B
bitrex
Guest
On 8/22/19 3:03 PM, John Larkin wrote:
"self-selected adventurous people" is a good euphemism for "hustler"
"self-selected adventurous people" is a good euphemism for "hustler"
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
R
Rick C
Guest
On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 2:42:16 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
That's one definition. But what about people makes us "unnatural"? We are products of evolution and are a part of the biosphere. Aren't we part of "natural"? If not, at what point did humans become "unnatural"? Was it when we tamed fire? Maybe when we domesticated animals? Started making tools? Working with metals? Harnessed animals to do our heavy work? Used machines to do our heavy work? Drove cars? Flew airplanes? Landed on the moon?
Maybe our first truly unnatural act was using the Internet to argue with people we don't even know.
So did Haiti. I guess we should look to them for guidance in many areas.
--
Rick C.
-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 12:26:18 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 8/21/19 10:12 PM, Rick C wrote:
Since when is "natural" an implication of anything good?
Natural is what happens unless people interfere. Good is an arbitrary
value judgement.
That's one definition. But what about people makes us "unnatural"? We are products of evolution and are a part of the biosphere. Aren't we part of "natural"? If not, at what point did humans become "unnatural"? Was it when we tamed fire? Maybe when we domesticated animals? Started making tools? Working with metals? Harnessed animals to do our heavy work? Used machines to do our heavy work? Drove cars? Flew airplanes? Landed on the moon?
Maybe our first truly unnatural act was using the Internet to argue with people we don't even know.
The UK solved the forest fire problem by chopping down most of the
trees.
So did Haiti. I guess we should look to them for guidance in many areas.
--
Rick C.
-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
T
Tom Gardner
Guest
On 22/08/19 19:42, John Larkin wrote:
As did the Easter Islanders.
The UK solved the forest fire problem by chopping down most of the
trees.
As did the Easter Islanders.
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 23:46:10 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
Hustlers don't invent or build stuff. Americans do.
Hustlers don't save the world from Germany (twice) and Japan and the
USSR.
On 8/22/19 10:23 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, August 23, 2019 at 5:03:44 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:54:22 -0500, Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com
wrote:
On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:12:58 -0400, bitrex wrote:
Maybe California is America's Never-Never Land.
Oh, this has been true for 60 years or so, maybe more!
Jon
Post-Columbian USA was (mostly) populated by self-selected adventurous
people.
That leaves out the Puritans who wanted to practice religious intolerance of their neighbours to a degree that more cilivised countries wouldn't tolerate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_martyrs
The US is a remarkably religious country, even today. It isn't religious in a particularly attractive sense - banning abortions and persecuting gays seems to be the most obvious symptom of this heightened sensibility. Much of the adventurous character seems to manifest itself in new ways of being mean to the neighbours.
Biblicalism, holy-roller-ism, and "Cultural Christianity" provide a
great cover story for scoundrels to hide out under and run various
hustles and confidence-game swindles. along with patriotism.
"self-selected adventurous people" = hustler.
Hustlers don't invent or build stuff. Americans do.
Hustlers don't save the world from Germany (twice) and Japan and the
USSR.
R
Rick C
Guest
On Friday, August 23, 2019 at 3:22:04 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
I love it when people just make up stuff because it makes them feel good. I guess there are always going to be "feel good" people offering opinions of stuff.
So do you own the trees? Or do the trees own you?
--
Rick C.
-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:37:34 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 22/08/19 19:42, John Larkin wrote:
The UK solved the forest fire problem by chopping down most of the
trees.
As did the Easter Islanders.
I you fly across the USA and look out the window, there can be
half-hour stretches when all you see is trees. With good vision, you
might see a road now and then.
We probably have more trees than 100 years ago.
I love it when people just make up stuff because it makes them feel good. I guess there are always going to be "feel good" people offering opinions of stuff.
But in many places, like here in California, the ultimate destiny of
trees is to burn. Our choice is to have lots of small fires or fewer
giant ones. Or log a lot maybe.
I own a couple hundred trees. Mo has named most of them. They won't
burn because we are subject to draconian forest maintenance and
defensible space rules, and because the cabin is not very flammable.
So do you own the trees? Or do the trees own you?
--
Rick C.
-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:37:34 +0100, Tom Gardner
<spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
I you fly across the USA and look out the window, there can be
half-hour stretches when all you see is trees. With good vision, you
might see a road now and then.
We probably have more trees than 100 years ago.
But in many places, like here in California, the ultimate destiny of
trees is to burn. Our choice is to have lots of small fires or fewer
giant ones. Or log a lot maybe.
I own a couple hundred trees. Mo has named most of them. They won't
burn because we are subject to draconian forest maintenance and
defensible space rules, and because the cabin is not very flammable.
<spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 22/08/19 19:42, John Larkin wrote:
The UK solved the forest fire problem by chopping down most of the
trees.
As did the Easter Islanders.
I you fly across the USA and look out the window, there can be
half-hour stretches when all you see is trees. With good vision, you
might see a road now and then.
We probably have more trees than 100 years ago.
But in many places, like here in California, the ultimate destiny of
trees is to burn. Our choice is to have lots of small fires or fewer
giant ones. Or log a lot maybe.
I own a couple hundred trees. Mo has named most of them. They won't
burn because we are subject to draconian forest maintenance and
defensible space rules, and because the cabin is not very flammable.
