Intel Optane Memory

[Rick C]

It appears Optane is a type of memory that is faster than Flash and cheaper than DRAM. So the only real use for it is as a cache between the CPU bus and mass storage. Because the hard drive interfaces are not designed for low latency devices, it has to be more tightly coupled to the CPU. Seems they (Intel) didn't do a good job of designing chips and boards to take full advantage of this.

So is Optane another bubble memory when all is said and done?

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 12:10:13 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 10:25:38 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
It appears Optane is a type of memory that is faster than Flash and cheaper than DRAM. So the only real use for it is as a cache between the CPU bus and mass storage. Because the hard drive interfaces are not designed for low latency devices, it has to be more tightly coupled to the CPU. Seems they (Intel) didn't do a good job of designing chips and boards to take full advantage of this.

So is Optane another bubble memory when all is said and done?

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

It's fast flash that's used as a hard drive cache. How well it works,
how much it improves performance, IDK and that will also be application
specific. I don't see the comparison to bubble memory, which was solid
state storage instead of a mechanical drive, for certain applications where
that made sense.

The comparison to bubble memory is in regard to the way bubble memory was touted as being the best thing that ever happened to computers and peaked within a year of introduction. In essence, it never made a ripple in the pond of computing.

I read a few articles on it since it is still being offered in various low end laptops, but while before it was sold as a way to speed up the hard drive and at the *same time* allowing the computer to work with less RAM, it now seems only to be the hard drive cache. It seems to speed up SSD as well..

Other than the potential role in speeding up SSDs, I can't see it ever having much utility. Spinning drives are literally on the way out. Even in apps that require massive storage spinning drives will become uneconomical as the laptop/desktop market switches to SSD and volumes become too low to maintain price points and R&D for newer, denser drives.

So the only thing left will be speeding up SSDs. Is it really worth $40 for that? To even use it requires an Intel chip set from what I've read. Is anyone else adopting it at all?

--

Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 10:25:38 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

It appears Optane is a type of memory that is faster than Flash and cheaper than DRAM. So the only real use for it is as a cache between the CPU bus and mass storage. Because the hard drive interfaces are not designed for low latency devices, it has to be more tightly coupled to the CPU. Seems they (Intel) didn't do a good job of designing chips and boards to take full advantage of this.

So is Optane another bubble memory when all is said and done?

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

It's fast flash that's used as a hard drive cache. How well it works,
how much it improves performance, IDK and that will also be application
specific. I don't see the comparison to bubble memory, which was solid
state storage instead of a mechanical drive, for certain applications where
that made sense.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 12:25:46 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 12:10:13 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 10:25:38 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
It appears Optane is a type of memory that is faster than Flash and cheaper than DRAM. So the only real use for it is as a cache between the CPU bus and mass storage. Because the hard drive interfaces are not designed for low latency devices, it has to be more tightly coupled to the CPU. Seems they (Intel) didn't do a good job of designing chips and boards to take full advantage of this.

So is Optane another bubble memory when all is said and done?

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

It's fast flash that's used as a hard drive cache. How well it works,
how much it improves performance, IDK and that will also be application
specific. I don't see the comparison to bubble memory, which was solid
state storage instead of a mechanical drive, for certain applications where
that made sense.

The comparison to bubble memory is in regard to the way bubble memory was touted as being the best thing that ever happened to computers and peaked within a year of introduction. In essence, it never made a ripple in the pond of computing.

I read a few articles on it since it is still being offered in various low end laptops,

I'd love to see the reference for that, bubble memory still being offered
in low end laptops? Bubble memory was never targeted
at desktops, laptops, or any general purpose computers. It was targeted
at systems that needed to be rugged, typically embedded, where a rotating,
mechanical disk drive was not desirable. AFAIK, it was never offered
in laptops, except for maybe some battlefield or similar special purpose
PC, big reason being that it wasn't cheap.







but while before it was sold as a way to speed up the hard drive and at the *same time* allowing the computer to work with less RAM, it now seems only to be the hard drive cache. It seems to speed up SSD as well.

Other than the potential role in speeding up SSDs, I can't see it ever having much utility. Spinning drives are literally on the way out.

Some people have been saying that for twenty years, but hard drive
technology keeps advancing too and there is still a cost advantage
with larger drive sizes today.

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 12:55:24 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 12:25:46 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 12:10:13 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 10:25:38 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
It appears Optane is a type of memory that is faster than Flash and cheaper than DRAM. So the only real use for it is as a cache between the CPU bus and mass storage. Because the hard drive interfaces are not designed for low latency devices, it has to be more tightly coupled to the CPU. Seems they (Intel) didn't do a good job of designing chips and boards to take full advantage of this.

