SmartAssProducts.com

My fantastic vegan fajitas

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Mon, 02 Jan 2012 07:47:00 +0000

So many people are under the MISconception that vegan and/or vegetarian food is boring, dull, unsatisfying, tasteless, bland...well, you get the idea. All I can say to that is: NONSENSE! Anyone who thinks of vegan/vegetarian food that way has obviously never tasted good veg*n food.

Tonight I made some of my crazy delicious vegan fajitas. They're extremely easy to make, and they're so good that folks who eat dead animals will gobble these down--and usually ask for seconds.

----------
Vegan/vegetarian merchandise
----------

Here's my basic recipe, which can be adapted according to personal taste. My motto is "you can never have too many onions!", so I'll let you decide how much is right for you. For some of the ingredients, I've listed the specific brands that I prefer, but you can certainly use other brands/styles. I really encourage you to use "homestyle" tortillas, though, because they add a much nicer dimension to the fajitas than plain old tortillas do.

The following is roughly for 4 people:

. 2-4 large onions, julienned
. 1-2 any combination of red/green/yellow bell peppers, julienned
. 2-4 avocados, sliced
. 1 package Morningstar Farms Meal Starters Grillers Recipe Crumbles (Boca Crumbles are good, too)

. Lawry's Baja Chipotle Marinade

. Mission Homestyle Flour Tortillas

. Olive oil, extra virgin
. Lemon juice, preferably fresh
. Salt
. Pepper

Heat the olive oil in a large skillet over medium heat.

Add the onions and bell peppers.

Add some lemon juice--depending on quantity of onions/peppers, approximately 2-3 tablespoons

Add some of the Baja Chipotle Marinade--taste it first so you'll know how spicy it is.

Add salt and pepper to taste.

Saute the onions/peppers until they're as cooked as you prefer; they really need to be caramelized and/or charred a bit for best flavor in this dish.

When the onion/pepper mixture is done, scoop it out and set aside.

In the same skillet (without emptying or rinsing it), pour in the Crumbles; stir frequently and cook thoroughly.

Place 4-8 tortillas on a plate, then cover with another plate turned upside down; heat in the microwave for 30-45 seconds (don't cook them too long or they'll get TOUGH and HARD!; just cook them long enough to warm them up a bit).

For each fajita, spoon and spread some of the crumbles, some of the onions and peppers, and some avocado slices, placing the filling in the center of the tortilla,

then fold over both sides of the tortilla to make the finished product.

NOTE: These can be very messy to eat with your hands! You may prefer to use a knife and fork.

Enjoy!

.

Animal lover since birth. Vegan/vegetarian since [your year]

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 05:42:00 +0000

If you're looking for a really unique gift for a vegan or vegetarian, we're proud to offer our collection of Animal lover since birth. Vegetarian since [year] and Animal lover since birth. Vegan since [year] merchandise.

We have a complete line of merchandise for every year dating back to 1970. Our products include a huge selection of shirts, plus bumper stickers, mugs, buttons and magnets, jewelry, kids' clothes and much more.

Speaking as a longtime vegetarian, I can say with reasonable certainty that most of us who've chosen not to participate in the cruelty of the meat industry are proud of that fact. I like letting people know that I've been vegetarian since 1988. When someone sees me in my Animal lover since birth. Vegetarian since 1988 t-shirt, it's very common for them to strike up a conversation to ask me how and why I went veg in the first place. This is always a great opportunity to tell people about the atrocities committed against animals--sentient beings--in the meat industry and on factory farms.

So if your holiday shopping this year includes wanting to get something special and meaningful for the vegan/vegetarian(s) in your life, please have a look!

Here are a few samples; click on any image to see all years with that design:

.

Don't blame me! I voted for Hillary

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 17:52:00 +0000

As disgust with the grossly unqualified, incompetent Obama continues to grow, we're getting more and more hits from people looking for "Don't blame me! I voted for Hillary" merchandise. Although it sucks that we're stuck with Obama--for now--my conscience is clear knowing that I did not support him and that I KNEW Hillary Clinton was the better choice. It's still surprising to me, a lifelong Democrat, that I ended up voting Republican in the Presidential election, but I simply could not, with a clear conscience, vote for Barack Hussein Obama, so my vote went to McCain. Hopefully, the 2012 elections will see a QUALIFIED Democrat on the ticket that I'll feel good voting for. Stay tuned...