B
bitrex
Guest
On 8/23/19 3:42 PM, John Larkin wrote:
American industry has come up with some pretty nice things but I think
the notion of American Innovation as a perpetual habit is a bit
overblown. it goes through cycles.
In the late 20th and early 21st century at least it seems American
industry has been at its most innovative when the industry in question
has the metaphorical gun to its head, competition out for blood and they
have no choice but to come up with something, and quickly, or it's
lights out. Apple as an example.
The US steel industry meanwhile wasn't killed by China or Europe it was
killed by complacency. Who doesn't like just collecting checks and not
spending money?
the real labor of those efforts mostly fell to poor people. My father
was a Boston minister's son he was a richie-rich by the standards of his
fellows in the Amry in 1944, though lower middle-class by Boston standards.
The guys from the South? They often slept with their boots on because
they'd never owned a real pair of shoes before; afraid they'd be stolen.
And the majority of all of them had never fired a military-type rifle
before they arrived at basic training, and many not even a hunting
rifle. So poor their family couldn't even afford to buy them real
store-bought shoes, much less a good-quality rifle and ammunition to
practice with.
Seemed to work out OK even so.
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 23:46:10 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 8/22/19 10:23 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, August 23, 2019 at 5:03:44 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:54:22 -0500, Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com
wrote:
On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:12:58 -0400, bitrex wrote:
Maybe California is America's Never-Never Land.
Oh, this has been true for 60 years or so, maybe more!
Jon
Post-Columbian USA was (mostly) populated by self-selected adventurous
people.
That leaves out the Puritans who wanted to practice religious intolerance of their neighbours to a degree that more cilivised countries wouldn't tolerate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_martyrs
The US is a remarkably religious country, even today. It isn't religious in a particularly attractive sense - banning abortions and persecuting gays seems to be the most obvious symptom of this heightened sensibility. Much of the adventurous character seems to manifest itself in new ways of being mean to the neighbours.
Biblicalism, holy-roller-ism, and "Cultural Christianity" provide a
great cover story for scoundrels to hide out under and run various
hustles and confidence-game swindles. along with patriotism.
"self-selected adventurous people" = hustler.
Hustlers don't invent or build stuff. Americans do.
American industry has come up with some pretty nice things but I think
the notion of American Innovation as a perpetual habit is a bit
overblown. it goes through cycles.
In the late 20th and early 21st century at least it seems American
industry has been at its most innovative when the industry in question
has the metaphorical gun to its head, competition out for blood and they
have no choice but to come up with something, and quickly, or it's
lights out. Apple as an example.
The US steel industry meanwhile wasn't killed by China or Europe it was
killed by complacency. Who doesn't like just collecting checks and not
spending money?
Hustlers don't save the world from Germany (twice) and Japan and the
USSR.
the real labor of those efforts mostly fell to poor people. My father
was a Boston minister's son he was a richie-rich by the standards of his
fellows in the Amry in 1944, though lower middle-class by Boston standards.
The guys from the South? They often slept with their boots on because
they'd never owned a real pair of shoes before; afraid they'd be stolen.
And the majority of all of them had never fired a military-type rifle
before they arrived at basic training, and many not even a hunting
rifle. So poor their family couldn't even afford to buy them real
store-bought shoes, much less a good-quality rifle and ammunition to
practice with.
Seemed to work out OK even so.
R
Rick C
Guest
On Friday, August 23, 2019 at 3:43:00 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
The US didn't save anyone from Germany either... oh, right, you make up your own fake facts.
--
Rick C.
+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 23:46:10 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 8/22/19 10:23 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, August 23, 2019 at 5:03:44 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:54:22 -0500, Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com
wrote:
On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:12:58 -0400, bitrex wrote:
Maybe California is America's Never-Never Land.
Oh, this has been true for 60 years or so, maybe more!
Jon
Post-Columbian USA was (mostly) populated by self-selected adventurous
people.
That leaves out the Puritans who wanted to practice religious intolerance of their neighbours to a degree that more cilivised countries wouldn't tolerate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_martyrs
The US is a remarkably religious country, even today. It isn't religious in a particularly attractive sense - banning abortions and persecuting gays seems to be the most obvious symptom of this heightened sensibility. Much of the adventurous character seems to manifest itself in new ways of being mean to the neighbours.
Biblicalism, holy-roller-ism, and "Cultural Christianity" provide a
great cover story for scoundrels to hide out under and run various
hustles and confidence-game swindles. along with patriotism.
"self-selected adventurous people" = hustler.
Hustlers don't invent or build stuff. Americans do.
Hustlers don't save the world from Germany (twice) and Japan and the
USSR.
The US didn't save anyone from Germany either... oh, right, you make up your own fake facts.
--
Rick C.
+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 16:00:37 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
Apple was started by a couple of guys who met in the Homebrew Computer
Club. Microsoft, Google, and Facebook were started by dropout
amateurs.
I don't see that sort of thing happening much in other countries.
The German Master Race, and the Emperor's blessed Samurai warriors,
thought that they would out-gun the American hicks by 10:1. The actual
ratio was roughly reversed.
On 8/23/19 3:42 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 23:46:10 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 8/22/19 10:23 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, August 23, 2019 at 5:03:44 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:54:22 -0500, Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com
wrote:
On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:12:58 -0400, bitrex wrote:
Maybe California is America's Never-Never Land.
