Re: Announcing my new Sci-fi Book

Tina_Hall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Tina Hall) wrote in
news:MSGID_2=3A240=2F2199.13=40fidonet_61674abd@xxxxxxxxxxx:

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Tina_Hall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Tina Hall) wrote
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Tina_Hall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Tina Hall) wrote
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Tina_Hall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Tina Hall) wrote

not something based on fact. If they literlly "don't make
enough to live on," they'll *die*.

That's looking at it a bit too, well, literally.

If it wasn't meant to be taken literally, it wasn't a
documentary, and thus isn't a credible source of facts.

Even documentaries don't sound too credible all too often.

Rather the point, yes?

Of what?

That you shouldn't accept everything you see on TV at face value.

(On the other hand, I recall quite a few years ago, Ace
Hardware was trying to break in to the international market
more, and had opened some test stores in Germany. They
apparently had a hell of a time finding employees who could
grasp the American ideals of good customer sevice. By our
standards, the best they could get were surly, lazy, and
uninterested. Or so I've read in the trade rags.)

Heh. I trust there's at least some truth in it. And just
perhaps
they looked at the wrong wage category for what they wanted.

Retail is a rough business that doesn't pay well. That's the
reality.

If they don't pay well, there's no surprise in not getting good
staff.

The point was, the best they could find was pretty bad compared to
what they were used to here.


I could have been lucky to have missed them (I do try to
evade commercials, usually taping stuff I want to watch and
then just fast forward past them).

DVRs are your best friend. I almost *never* watch commercials
any more.

That would be more than I can affort (yet - the price of them
might one day reach affordable levels).

$10/month from the cable company. Or you could build a MythTV
box of your own from an old PC.

? (I don't know what that box is.)

A homemade DVR, made out of a computer and one or more tuner cards.

Ten dollar (or euro) a month for all eternity is a bit more than
I'm willing to pay for a DVrecorder (what does the DV stand
for, anyway?).

Digital Video.

I've got a video recorder that does the job,
too. And finally a DVD player to watch DVDs.

If your current rig does what you want, no reason to upgrade
(though VHS tapes are disappearing, so hoard what you've got.)

Besides, I would just use it for the same as the video; taping
and fast forwarding. I don't need a DVR for that. I'd much
rather just buy some more series.

DVRs have a couple of advantages. They can hold a lot more
video - even a cheap one can usually hold at least 40 hours of
programming. And the better ones can record multiple channels
at a time.

That again is more than I can afford at present.

Not that I'm opposed to the idea.

Not good for stuff you want to keep a copy of permanently,
though.

How fast do the rewritable DVDs wear out? (Most I tape is to
watch and be taped over.)

No idea, but you can still buy new ones. Not sure how much longer
that will be true for videotapes.

Unless you mean downloading stuff and putting that on to
DVDs... I may be weird in prefering to pay for what I find
interesting enough to want to watch, or just get it off TV.

That's actually quite difficult to do, because of the retarded
copyright laws. Here, at least (and Europe doesn't seem to be
any more sensible.)

What exactly?

It is a felony to bypass copy protections, and copy protections are
built in to the standards because the standards are based on
patents, and you can't licenes the patents unless you agree to
abide by *all* the standard.

Getting it off the TV is easy: press record on the video
recorder.
:)

They're working on that, too. When your TV wears out, you probably
won't be able to buy on that doesn't require the encryption
standards for the new HD stuff. In other words, your new TV won't
be able to accept an analog signal from your VCR.

Yeah, only more consistently cranky. Which is to say, they're
probably smarter on average, and know better than to be
cheerful.

Being cranky is just a waste of energy. No fun. I get more out
of being cheerful. :)

Being cranky *is* fun.

You obviously react differently to the feeling. :)

Obviously.

I'm more in favour of sharks though.

Shark porn? Now that you mention it, I think there's already
an active market.

Ew. No. Just sharks.

And you wonder why you're not rick.

Heh. Not really, I know why; I can't be bothered. <g>

Heh.

Porn has the flaw of showing too many people's faces that
pretend to enjoy themselves. Boring.

That's why amateur stuff is so much more popular.

Haven't seen any of that, but I doubt it has less faces of
people pretending to enjoy themselves.

The image is that it has exactly that.

Does that Survivor show you mentioned take place at a beach
with sharks? If not they should.

