Right. But in cases when the heart needs stopped, there's a heart lung machine plumbed into place in order to take over for it. And if anything stops for any real length of time, the patient dies.
It's like rebuilding a Harley motor, with no battery, without losing the radio[1] presets, and while maintaining a functional and running (if substitute) driveline the entire time, while ensuring that nothing ever stops because if it does, the bike will die. And then, all the kings horses and all the kings men, won't be able to put Harley together again.
But that's simply too wordy for a punchline. Especially when the original was so concise and to the point.
[1]: I don't know why Harleys are so often equipped with radios, but they are, so there.
I see a few confused posts here about "WTF? Cooling?"
Just RTFA, folks. It's a blade server arrangement, not a standalone computer. These "naked" computers are nothing more than a pair of dual-proc computers, in a 1U-ish chassis without a lid, which needs to slide into the appropriate rack-mounted housing in order to work. This housing includes all of the cooling and power supply goodness one would expect, and (of course) includes a top panel to promote useful airflow and limit RFI.
I don't see much "new" about these things at all, since AFAICT most/all "blade servers" were already naked since their inception.
Unfortunately people like you tend to demonize drivers, and this attitude is spreading.
Just because I like to ride my bike now and then, doesn't mean that I hate cars. There's few things I like more than tearing up a quiet, twisty road in my '95 325i, with its wide tires, trick suspension, and 3.91 gears. If the weather's nice, I'll do the same thing in the '79 Firebird, which has the added advantage of being obscenely loud. The racket from that car gives me silly grin every time I get into it. And, sure, there's lots of times I'd wish that a baffoon on a bike would stop behaving erratically, or that a pedestrian would just cross the fucking road already, or just stare in astonishment as a jogger WEAVES HIS WAY THROUGH SIX LANES OF TRAFFIC rather than cross with the light.
People like me? Hah. (No wonder your mouth keeps frothing up.)
Relax.
Meanwhile, I do look around. I do see how society has changed to be more protective of everyone else's children (and my usual response to that is "leave me/my kids the fuck alone").
However, relating to car-bike incidents in particular: Here in NW Ohio, it seems the only times drivers are demonized is when they've done something to deserve it. Smashing a kid on accident doesn't frequently appear to be worthy of demonization on its own merits; it needs combined with something else (grossly excessive speed, gross inebriation, hit-skip, etc) before folks get too worked up over it.
There's no signs to say to drivers "Slow down!" or anything so hysteric as that. The closest thing we have are yellow warning signs about the "SLOW CHILDREN" near playgrounds and such, which seems reasonable enough in the few places they actually exist.
Yes, what came first however is now irrelevent. The roads are built with cars in mind. Sidewalks are for people. I really don't care that the first roads in human history people walked upon... we're in the modern world now, deal with it.
Naw. I don't want to deal with the modern world any more than you want to deal with the past -- thanks.
Basic car insurance is for MEDICAL purposes, not property damage. It's so that if you hit someone with your car, THIER medical bills are paid if they are hurt. Insurance for bikers should cover their own medical bills; they are CHOOSING to take a huge risk in roads not built for them. As for "not every state requires insurance" nonsense, only two don't, but in those you must prove finanical responsiblity if you don't.
I'm afraid I just don't understand what you're trying to say here with the text that I've bolded. In Ohio, for instance, one is required only to have liability insurance in order to operate a car on a public road, and this coverage will do nothing for the driver insured by it but limit their liability toward others. Why should bicyclists be required to go above and beyond that standard and insure themselves?
If an accident involves a ped or cyclist, the driver is instantly demonized for not being able to stop 2000 lbs of metal and plastic in half a second because the ped or cyclists blasts right out in front without even looking. And that's the norm here.
Well, then, move someplace else where folks are more hostile toward bikes, and perhaps you'll see a different attitude emerge. I was issued a ticket for "failure to yield," with the little "resulting in an accident" checkbox ticked, while I was in the hospital getting fixed up after being hit by a truck on my bike. It went about how you describe, except it was more like 4,600 pounds than 2,000 pounds. I was twelve at the time. I should've been paying more attention, and it certainly wasn't the driver's fault (who was not cited for anything), and nobody was demonized (though I did get to go to juvenile court over the incident). A few months after that, a friend of mine was killed on his bike, and nobody was demonized -- he should've been paying more attention, too.