Oh, this has been true for 60 years or so, maybe more!
Jon
Post-Columbian USA was (mostly) populated by self-selected adventurous
people.
That leaves out the Puritans who wanted to practice religious intolerance of their neighbours to a degree that more cilivised countries wouldn't tolerate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_martyrs
The US is a remarkably religious country, even today. It isn't religious in a particularly attractive sense - banning abortions and persecuting gays seems to be the most obvious symptom of this heightened sensibility. Much of the adventurous character seems to manifest itself in new ways of being mean to the neighbours.
Biblicalism, holy-roller-ism, and "Cultural Christianity" provide a
great cover story for scoundrels to hide out under and run various
hustles and confidence-game swindles. along with patriotism.
"self-selected adventurous people" = hustler.
Hustlers don't invent or build stuff. Americans do.
American industry has come up with some pretty nice things but I think
the notion of American Innovation as a perpetual habit is a bit
overblown. it goes through cycles.
In the late 20th and early 21st century at least it seems American
industry has been at its most innovative when the industry in question
has the metaphorical gun to its head, competition out for blood and they
have no choice but to come up with something, and quickly, or it's
lights out. Apple as an example.
Apple was started by a couple of guys who met in the Homebrew Computer
Club. Microsoft, Google, and Facebook were started by dropout
amateurs.
I don't see that sort of thing happening much in other countries.
The US steel industry meanwhile wasn't killed by China or Europe it was
killed by complacency. Who doesn't like just collecting checks and not
spending money?
Hustlers don't save the world from Germany (twice) and Japan and the
USSR.
the real labor of those efforts mostly fell to poor people. My father
was a Boston minister's son he was a richie-rich by the standards of his
fellows in the Amry in 1944, though lower middle-class by Boston standards.
The guys from the South? They often slept with their boots on because
they'd never owned a real pair of shoes before; afraid they'd be stolen.
And the majority of all of them had never fired a military-type rifle
before they arrived at basic training, and many not even a hunting
rifle. So poor their family couldn't even afford to buy them real
store-bought shoes, much less a good-quality rifle and ammunition to
practice with.
Seemed to work out OK even so.
The German Master Race, and the Emperor's blessed Samurai warriors,
thought that they would out-gun the American hicks by 10:1. The actual
ratio was roughly reversed.
B
bitrex
Guest
On 8/23/19 5:05 PM, John Larkin wrote:
The Wehrmacht fought extremely well given the circumstances they were
under on both fronts at the time of the invasion of Europe (as compared
to e.g. to the Italians or Hungarians who easily surrendered by the
thousands.) Full strength German Army groups with new equipment were a
terror.
By late 1944 when my late father was in southern Europe the conditions
they were operating under were rarely favorable like that and in
Northern Italy where my father was stationed, say, pretty bad. The few
engagements he was in (he was a mortarman) were mostly
artillery-pounding heavily dug-in defenders in the mountains and they
never broke thru the Po Valley into the Anschluss before the war ended.
but even fighting generally outnumbered and lacking equipment under
pressure in Northern Europe the Germans never gave up ground easy. They
took a lot of casualties but it was never like 10:1. and two of my Dad's
Boston school buddies who got sent to Germany instead of Italy never
came home, killed in a lit-up Sherman in the Battle of Remagen.
in Eastern Europe the US tended to try not to go in to fights with under
2:1 and 2:1 is devastating. in Eastern Europe against the Russians it
was often more like 3:1 which is catastrophic.
Not trying to disparage the American soldier's skill they were at least
on part with the Germans for the most part but they weren't
miracle-workers and leadership learned the hard way after Market Garden
to be careful about which fights you pick even with an enemy in retreat.
After the surrender the 10th Mountain immediately started training for
the planned invasion of Japan and while I'm not comfortable with saying
I'm glad the atomic bombings happen I know the chances my Dad would've
survived that as a low-level NCO were not good no matter how much the
trained.
On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 16:00:37 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 8/23/19 3:42 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 23:46:10 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 8/22/19 10:23 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, August 23, 2019 at 5:03:44 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:54:22 -0500, Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com
wrote:
On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:12:58 -0400, bitrex wrote:
Maybe California is America's Never-Never Land.
Oh, this has been true for 60 years or so, maybe more!
Jon
Post-Columbian USA was (mostly) populated by self-selected adventurous
people.
That leaves out the Puritans who wanted to practice religious intolerance of their neighbours to a degree that more cilivised countries wouldn't tolerate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_martyrs
The US is a remarkably religious country, even today. It isn't religious in a particularly attractive sense - banning abortions and persecuting gays seems to be the most obvious symptom of this heightened sensibility. Much of the adventurous character seems to manifest itself in new ways of being mean to the neighbours.
Biblicalism, holy-roller-ism, and "Cultural Christianity" provide a
great cover story for scoundrels to hide out under and run various
hustles and confidence-game swindles. along with patriotism.
"self-selected adventurous people" = hustler.
Hustlers don't invent or build stuff. Americans do.
American industry has come up with some pretty nice things but I think
the notion of American Innovation as a perpetual habit is a bit
overblown. it goes through cycles.
In the late 20th and early 21st century at least it seems American
industry has been at its most innovative when the industry in question
has the metaphorical gun to its head, competition out for blood and they
have no choice but to come up with something, and quickly, or it's
lights out. Apple as an example.