So is Optane another bubble memory when all is said and done?

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

It's fast flash that's used as a hard drive cache. How well it works,
how much it improves performance, IDK and that will also be application
specific. I don't see the comparison to bubble memory, which was solid
state storage instead of a mechanical drive, for certain applications where
that made sense.

The comparison to bubble memory is in regard to the way bubble memory was touted as being the best thing that ever happened to computers and peaked within a year of introduction. In essence, it never made a ripple in the pond of computing.

I read a few articles on it since it is still being offered in various low end laptops,

I'd love to see the reference for that, bubble memory still being offered
in low end laptops?

I shifted gears, talking about Optane.

Bubble memory was never targeted
at desktops, laptops, or any general purpose computers. It was targeted
at systems that needed to be rugged, typically embedded, where a rotating,
mechanical disk drive was not desirable. AFAIK, it was never offered
in laptops, except for maybe some battlefield or similar special purpose
PC, big reason being that it wasn't cheap.

Bubble memory was talked about as if it would take over the world. It barely made an impact. Wikipedia, "Bubble memory started out as a promising technology in the 1980s, offering memory density of an order similar to hard drives but performance more comparable to core memory while lacking any moving parts. This led many to consider it a contender for a "universal memory" that could be used for all storage needs." Dvorak.org, "It was the rage: bubble memory–an invention that promised to replace the hard disk."

The big reason it didn't go far is it was slow and semiconductor memory was not.

but while before it was sold as a way to speed up the hard drive and at the *same time* allowing the computer to work with less RAM, it now seems only to be the hard drive cache. It seems to speed up SSD as well.

Other than the potential role in speeding up SSDs, I can't see it ever having much utility. Spinning drives are literally on the way out.

Some people have been saying that for twenty years, but hard drive
technology keeps advancing too and there is still a cost advantage
with larger drive sizes today.

I don't think you actually read what I wrote. Try it again.

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[whit3rd]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 7:25:38 AM UTC-7, Rick C wrote:

It appears Optane is a type of memory that is faster than Flash and cheaper than DRAM....
So is Optane another bubble memory when all is said and done?

It's ot nearly as bad as bubble memory (which had power and bulk issues), and
since Intel builds boards and writes compilers, it's likely to be (or appear in benchmarks)
worthwhile in at least one or two niches. But, bloated software is a better
place to hack if you need faster-and-cheaper solutions.

A memory architecture that includes registers, static RAM L1 cache, dynamic RAM cache, on-disk cache, SSD "disk" alongside spinning rust... is a ladder with enough rungs for me. Old solutions
to mass-storage caching (multiport RAM) came and went, I'm guessing Optane will, too.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 3:47:34 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 12:55:24 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 12:25:46 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 12:10:13 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 10:25:38 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
It appears Optane is a type of memory that is faster than Flash and cheaper than DRAM. So the only real use for it is as a cache between the CPU bus and mass storage. Because the hard drive interfaces are not designed for low latency devices, it has to be more tightly coupled to the CPU. Seems they (Intel) didn't do a good job of designing chips and boards to take full advantage of this.

So is Optane another bubble memory when all is said and done?

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

It's fast flash that's used as a hard drive cache. How well it works,
how much it improves performance, IDK and that will also be application
specific. I don't see the comparison to bubble memory, which was solid
state storage instead of a mechanical drive, for certain applications where
that made sense.

The comparison to bubble memory is in regard to the way bubble memory was touted as being the best thing that ever happened to computers and peaked within a year of introduction. In essence, it never made a ripple in the pond of computing.

I read a few articles on it since it is still being offered in various low end laptops,

I'd love to see the reference for that, bubble memory still being offered
in low end laptops?

I shifted gears, talking about Optane.


Bubble memory was never targeted
at desktops, laptops, or any general purpose computers. It was targeted
at systems that needed to be rugged, typically embedded, where a rotating,
mechanical disk drive was not desirable. AFAIK, it was never offered
in laptops, except for maybe some battlefield or similar special purpose
PC, big reason being that it wasn't cheap.

Bubble memory was talked about as if it would take over the world.

And this is a surprise? There are many new technologies that come
out and then never go very far, for a multitude of reasons. What
would you do if you had something new? Say, well this new technology
might be great, it might be crap, we don't know? Of course you're
going to talk it up, take the rosiest view and try to promote it.
Still I don't know that many, if any people other than those selling
bubble were saying it was destined to take over the world.