Sorry it doesn't work that way more in your neck of the woods.
According to Giganews, Usenet bandwidth is currently exceeding 5TB per day. (They have lovely, though slightly dated, graph demonstrating this point.)
That's a lot of storage and network infrastructure to manage for a service that almost none of an ISP's customers care about.
Now, of course, it could be argued that something like nntpcache, running locally on the ISP's network and fed by an outsourced service like Giganews might fit the bill well, by conserving bandwidth and storage on popular items and using very little for unpopular items. And, as someone who had previously (a decade ago) set up a system like this for a local ISP, I think I'm qualified to attest that it does work.
However, here's the way it probably went down with AT&T: Manager opens newspaper, sees some horrific headline about GM bankruptcy, and decides to cull the expenditures. "This Usenet thing is expensive," he thinks to himself, "and I don't think the cost is worth the 0.3% of customers who actually know it exists, let alone ever even use it." And then, just like that, AT&T's Usenet servers get thrown under the bus.
It's a sad state of affairs, I agree - I'm all for using networks efficiently, and BitTorrent just ain't it. But we (users) have to deal with what we've got to work with, and if BitTorrent's horrific network efficiency is the best we can do in a Usenet-free world, then so be it.
ISPs have been putting the axe to hosted Usenet services (or at least alt.binaries, or even alt.*) for years with minimal customer outcry, since almost nobody cares. However, the last time someone tried to fuck with BitTorrent on any grand scale (Comcast), it got the attention of all levels of government and Comcast turned their policy around in a (relative) hurry.
So, again: BitTorrent (or perhaps Giganews) it is.
As an AT&T subscriber, long-time Usenet fan, and someone who remembers when the daily bandwidth of Usenet exceeded that of a then-common 14.4kbps v.32bis modem, I'm neither surprised, shocked, nor offended by this move. *shrug*
It's worth noting that the Netalyzer says my AT&T Uverse connection works fine, complaining only that upstream buffering might be a little heavy (which is typical for any consumer broadband). All the usual ports are open, including 25(*), except for those that I have blocked on purpose (Netbios, SMB, etc). I've never seen any throttling, even with hundreds of gigabytes of torrents monthly. I guess this means that AT&T gives me "real internet access."
Just FYI, FWIW, etc. They're even pretty responsive toward questions and problems -- I have cell phone numbers for the individuals who installed my service, and the desk phone for the local manager, and I didn't have to fight anyone to get this information. They just gave it to me as par for the course. This makes it feel, to me, a lot more like a local ISP than the huge conglomerate that it really is.
*: Port 25 is blocked by default on Uverse. It takes a phone call to tech support to get it switched on, which I've done. This seems reasonable enough to me, in light of the current problems with zombie spam botnets. Helpful hint: The native English-speaking Uverse techs seem pretty well clued and are remarkably easy to work with, while their outsourced non-native-English speaking script-readers are a pain in the ass. If you get the non-English kind, just hang up and try some other time -- it's not worth the effort to fight your way past them to the better-clued clued techs. Once you get someone on the phone with their wits about them, getting port 25 turned on takes only about a minute.
i guess i see what you said cuz i mean the real problem is when folks just you know they're brain does not have working thot when this happens all goes to shit so i can see ur point with this i understand k thx
Perhaps in some instances, some pedanticism might be in order -- but I still think it's better to pick on people for being stupid, or for having asinine ideas, than for poor use of English. In general, at least. (I know a few brilliant people, with lots to share, whose written English is a nonsensical mess. It'd be a shame to write them off just because they're sometimes difficult to understand.)
If yr. failing to comprehend the meaning of the werds on the paige, than I s'pose yr. not so good at reading, after all. Offentimes, its better to just try and understand what their trying to say, then to be such a whiney pedant.
First, there were people. They walked with their feet. The common routes were cut or trampled into paths.
Later, the paths were paved.
And a long time later, we got bicycles.
And sometime after that, we got cars.
I skipped a few steps in the evolution of the road, obviously, preferring to stick to the high points and just to show that bikes and pedestrians were here first (for various definitions of "here"), before Henry Ford changed everything.
Regarding insurance and taxation: Bikes don't weigh 3,800 pounds, and aren't generally moving very fast. There's just not very much damage one can do with one. And they aren't as destructive on the pavement as cars are, again because of their reduced weight. (And not every state requires insurance for cars, anyway.)