Apple was started by a couple of guys who met in the Homebrew Computer
Club. Microsoft, Google, and Facebook were started by dropout
amateurs.
I don't see that sort of thing happening much in other countries.
The US steel industry meanwhile wasn't killed by China or Europe it was
killed by complacency. Who doesn't like just collecting checks and not
spending money?
Hustlers don't save the world from Germany (twice) and Japan and the
USSR.
the real labor of those efforts mostly fell to poor people. My father
was a Boston minister's son he was a richie-rich by the standards of his
fellows in the Amry in 1944, though lower middle-class by Boston standards.
The guys from the South? They often slept with their boots on because
they'd never owned a real pair of shoes before; afraid they'd be stolen.
And the majority of all of them had never fired a military-type rifle
before they arrived at basic training, and many not even a hunting
rifle. So poor their family couldn't even afford to buy them real
store-bought shoes, much less a good-quality rifle and ammunition to
practice with.
Seemed to work out OK even so.
The German Master Race, and the Emperor's blessed Samurai warriors,
thought that they would out-gun the American hicks by 10:1. The actual
ratio was roughly reversed.
The Wehrmacht fought extremely well given the circumstances they were
under on both fronts at the time of the invasion of Europe (as compared
to e.g. to the Italians or Hungarians who easily surrendered by the
thousands.) Full strength German Army groups with new equipment were a
terror.
By late 1944 when my late father was in southern Europe the conditions
they were operating under were rarely favorable like that and in
Northern Italy where my father was stationed, say, pretty bad. The few
engagements he was in (he was a mortarman) were mostly
artillery-pounding heavily dug-in defenders in the mountains and they
never broke thru the Po Valley into the Anschluss before the war ended.
but even fighting generally outnumbered and lacking equipment under
pressure in Northern Europe the Germans never gave up ground easy. They
took a lot of casualties but it was never like 10:1. and two of my Dad's
Boston school buddies who got sent to Germany instead of Italy never
came home, killed in a lit-up Sherman in the Battle of Remagen.
in Eastern Europe the US tended to try not to go in to fights with under
2:1 and 2:1 is devastating. in Eastern Europe against the Russians it
was often more like 3:1 which is catastrophic.
Not trying to disparage the American soldier's skill they were at least
on part with the Germans for the most part but they weren't
miracle-workers and leadership learned the hard way after Market Garden
to be careful about which fights you pick even with an enemy in retreat.
After the surrender the 10th Mountain immediately started training for
the planned invasion of Japan and while I'm not comfortable with saying
I'm glad the atomic bombings happen I know the chances my Dad would've
survived that as a low-level NCO were not good no matter how much the
trained.
B
bitrex
Guest
On 8/23/19 5:30 PM, bitrex wrote:
mind you IDK if the Sherman really caught fire more often than any other
tank. The newest German tanks were superior in just about every way they
just didn't have very many of them.
The Sherman and T-34 were just okay. The T-34 wasn't nearly as reliable
as commonly believed in the mythology (it was a dreadful tank in a lot
of ways) and the Sherman probably wasn't as unreliable as is believed
either.
All of them would catch fire if shot up enough. The US Army was quite a
bit better at salvage operations and returning even heavily-damaged
tanks and vehicles to service:
<https://www.reddit.com/r/DestroyedTanks/comments/3qjp3o/m31_recovery_vehicle_preparing_to_tow_a_burnt_out/>
The German Master Race, and the Emperor's blessed Samurai warriors,
thought that they would out-gun the American hicks by 10:1. The actual
ratio was roughly reversed.
The Wehrmacht fought extremely well given the circumstances they were
under on both fronts at the time of the invasion of Europe (as compared
to e.g. to the Italians or Hungarians who easily surrendered by the
thousands.) Full strength German Army groups with new equipment were a
terror.
By late 1944 when my late father was in southern Europe the conditions
they were operating under were rarely favorable like that and in
Northern Italy where my father was stationed, say, pretty bad. The few
engagements he was in (he was a mortarman) were mostly
artillery-pounding heavily dug-in defenders in the mountains and they
never broke thru the Po Valley into the Anschluss before the war ended.
but even fighting generally outnumbered and lacking equipment under
pressure in Northern Europe the Germans never gave up ground easy. They
took a lot of casualties but it was never like 10:1. and two of my Dad's
Boston school buddies who got sent to Germany instead of Italy never
came home, killed in a lit-up Sherman in the Battle of Remagen.
mind you IDK if the Sherman really caught fire more often than any other
tank. The newest German tanks were superior in just about every way they
just didn't have very many of them.
The Sherman and T-34 were just okay. The T-34 wasn't nearly as reliable
as commonly believed in the mythology (it was a dreadful tank in a lot
of ways) and the Sherman probably wasn't as unreliable as is believed
either.
All of them would catch fire if shot up enough. The US Army was quite a
bit better at salvage operations and returning even heavily-damaged
tanks and vehicles to service:
<https://www.reddit.com/r/DestroyedTanks/comments/3qjp3o/m31_recovery_vehicle_preparing_to_tow_a_burnt_out/>
T
Tom Gardner
Guest
On 23/08/19 20:21, John Larkin wrote:
And other stretches when you see none.
Do you think the Easter Islanders made a
good decision and tradeoff?
