Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Ben

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 25
271
:C Everybody seems to be doing it. Look at facebook, the only social networking site I use, and beacon. I turned beacon off, but lo-and-behold, beacon is still tracking/targeting me. I think that the advertisers and those who get money from that will have their way, no matter what. If they did not exist, this monitoring technology would not be for bad use, but for the use which we would like to see it.

The level of invasiveness of personal privacy that people are willing to accept astounds me.

When your most intimate things are common there is no reason for self-respect, and if you do not have self-respect, then there is nothing for others to respect in you.

The psychological makeup of a person is such that the potential for individuality is there as a product of one's birth. But it is not guaranteed to mature.

In addition, society is setup to prevent this maturation from happening. Your Core needs something precious that helps make an individual special to himself, and to others. And you need to hold and keep it dear. Then you can give it to someone special in your life who will in turn, in love, give you something special of themselves, and together you can make a strong bond that can last a lifetime and give you a sense of completeness.

Look around you. The average lifetime today tosses away mates like a flu-stricken person going through a box of tissues.

No bonding with your mate, no strong ties. No strong ties, no strong family. No strong family, no one to miss you or stand up for you, should you be the object of oppression... as we all are today. Rights and freedoms today are just another box of Kleenex. You cannot do this without a detrimental backlash.

When all things precious are common, individuality is lost. When individuality is lost we are cloned common stock in a communal society. i.e.: communistic or, as you'll be hearing more of soon, Collectivistic. This is not good. Individuality will disappear and group-think will reign. In a group you are a number. As a number you can never be special. And your birthright is still-born.

Saijin Naib, I know I quoted a stale message from you, and, just to be clear, I'm not really responding to you, rather, I'm using your post as mechanism for information delivery to all in general. It is not personal;)

Very few people these days understand that privacy is the keystone to security of mind... and of body. You pull it out, (or give it away), to the detriment of all involved. This was well known in the past, but is hidden from the public at large today, stolen from your back pocket with their left hand, while their right hand keeps you dazzled by the glitz of the Internet and the illusion of a real community. It can never be real.

When the peg of respect is pulled out, the very foundations of what we are will shake, and ultimately, fall. If there is nothing differentiating us from anything, and all we have is common, then we are common. Common is the opposite of Special and built in to, even the very word, Communist.

As a small taste of what I say, look up "The Hidden Agenda" on YouTube and listen to the now deceased Norman Dodd in a interview just before his death.

Norman Dodd was many things, but in relevance, he was the head of the Congressional Investigation Committee setup by the US Congress, (by Congressman Carroll Reese),  to investigate the wrong doings of the big tax-exempt foundations with respect to what they were up to with the Nazis during the second world war. This committee is generally, and unofficially, referred to as the Reese Committee in the early 50s and did complete its task. But their finding were never allowed to be submitted before Congress, having been crushed by powerful forces. The findings are, however, available.

To wrap this up, the foundations knew they couldn't get people to give up their privacy and let the government into their bedrooms and mental inner sanctum, by force. As soon as the people got wind of it heads would roll. So they made it
KEWL to give up privacy, for a new and unsuspecting generation who know nothing of war and national deceit, in an education system that has thrown away the banana and kept the peel.

This soon spread to all generations in a world of apparent safety and comfort..

272
Article Discussions / Re: Papyrus 2008 (DEMO)
« on: 2008.08.09, 04:18:42 »
Quote
What I was trying to say was I saw no OS/2 version in English  - just the German version. Unless the English version is available on the German "side" of the site for purchase (there is no English Demo on the German side for OS/2).

Greetings, Robert M.

Yeah, I got all that from your first post, though that might not have come across in my response; I know there is no English version of OS/2.

Thanks for the additional info though.  ;)

273
Article Discussions / Re: Papyrus 2008 (DEMO)
« on: 2008.08.08, 23:23:26 »
I wonder how hard it can be to make an English OS/2 version since they must all ready have most of core data done for the Windows and Mac versions.

Now, that is a bit of an assumption for I haven't had the time to check, but I find it hard to believe that all versions are in German.

Also, I'm not a programmer so...

However, I surely would be interested in seeing what they've done so far WRT the OS/2 version... maybe I'll download the German one and check it out for myself if I can find the time.

Later...

274
Article Discussions / Re: Papyrus 2008 (DEMO)
« on: 2008.08.08, 18:28:05 »
Greetings, Saijin Naib.

Papyrus has had a love/hate relationship with the OS/2 community for a long time.

Once, Rom Logic actually supported OS/2. And now, every time a new version is in the works there is the usual chatter from past users and Rom Logic about whether or not there will be a new OS/2 version.

It always comes down to the developer saying that they will look into it, or will work on making one. However, it's been a looong time since there has been an OS/2 version of Papyrus, though it certainly is a wonderful word processor.

I believe there was such a discussion about a year and a half ago more or less, referencing this, now present, version.

