Re: Linux, X, ld, gcc, linking, shared libraries and stuff
- From: "Beth" <BethStone21@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 05:31:38 GMT
Annie wrote:
> Beth wrote:
> > [ ... snip ... ]
> > Mind you, if they need a replacement for Anne Robinson, then Annie
> > seems a good choice...her name even sounds similar...and she'd have
> > no problem with that whole "ridicule the contestants" section...
>
> Still thinking of me even at 4:10 in the morning, Beth?
Not intentionally, I assure you...and not necessarily at that time...
First, "Anne" -> "Annie"...the mental association should be obvious to even
the biggest idiot, including yourself...your names are similar and I
actually happen to not know many other people, with "Anne" or "Annie" (as
their first name, anyway)...
Also, on a Freudian level, Anne Robinson "acts" being a horrible, evil
bitch for that show (she actually isn't like that because she used to
present the "consumer programme" Watchdog, where it was the other way
around: She was fighting against the big "PR" people _FOR_ defending the
"ordinary person in the street" who'd been screwed over by some company
:)...the mental association, again, shouldn't be too surprising...she
"acts" what you actually are ;)...
Second, the "timestamp" is an unreliable measure...my mail program has the
"do not send immediately" option selected...sometimes, you might notice a
bunch of posts all sent with apparently the exact same "timestamp"...this
isn't that I wrote them simultaneously but that I wrote a bunch of them and
sent them all "en masse" in one go...
And this, of course, is rich...the person who does not ever really reply to
the group more generally, but simply replies to my posts predominently with
transparent "take your medicine" attempts at discrediting my words...who
repeatedly posts nothing more than "[ snipped 100 lines ]" to tell us
little more than that you didn't read the post or didn't like its content
(but don't actually discussion any of it in any way, so what use this
"information" is to the group is highly questionable)...who has waged a
"campaign" against me, almost exclusively, for a number of years...who
seems so "obsessed" that you probably wouldn't even exist or post to the
group at all, if I weren't here, because your entire posting life on this
group resolves (except for rare instances, which often happen after I make
this point, suggesting you're trying to "fake" that you have an actual
interest in discussing the group's topic)..._YOU_, of all people, accuse me
of "obsession" over something so trivial as pointing out a name
similarity - "Anne" -> "Annie", hardly rocket science or unusual to make
that connection - on a post _SENT_ at that time (but on which we can only
determine that it was written sometime after the post it was replying to
and sometime before that sending time...which, indeed, may very well have
been a case of one last send before calling it a night or, as I am an
insomniac I fully admit, then I could even have been waking up at such a
time and turned on the computer then, sending as I started up the mail
program...you know, when you can't sleep, then you might as well do
something to while away the time...other insomniacs will know the problem:
There's no point "trying" to go to sleep, it just won't work...I've been
like that so long now, that I've ceased to have any "normal" and I've
ceased to even care...que sera sera...indeed, I actually tend, instead, to
fall naturally into a "siesta" pattern - very European, I suppose - of
sleeping a little in the afternoon / evening and a little in the night...to
"split" the sleeping...and, you know, I'm beginning to believe that this is
a far more sensible approach and might even be what the body is _supposed_
to do...an opinion that some scientists are warming to the idea of:
http://www3.azwestern.edu/psy/dgershaw/lol/SiestaSense.html
....that, in fact, we're perhaps _naturally_ supposed to do this but have
"culturally" removed it because of the "work day" customs...
Also, research into teenager's sleeping patterns noticed that, in fact,
teenagers are permanently grumpy and appear lazy because they are
_SUPPOSED_ to sleep longer...they are _STILL_ on the "sleep cycle" of
children - which is longer - but have begun to only _feel_ "sleepy" when
adults feel sleepy (later at night)...hence, they need a child's length of
sleep but it only hits them at adult times (well, as a "transitional"
period in everyone's life, the "overlap" surely isn't unusual :)...which
means that when a teenager tries to constantly go back to sleep when you
wake them in the morning, it isn't actually "laziness" (at least, not
entirely ;) but you really are waking them up in what's naturally their
"middle of the night"...and, well, what are _you_ like at that time, if
someone kept doing that to you every single night? You'd also become
exactly the same, as all the typical symptoms teenagers have: Tetchy,
irritable, walking around in a daze, not able to function mentally in a
full capacity, etc....it's amazing it took so long for scientists to notice
the connection that all the "stereotypical" symptoms attributed to "lazy
teenagers" are, in fact, all the exact same symptoms that _ANYONE_ gets
were they repeatedly woken up in the middle of the night and forced to go
to work at that time, like it or not...
And the actual problem that exists is that they are _still_ forced to wake
up for 9am, like children and adults are...so, to test this theory, an
experiment was started with an American school where all they did was start
the school day a little later for those in this age range...starting at
10am, not 9am (only an hour extra sleep...possibly it would be even better
to start 10:30 or 11:00 :)...and the results startled the scientists...the
teenagers were NOT grumpy, were paying more attention in class, were not
playing up so much, were not irritable, were getting _better grades_ and so
on and so forth...it was almost like a "miracle cure" of all the complaints
everyone makes about teenagers...