On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:37:34 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 22/08/19 19:42, John Larkin wrote:
The UK solved the forest fire problem by chopping down most of the
trees.
As did the Easter Islanders.
I you fly across the USA and look out the window, there can be
half-hour stretches when all you see is trees. With good vision, you
might see a road now and then.
And other stretches when you see none.
Do you think the Easter Islanders made a
good decision and tradeoff?
R
Rick C
Guest
On Friday, August 23, 2019 at 4:00:42 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
I assume this is a reference to the iPhone? I think this is not a good example of your point. Apple was always disruptive. The time was right for a new phone paradigm. It was more about ineptness in the market otherwise. The people making flip phones had no motivation to rock the boat. Palm tried in a very inept way to market their idea of a "smart" phone which was just a phone an a PDA in the same package. It couldn't even use a number from the contacts list to dial the phone. You had to write it down, switch to the phone and type it in. lol
No, the iPhone wasn't a result of Apple having their backs to the wall, it was about Jobs being brilliant with yet another new idea who's time was right.
--
Rick C.
++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On 8/23/19 3:42 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 23:46:10 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 8/22/19 10:23 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, August 23, 2019 at 5:03:44 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:54:22 -0500, Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com
wrote:
On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:12:58 -0400, bitrex wrote:
Maybe California is America's Never-Never Land.
Oh, this has been true for 60 years or so, maybe more!
Jon
Post-Columbian USA was (mostly) populated by self-selected adventurous
people.
That leaves out the Puritans who wanted to practice religious intolerance of their neighbours to a degree that more cilivised countries wouldn't tolerate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_martyrs
The US is a remarkably religious country, even today. It isn't religious in a particularly attractive sense - banning abortions and persecuting gays seems to be the most obvious symptom of this heightened sensibility. Much of the adventurous character seems to manifest itself in new ways of being mean to the neighbours.
Biblicalism, holy-roller-ism, and "Cultural Christianity" provide a
great cover story for scoundrels to hide out under and run various
hustles and confidence-game swindles. along with patriotism.
"self-selected adventurous people" = hustler.
Hustlers don't invent or build stuff. Americans do.
American industry has come up with some pretty nice things but I think
the notion of American Innovation as a perpetual habit is a bit
overblown. it goes through cycles.
In the late 20th and early 21st century at least it seems American
industry has been at its most innovative when the industry in question
has the metaphorical gun to its head, competition out for blood and they
have no choice but to come up with something, and quickly, or it's
lights out. Apple as an example.
I assume this is a reference to the iPhone? I think this is not a good example of your point. Apple was always disruptive. The time was right for a new phone paradigm. It was more about ineptness in the market otherwise. The people making flip phones had no motivation to rock the boat. Palm tried in a very inept way to market their idea of a "smart" phone which was just a phone an a PDA in the same package. It couldn't even use a number from the contacts list to dial the phone. You had to write it down, switch to the phone and type it in. lol
No, the iPhone wasn't a result of Apple having their backs to the wall, it was about Jobs being brilliant with yet another new idea who's time was right.
--
Rick C.
++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
B
Bill Sloman
Guest
On Saturday, August 24, 2019 at 7:05:52 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
John Larkin wouldn't. ARM computers in Cambridge - originally Acorn Computers when I got a job offer from them - weren't started by drop-out amateurs.
I know their first software manager, who was getting Ph.D, in psychology at the same time, and his Ph.D. supervisor. The software manager was wise enough to be unhappy about the other manager's skills and sold his share of the company back to the other founders - Chris Curry and Herman Hauser - shortly before it went bust for the first time.
Andy Hopper was active in the company (while remaining a lecturer at Cambridge) and stayed associated with ARM computers. He might be the most significant factor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Hopper
--
Bill Sloman, sydney
On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 16:00:37 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 8/23/19 3:42 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 23:46:10 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 8/22/19 10:23 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, August 23, 2019 at 5:03:44 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:54:22 -0500, Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com
wrote:
On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:12:58 -0400, bitrex wrote:
Maybe California is America's Never-Never Land.
Oh, this has been true for 60 years or so, maybe more!
Jon
Post-Columbian USA was (mostly) populated by self-selected adventurous
people.
That leaves out the Puritans who wanted to practice religious intolerance of their neighbours to a degree that more cilivised countries wouldn't tolerate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_martyrs
The US is a remarkably religious country, even today. It isn't religious in a particularly attractive sense - banning abortions and persecuting gays seems to be the most obvious symptom of this heightened sensibility. Much of the adventurous character seems to manifest itself in new ways of being mean to the neighbours.
Biblicalism, holy-roller-ism, and "Cultural Christianity" provide a
great cover story for scoundrels to hide out under and run various
hustles and confidence-game swindles. along with patriotism.
"self-selected adventurous people" = hustler.
Hustlers don't invent or build stuff. Americans do.
American industry has come up with some pretty nice things but I think
the notion of American Innovation as a perpetual habit is a bit
overblown. it goes through cycles.
In the late 20th and early 21st century at least it seems American
industry has been at its most innovative when the industry in question
has the metaphorical gun to its head, competition out for blood and they
have no choice but to come up with something, and quickly, or it's
lights out. Apple as an example.
Apple was started by a couple of guys who met in the Homebrew Computer
Club. Microsoft, Google, and Facebook were started by dropout
amateurs.