IIRC, the first season's most horrifying moment (for the
constestants, at least) was when they had to cook and eat a
rat. Pussies. Rat is quite nutritious, and tasty if cooked
right.

Poor rat. :)

It was dead at the time, and thus, had lost its vote.

Heh.

I still have more, or actually only, sympathy for the rat.

Yeah, well, some have sympathy for the lettuce in a salad, too.

By encouraging the involvment of fewer and fewer creative
minds in the production of shows. Actors contribute far more
than most people realize, creatively. With virtual actors,
you lose that.

That's like saying books involve fewer creative minds. My hope
is that once it's wide spread, other people do the stories,
just like now writers write the stories.

The acting is an art form in and of itself, in addition to the
writing behind it. There's a reason people tend to watch TV or
movies instead of read books these days.

Because they can't read. :-P

Why bother to learn when they get more entertainment value out of
TV.

(People tend to be stupid, after all.)

And that.

We all grow up to be our parents, on way or another. A
horrifying thought, for some of us.

Yeah. I cling to the hope that all I've got from my supposed
mother is part of the looks. :)

Just keep telling youself that.

Oh, I do. :)

Nearly everyone has one or more. Most people have several,
usually with enough total credit to buy a new car. And it is
very convenient to not have to worry about having enough cash
(or losing it).

For me, personally, I would find it a bit silly to pay my
groceries with a credit card.

Credit cards and debit cards are pretty much interchangable in
most people's mind, and are used the same way. If you pay off
the credit card every month, there isn't much difference at
all.

I prefer just plundering the bank account each month (leaving
what's wired for rent, electric/heating bill, phone,...), and
use that without any charge at all.

But then, you don't have banks barraging you with offers of cheap
credit you can't afford (and they know it).

Never mind the extra charge that would cost (I'm too tight to
be willing to pay that).

Credit cards are cheaper for the consumer here (no additional
charges, and, in fact, it's technically a violation of the
merchant agreement to charge more for credit card customers -
though not, apparently, to give discounts for cash). Debit
cards often have per-transaction fees for the card holder.

If they don't pay anything for the credit card usage (whether by
using it directly, or by interest or whatever indirectly), how
do the banks make money with it?

All credit card transactions include a small percentage paid by the
merchant. And most card holders do, in fact, carry a balance and
thus pay interest.

From what I read, MILFs are quite the rage now.

Military Fantasy? Military Females?

Mother I'd Like to F**k. In other words, as baby boomers
reach retirement age, porn tastes have trended towards older
women.

Ah, right. (No mother me, though.)

One need not actually have any children to quality of a MILF,
apparently. Only be old enough you can't pretend to be a
teenager any more, and reasonably attractive. And, of course,
willing to be slutty.

Ah. Well, that's not me on at least the last point. :)

Well, there it is.

Sorry, I get enough hits from idiots that think I'm on the
market even though I tell them I'm not, even without meeting
many people.
:)

Then it sounds like you qualify.

Why, I ask you? Why do they not get it that I don't want to
qualify!? :)

What you want is irrelevant. People in to that sort of thing
believe (need to believe) that if they just off you enough money .
.. .

"Would you sleep with me a million dollars?" "Sure!" "How about for
$20?" "What kind of girl do you think I am?" "We've already
established that. Now we're just negotiating over the price."

I've got two theories on that: 1. I've got honey running out
of my ass, or 2. they think I'm so ghastly I'd be grateful
for any looser who takes mercy.

There's a theory that if one is willing to accept the near
universal rejection (and occasional slaps) that a man can
occastionally - maybe one time in a hundred - get laid by
walking up to every woman he sees and saying "Hey, bitch, wanna
***?"

Yabbut, _after_ they've been told I take no applications on that
regard?

Well, in Hollywood land, at least, no means yes; you're just being
coy.

And then start to argue? (With arguments from their deluded
empty heads that assume I must want it, too.)

In some cases, it might well be the only female attention they ever
get.

But mostly, men are willing to screw anything that will sit
still long enough.

LOL. Sounds too true.

A tree stump with a knot hole in it, if they could be certain there
wouldn't be any splinters.

Bloody idiots.

If you hit them with something sharp, yes.

Maybe I should try that next time. <g>

I recommend something chemically propelled.

