browse compressed archives - now final!

[Kilmatead]

See? Now we're getting somewhere. One can only trade with the cards they are dealt, and so when forced to read between the lines, I call things as I see them and that's the vibe you gave. There is nothing ethically wrong with judging things as they are presented, in paucity or in gluttony.

However, to wit:

...I asked for help once in using Menu++ enhancement...

That is a user-made extension, so only the author himself could help with it - Nikos bears no responsibility for its functionality, as is true with almost any of the sub-utilities found lying around the place here. You can't take slight from getting no response for something like that.

...with regard to Mr. Kilmatead's reference with me not offering to test versions of Xplorer², I am very willing to do so.

That's wildly out of context - given that there is was no XP version of 7zNSE, obviously you could not test anything, and I don't fault anyone for that. I did not tie one's ability to actually test things with one's ability to make a contribution - some of the best contributions can come from the simplest of observations, no testing necessary.

If there is any entitlement attitude it comes from the fact that I have paid for every Xplorer² incarnation, every update when they were charged for, and lifetime update contracts for each of those incarnations that offered such. I simply wanted these enhancements to work on my Xplorer² purchases on my machines.

As should have been made clear from the "open form" of 7zNSE (it is in no way tied to x2 or any licences thereof - it's available for users of any file-manager, gratis). As it's not a dedicated x2 product, any expectation of 100% integration is not reasonable. As I stated earlier in this thread, Nikos does go out of his way to ensure and maintain XP (even Win2000) compatibility within x2 itself as far as possible, and no doubt there are people who rely upon that aspect of things. However, there's a big difference between maintaining x2 (professionally) and the little unpaid side-projects he writes up for fun.

I had hoped, and perhaps at my age expected, that any questions I asked in this forum, perhaps naively, would be responded to with the respect I have earned and am "entitled" to. For somebody, like Mr. Kilmatead, who knows me only by the words I used in this forum, I believe judging me as he did is ethically wrong.

All questions (from anyone) on this forum are treated (and have always been, for my part) with equal respect, insofar as they appear rational and are not repeated for the sake of repetition. A forum can only persist by little more than that kind of tacit agreement.

As I have said repeatedly, I never had a problem with someone expecting or inquiring after XP compatibility. And, after Nikos answered that question himself (it's not one I was qualified to field), it should have been the end of the matter. No means no. Or, more specifically, "not at this time". That you asked again with no small implication that it should be given more credence other than "equity", is where I run out of patience, as I consider that to be irrational. And once I deduce from empirical evidence that someone is irrational, all bets are off. That you were affronted by that is unfortunate, but (and I hate to say this) no one is entitled to anything in this world. Not respect, not happiness, not anything. And the minute (the very millisecond itself) that someone entertains that notion, they are not thinking straight.

In the small confines of this forum you (and all else) are entitled to an open respect, and you've always been shown it in your interactions (as I review past posts). Indeed, even in this thread I merely presented you with an alternative that you dismissed out of hand. So, after that, there is nothing but obvious fun to be had as all's fair in love and war.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As an afterthought...

Curiously, I have never once in my entire life felt entitled to any respect (or that anything I have was somehow "earned") - and why should I? That would be the height of hubris and conceit. I am merely human. And to be human is not something particularly worthy of any note. I know that the world is a dangerous violent place and most of us are consigned by fate to die painful violent and lonesome deaths. This is just reality. I expect nothing of the world, and can only fight against its indifference and suffering with a humour evident of God's spiteful revenge.

People seem to misunderstand that about me (even when I was a child) - they assume that I'm actually "a nice guy" and have somehow accepted the same social contract that they have, simply because I "act that way", and that we're somehow all in this world together. But appearances aside, that is simply not true. This is the purpose of philosophy, to carefully wrest a "valid" comprehension of the world as we encounter it, and to seek an understanding therein. And more importantly, to act upon it.

That we should "like" what we discover or come to understand is not actually important. The hard truths of life really are little more than Mongols, Huns, Cossacks, or just the children of your neighbourhood coming over the horizon to tear the world asunder. It's not nice, it's not pleasant, and it's not respectful. And most importantly, nor should it be, as that would only lead to madness and further expectation of relief.