I don't see that sort of thing happening much in other countries.
John Larkin wouldn't. ARM computers in Cambridge - originally Acorn Computers when I got a job offer from them - weren't started by drop-out amateurs.
I know their first software manager, who was getting Ph.D, in psychology at the same time, and his Ph.D. supervisor. The software manager was wise enough to be unhappy about the other manager's skills and sold his share of the company back to the other founders - Chris Curry and Herman Hauser - shortly before it went bust for the first time.
Andy Hopper was active in the company (while remaining a lecturer at Cambridge) and stayed associated with ARM computers. He might be the most significant factor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Hopper
--
Bill Sloman, sydney
The US steel industry meanwhile wasn't killed by China or Europe it was
killed by complacency. Who doesn't like just collecting checks and not
spending money?
Hustlers don't save the world from Germany (twice) and Japan and the
USSR.
the real labor of those efforts mostly fell to poor people. My father
was a Boston minister's son he was a richie-rich by the standards of his
fellows in the Amry in 1944, though lower middle-class by Boston standards.
The guys from the South? They often slept with their boots on because
they'd never owned a real pair of shoes before; afraid they'd be stolen.
And the majority of all of them had never fired a military-type rifle
before they arrived at basic training, and many not even a hunting
rifle. So poor their family couldn't even afford to buy them real
store-bought shoes, much less a good-quality rifle and ammunition to
practice with.
Seemed to work out OK even so.
The German Master Race, and the Emperor's blessed Samurai warriors,
thought that they would out-gun the American hicks by 10:1. The actual
ratio was roughly reversed.
R
Rick C
Guest
On Friday, August 23, 2019 at 5:39:24 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
Largely the Shermans were out gunned. But the German tanks were largely outnumbered. That was the point. Our strength was in making tons and tons of weapons which allowed us to continue fighting hard the whole war. The Germans used very high tech weapons which were hard to make and hard to keep running. So as the war ran on they had fewer and fewer of them.
Some of the German weapons were amazing. They had AA towers over Berlin that I don't think were ever taken be attack, they were sieged. The guns could be used against tanks as well. When Berlin was taken they were some of the last to surrender to the Russians.
I don't know we could have actually defeated Germany without Russia. Most likely we would have obtained a truce.... for a while.
--
Rick C.
++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
On 8/23/19 5:30 PM, bitrex wrote:
The German Master Race, and the Emperor's blessed Samurai warriors,
thought that they would out-gun the American hicks by 10:1. The actual
ratio was roughly reversed.
The Wehrmacht fought extremely well given the circumstances they were
under on both fronts at the time of the invasion of Europe (as compared
to e.g. to the Italians or Hungarians who easily surrendered by the
thousands.) Full strength German Army groups with new equipment were a
terror.
By late 1944 when my late father was in southern Europe the conditions
they were operating under were rarely favorable like that and in
Northern Italy where my father was stationed, say, pretty bad. The few
engagements he was in (he was a mortarman) were mostly
artillery-pounding heavily dug-in defenders in the mountains and they
never broke thru the Po Valley into the Anschluss before the war ended.
but even fighting generally outnumbered and lacking equipment under
pressure in Northern Europe the Germans never gave up ground easy. They
took a lot of casualties but it was never like 10:1. and two of my Dad's
Boston school buddies who got sent to Germany instead of Italy never
came home, killed in a lit-up Sherman in the Battle of Remagen.
mind you IDK if the Sherman really caught fire more often than any other
tank. The newest German tanks were superior in just about every way they
just didn't have very many of them.
The Sherman and T-34 were just okay. The T-34 wasn't nearly as reliable
as commonly believed in the mythology (it was a dreadful tank in a lot
of ways) and the Sherman probably wasn't as unreliable as is believed
either.
All of them would catch fire if shot up enough. The US Army was quite a
bit better at salvage operations and returning even heavily-damaged
tanks and vehicles to service:
https://www.reddit.com/r/DestroyedTanks/comments/3qjp3o/m31_recovery_vehicle_preparing_to_tow_a_burnt_out/
Largely the Shermans were out gunned. But the German tanks were largely outnumbered. That was the point. Our strength was in making tons and tons of weapons which allowed us to continue fighting hard the whole war. The Germans used very high tech weapons which were hard to make and hard to keep running. So as the war ran on they had fewer and fewer of them.
Some of the German weapons were amazing. They had AA towers over Berlin that I don't think were ever taken be attack, they were sieged. The guns could be used against tanks as well. When Berlin was taken they were some of the last to surrender to the Russians.
I don't know we could have actually defeated Germany without Russia. Most likely we would have obtained a truce.... for a while.
--
Rick C.
++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
T
Tom Gardner
Guest
On 24/08/19 01:36, Bill Sloman wrote:
And Roger Wilson was central to the development of
the Acorn RISC Machine.
I'm not aware he was part of the financial/management
corporate structure.
On Saturday, August 24, 2019 at 7:05:52 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 16:00:37 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 8/23/19 3:42 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 23:46:10 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 8/22/19 10:23 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, August 23, 2019 at 5:03:44 AM UTC+10, John Larkin
wrote:
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:54:22 -0500, Jon Elson
elson@pico-systems.com> wrote:
On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:12:58 -0400, bitrex wrote:
Maybe California is America's Never-Never Land.