And, er, uh: I do generally have a right to use the roads with my bicycle, on the basis that the right to do so has not yet been taken away. No, it's not a Constitutionally-protected right; it's not inalienable and it can be taken away. But the simple fact that it generally hasn't been stripped means that it's still my right to ride my bike on the street wherever it's legal to do so. (Which isn't quite everywhere; it is illegal to ride a bike on an Interstate Highway, for instance, and therefore I have no right to do it.)
And, if I'm riding my bike in traffic, it is my responsibility to use proper hand signals to communicate my intentions with others using the roadway, follow traffic signals, and use lanes properly.
I do understand that it seems that nobody ever gets cited for a traffic offense on a bicycle, and I believe that this is probably unfair. But I have been cited for a traffic offense while riding a bicycle, so plainly it's possible.
I ran across this spectacular video a few days ago, and it took me awhile to figure out what the giant pink thing was that started creeping across the sky.
Sure, I'd seen pictures of the Milky Way in textbooks and stuff, but never in motion or with my own eyes. I've lived in Ohio for my entire life, which has pretty bad light pollution over most of the state.
I now aspire to travel west, at least once, in order to find sufficient darkness to actually see this thing for real.
On my bike, I have a 3W LED flashlight with a handlebar mount. It is bright enough to see where I'm going at night, even with an oncoming car. Other important points:
1. It's bright. Folks sometimes flash their highbeams at my puny little flashlight, which is fine with me - it means that they at least know I'm there. 2. The model I have also includes a panic-inducing strobe mode. I haven't found a use for this, yet, but there's bound to be one. 3. It was cheap. Something like $10, shipped, from dealsextreme.com.
But...every car I've had that was made in the past 1.5 decades or so already has fancy dome light electronics -- including a dimmer circuit for smooth ramps between states.
Reworking that to handle the different linearity of an LED and to add current limiting for an LED just seem so cheap, by comparison. (This is not to say that I think you're wrong, however -- just because it's cheap, doesn't mean it's free.)
It's not my fault, nor Microsoft's, that folks don't read the things they agree to. It's not my fault, nor Microsoft's, that people don't think they're responsible for things after they've agreed to take part in them without further prompting.
Besides, it didn't modify Firefox. It dropped an addon into Firefox's system-wide addon directory, which normal users aren't allowed to touch from within Firefox (though they certainly could if the developers of Firefox decided that they should be able to), and which Firefox loads by default (which, again, was a decision made by Firefox's development crew). (Gee, put this way, and it almost sounds like a Firefox problem instead of a.NET one.)
Please try to understand the situation in question.
(On another note: VMWare Workstation installed a "VMWare Remote Console Plugin" Firefox addon on my machine, and I certainly don't recall it ever asking me if it should be allowed to do so. Should everyone get all torches-and-pitchforks over this?)
At 1 in 20, I ought to be able to show you pictures of the meteor that shot a hole in the roof of my house at some point in my 29 years of existence, or I ought to be able tell you about one of the twenty people I know whose house was hit by a meteor.
No such hole exists, however.
Yeah, sure: Airplanes fly up high. Stuff that might otherwise disintegrate before it hits the ground is going to have the potential to be a pesky little fireball at cruising altitude.
And besides, my sampleset is pretty sall. So, let's up the ante by a few orders of magnitude and ask: Has ANY Slashdotter ever had their house damaged by one or more meteors?
Anyone?
Therefore, lacking a preponderance of affirmations, I submit: One in twenty, over twenty years, my ass.
I have an idea: The parent poster's "novelette" was 2369 characters, account to wc. Your retort was 1703 characters, measured in the same fashion.
Therefore, your post constitutes 72% of a novelette. If you want people to read your disjointed and nonsensical ramblings in the future, please try to condense it down to something a little less time-consuming.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, c'mon, it's easy. Just plug in things like "lesbian teen fisting," and Bing!
Right. But in cases when the heart needs stopped, there's a heart lung machine plumbed into place in order to take over for it. And if anything stops for any real length of time, the patient dies.
It's like rebuilding a Harley motor, with no battery, without losing the radio[1] presets, and while maintaining a functional and running (if substitute) driveline the entire time, while ensuring that nothing ever stops because if it does, the bike will die. And then, all the kings horses and all the kings men, won't be able to put Harley together again.