Looks are largely irrelevant in porn. It's all about how
disgusting you're willing to be.

Would it count as sufficiently disgusting to bash in heads
with a big club, of anyone trying to take my clothes? <g>

In fact, there is a submarket of just that, so long as you put
out in the end. Or you could go the bondage S/M route, which
isn't sexual at all if done right.

I've had a look at that once, just to see if that were more
interesting than what obviously isn't my thing.

On the bottom line, the costumes are great to look at, but it
still involves having to deal with people, or even fulfilling
some masochist's fantasies. If I were out to make someone else
happy, I might as well just go with the next guy.

I don't find tying people up (and I mean proper bondage)
appealing, nor any of the dominance stuff. The only thing
useful (not erotic) there would be a slave to clean up for me,
but of course they have extra wishes, too. Bah.

What's the point in that? :)

One might almost think you're anti-social.

Besides, I always had the feeling that there's something
mentally wrong with the masochists and subs.

Many professionals agree with you, in varying degrees.

Not here. But I've been in favour of the idae that I'm a
mutant for years. (That or an alien, abandoned or
forgotten. This place is just too strange.)

If you are not lactose intolerant, and you're probably not,
you are, technically a mutant.

<g>

Whee! I _am_ a mutant.

Nearly all of us are, but hey, whatever gets you through the
day.

Heh.

They'd just pull and pinch at every corner. I'd freeze when
it's cold, and have icky sticky skin when hot. And I
couldn't sit anywhere.

I doubt these will sell well in countries that border the
North Sea, now that you mention it.

Heh.

They'd sell (Germany has enough weirdos), but you'll have to
find someone else for the production. But I'm sure you could
find enough local airheads for the production.

I'll just film the commercials here with some typical beach
bunnies. IIRC, Baywatch was insanely popular in Germany.

True.

More so, in fact, than it ever was in the US.

I think you need to find someone else for that venture. :)

You're no fun.

We've already found that out. :)

Want me to polish your boots again in shame?

I'm telling you, there's money to be made in that fetish.

LOL.

Who'd pay money for Usenet posts that are available for free? :)

Heh.

Add a little (or a lot of) alcohol, and stir to taste. (I've
been told, by a woman who had her first alcohol related
blackout before she learned to drive, that the reason that
drunks take their clothes off is because the alcohol thins
the blood, which makes one feel hot. I'll take her word for
it.)

:)

They'll give any cheap excuse. Thing is just, a brain
preserved in alcohol doesn't work very well in the thinking
business. It drops the thin coat of the technological age and
go right back to cave huggers. Which is more likely the
reason they drop their clothes, what with not being used to
them. They'd probably be happy with a few lengths of fur. <g>

Unless you, too, have been an alcoholic for longer than you
haven't been, I'm inclined to take the word of the obvious
expert. :)

For longer than I haven't been?

An alcoholic.

I don't drink any alcoholic drinks at all. I did some testing in
my youth, but then decided that lifetime - according to latest
science limited - is better not wasted by switching off all I,
on the bottom line, have; my ability to think (more or less
coherent). It's like buying a ton of chocolate, and then
chucking away large amounts of it.

I had an experience when I was about 18 involving screwdrivers
(orange juice and vodka - mostly vodka), a swivel chair and an
ultraviolet strobe light that cured me of any curiosity. (Not that
I was inclined to ever do that again anyway.)

I've got some strong opinions on people who do drink, another
subject where I'm in a minority of one. :)

It's juts another form of self destructive stupidity.

The supposed stars (and wannabes) themselves seem to be
pretty obsessed with very horror-movie-fitting looks, too,
what with turning faces into a plastic mask by means of some
nerve poison injected beneath the skin.

True beauty just can't be bothered with it. (Speaking from
experience here.)

No arguments from me. A woman who is too perfect becomes more
an asthetic object d' art, and not so much a woman. Flaws add
character and personality to a person's looks. The flaws are
what's *interesting*.

I wouldn't agree with that,

Women never do.

I object to that being a solely women thing, though.

Oh, many men agree, too, but women *always* do.

but trying to remove them doesn't improve the actual looks,
they just make it worse. Like the plastic mask faces with
rubber dinghy lips.

I've met women who were pretty much perfect by birth, and while
it's less so, the same principle still applies. (Mind you,
looks aren't the top of my list anyway. Never have been, and
get less so as I get older.)