Meanwhile, if you're looking for "Don't blame me! I voted for Hillary" merchandise, please stop by our CafePress shop. Here are a few samples; select any image to see all products with this design on them:

.

More about the LA Times' "Facebook only" commenting test

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Wed, 11 May 2011 23:28:00 +0000

I recently wrote about the idiotic test the LA Times is running, whereby only Facebook members can post comments on the LA Times site. I thought I'd post yet more ammunition against this stupid idea.

UPDATE 09/26/11: Here's yet ANOTHER story from the LA Times about Facebook killing its users' privacy...yet I can't comment on the story because--you guessed it!--the LA Times only allows comments from Facebook members!

Today's LA Times has this story, Facebook apps may have leaked millions of users' personal data to third parties, which says:

"Facebook apps may have inadvertently leaked the personal data of millions of Facebook users to third parties such as advertisers, according to the Web security firm Symantec.

Among the information that could have been accessed is data from user profiles, pictures and Facebooks chats between users..."

Last month the LA Times ran this article, Facebook looks to cash in on user data, which says:

"Julee Morrison has been obsessed with Bon Jovi since she was a teenager.

So when paid ads for fan sites started popping up on the 41-year-old Salt Lake City blogger's Facebook page, she was thrilled. She described herself as a "clicking fool," perusing videos and photos of the New Jersey rockers.

Then it dawned on Morrison why all those Bon Jovi ads appeared every time she logged on to the social networking site.

"Facebook is reading my profile, my interests, the people and pages I am 'friends' with, and targeting me," Morrison said. "It's brilliant social media but it's absolutely creepy."

Three days ago, the LA Times ran this editorial, Internet data collection: The privacy line, which says:

"A good example is what Facebook is doing with the "Like" button it has persuaded more than 2.5 million websites to display. The button ostensibly lets Facebook users recommend things they encounter online — a blog post, for example — to their friends on the social network. But researcher Arnold Roosendaal of the Netherlands found that once a Facebook user has clicked on a single "Like" button, Facebook will be alerted to all of his or her subsequent visits to any Web page with a "Like" button. The company even tracks individuals who aren't Facebook members, Roosendaal reported, although it cannot identify them by name..."

Today, the LA Times published this article, Congressmen Edward Markey and Joe Barton ask Facebook to explain security vulnerability, which says:

"Congressmen Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Joe Barton (R-Texas) have asked Facebook Inc. CEO Mark Zuckerberg to explain a security vulnerability that gave advertisers and other third parties access to users' accounts and personal information.

Security company Symantec Corp. discovered the vulnerability and alerted Facebook, which said it was fixed.

Facebook faces growing scrutiny from lawmakers and regulators concerned how it protects personal information shared by its users..."

Yesterday's LA Times ran this article, Consumer Reports: Facebook has 7.5 million underage users, which says:

"About 7.5 million active Facebook users are lying about their age -- they're younger than 13. And among those preteens, more than 5 million are under 10, according to a recent Consumer Reports survey.

That violates Facebook's own policy, meant to avoid federal regulations that apply to websites with young members. Those regulations require people who sign up to be 13 or older, the report says..."

I cite the above not because it proves privacy leaks--as is so common with Facebook--but because it proves how easily Facebook's own policies can be circumvented. So if the LA Times thinks that forcing people to have Facebook accounts in order to post comments on its web site will somehow keep things honest...um, NO! If little kids can figure out how to sign up illegally, I'm sure adults can, too.

You'd think that after publishing all of the above, the LA Times would maybe get a clue.

Here's something I guess they missed, which quotes Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, 'Facebook is the most appalling spying machine ever invented,’ says Assange, which says:

"Facebook in particular is the most appalling spying machine that has ever been invented. Here we have the world’s most comprehensive database about people, their relationships, their names, their addresses, their locations, their communications with each other, their relatives, all sitting within the United States, all accessible to US Intelligence. Facebook, Google, Yahoo, all these major US organisations have built-in interfaces for US Intelligence.