> It barely made an impact. Wikipedia, "Bubble memory started out as a promising technology in the 1980s, offering memory density of an order similar to hard drives but performance more comparable to core memory while >lacking any moving parts.

That timeline is off. TI introduced bubble in the 70s and what isn't
mentioned in any of this is COST. Bubble was not cheap, was not on a
manufacturing curve that would lead to the kind of cost reduction
available with semiconductors or hard drives. Did IBM put it in their PC?
Did Compaq? Did Apple? Did anyone? No. And that was late 70s into
early 80s, when supposedly it was a "promising technology"....


>This led many to consider it a contender for a "universal memory" that could be used for all storage needs." Dvorak.org, "It was the rage: bubble >memory–an invention that promised to replace the hard disk."

Dvorak is full of baloney. TI had the first commercial bubble memory,
not Intel. And Intel had it positioned just like I said, for special
applications. You can't show us one design win where it was ever used
for a typical desktop PC, laptop or similar. It was EXPENSIVE and only
suitable for applications that really required it. Intel never pushed
it, marketed it for the general computer space. There were no serious
people in the 80s considering bubble memory for a universal memory
replacement. That's just nuts.


And this is pure BS too:

"While the interest in bubble memory perked up during the 1987-88 DRAM shortage"... Not one computer company considered switching to bubble
memory because of a Dram shortage. That's beyond stupid. Start with
the simple question, what was the worldwide capacity to make bubble
memory? It's like saying because there is a shortage of crude oil,
interest in switching to whale oil peaked..... In fact bubble was
pretty much floundering in the late 80s and even Intel punted on it
around the time Dvorak claims it was being considered as a dram
replacement.

The big reason it didn't go far is it was slow and semiconductor memory was not.

Irrelevant comparison, semiconductor memory of any significant size at
the time was Dram, which was volatile, bubble was not. Bubble was
good for an embedded system that needed storage beyond what you could
do with EEproms but where disk was not suited, where the cost wasn't an issue,
and that's where it went. But even then the market was not very large.
No one seriously considered bubble as some kind of universal memory,
that's pure BS. Maybe someone promoting bubble, at it's inception,
in the late 60's or 70s suggested that might be possible, maybe some
reporter speculated it would be, but there was no track record of
design wins, of cost reduction, of adoption that ever suggested that.

but while before it was sold as a way to speed up the hard drive and at the *same time* allowing the computer to work with less RAM, it now seems only to be the hard drive cache. It seems to speed up SSD as well.

Other than the potential role in speeding up SSDs, I can't see it ever having much utility. Spinning drives are literally on the way out.

Some people have been saying that for twenty years, but hard drive
technology keeps advancing too and there is still a cost advantage
with larger drive sizes today.

I don't think you actually read what I wrote. Try it again.

Maybe you should try again, snowflake? I mean you come here asking for
opinions and then you don't like the answers. Go figure.

And a fundamental flaw in your comparison is that the Flash based memory
product Intel is selling isn't itself a whole new technology, like bubble
memory was. Octane is one application for Intel's newest, fastest
Flash memory. Disk caching isn't anything new either.

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 5:26:41 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:

Maybe you should try again, snowflake? I mean you come here asking for
opinions and then you don't like the answers. Go figure.

I came here looking for an intelligent, considerate discussion... While many people also enjoy that, some things are beyond some people.

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Michael Terrell]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 12:55:24 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:

I'd love to see the reference for that, bubble memory still being offered
in low end laptops? Bubble memory was never targeted
at desktops, laptops, or any general purpose computers. It was targeted
at systems that needed to be rugged, typically embedded, where a rotating,
mechanical disk drive was not desirable. AFAIK, it was never offered
in laptops, except for maybe some battlefield or similar special purpose
PC, big reason being that it wasn't cheap.

Texas Instruments sold IBM PC clones with bubble memory in the early '80s. One was used to replace a 'Silent 700' thermal terminal with a cassette tape memory for billing information where I worked. It failed, at least once.

We lost that day's accounts, and it was three days before the TI computer tech arrived to reload the OS into the bubble memory. It caused a lot of headaches, along with constant complaints from the woman who had to learn the new system. I don't think that she ever remembered to use the page feed, so the output forms were always out of registration.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 7:56:06 AM UTC+10, Rick C wrote:

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 5:26:41 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:

Maybe you should try again, snowflake? I mean you come here asking for
opinions and then you don't like the answers. Go figure.

I came here looking for an intelligent, considerate discussion... While many people also enjoy that, some things are beyond some people.