Since (as stated) I have never felt "entitled" to any respect myself, I honestly find the notion that others do to be somewhat strange, irrational, and curious (given that the evidence of life always clearly states the contrary). However, as a vaguely open-minded person, I just shrug my shoulders and tolerate that irrational belief of others' as just being "their thing". I am, therefore, quite genuinely surprised when they fail to see themselves as being trapped in the thralls of madness and suffering and instead expose some delusioned "higher purpose" as to how the world should be (bereft of respect, pleasure, and reason) - that they exhibit something akin to "hope", which is to say, "expectation". I can but shake my head.

To me, it is only reasonable to respond to things the way I do. If you (or anyone) find those proclivities of mine offensive at times (or even humorous or informative in other contexts), then I could proffer an apology - but I wouldn't mean it. That would not be consistent with what I call sanity... insufferable as it is.

One should never apologise for being helpful, or informative, or entertaining, or rude, or awful, or neglectful of social grace. As the theologians of old have reposed, while the moral man knows what is right; the ethical man simply does what is right. Unfortunately for us, as the concatenated protoplasm that we are, none are qualified to judge what is actually one, or what is actually the other. And I would never presume to, for my sins.

This is the hopelessness of life.

And that's all it is.

[drac]

dmattote, we share similar backgrounds - as I, too, started working with computers that filled rooms. I did not use it (it was actually before my time) but I was able to stand INSIDE a computer. It was a vacuum tube unit that required internal access to change tubes when they failed. I also worked with punch cards and paper tape even punching code into a computer (in binary) via buttons on the front panel. And today, while not retired, I have chosen to only retain a few clients from my previous consultant days. Just enough to have interesting things to do, but not (usually) too many so as to add stress to my life. Like you I think respect is very important and I believe I deserve it. BUT that only applies to people that know me or hire me - not to people who do not have enough information about, or experience with, me to decide whether I deserve to be respected.

Kilmatead, I am an engineer (EE) and NOT good at social interactions. Still, I think it was not necessary to defend yourself (via your previous post). I am sure you can (and maybe did) make points as to why YOU think what you said to dmattote was OK. But your premise that many people (including you) are bad (or whatever) and thus one should not expect anything from them - especially respect, is not one that I accept. If most people, including you, were that bad, we would be living in a post-apocalyptic world similar to what the Mad Max movies depict.

Maybe you felt bad about insulting dmattote and wanted to redeem yourself by proving you were right. BTW that is something that I would probably do - which is why I am thinking it was what you were doing. You and I have interacted many times on this forum. Certainly it is possible that you have been presenting an image that you want the world to see and you are really nothing like the person that appears on the pages of this forum. However, I doubt it. I think the real Kilmatead is present (maybe only in part) in his posts. For what its worth, I LIKE and RESPECT the Kilmatead I see on this forum. I find him a fun, interesting and very INTELLIGENT person. I also find him helpful - a person that is interested in helping others, cannot be a bad human. So I choose to reject your bad person premise and continue thinking of you the way I do. I am not stupid and I am not naïve but I am not perfect (as much as I would like to be) so I can be fooled and I can be wrong. I just don't think this is one of those times.

[Kilmatead]

I think the real Kilmatead is present (maybe only in part) in his posts. For what its worth, I LIKE and RESPECT the Kilmatead I see on this forum. I find him a fun, interesting and very INTELLIGENT person. I also find him helpful - a person that is interested in helping others, cannot be a bad human. So I choose to reject your bad person premise and continue thinking of you the way I do.

You'll note that I have tried to disabuse you of that rosy (rosey, rosie?) notion previously, and apparently will have to continue to do so in the future, regrettably. We all enjoy our illusions about the world, and especially our illusions about being able to make sense of it, but few enjoy the loss of such things. I embraced my loss when it happened, and it taught me almost everything I needed to know to become the practised contrarian I am. I have noticed that it's rather rare for humans to adopt that tack, as they usually settle for "coping" with their losses, rather than embracing them (and they curiously believe that to be healthy, since it allows them the luxury of not having to change their ecumenical views). And they call me strange! Crazy.

But your premise that many people (including you) are bad (or whatever) and thus one should not expect anything from them - especially respect, is not one that I accept. If most people, including you, were that bad, we would be living in a post-apocalyptic world

Avoiding the amusing Augustinian theory of religious Original Sin (which is not what I was referring to, and you didn't juggle well anyway - you missed the bit about the height of hubris and conceit), you'll note that we already do live in such a world (though I don't think Mad Max has much to do with it). The curious part is, most people just choose to ignore it. Ever been to the romantic end of Casablanca? It's not a nice place. If ever there was an antithesis of a tourist destination, that would be it. But if you asked anyone, they would say, "yeah, that would be great to see!" (Goes to long-held populist illusions; that one is easy to disabuse people of - other ones require more work.)