It’s not a matter of serving a subpoena, they have an interface they have developed for US Intelligence to use. Now, is it the case that Facebook is actually run by US Intelligence? No, it’s not like that. It’s simply that US Intelligence is able to bring to bear legal and political pressure to them and it’s costly for them to hand out records, one by one, so they have automated the process. Everyone should understand that when they add their friends to Facebook they are doing free work for United States intelligence agencies in building this database for them..."

Should I go on? I can! "Facebook" and "privacy leaks" go hand in hand. And the LA Times thinks it's a *GOOD* idea to force its users to join Facebook in order to post comments on its web site?

.

Justice for Caylee: The Casey Anthony murder trial

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 01:15:00 +0000

(LOOKING FOR CAYLEE ANTHONY OR CASEY ANTHONY MERCHANDISE?)

With jury selection set to begin on May 9 for the Casey Anthony murder trial, we're finally inching closer to seeing justice done for little Caylee Marie Anthony.

In case you've been in a cave somewhere and don't know who Casey and Caylee Anthony are/were, Investigation Discovery has a comprehensive timeline, or you can make do with this very brief summary:

In June, 2008, Casey's almost-3-year-old daughter, Caylee, was murdered and Casey is the prime suspect. Casey claimed Caylee was missing; she made up an elaborate story about a nanny who took Caylee, and how her whole family was in danger if they did anything. She failed to report Caylee "missing" for more than a month. It was her mother who, upon learning that Caylee was missing, contacted the police. Casey then proceeded to tell lie after lie to the authorities, including taking the police on a wild goose chase to Universal Studios, where she claimed to work--but didn't. Caylee's completely skeletonized body was found about 6 months after her "disappearance," with duct tape tightly wrapped around her mouth, and just blocks away from the Anthonys' home.

Fast forward to now. Almost three years have gone by and Casey Anthony's murder trial is about to begin. Any reasonable person, if they're aware of the facts--such as the plethora of lies Casey told, the way she was out partying (with tons of pictures to prove how happy she was while doing it) while her daughter was supposedly missing, etc.--can only come to one conclusion: Casey did it. If you're going to be at the courthouse during the trial, you might want to go prepared with t-shirts, buttons, stickers or other items saying Casey did it and/or Justice for Caylee. You won't be allowed to display these INSIDE the courtroom, but outside? I believe that's covered under free speech.

Select any image to see all merchandise with that design:

.

Amazon.com streaming videos and Linux

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Sat, 23 Apr 2011 20:26:00 +0000

Because I order frequently from Amazon.com, I recently decided to go ahead and get an Amazon Prime membership. With it, you get free 2-day shipping on eligible products. It's a pretty good deal, if you're ordering frequently as I do; it's $79 for one year. When I signed up for it I was in the process of checking out an order I was already placing, so other than the free 2-day shipping and the $79 charge, I didn't notice any other info about the membership. It came with a free 30-day trial, and I figured I'd come back later and look at its conditions/benefits and then decide whether to keep it.

Before I had a chance to do that--I procrastinated, and the 30 days came and went!--I received an e-mail from Amazon saying:

"Did you know that your Amazon Prime membership now includes instant streaming of over 5,000 movies and TV shows at no additional cost? Visit the Prime instant videos store to learn more, and start watching today, online or on your TV."

Wow. I had no idea! That's great, I thought to myself...and then a feeling of dread started creeping over me. You see, I've heard/read bad things about Amazon's streaming video service as it relates to Linux--and as a Linux only user, that's not good.

So I followed the link to check it out, and braced myself for the bad news. I got to the first intro screen and there was no mention of system requirements, so I moved on. Next screen said "watch on a Mac or PC"--and keep in mind that PC does not mean "personal computer running windows," it just means "personal computer":

Okay, I'm gearing up for the letdown. They're saying this works on PCs, I use PCs--with Linux as their operating system--so they'd better not mean PCs running windoze! I check out their system requirements (select image for larger version):

Wow, still no mention of windoze. So I proceed to try watching something...and it works! Yay!