Everyone had always assumed that the problem was with them and it was
"laziness"...similar, indeed, to many people's opinions about "taking a
siesta" (even though, as noted, scientific evidence seems to suggest that
"siesta" is, in fact, the _natural_ way...and that we're forcing ourselves
not to do so because of "cultural" stuff: The standard "work hours",
wanting to immediately get home after work and then go out and do things,
etc.)...being an insomniac, I've never been able to sleep "normal
hours"...and, after a while, I simply accepted this and sleep whenever I
get tired (all other things permitting, of course ;)...and I find that,
indeed, like the experiment, I fall into a "siesta"-like pattern when I go
with "tiredness" rather than "cultural expectation" to tell me when to
sleep...and, hence, yeah, I am awake at strange hours sometimes but the
"siesta" style _IS_ more refreshing and energy-giving (ironically, perhaps,
as those who follow "siesta" are often called "lazy" but, you know, I don't
hesitate to write long posts or take the effort to do that because I'm full
of energy that I don't feel there's the slightest need to "conserve" it, if
you know what I mean...and, on the contrary, if I slept "normal hours" then
I assure you this would actually make me lazier...because, when I tried it,
that's exactly what resulted..."forcing" yourself to sleep unnatural
hours - which, believe it or not, the majority of you probably are exactly
doing but don't realise because it's "cultural norm" to do so - actually is
an exhausting act in itself...yeah, I know, you don't believe me...it's
challenging centuries of "established thought" to even suggest such a
blasphemy...but, you know, I have tried _both_ - as science has tested
both - and the conclusion exactly corresponds: A "siesta" a day takes the
laziness away! :)...
It's more "deep irony" for you...in wanting to "maximise" people's
productivity, cultures have actually develop something that _eats into_ a
person's capacity to work...they are paying people to "slack off" in the
afternoons - everyone does it to one degree or another - with some "crack
of the whip" mentality that forcing people to be productive was a "cure"
for their "laziness"...bzzt! Wrong answer...if working hours were altered
or otherwise accounted for this, they'd have workers who are much more
alert...and, even if productivity were not particularly improved, it
certainly improves people's attitudes...
And forcing that teenager to wake up to go to school because, if they don't
go they'll get bad grades? Bzzt! Wrong answer...if school actually started
just an hour or so later then they'd get the sleep that actually physically
and naturally _NEED_ (don't be fooled by teenagers wanting to go to sleep
and feeling tired at "adult hours"...they still actually _NEED_ the longer
child-length amount of sleep...the "transition" from child to adult, you
see, just doesn't work quite as "simply" as people often believe it
does...feeling tired later on in the night comes first - even though
needing to sleep longer hasn't shortened at all - but needing to sleep for
less time comes later...it comes in "stages" like this and "culture" is not
accounting for it...indeed, the adult teachers are fine at 9am, so they've
all been "assuming" all this time that teenagers would be too...and the
"convenience" of having children go to school at the same time people work
to not have problems with "arrangements" to have people to look after them
(though, by teenage years, surely they are "independent" enough to be able
to start managing themselves a bit more? :)...
The way that's developed in our cultures, deeply ironically, is actually
making people _LESS_ productive at work and getting _WORSE_ grades at
school (worse: Teenagers have this "problem" forced on them whilst, at the
same time, this being made their "most important years" in their education!
If you've been thinking that doing this was "for their own good" to get the
"laziness" out of them then, sorry, culture has been getting it _the wrong
way around_ for centuries! ;) by thinking that it's possible to "tame"
natural sleeping into "set hours"...
Sorry, Annie...but, really, you are the "obsessed freak" (chasing me around
with your nonsense...again, no "paranoia" at all: Go check Annie's "posting
patterns" for yourself in Google...plus, also, her typical "content" in
those posts...then come back and tell me who's "obsessed" with who) with
"unnatural sleeping hours"...NOT me...
Indeed, truth is, it's your "obsession" that prompts my comments...you just
won't leave me alone...you're a weird freak who follows me around,
basically...your "problem" forces itself on me by you chasing me around
like a weirdo...I'm actually trying to politely "shoo" you away...your
favourite movie is "Girl, interrupted" about sociopathic women in a mental
asylum? Nothing to do with you "relating" to those characters or anything,
is it?
Beth :)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Linux, X, ld, gcc, linking, shared libraries and stuff
- Next by Date: Re: Linux, X, ld, gcc, linking, shared libraries and stuff
- Previous by thread: Re: Linux, X, ld, gcc, linking, shared libraries and stuff
- Next by thread: Re: Linux, X, ld, gcc, linking, shared libraries and stuff
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