For myself, I used Papyrus many years ago and loved it. Fast, small, powerful and stable somewhere between Describe and Lotus' Word Pro, ( Ami Pro then), and I would very much like to see a new, native version, but another weak port I can do without.

275
I think, theoretically speaking, it could be.

But the same problem persists as with all new software, (and hardware), with respect to OS/2; who's going to develop/port/modify the software to utilize such a thing?

Clearly, OS/2 needs more developers/porters etc.

What this means is OS/2 needs new blood.

Of course, this is nothing new and is, in fact, the "same ol' same ol'".

As usual there's always hope   :D

276
Applications / Re: Desktop Backgrounds
« on: 2008.08.05, 01:23:53 »
Sorry it took me so long ben, here they are in 1900x1200. (Native for me is 1280x1024 hence the resolution ;) )
Greetings, Saijin Naib.

Not a problem on the time. And I "thank you" for taking the effort to do it.

Hmm...    *Ben quietly tests out the images for fit and finish*

Hey! They look great and fit my desktop to a "T".   :o

Thanks again.

277
Applications / Re: Desktop Backgrounds
« on: 2008.08.04, 16:23:07 »
I agree - 1920x1200 is NICE - FWIW I use the same combination as Ben - ie ATI X300 and Viewsonic VX2835 28" screen - only issue is that DPMS doesn't seem to work when connected via DVI :/
Same here, but it's not a true DVI input. DVI works through an adapter that goes through the HDMI input.

So it would seem that HDMI = Half DPMS Matched Input.
  :D

278
Applications / Re: Desktop Backgrounds
« on: 2008.08.04, 05:08:41 »
Greetings, RobertM

Yep, it's real 1900x1200 on my ViewSonic VX2835, 28" monitor.

My wife bought it for me last year. It was pretty cheap.$600.00 or there abouts.

My video card is an ATI Radeon X300 PCX. It's a good combination.  :D

I tried monitor spanning for a while, (with lesser monitors), but they were of different sizes and one was a CRT, so I gave that up.

I like this setup better; it works well for me.

The only problem is the brightness. It is totally insane and would fry the retinas, so I have to keep it set between 3 - 5:o

Still, 1900x1200 makes for some lovely backgrounds. ;D

WRT the resizing, at that high a resolution, the e x p a n d e d resolution looks less than spectacular so I stick with native matches only.

279
Applications / Re: Desktop Backgrounds
« on: 2008.08.03, 22:05:06 »
Nice desktop, Saijin Naib, but it is a little small on my 1900x1200 desktop.

Are the versions that you have placed here, the largest available?

Later...

280
Communication / Re: LAN-based OS/2 messenger.
« on: 2008.07.31, 05:49:31 »
Hi Ben

That url does not give an empty directory here; here are the 1st few listings:-

Index of ftp://os2voice.org/EWS/

Yes, I did clear the browser cache before re-checking.

Regards

Pete
Works now. *shrugs*

They might have had a problem when I went up first... didn't have to do anything to get it to work.

Thank you.

... and "Thank-you" RobertM as well.

281
Communication / Re: LAN-based OS/2 messenger.
« on: 2008.07.30, 17:11:17 »
That "saw it relatively recently" rang a bell here to...

A quick hunt through my Bookmarks for /ews found ftp://os2voice.org/EWS/

You may want to add it to your bookmarks  :-)

Pete
OK. Pete.

I'll check it out.

Err.. .I did check it out... it's an empty directory.  :D

Thanks for the tip though, I'll look for another Employee Written Software archive...

282
Marketplace / Re: OS/2 motherboards
« on: 2008.07.28, 03:41:25 »
Also, for you or anyone else with a Netfinity or xServer:

http://www.aibuiltpc.com/IBM_Servers/ServeRAID_Comparison_Guide.pdf

Lists which ServeRAID cards are compatible with OS/2 - note, not all are compatible with every model Netfinity or xServer.

-Robert
Hail, RobertM.

When I gave the above link a go, it yielded the following error;

                         "The file does not exist or is read-protected.

                         Please check the URL and try again."

Did you mis-type it? or have they removed it?

Thanks.

283
Communication / Re: LAN-based OS/2 messenger.
« on: 2008.07.24, 21:26:27 »
Of course Pidgin IM. However, it needs the GTK+ Runtime and other things ported to OS/2 first before it could ever be used.
Ack!

It is hardly a viable solution then... for I was looking for something that could actually be used...  :-\ *smacks forehead*

Saijin Naib; I "thank you" for the information.

I guess I will have to be more careful and try to avoid stepping into Pigeon Pooh.
  :D

284
Those cellular modems, b'y... tut, tut.

Perhaps you should get yourself one of those one-piece ones... maybe that would work better for you.
::)     ;)

285
Marketplace / Re: Process Commander for OS/2
« on: 2008.07.24, 16:15:37 »
Doh, er...

PM = Personal Message... think Profile;D

I didn't design it, I just use it.  ;)

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 25