For the record, I'm using Kubuntu Linux and my browser is SeaMonkey. Although the system requirements only mention Firefox, it does indeed work perfectly with SeaMonkey, which is the older sibling of Firefox and was formerly known as the Mozilla Suite.

After my initial glee at finding that I now have access to thousands of streaming movies and TV shows, I poked around a little more. The "Unbox Video Player" says:

"Download the same high-quality videos and watch them anytime you're away from an Internet connection. Perfect for plane trips or when you're away from home."

Sounds good, right? Um...yeah, until you read this:

"Note: The Unbox Video Player is not compatible with Mac or Linux computers. Downloaded videos cannot be transferred to iPods."

(Select for larger image.)

So I guess if you're a Mac or Linux user, what?, you don't take plane trips? You don't want to watch movies/TV away from home? I don't get it.

At any rate, at least the millions of us Linux users (keep in mind that the WILDLY popular Android operating system on smart phones, such as mine, is Linux, too) who want to watch streaming video on Amazon can definitely do it. Thank you, Amazon! You're already running your entire business on Linux, so I guess it follows that you're FINALLY starting to support the millions of us intelligent people who've chosen to do the same for our personal computers and smart phones. Now you just need to lose the windoze-only requirement for watching downloaded videos offline and we'll be good.

.

Facebook: Why?

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 21:19:00 +0000

I don't get the whole Facebook phenomenon. Really. Let me explain.

First of all, I don't understand why companies that already have their own web sites--as ALL companies do these days!--want to send their customers/viewers to a DIFFERENT web site to contact them, comment about their TV show, or whatever. What's the point? For example, SomeCompany has their own domain, somecompany.com. It's easy to say and everybody knows they can just type somecompany.com into their browser and go to their site. But now SomeCompany has a Facebook page--and they're advertising it and telling people to go to Facebook.com/SomeCompany to post on their wall or whatever. Why? I don't want to be bothered going to some OTHER web site to contact the company! Why wouldn't I just go to their own web site? It doesn't make sense. It's redundant, and for those of us who've chosen to rid Facebook from our lives, or who never had an account to begin with and don't want one, it's impossible since we can't post without an account. I don't want an account. That's why I deleted mine. (You've heard about all the privacy issues, the use of your personal info for targeting ads, etc., right?)

I wrote recently that the LA Times is experimenting with a Facebook only commenting system, and how stupid that is. It requires that you have a Facebook account and use it if you want to post comments on the LA Times site. Why? There's no connection between the two sites--they're separate entities. Like I said in that post, it's like saying you have to open a Wells Fargo bank account if you want to use your Bank of America debit card at Bank of America. Just absolutely stupid.

So right now Facebook is the hot thing. Does anyone remember GeoCities? MySpace? AOL? "Hot" things come and go. It's silly for companies to get all wrapped up in an unrelated site, forcing their users to have accounts at another site in order to use theirs, and so on. At some point Facebook WON'T be hot any more...and then what?

As for individuals whose lives are totally wrapped up in Facebook, what can I say? How about interacting with all those "friends" in real life? In fact, how many of those "friends" do you even know in real life? And why do you want to put your life out for all to see like an open book? Even with Facebook's supposed improvements to its privacy settings, did you know:

"According to CBS News, 15 privacy and consumer protection agencies recently filed complaints against Facebook with the Federal Trade Commission. These companies stated that Facebook 'manipulates privacy settings to make users' personal information available for commercial use.'" [Source]

and:

"Many of the most popular applications, or 'apps,' on the social-networking site Facebook Inc. have been transmitting identifying information—in effect, providing access to people's names and, in some cases, their friends' names—to dozens of advertising and Internet tracking companies, a Wall Street Journal investigation has found." [Source]

Like I said before, I don't get it. At all.

.

Sharing the wealth: Food for people who need it

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Sun, 17 Apr 2011 21:22:00 +0000

Over the last few days I've watched a number of TV shows that left me scratching my head, wondering why there can't be some coordination between people who have way too much and those who have nothing.