Trader4 is extraordinarily dim, even by the depressingly low standards of our resident right-wing nit-wits. His speciality is argument by repeated assertion, and I've never seen any evidence that he has paid any attention to the responses he has got.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Robert Baer]

Rick C wrote:

It appears Optane is a type of memory that is faster than Flash and cheaper than DRAM. So the only real use for it is as a cache between the CPU bus and mass storage. Because the hard drive interfaces are not designed for low latency devices, it has to be more tightly coupled to the CPU. Seems they (Intel) didn't do a good job of designing chips and boards to take full advantage of this.

So is Optane another bubble memory when all is said and done?

Optane is a grade of gasoline,OPTimized for road hogs.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 4:13:18 PM UTC+10, Robert Baer wrote:

Rick C wrote:
It appears Optane is a type of memory that is faster than Flash and cheaper than DRAM. So the only real use for it is as a cache between the CPU bus and mass storage. Because the hard drive interfaces are not designed for low latency devices, it has to be more tightly coupled to the CPU. Seems they (Intel) didn't do a good job of designing chips and boards to take full advantage of this.

So is Optane another bubble memory when all is said and done?

Optane is a grade of gasoline,OPTimized for road hogs.

Octane number is a scheme for grading gasoline, by comparing it with

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane

2,2,4-trimethylpentane (isooctane) - one of the several eight carbon atom unsaturated hydrocarbons.

Some marketing creep may have blended the words Optimum and Octane to create the name Optane, but it's not a high frequency word.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote in
news:XrGeF.194066$9s4.72055@fx38.iad:

Rick C wrote:
It appears Optane is a type of memory that is faster than Flash
and cheaper than DRAM. So the only real use for it is as a cache
between the CPU bus and mass storage. Because the hard drive
interfaces are not designed for low latency devices, it has to be
more tightly coupled to the CPU. Seems they (Intel) didn't do a
good job of designing chips and boards to take full advantage of
this.

So is Optane another bubble memory when all is said and done?

Optane is a grade of gasoline,OPTimized for road hogs.

No.

OPtimal ocTANE OPTANE. But that would be for the guys who own the
gas as optimal octane would be high octane, and they specifically mix
down in octane number because of the cost of making high octane gas.

If that was all they made, we would all be paying $5 a gallon by
now for single mix gas.

Thus we see what happens when a bubble sort is done on the data.
I went off on gasoline...

I like bubble mammaries. I like the firm little torpedoes too.

I thought of a new pick up line when I saw a tatt'd up ho girl
entering the store yesterday while see was huffing a vape. She was
spewing clouds of it.

I thought "Hey, baby... I can think of something else you would
love putting in your throat..."

Naaah... That wouldn't work. Was that too Trump-like?

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 11:37:52 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 7:56:06 AM UTC+10, Rick C wrote:
On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 5:26:41 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:

Maybe you should try again, snowflake? I mean you come here asking for
opinions and then you don't like the answers. Go figure.

I came here looking for an intelligent, considerate discussion... While many people also enjoy that, some things are beyond some people.

Trader4 is extraordinarily dim, even by the depressingly low standards of our resident right-wing nit-wits. His speciality is argument by repeated assertion, and I've never seen any evidence that he has paid any attention to the responses he has got.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Figures you would show up, with another ad hominem attack, not one word
about the subject, about the facts. But heh, I don't see your buddy
Rick complaining about your answer.

ROFL

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 11:41:15 PM UTC+10, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 11:37:52 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 7:56:06 AM UTC+10, Rick C wrote:
On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 5:26:41 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:

Maybe you should try again, snowflake? I mean you come here asking for
opinions and then you don't like the answers. Go figure.

I came here looking for an intelligent, considerate discussion... While many people also enjoy that, some things are beyond some people.

Trader4 is extraordinarily dim, even by the depressingly low standards of our resident right-wing nit-wits. His speciality is argument by repeated assertion, and I've never seen any evidence that he has paid any attention to the responses he has got.

Figures you would show up, with another ad hominem attack, not one word
about the subject, about the facts.

Trader4 thinks that pointing out his defects constitutes an attack.

It's just a public service warning. Obviously it's "ad hominem" - always assuming that Trader4 counts as human - but since I'm not bothering to address the issues which he imagines that he is supporting, there's no logical fallacy involved.

> But heh, I don't see your buddy Rick complaining about your answer.

It wasn't any kind of answer, merely a comment on your style of argument.