I once fancied a guy who, on first seeing him, I thought "Oh
dear, what does _he_ look like!?", and then he started talking.
Great person. :)

Ever since then my 'first impression' isn't based on the very
first glance.

Looks are useful to get someone's attention, I suppose, but that's
about it.

There's one friend whom I'll call if I have a problem with the
computer or bicycle (or just talk on the phone for hours now
and then), with whom I would spend time doing whatever, but
he's mostly whizzing around Hannover on his bicycle around
all the different people he knows. He's the type who gets on
with pretty much everybody.

My Mum (my Dad's wife, not my birth mother) is like that,
getting on with people easily. And I concluded that people
like he or me do need someone like that to have some contact
with somebody. :)

Friends will help you move. Real friends will help you move
bodies. Some of us have little use for mere friends.

Heh. True.

I can sympathise; I can't kneel well either (bad knees),

Got those, too, and bad shoulders.

Ow.

My shoulders are fine, fortunately. It used to be that my
right shoulder had an occasional ache like someone twisting a
knife in the back of it, but that was when I was much much
younger. Somehow that hasn't happened for years and years
now.

My wrists don't like me leaning on something flat-handed,
though.

I am prone to what the doctor called "traumatic athrithis." Any
time I injure a joint, I get arthritis in it a few months
later.

Ouch.

My Dad's got athritis, and what he says doesn't sound pleasant
at all.

It's not generally a big deal, though the one shoulder hurts more
as I get older. Eventually, it will bother me enough to see the
doctor, and they'll have something for it.

About 15 years ago, I had a nasty bicycle accident that injures
pretty much every major joint that wasn't already messed up.
Not a huge deal, mostly, but everything aches when the weather
changes.

You have my sympathies.

Three days in the hospital without food or water, surgery and a pin
in my wrist. It was a blast.

(Are we going to compare our aches now like some granny club?
<g>)

It's a sport one can play without having to get out of one's
easy chair.

Heh.

My hips are just arranged the wrong way, so I can evade long
walks by saying I'm not allowed to do that. <g> (They do
actually start to hurt after walking too much, but
otherwise rarely bother me - though they would if I tried
to sit on the floor. Normally they just click at every step
climbing stairs, which I find amusing rather than
annoying.)

A very wise woman once pointed out that getting old is not
for sissies.

Hey, I'm not that old! (And I was born with those hips.)

Some of us were born old.

Could be. I was born kind of not really present at all, just
sort of around, and only came into being around twenty years
later. (The only explanation for having missed so much stuff
that's supposedly mandatory.)

No doubt. Perhaps you sprung, fully grown, from Zeus' forehead.

Lazy, yes, that would keep me waving you on instead, too. :)

I suspect I'd get tired watching you expend that much energy,
waving and all.

LOL.

Right, don't want to strain you.

Laziness is a subtle art. Mostly, because the artists are too
lazy not to be.

LOL.

I'm more the "light something on fire to distract you while
I call a cab" sort of person.

Ow. <g>

If I do it right.

There's a chance of you failing?

With me, there's always a significant chance I'll light myself
on fire. Even if no combustion source is involved. I've been
known to trip over stray air currents.

Sounds familiar.

I'm better at bumping into things, dropping things, or just
cutting myself accidentally on harmless objects (or more
conventionally while peeling potatoes).

I've learned to be very careful, and very aware of everything
around me. Had a roommate, once, though, who nearly put himself in
the emergency room cutting up cardboard counters for a game with an
Xacto knife.

My favorite games at this point are Civ II (which was,
IIRC, a Win95 game originally)

What does it need now?

It run OK, if you use a cacked version that has the correct
configuration file for XP. Other than there's apparently a
limit on the total number of military units that can be in
play. When you build more, it just silently deletes some at
random. The computer players use that to capture cities
sometimes.

Ouch.

Yeah. Really pisses me off.

I'd probably start cheating, I tend to when the computer gets
on my nerves. :)

I always save before every battle. Just in case.

Does that help with the disappearing military units? I'd expect
that being too late...

Not in the least. That's why it pisses me off.

The message arrived here split (too big I guess), so I'll
continue in the next one...

We're both chatterboxes who don't snip.

Heh. I try my best to do snip.

And?

--
Terry Austin

Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more ***. -
David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
.

Quantcast