never (seriously) asked any of the above questions, in regard to his “computer museum” — which is why had has made no progress whatsoever on the “project” over the 25+ years of our “friendship”.

What he has done (in lieu of such planning) is the following:

  1. Amass a vast morass of random detritus, most of which was acquired from hamfests, because others didn’t want to be bothered loading it back into their vehicles.
  2. Cram the above-mentioned detritus into every available inch of space wherever he happened to be living at any given time.  (His parents basement/garage, his grandparents’ house, etc.) — while at the same time, continuing to compulsively acquire MORE of the same.
  3. NEVER meaningfully “sort” any of it — at any of the above-mentioned locations.
  4. When it became impossible to cram any more unsorted  debris into the above-mentioned locations, acquire a myriad of storage-units, which were then crammed floor-to-ceiling, as per the above ‘method”.
  5.  Whenever one of the existing storage-units became overly full, rent another one — and repeat step #5 above.

Result?   His rickety shit-bucket of a jeep is illegal to drive at all.  Even if it was legal to drive, it would still be insufficiently reliable for him to drive across two counties, to go to the storage units.

Even if he could drive to the storage units, he cannot do any meaningful level of sorting in a timely fashion.

Even if had had sufficient time in which to do such sorting the fact that all of the storage units and his trailer are crammed floor-to-ceiling with other such debris necessarily means that he has “no space to do it”.

To put it bluntly: his compulsive hoarding, coupled with his total inability to plan, prioritize, or structure ANY aspect of his existence, has now BITTEN HIM IN HIS FLABBY, WHITE ASS.



Karl can’t even manage to be stupid in an “original” fashion:

So last night (before he deluded himself into believing that I had “insulted” him, threw a tantrum, and hung up on me), Karl had spent an inordinate amount of time blathering about the following two themes:

“Matter is Energy given form by thought”


“Manifesting abundance”

IN other words, he’s basically your typical “New Age” imbecile.

Now, watch this video, and then: we can come back to what I’m trying to get at, here:

Now, Karl’s gimmick consists of equivocating in regard to the key term “energy”.

Moreover, buy the attempt to make “energy” and “thought” more ontologically primary than “matter”, Karl is implicitly — hell, explicitly — committing himself to what Ayn Rand would call the “Primacy of consciousness” viewpoint.

The basic metaphysical issue that lies at the root of any system of philosophy [is] the primacy of existence or the primacy of consciousness.

The primacy of existence (of reality) is the axiom that existence exists, i.e., that the universe exists independent of consciousness (of any consciousness), that things are what they are, that they possess a specific nature, an identity. The epistemological corollary is the axiom that consciousness is the faculty of perceiving that which exists—and that man gains knowledge of reality by looking outward. The rejection of these axioms represents a reversal: the primacy of consciousness—the notion that the universe has no independent existence, that it is the product of a consciousness (either human or divine or both). The epistemological corollary is the notion that man gains knowledge of reality by looking inward (either at his own consciousness or at the revelations it receives from another, superior consciousness).

The source of this reversal is the inability or unwillingness fully to grasp the difference between one’s inner state and the outer world, i.e., between the perceiver and the perceived (thus blending consciousness and existence into one indeterminate package-deal). This crucial distinction is not given to man automatically; it has to be learned. It is implicit in any awareness, but it has to be grasped conceptually and held as an absolute.

Now, in Karl’s case, it is obvious why he would go for the “primacy of consciousness” (and its attendant dismissal/hatred of “matter”).  Karl is constantly and unremittingly defeated by literally everything else around him.  He is pervasively inept, and utterly incapable of exerting any meaningful level of “control” EVEN OVER HIMSELF.  The obesity, and compulsive hoarding, the rickety shit-bucket of a jeep — even the fact that other people can – and regularly do — dare to hold him to standards OTHER — and in many cases HIGHER THAN — his own (like for example, the employers who tend to fire him on a regular basis) — Karl is utterly and pervasively inept, and (barely) capable of even the relatively-trivial activities designated “independent living skills” (or “activities of daily living”)

  • Personal Hygiene
  • Dressing and Clothing Care
  • Health Care
  • Cooking, Eating, Nutrition
  • Home Management and Home Safety
  • Financial Management
  • Personal Growth, Awareness, and Problem Solving
  • Community Access

he would fail any such assessment.  Moreover, he (implicitly) recognizes this fact.  Rather than actually doing something to IMPROVE his level of functioning in the above-mentioned areas (which would actually require the expenditure of effort) — he takes the easiest cop-out possible:

Blame it on “The Reptilians”

Blame it on the “law of attraction”

Blame it on“Malevolent extra-dimensional entities infesting  his Grandparents’ farmhouse”)

But above all else — under NO circumstances — blame ANY of it on HIMSELF.

And THAT — his utter  lack of the ability to even CONSIDER that he might be WRONG about something — goes a long way toward explaining the (otherwise inexplicable) combination of extreme arrogance and near-total ineptitude in the same “person”.