Once upon a time the term "deserve" was derived of the phrase "from service" - somewhere along the line that was confused into the medieval courtly mean of bonhomie (giving it some kind of moral edge vis-à-vis Le Roman de la Rose) - and it seems to have become ever more watered-down to the contemporary assumptions many humans hold today about respect (that it just magically "speaks for itself"). Illusions are deeply held, it seems. Why do people cling to such linguistic corruptions so? Curious. Must write one of those conspiracy-debunking books about it one day, just to undermine misconstrued contemporary wisdom and usher in a much needed new ultraviolent Buddhist theocracy.

[dunno]

Humans should stop pretending that they are civilized, scratch the surface and the maggots will emerge. Few have the courage to stand by their ethics when presented with wrong, most just "look the other way". "I was only following orders". "I saw nuffink"

I've lived in many countries, my take on human nature is, Everyone does as they please irrespective of the laws of the land and the golden rule of society,
The biggest transgressors of civil rules where I live are the pious religious, christian and muslim, needless to say my direct manner with these folks doesn't go down well, I expect to be booted out the country by these zealots who have connections in the immigration office. If hypocrisy were uranium one could power the planet.
Respect, politeness, logic and reason are perceived as weaknesses by the local populace, I've had to emancipate my mind of social norms to dish as well as I'm served. Politeness is a shield which is well utilised by the insincere one's, it's the mask behind which evil seethes and writhes. Don't get me started on the horrible mendaciousness of the Hindu's either..

@ Draco,
As a engineer you have led a sheltered life, the real world is a totally twisted place, populated with mendacious, double thinking scoundrels, Survival and Greed are especially devoid of morals or ethics.
Morals and Ethics, the golden rule, are virtues which the TRULY civilized will uphold under any circumstance, < these folks are very very scarce.

back on topic : *Returns to hammock*

[drac]

Kilmatead, yes, people like thinking their rosy thoughts, it makes them happy. And much to my dismay, a whole lot of people think being happy is the purpose of life. I disagree - but do not find many people that will admit to agreeing with me. I also believe that people can have their own "purpose of life" and just because I do not agree they are correct, it does not mean they are wrong. Life may have no purpose (other than sustaining the species) and the way we are going, we are going to fail at that, too. I know what I WANT the purpose of MY life to be, I am just not doing a great job at living my life in a way to achieve that purpose. I WANT there to be something after death other than nothingness. Most religions offer that option and I think that contributes to the popularity of religion. So it seems like not wanting death to be the end is something basic to humans.

You are correct that I do not want you to be different than I picture you. And you are correct that, like others, I accept the information that supports my beliefs and reject that which doesn't. There is a word for that, though I am not sure what it is: optimism, positivity, faith, inflexibility, single-mindedness, denial.

The world is a big place and it is NOT homogeneous. Some places are beautiful but are inhabited by ugly people. Some places are bland and boring (and cold) but inhabited by wonderful (at least superficially) people. Parts of Canada come to mind as a place where people act (again, at least publically) the way my rosy vision of humans thinks that people should act. I have no doubt that there are parts of the world (as where dunno currently hangs his hammock) where the people live by different rules. I have travelled, but not lived in diverse places. I have experienced all kinds of people - and I expect they were far from the worst that humanity has to offer. Still even the worst of them do not sound as bad as dunno describes. I think people's perceptions are colored by their experiences and by their own attitudes. I believe that someone on another hammock down the road from dunno may have a very different perception of the people there. Maybe I have had a sheltered life, but I am happy that I do not have to live in a world where life is so hard and people are so (emotionally) ugly. That is the Mad Max world. I am not sure why one would choose to live in that part of the earth. I understand it is all about the money - which is another sad fact of life. No matter how many times people say money isn't everything, I think that is what the rich and powerful tell the masses so they won't feel so miserable in their own lives. But, I digress, the world is a beautiful place, the world is an ugly place (to paraphrase Dickens). It all depends on the perception of the person who is looking at it. So, to ME, Kilmatead, you are a beautiful person (probably not the word I would normally use but I am trying to flow from the previous point).

[dunno]

I accept the information that supports my beliefs and reject that which doesn't. There is a word for that, though I am not sure what it is: optimism, positivity, faith, inflexibility, single-mindedness, denial.