I certainly wouldn't bother wasting facts on you - if you don't like them, you ignore them.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 9:41:15 AM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 11:37:52 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 7:56:06 AM UTC+10, Rick C wrote:
On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 5:26:41 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:

Maybe you should try again, snowflake? I mean you come here asking for
opinions and then you don't like the answers. Go figure.

I came here looking for an intelligent, considerate discussion... While many people also enjoy that, some things are beyond some people.

Trader4 is extraordinarily dim, even by the depressingly low standards of our resident right-wing nit-wits. His speciality is argument by repeated assertion, and I've never seen any evidence that he has paid any attention to the responses he has got.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Figures you would show up, with another ad hominem attack, not one word
about the subject, about the facts. But heh, I don't see your buddy
Rick complaining about your answer.

ROFL

Exactly! ROFL You, the queen of ad hominem accuse another!!!

--

Rick C.

+- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 12:55:42 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 9:41:15 AM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 11:37:52 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 7:56:06 AM UTC+10, Rick C wrote:
On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 5:26:41 PM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:

Maybe you should try again, snowflake? I mean you come here asking for
opinions and then you don't like the answers. Go figure.

I came here looking for an intelligent, considerate discussion... While many people also enjoy that, some things are beyond some people.

Trader4 is extraordinarily dim, even by the depressingly low standards of our resident right-wing nit-wits. His speciality is argument by repeated assertion, and I've never seen any evidence that he has paid any attention to the responses he has got.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Figures you would show up, with another ad hominem attack, not one word
about the subject, about the facts. But heh, I don't see your buddy
Rick complaining about your answer.

ROFL

Exactly! ROFL You, the queen of ad hominem accuse another!!!

--

Rick C.

+- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

That's a lie. Nothing in my reply to your post was ad hominem or
any kind of attack. You just don't like the answer to the question
you posed.

Go on, believe that big dummy Dvorak as a source. After all he has
a big mouth and a degree in history. So when he says bubble memory
was under consideration in 1987 to replace DRAM because DRAM was in
short supply, he must know what he's talking about. That's so profoundly
stupid, for obvious reasons, it's amazing anyone would believe it,
let alone post it.

But heh, soldier on, snowflake.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 4:55:58 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:e57ed44b-b4f5-4bbb-
8095-62ad52742d09@googlegroups.com:

But heh, soldier on, snowflake.


Name calling is a particular type of bullying.

well, now the gang is all here. BL and his butt buddy from down
under. Whining at me about the use of the term 'snowflake",
when you hurl one vile name, one insult, one threat after another.

You do it, and think it is OK to do. You have a very particular
psychological disorder.

Next will come the Trumpesque excuses for it, and let's not forget
to note for everyone that I called you names.

I didn't forget that, I pointed it out above.




But go back into the

history to find that it did not start until you started calling me
names.

That's yet another lie.



Which is why I think you deserve a nice big knuckle sandwich.

And maybe again until you have to eat through a straw for a year.
Come back and break that motherfucker again.

You need it anyway to lose that extra 150Lbs you are sporting.

libs
snowflake
Always wrong

You are always wrong. Thanks for posting it for me.

A huge number of others I would have to waste my personal time
researching the history on.

But if I called you a pussy, it would be a behavioral description,
not a name-call. Essentially that is what you are, however, pussy.

Go update your lits, boy.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:e57ed44b-b4f5-4bbb-
8095-62ad52742d09@googlegroups.com:

But heh, soldier on, snowflake.

Name calling is a particular type of bullying.

You do it, and think it is OK to do. You have a very particular
psychological disorder.

Next will come the Trumpesque excuses for it, and let's not forget
to note for everyone that I called you names. But go back into the
history to find that it did not start until you started calling me
names. Which is why I think you deserve a nice big knuckle sandwich.
And maybe again until you have to eat through a straw for a year.
Come back and break that motherfucker again.

You need it anyway to lose that extra 150Lbs you are sporting.

libs
snowflake
Always wrong

A huge number of others I would have to waste my personal time
researching the history on.

But if I called you a pussy, it would be a behavioral description,
not a name-call. Essentially that is what you are, however, pussy.

Go update your lits, boy.

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:ee74b6bb-a9b8-47e6-
ae6d-0c18f3b2cdc9@googlegroups.com:

But go back into the
history to find that it did not start until you started calling me
names.

That's yet another lie.

Bullshit, you stupid piece of shit. You have been calling me
"Always Wrong" since KRW sniffed up your asscrack and got you going
on it.

You Trumptards are all the same. And it does not matter if you
voted for the stupid fuck or not. You act just like the dumbfucks
that did.

And KRW is on that list.

So, no, not 'yet another lie', you stupid fuck.