But that's simply too wordy for a punchline. Especially when the original was so concise and to the point.
[1]: I don't know why Harleys are so often equipped with radios, but they are, so there.
I see a few confused posts here about "WTF? Cooling?"
Just RTFA, folks. It's a blade server arrangement, not a standalone computer. These "naked" computers are nothing more than a pair of dual-proc computers, in a 1U-ish chassis without a lid, which needs to slide into the appropriate rack-mounted housing in order to work. This housing includes all of the cooling and power supply goodness one would expect, and (of course) includes a top panel to promote useful airflow and limit RFI.
I don't see much "new" about these things at all, since AFAICT most/all "blade servers" were already naked since their inception.
Color me unimpressed.
Crowd-pleasing usernames are overrated.
You had me going, until I saw this:
Unfortunately people like you tend to demonize drivers, and this attitude is spreading.
Just because I like to ride my bike now and then, doesn't mean that I hate cars. There's few things I like more than tearing up a quiet, twisty road in my '95 325i, with its wide tires, trick suspension, and 3.91 gears. If the weather's nice, I'll do the same thing in the '79 Firebird, which has the added advantage of being obscenely loud. The racket from that car gives me silly grin every time I get into it. And, sure, there's lots of times I'd wish that a baffoon on a bike would stop behaving erratically, or that a pedestrian would just cross the fucking road already, or just stare in astonishment as a jogger WEAVES HIS WAY THROUGH SIX LANES OF TRAFFIC rather than cross with the light.
People like me? Hah. (No wonder your mouth keeps frothing up.)
Relax.
Meanwhile, I do look around. I do see how society has changed to be more protective of everyone else's children (and my usual response to that is "leave me/my kids the fuck alone").
However, relating to car-bike incidents in particular: Here in NW Ohio, it seems the only times drivers are demonized is when they've done something to deserve it. Smashing a kid on accident doesn't frequently appear to be worthy of demonization on its own merits; it needs combined with something else (grossly excessive speed, gross inebriation, hit-skip, etc) before folks get too worked up over it.
There's no signs to say to drivers "Slow down!" or anything so hysteric as that. The closest thing we have are yellow warning signs about the "SLOW CHILDREN" near playgrounds and such, which seems reasonable enough in the few places they actually exist.
Yes, what came first however is now irrelevent. The roads are built with cars in mind. Sidewalks are for people. I really don't care that the first roads in human history people walked upon... we're in the modern world now, deal with it.
Naw. I don't want to deal with the modern world any more than you want to deal with the past -- thanks.
Basic car insurance is for MEDICAL purposes, not property damage. It's so that if you hit someone with your car, THIER medical bills are paid if they are hurt. Insurance for bikers should cover their own medical bills; they are CHOOSING to take a huge risk in roads not built for them. As for "not every state requires insurance" nonsense, only two don't, but in those you must prove finanical responsiblity if you don't.
I'm afraid I just don't understand what you're trying to say here with the text that I've bolded. In Ohio, for instance, one is required only to have liability insurance in order to operate a car on a public road, and this coverage will do nothing for the driver insured by it but limit their liability toward others. Why should bicyclists be required to go above and beyond that standard and insure themselves?
If an accident involves a ped or cyclist, the driver is instantly demonized for not being able to stop 2000 lbs of metal and plastic in half a second because the ped or cyclists blasts right out in front without even looking. And that's the norm here.
Well, then, move someplace else where folks are more hostile toward bikes, and perhaps you'll see a different attitude emerge. I was issued a ticket for "failure to yield," with the little "resulting in an accident" checkbox ticked, while I was in the hospital getting fixed up after being hit by a truck on my bike. It went about how you describe, except it was more like 4,600 pounds than 2,000 pounds. I was twelve at the time. I should've been paying more attention, and it certainly wasn't the driver's fault (who was not cited for anything), and nobody was demonized (though I did get to go to juvenile court over the incident). A few months after that, a friend of mine was killed on his bike, and nobody was demonized -- he should've been paying more attention, too.
Sorry it doesn't work that way more in your neck of the woods.
According to Giganews, Usenet bandwidth is currently exceeding 5TB per day. (They have lovely, though slightly dated, graph demonstrating this point.)
That's a lot of storage and network infrastructure to manage for a service that almost none of an ISP's customers care about.