It also goes a long way toward explaining his frantic desire to “manifest abundance” — by the only means he will allow himself – WISHING:

Again, Ayn Rand has a salient quote for that, as well:

What is the nature of that superior world to which they sacrifice the world that exists? The mystics of spirit curse matter, the mystics of muscle curse profit. The first wish men to profit by renouncing the earth, the second wish men to inherit the earth by renouncing all profit. Their non-material, non-profit worlds are realms where rivers run with milk and coffee, where wine spurts from rocks at their command, where pastry drops on them from clouds at the price of opening their mouth. On this material, profit-chasing earth, an enormous investment of virtue—of intelligence, integrity, energy, skill—is required to construct a railroad to carry them the distance of one mile; in their non-material, nonprofit world, they travel from planet to planet at the cost of a wish. If an honest person asks them: “How?”—they answer with righteous scorn that a “how” is the concept of vulgar realists; the concept of superior spirits is “Somehow.” On this earth restricted by matter and profit, rewards are achieved by thought; in a world set free of such restrictions, rewards are achieved by wishing.

And that is the whole of their shabby secret. The secret of all their esoteric philosophies, of all their dialectics and super-senses, of how their evasive eyes and snarling words, the secret for which they destroy civilization, language, industries and lives, the secret for which they pierce their own eyes and eardrums, grind out their senses, blank out their minds, the purpose for which they dissolve the absolutes of reason, logic, matter, existence, reality—is to erect upon that plastic fog a single holy absolute: their Wish.

That is also why pesky questions about how he plans to implement the “computer museum” tend to provoke a tantrum: the dirty little secret is: he DOESN’T “plan” to do it.  He is INCAPABLE of “planning” anything.

And so he sits in his trailer, listening to “creepy-pastas” and “paranormal” radio shows, and rummaging through boxes of shit nobody wanted to even load into their vehicles after 30+ years of hamfests, “dreaming” about a “computer-museum” which will never exist, and occasionally using the sink in his (otherwise-inaccessible) kitchen to wash his underwear.








Why do so many who know better, insist on mollycoddling the stupid

The particularly galling and evil part:

Tauromancy is a fraudulent system for performing ‘psychic’ readings. I made it up from scratch so there was no chance of any factors other than pure science. As with Tarot, Astrology, Numerology and Palm Reading, the reader is able to make a large number of statements about the client which appear to give information the reader could not know without special powers. The technique is called Cold Reading and is described in The Skeptic’s Guide to the Paranormal.

Using Tauromancy, I have given hundreds of readings using cold reading techniques. Despite this honesty, there have been a number of sitters who are convinced I could not have known the things I claimed to know without psychic insights. I failed to convince them otherwise.

So, what is the “take-away” here, exactly?

The really galling thing is:

Some of the most rewarding and close conversations I have ever had have resulted from doing a reading first. Cold reading offers far more than debunking psychics.

“rewarding”, and “close” conversations?

How is that even possible? 

Remember that scene in the Wizard of Oz?  That whole “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!” thing?  What this woman is doing is the equivalent of the “man behind the curtain” STEPPING OUT IN FULL VIEW OF DOROTHY & PALS, microphone in hand — painstakingly explaining EVERY CONTROL ON THE PANEL concealed “behind the curtain” — only for Dorothy to reply “oh no, that can’t be it!  You really ARE a wizard, and you just don’t know it!”.

“Tauromancy’ (and the myriad equivalents) are yet another reason why I have genuinely concluded that global nuclear war culminating in the extinction of humankind would be richly deserved.

The vast majority of these stupid fucks are incapable of appreciating the merits of a scientific, technological, (semi)-rational civilization.  They desperately want to be “fleeced”.

I cannot help but find that detestable.

Some while back, I suggested something to Karl:

A website selling “cutting edge technology” based on “fringe physics”.

“Water memory” as an information storage medium.

What this would entail is:

  1. A simple balloon filed with utterly ordinary tap-water, placed inside of an equally ordinary external Hard drive enclosure, which would then be sealed against leakage.
  2. The “device” would be equipped with a single, standard USB cable, and sold for the “reasonable” price of $150,000.

I would include a “disclaimer” consisting of some half-assed boilerplate gibberish cribbed from “radionics” and “homeopathy’ web-sites and books, as well as a none-too-subtle implication that the (predictable) failure of said “water-memory device” to actually be able to store or retrieve information, is most likely do to the user’s failure to use the “law of attraction” to full advantage:

I genuinely wonder how many of the idiotic new-age shit-clowns would

  1. pay the ridiculous amount I would charge, and:
  2. Blame themselves for not “thinking positive”, when the “water-drive” failed to work

As an added bonus, I could simply hand-wave away any complaints by insinuating that all such disgruntled customers were really “paid debunkers” used by “big data’ to “discredit my revolutionary invention”.

Given whats-her-name’s mollycoddling of those who “believe” her Taurology shtick — I’m beginning to wonder exactly why my “water-memory hard drive” would constitute any kind of “scam”.