Oh, this has been true for 60 years or so, maybe more!
Jon
Post-Columbian USA was (mostly) populated by self-selected
adventurous people.
That leaves out the Puritans who wanted to practice religious
intolerance of their neighbours to a degree that more cilivised
countries wouldn't tolerate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_martyrs
The US is a remarkably religious country, even today. It isn't
religious in a particularly attractive sense - banning abortions
and persecuting gays seems to be the most obvious symptom of this
heightened sensibility. Much of the adventurous character seems to
manifest itself in new ways of being mean to the neighbours.
Biblicalism, holy-roller-ism, and "Cultural Christianity" provide a
great cover story for scoundrels to hide out under and run various
hustles and confidence-game swindles. along with patriotism.
"self-selected adventurous people" = hustler.
Hustlers don't invent or build stuff. Americans do.
American industry has come up with some pretty nice things but I think
the notion of American Innovation as a perpetual habit is a bit
overblown. it goes through cycles.
In the late 20th and early 21st century at least it seems American
industry has been at its most innovative when the industry in question
has the metaphorical gun to its head, competition out for blood and they
have no choice but to come up with something, and quickly, or it's lights
out. Apple as an example.
Apple was started by a couple of guys who met in the Homebrew Computer
Club. Microsoft, Google, and Facebook were started by dropout amateurs.
I don't see that sort of thing happening much in other countries.
John Larkin wouldn't. ARM computers in Cambridge - originally Acorn Computers
when I got a job offer from them - weren't started by drop-out amateurs.
I know their first software manager, who was getting Ph.D, in psychology at
the same time, and his Ph.D. supervisor. The software manager was wise enough
to be unhappy about the other manager's skills and sold his share of the
company back to the other founders - Chris Curry and Herman Hauser - shortly
before it went bust for the first time.
Andy Hopper was active in the company (while remaining a lecturer at
Cambridge) and stayed associated with ARM computers. He might be the most
significant factor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Hopper
And Roger Wilson was central to the development of
the Acorn RISC Machine.
I'm not aware he was part of the financial/management
corporate structure.
T
Tom Gardner
Guest
On 23/08/19 22:05, John Larkin wrote:
You have to know where to look.
One starting point would be an early 80s book called
"The Cambridge Phenomenon", detailing the interactions
between all the (then) companies in Silicon Fen.
I've no idea whether it has been updated since, but the
phenomenon undoubtedly continues.
On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 16:00:37 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 8/23/19 3:42 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 23:46:10 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 8/22/19 10:23 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, August 23, 2019 at 5:03:44 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:54:22 -0500, Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com
wrote:
On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 21:12:58 -0400, bitrex wrote:
Maybe California is America's Never-Never Land.
Oh, this has been true for 60 years or so, maybe more!
Jon
Post-Columbian USA was (mostly) populated by self-selected adventurous
people.
That leaves out the Puritans who wanted to practice religious intolerance of their neighbours to a degree that more cilivised countries wouldn't tolerate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_martyrs
The US is a remarkably religious country, even today. It isn't religious in a particularly attractive sense - banning abortions and persecuting gays seems to be the most obvious symptom of this heightened sensibility. Much of the adventurous character seems to manifest itself in new ways of being mean to the neighbours.
Biblicalism, holy-roller-ism, and "Cultural Christianity" provide a
great cover story for scoundrels to hide out under and run various
hustles and confidence-game swindles. along with patriotism.
"self-selected adventurous people" = hustler.
Hustlers don't invent or build stuff. Americans do.
American industry has come up with some pretty nice things but I think
the notion of American Innovation as a perpetual habit is a bit
overblown. it goes through cycles.
In the late 20th and early 21st century at least it seems American
industry has been at its most innovative when the industry in question
has the metaphorical gun to its head, competition out for blood and they
have no choice but to come up with something, and quickly, or it's
lights out. Apple as an example.
Apple was started by a couple of guys who met in the Homebrew Computer
Club. Microsoft, Google, and Facebook were started by dropout
amateurs.
I don't see that sort of thing happening much in other countries.
You have to know where to look.
One starting point would be an early 80s book called
"The Cambridge Phenomenon", detailing the interactions
between all the (then) companies in Silicon Fen.
I've no idea whether it has been updated since, but the
phenomenon undoubtedly continues.
B
bitrex
Guest
On 8/24/19 2:15 AM, bitrex wrote:
Oh right I totally forgot about the Centris, even:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_Centris>
Good grief that slushbox cost $2500 in 1993. Nuts!
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjTzMBYeQLY>
On 8/23/19 7:43 PM, Rick C wrote:
In the late 20th and early 21st century at least it seems American
industry has been at its most innovative when the industry in question
has the metaphorical gun to its head, competition out for blood and they
have no choice but to come up with something, and quickly, or it's
lights out. Apple as an example.
I assume this is a reference to the iPhone? I think this is not a
good example of your point. Apple was always disruptive. The time
was right for a new phone paradigm. It was more about ineptness in
the market otherwise. The people making flip phones had no motivation
to rock the boat. Palm tried in a very inept way to market their idea
of a "smart" phone which was just a phone an a PDA in the same
package. It couldn't even use a number from the contacts list to dial
the phone. You had to write it down, switch to the phone and type it
in. lol
No, the iPhone wasn't a result of Apple having their backs to the
wall, it was about Jobs being brilliant with yet another new idea
who's time was right.