Now, of course, it could be argued that something like nntpcache, running locally on the ISP's network and fed by an outsourced service like Giganews might fit the bill well, by conserving bandwidth and storage on popular items and using very little for unpopular items. And, as someone who had previously (a decade ago) set up a system like this for a local ISP, I think I'm qualified to attest that it does work.
However, here's the way it probably went down with AT&T: Manager opens newspaper, sees some horrific headline about GM bankruptcy, and decides to cull the expenditures. "This Usenet thing is expensive," he thinks to himself, "and I don't think the cost is worth the 0.3% of customers who actually know it exists, let alone ever even use it." And then, just like that, AT&T's Usenet servers get thrown under the bus.
It's a sad state of affairs, I agree - I'm all for using networks efficiently, and BitTorrent just ain't it. But we (users) have to deal with what we've got to work with, and if BitTorrent's horrific network efficiency is the best we can do in a Usenet-free world, then so be it.
ISPs have been putting the axe to hosted Usenet services (or at least alt.binaries, or even alt.*) for years with minimal customer outcry, since almost nobody cares. However, the last time someone tried to fuck with BitTorrent on any grand scale (Comcast), it got the attention of all levels of government and Comcast turned their policy around in a (relative) hurry.
So, again: BitTorrent (or perhaps Giganews) it is.
As an AT&T subscriber, long-time Usenet fan, and someone who remembers when the daily bandwidth of Usenet exceeded that of a then-common 14.4kbps v.32bis modem, I'm neither surprised, shocked, nor offended by this move. *shrug*
It's worth noting that the Netalyzer says my AT&T Uverse connection works fine, complaining only that upstream buffering might be a little heavy (which is typical for any consumer broadband). All the usual ports are open, including 25(*), except for those that I have blocked on purpose (Netbios, SMB, etc). I've never seen any throttling, even with hundreds of gigabytes of torrents monthly. I guess this means that AT&T gives me "real internet access."
Just FYI, FWIW, etc. They're even pretty responsive toward questions and problems -- I have cell phone numbers for the individuals who installed my service, and the desk phone for the local manager, and I didn't have to fight anyone to get this information. They just gave it to me as par for the course. This makes it feel, to me, a lot more like a local ISP than the huge conglomerate that it really is.
*: Port 25 is blocked by default on Uverse. It takes a phone call to tech support to get it switched on, which I've done. This seems reasonable enough to me, in light of the current problems with zombie spam botnets. Helpful hint: The native English-speaking Uverse techs seem pretty well clued and are remarkably easy to work with, while their outsourced non-native-English speaking script-readers are a pain in the ass. If you get the non-English kind, just hang up and try some other time -- it's not worth the effort to fight your way past them to the better-clued clued techs. Once you get someone on the phone with their wits about them, getting port 25 turned on takes only about a minute.
i guess i see what you said cuz i mean the real problem is when folks just you know they're brain does not have working thot when this happens all goes to shit so i can see ur point with this i understand k thx
Perhaps in some instances, some pedanticism might be in order -- but I still think it's better to pick on people for being stupid, or for having asinine ideas, than for poor use of English. In general, at least. (I know a few brilliant people, with lots to share, whose written English is a nonsensical mess. It'd be a shame to write them off just because they're sometimes difficult to understand.)
Ah. So you do have more to share.
I'm learning more and more about me with each of these exchanges.
Please continue.
If yr. failing to comprehend the meaning of the werds on the paige, than I s'pose yr. not so good at reading, after all. Offentimes, its better to just try and understand what their trying to say, then to be such a whiney pedant.
Wow.
If you're done frothing at the mouth...
First, there were people. They walked with their feet. The common routes were cut or trampled into paths.
Later, the paths were paved.
And a long time later, we got bicycles.
And sometime after that, we got cars.
I skipped a few steps in the evolution of the road, obviously, preferring to stick to the high points and just to show that bikes and pedestrians were here first (for various definitions of "here"), before Henry Ford changed everything.
Regarding insurance and taxation: Bikes don't weigh 3,800 pounds, and aren't generally moving very fast. There's just not very much damage one can do with one. And they aren't as destructive on the pavement as cars are, again because of their reduced weight. (And not every state requires insurance for cars, anyway.)