Biased fits.

I think people's perceptions are colored by their experiences and by their own attitudes.

Wrong, My Perceptions and experience cannot be influenced by my attitude, they can be influenced by my state of mind though. If joesoap is a lunatic irrespective of my attitude, that's what I perceive, experience.

I believe that someone on another hammock down the road from dunno may have a very different perception of the people there

.
The 4 someone's in other hammocks that I'm surrounded by.
(1) 6 dogs, 7 security cameras, perimeter lighting that's used as a navigational aid by cosmonauts. Mrs. paranoid is American and hubby is a local hindu, she is a "devout christian", only reads the bible. They were seriously annoyed when I POLITELY asked them to stop pointing cameras at my house.
(2) 3 dogs, I requested that the perimeter "search lights" frying my bedrooms be switched off at night, also miffed by that, but complied.
(3) 7 dogs, perimeter lighting that could power the entire local village, they thankfully turn their search lights off at bedtime.
(4) 2 dogs, perimter lighting that could power the village on the other side, fortunately the stupid yapping cocker spaniel went awol, there is a god.
All of them are religious. All of them complain about the noise the locals make when they party over weekends, yet when I point out that their dogs are louder and they yap every night they look at me as if I'm totally deranged.
I don't have any dogs, and zero perimeter lighting. No issues to date.

This is on a tropical island advertised as one of THE destinations for a family or romantic holiday...go figure. The hotels are mini fortresses though.

Maybe I have had a sheltered life, but I am happy that I do not have to live in a world where life is so hard and people are so (emotionally) ugly.

Nothing emotional about the nature of the local people, they are the product of their system of belief, education, myths, superstitions, envy, greed, now throw in the lack of nutrition during the gestation period which results in "different biological brains", and voila, you have a culture.

I understand it is all about the money - which is another sad fact of life.

The best of the bible; Ecclesiastes 10:19
A Feast Is Made For Laughter, Wine Makes Merry, But Money Answers All Things.

I also like the bit where Jesus turns water into wine, now that's a miracle worth repeating, sadly the pope who is God's special anointed on earth hasn't been able replicate this wonderful deed, he still buys his sunday "blessed" tot from the bottle shop, at a price of course.

[nikos]

if i copy/paste all these "out of topic" posts and publish them in a book i'm sure it will be a gift to humanity only second to the annals of confucius

[Kilmatead]

I'm sure it will be a gift to humanity

The trouble with compendium-ised "Analects" is that they only really gain epistemological value posthumously.

A main prerequisite is that the contemporary "morēs" (pronunciation emphasis) from the period of source need to cycle through certified epochs of abandonment and reclamation before true worthiness may be affirmed or discarded.

So, not only do we (the wily contributors) have to die first, but it would help your sales (of said analects) if you too met a squeamish end (best in a cave valiantly defended by the equites of your most beloved Phoenician and best decorated Saracen bodyguards), having first certified your piety and scholarship in the courts of the principal kings of the day.

And then your remaining half-legible scraps of rolled soot-encrusted papyrus must be certified as lost for a set period of time (long enough for the carbon to decay to its "sweet spot").

The really tough part after all that is finding an illiterate and dusty (yet still photogenic) shepherd-boy who can be trusted enough to not only rediscover your cave on time (the timing is crucial) but to not actually utilise your last scribblings as a convenient source of toilet-roll.

Publishing just ain't as easy as it used to be. Vanity press was supposed to be the great equaliser, but it just hasn't worked out that way yet.

[nikos]

instead of a book (so last century) this rich information can go into echo in case it is asked of a difficult question such as "what is life"
where do they get these product ideas?

[Kilmatead]

where do they get these product ideas?

They buy them from the parody shop. I mean, if you could figure out how to market a 200 dollar talking vibrator x2 would probably have a lot more female users.

(There is nothing like the feeling you get lowering the intellectual standards of a forum at half 10 in the morning. It's tremendously satisfying [in so many ways - or so I hear]. )

[drac]

I am the proud and happy owner of an Echo. I have had it for several months. It is a great product (especially for $99) and it keeps getting better as Amazon adds new features every week or two. It is not going to win a completion with Siri or Cortana - YET. It has been getting very good reviews from owners. Those of you who choose to scoff at new technology (Luddites, all) are missing out.