Apple, as a corporation, was on the ropes for much of the mid 1990s if
you recall - their 80s Macintosh "1984" heyday had long passed and they
were selling a sprawling variety of (overpriced and underpowered)
desktop PCs at different price points, Performas and Quadras and Quadra
IIs and Mac Classics and 20th Anniversary Editions and God knows what,
mostly to niche markets like education and arts/media.
Oh right I totally forgot about the Centris, even:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_Centris>
Good grief that slushbox cost $2500 in 1993. Nuts!
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjTzMBYeQLY>
Guest
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 11:42:05 -0700, John Larkin
<jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
The undergrowth is often the problem, not the trees themselves.
With local small fires every few years will burn the undergrowth but
not wildfire resistant trees. With the undergrowth cleared, the
remaining trees will get more nutrient and more water so they are not
that dry i.e. less fuel load. Of course the interval between such
fires must be a few years so that some young fire resistant trees will
be big enough to live through undergrowth fires. This was the
situation before human interventions.
Now that even small fires are quickly put out, the undergrowth will
grow every year more and more, sucking more and more nutrients and
water from big trees. After a few years an inferno may start, burning
also the top of the big trees.
To avoid such big fires burning down everything including trees and
houses, the undergrowth should be regularly cleared every few years,
by small controlled undergrowth fires, by manually cutting down and
removing the undergrowth or letting cattle roam freely in the forest,
eating the undergrowth.
<jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 12:26:18 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
don't take most Americans seriously when they say dumb stuff like "fires
are natural." they'll respect you more if you don't lol.
Plants grow. In some places, like Louisiana, their ultimate
destination is to settle into the mud and decay. But in a lot of
places, the plants must burn. Biomass, aka fuel load, builds up. There
will always be ignition sources, namely lightning.
Before the Spanish settlers showed up, the average patch of California
forest or grassland burned about every 10 years. The natives warned
the Spanish about that. The fires kept the fuel load down, and most
big trees survived. Some trees *need* fires as part of their life
cycle.
Fire is an unavoidable, natural, and arguably healthy, component of
many parts of the world.
People have been using machines and hoses and helicopters to put out
the fires, which increases the fuel load, creating giant firestorms
that kill everything. Logging used to help some, but that is
politically incorrect.
The undergrowth is often the problem, not the trees themselves.
With local small fires every few years will burn the undergrowth but
not wildfire resistant trees. With the undergrowth cleared, the
remaining trees will get more nutrient and more water so they are not
that dry i.e. less fuel load. Of course the interval between such
fires must be a few years so that some young fire resistant trees will
be big enough to live through undergrowth fires. This was the
situation before human interventions.
Now that even small fires are quickly put out, the undergrowth will
grow every year more and more, sucking more and more nutrients and
water from big trees. After a few years an inferno may start, burning
also the top of the big trees.
To avoid such big fires burning down everything including trees and
houses, the undergrowth should be regularly cleared every few years,
by small controlled undergrowth fires, by manually cutting down and
removing the undergrowth or letting cattle roam freely in the forest,
eating the undergrowth.
B
bitrex
Guest
On 8/23/19 7:43 PM, Rick C wrote:
Apple, as a corporation, was on the ropes for much of the mid 1990s if
you recall - their 80s Macintosh "1984" heyday had long passed and they
were selling a sprawling variety of (overpriced and underpowered)
desktop PCs at different price points, Performas and Quadras and Quadra
IIs and Mac Classics and 20th Anniversary Editions and God knows what,
mostly to niche markets like education and arts/media.
First thing Jobs did before anything super "disruptive" happened was he
did a sensible thing that was right out of Gordon Ramsey from that Save
My Restaurant program whatever it's called - he cut the menu down. Don't
serve 25 mediocre options like the average consumer appreciates huge
choices. serve four excellent entrees that's it.
In the late 20th and early 21st century at least it seems American
industry has been at its most innovative when the industry in question
has the metaphorical gun to its head, competition out for blood and they
have no choice but to come up with something, and quickly, or it's
lights out. Apple as an example.
I assume this is a reference to the iPhone? I think this is not a good example of your point. Apple was always disruptive. The time was right for a new phone paradigm. It was more about ineptness in the market otherwise. The people making flip phones had no motivation to rock the boat. Palm tried in a very inept way to market their idea of a "smart" phone which was just a phone an a PDA in the same package. It couldn't even use a number from the contacts list to dial the phone. You had to write it down, switch to the phone and type it in. lol
No, the iPhone wasn't a result of Apple having their backs to the wall, it was about Jobs being brilliant with yet another new idea who's time was right.
Apple, as a corporation, was on the ropes for much of the mid 1990s if
you recall - their 80s Macintosh "1984" heyday had long passed and they
were selling a sprawling variety of (overpriced and underpowered)
desktop PCs at different price points, Performas and Quadras and Quadra
IIs and Mac Classics and 20th Anniversary Editions and God knows what,
mostly to niche markets like education and arts/media.
First thing Jobs did before anything super "disruptive" happened was he
did a sensible thing that was right out of Gordon Ramsey from that Save
My Restaurant program whatever it's called - he cut the menu down. Don't
serve 25 mediocre options like the average consumer appreciates huge
choices. serve four excellent entrees that's it.