And, er, uh: I do generally have a right to use the roads with my bicycle, on the basis that the right to do so has not yet been taken away. No, it's not a Constitutionally-protected right; it's not inalienable and it can be taken away. But the simple fact that it generally hasn't been stripped means that it's still my right to ride my bike on the street wherever it's legal to do so. (Which isn't quite everywhere; it is illegal to ride a bike on an Interstate Highway, for instance, and therefore I have no right to do it.)
And, if I'm riding my bike in traffic, it is my responsibility to use proper hand signals to communicate my intentions with others using the roadway, follow traffic signals, and use lanes properly.
I do understand that it seems that nobody ever gets cited for a traffic offense on a bicycle, and I believe that this is probably unfair. But I have been cited for a traffic offense while riding a bicycle, so plainly it's possible.
I ran across this spectacular video a few days ago, and it took me awhile to figure out what the giant pink thing was that started creeping across the sky.
Sure, I'd seen pictures of the Milky Way in textbooks and stuff, but never in motion or with my own eyes. I've lived in Ohio for my entire life, which has pretty bad light pollution over most of the state.
I now aspire to travel west, at least once, in order to find sufficient darkness to actually see this thing for real.
On my bike, I have a 3W LED flashlight with a handlebar mount. It is bright enough to see where I'm going at night, even with an oncoming car. Other important points:
1. It's bright. Folks sometimes flash their highbeams at my puny little flashlight, which is fine with me - it means that they at least know I'm there.
2. The model I have also includes a panic-inducing strobe mode. I haven't found a use for this, yet, but there's bound to be one.
3. It was cheap. Something like $10, shipped, from dealsextreme.com.
YMMV. This works for me.
Debate? This isn't a debate any more, it's just your pathetic attempt to protect your id.
Were you referring to someone else?
But...every car I've had that was made in the past 1.5 decades or so already has fancy dome light electronics -- including a dimmer circuit for smooth ramps between states.
Reworking that to handle the different linearity of an LED and to add current limiting for an LED just seem so cheap, by comparison. (This is not to say that I think you're wrong, however -- just because it's cheap, doesn't mean it's free.)
Interesting.
Is there anything else you'd like to share about me?
Wow; you are.
It's pretty late in the year, and most schools are already out. How'd you fare in debate class this time 'round, kid?
You're still here?
Amazing.
I'd never have known - I didn't have time to read anything so verbose.
Right. Because it's never anyone's fault that they made a bad deal.
Yeah. Poor little microsoft. Heh. Embelish much?
You're hopeless.
*sigh*
It's not my fault, nor Microsoft's, that folks don't read the things they agree to. It's not my fault, nor Microsoft's, that people don't think they're responsible for things after they've agreed to take part in them without further prompting.
Besides, it didn't modify Firefox. It dropped an addon into Firefox's system-wide addon directory, which normal users aren't allowed to touch from within Firefox (though they certainly could if the developers of Firefox decided that they should be able to), and which Firefox loads by default (which, again, was a decision made by Firefox's development crew). (Gee, put this way, and it almost sounds like a Firefox problem instead of a .NET one.)
Please try to understand the situation in question.
(On another note: VMWare Workstation installed a "VMWare Remote Console Plugin" Firefox addon on my machine, and I certainly don't recall it ever asking me if it should be allowed to do so. Should everyone get all torches-and-pitchforks over this?)
At 1 in 20, I ought to be able to show you pictures of the meteor that shot a hole in the roof of my house at some point in my 29 years of existence, or I ought to be able tell you about one of the twenty people I know whose house was hit by a meteor.
No such hole exists, however.
Yeah, sure: Airplanes fly up high. Stuff that might otherwise disintegrate before it hits the ground is going to have the potential to be a pesky little fireball at cruising altitude.
And besides, my sampleset is pretty sall. So, let's up the ante by a few orders of magnitude and ask: Has ANY Slashdotter ever had their house damaged by one or more meteors?
Anyone?
Therefore, lacking a preponderance of affirmations, I submit: One in twenty, over twenty years, my ass.
I have an idea: The parent poster's "novelette" was 2369 characters, account to wc. Your retort was 1703 characters, measured in the same fashion.
Therefore, your post constitutes 72% of a novelette. If you want people to read your disjointed and nonsensical ramblings in the future, please try to condense it down to something a little less time-consuming.
Thanks!
But Opera does a better job of scaling than Firefox does, which makes it my preferential porn browser.
*sigh*