Kilmatead, since most of those off-topic posts are your gems, you can be the one to publish that document (not book, e-book) rather than let Nikos get rich on your wit and wisdom. That is yet another option for you to increase your wealth.

dunno, you sound better protected than many high security government installations. I agree with you about the dogs yapping. People can be SO inconsiderate of their neighbors. Not just the dogs, apparently, but also bright lights and other distractions. My gutters are currently clogged with seeds from a neighbor's tree.

Biased might be a word that fits, but I think that it is not a GOOD fit with the others.

If your perceptions cannot be influenced by your attitude, I would suggest you are a rare exception to the workings of the human brain.

I did not say the people were emotional. I said they were emotionally ugly to emphasize that I did not mean physically ugly.

[dunno]

I did not say the people were emotional. I said they were emotionally ugly to emphasize that I did not mean physically ugly.

Emotionally ugly. Is this a politically correct term for a different set of principles, morals, and virtues, i.e. alien culture or philosophy ?.

Emotions are how one expresses feelings, if I'm emotionless it doesn't mean I'm bereft of feelings it merely means that I don't EXPRESS my feelings. Someone who is mendacious doesn't have ugly feelings, how can a feeling be ugly ?.
Crying is a ugly emotion, it distorts faces and water pours from the red, inflamed eyes, mucus pours from the nose, woman seem to be able to emote crying at will but is the feeling sincere ?, hence the term 'crocodile tears', if they knew how ugly it makes them look they'd ditch that emotion in a heartbeat. Crying without distorting the face is far more effective in soliciting empathy.

Humans that think differently to me have different, values, philosophies, cultures, I don't think they have ugly emotions.

[drac]

I have tried to explain this, twice. Apparently I have not done a good job. I will make one more attempt at it.

I used the term "emotionally ugly" to differentiate my point from a physically ugly person. Of course what is ugly? One person's ugly is another person's beautiful. So the term is certainly subjective. But I digress.

Emotions CAN be ugly. As examples: hate, jealousy, envy, greed, etc. Again those are my selections of ugly emotions, yours may be different.

Emotions are NOT how people express feelings!! Emotions and feelings are often words that are used interchangeably though there are subtle differences (http://www.thebestbrainpossible.com/wha ... -emotions/). ACTIONS are how people express feelings. Again emotions are feelings (let's ignore the subtle differences) so if you are emotionless you are probably a psychopath (though these people do have some feelings) or a computer. Am I communicating with an AI computer program???

Crying is not an emotion - it is an action. Crying is usually caused by an emotion but not necessarily an ugly one. Sadness is not an ugly emotion (at least on my list) and people also cry from joy. One person cannot see the feelings/emptions of another person - they can only see the actions that the person engages in when reacting to those feelings.

Empathy is a feeling some people get but it is not possible for one person to create feelings in another person (there are obvious exceptions here if I hit you with a 2x4 you will probably feel pain) . A person MAY feel empathy in response to the actions (or words) of another person but it is based on the emotional/psychological makeup of each person (a psychopath is unlikely to feel empathy no matter what your actions).

There is no correlation between thinking differently and ugly emotions. They are apples and oranges. There is NO emotion in thought (think left brain/right brain). Emotions can occur in response to thought but 2+2=4 contains no emotional component. Thought may evoke emotions and emotions may evoke thought (and action). Hate is a good example. The emotion of hate may evoke a violent action and the same emotion may evoke thoughts (A person hating an ethnic group may think members of that group are inferior or evil).

[dunno]

I have tried to explain this, twice. Apparently I have not done a good job. I will make one more attempt at it.

And there it is, you're convinced you're right. I'm trying to help you see the fine distinction between a feeling and a emotion, to no avail.

Just goes to show eh, Many parallel universes and right here on Earth, just ask your dog or cat.

P.S. if you wish to continue this pointless debate, PM me, lets leave the public forum.

[drac]

I actually acknowledged that there IS a fine difference between emotions and feelings. And even included a link to an article about the topic. What I don't agree with (and DO believe I am right about) is that you seem to not grasp the difference between feelings/emotions (which are internal) and actions. I think that is probably the biggest difference in what I am saying and what I understand from what you are saying.

I do appreciate your efforts to try and help me. And maybe it is my misunderstanding of what you are saying that is causing me to disagree with you. But IF I do understand you correctly, you are presenting a very different picture of reality than I am. I think I am right. And my experience in and knowledge of this subject is "above average". Of course I would not pretend to be at a Kilmatead level of comprehension, but definitely a high level.