Right now I'm watching one I've seen before, I'm Pregnant and...Homeless. It's about a couple, Misty and Jonathan, who through no fault of their own found themselves homeless--and expecting a baby. A year earlier they had a home, cable, heating and air conditioning, all the "normal" things we take for granted. Then the economy took its toll, Jonathan lost his job when the company he worked for folded, and they ended up homeless.

Eventually they sent their 1-year-old son, Zion, to live with Jonathan's relatives and they started camping out in the forest in North Carolina. They looked for work but couldn't find any. They resorted to panhandling just to eat. They don't qualify for subsidized housing because Jonathan has a prison record. You can tell from listening to them that these are not people who are used to getting handouts, nor is that their goal in life. They WANT to work. They WANT to pay their way through life. But at almost 9 months pregnant and with no job prospects in sight, they're stuck.

Because of their conditions and their lack of adequate food, Misty has actually lost 15 pounds since the onset of her pregnancy. She's receiving free prenatal care, and that's all well and good, but apparently in North Carolina--or, at least, in their area of NC--there aren't programs to provide proper nutrition to families in need.

They're shown panhandling for several hours and netting $17 and change. They head to the supermarket to buy some food, but as we all know $17 doesn't buy much. The high quality foods Misty should be eating are too expensive, and $17 just can't buy much of them.

When her nurse midwife asked if they'd been able to find a source of cheaper fruits and vegetables, and the answer was no, I just started wondering...WHY? Why is it like that? Fruits, and especially vegetables, are so easy to grow, and can be grown in such abundance even in a small area of a normal suburban backyard, I just can't help wondering why there aren't people with surpluses of produce giving them away to those who need them. Here in Southern California we have a great organization, Food Forward, that uses volunteers to go to properties and pick their excess fruits and vegetables, and then 100% of that produce is donated to local food pantries. So people who have more food than they can use give it away, and people who need food get it.

There's another show that REALLY makes me squirm, Extreme Couponing. It profiles people who've made saving with coupons the focal point of their lives. Seriously, these folks spend hours a day working out their shopping plans, coordinating sales with coupons, cutting coupons, stockpiling coupons, checking blogs and other web sites, before finally going off to do their shopping with hundreds of coupons in hand. So what's the problem? Well, it seems that most of these extreme couponers take pride in their "stockpiles"--massive collections of redundant items they've purchased for little or no money (or even gotten paid for taking from the stores). They may have 100 bottles of laundry detergent or 200 boxes of cereal...far more than their families can possibly use in the near future.

Their stockpiles grow so large that dedicated rooms soon become too small; some of these families have groceries stored in every room in their house, including under their kids' beds. I think it was at that point that I started shaking my head in disbelief...

There are people who have nothing, people like Misty and Jonathan, and then there are people stockpiling products they cannot possibly use, and it just makes me wonder why the haves aren't helping the have nots. (One notable exception from the couponing show, a man named Nathan Engels in Kentucky, has made HUGE donations to food banks, schools, and the military from his couponing hauls. Shout out to Nathan! Good job.)

I'd sure like to see some effort from the people who've gotten extreme couponing down to a science, so that instead of stockpiling products they're never going to use, they donate some of that excess to people who'd be grateful to have them.

As for Misty and Jonathan, when their episode ends they've just gotten into a house two days before their baby, Micah, is born; the owner has agreed to a barter situation and so they're temporarily with housing. Jonathan has gotten part-time work as well and is looking for something more secure. It's been a while since the episode was actually filmed, so I don't know what's become of this little family since then, but the impact they made on me continues. I hope they're doing well.

.

Windows losers and all the money they waste

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:44:00 +0000

I touched on this topic in a previous post, but thought it deserves its own post, so here goes.

Every time I see an ad for a service like:

MyCleanPC.com
DoubleMySpeed.com
MaxMySpeed.com
MyFasterPC.com
SpeedUpMyPC.tv
AntiSpywareForDummies.com
CyberDefender.com

I'm struck by how extraordinarily STUPID and/or ignorant windows users are! As a Linux user--and someone who started in computing on UNIX--I just don't understand how so many people can be so stupid and/or ignorant.

Windows losers throw good money after bad, signing up for services like those noted above, and dealing with issues they've come to think of as just part of their daily computing experience. But...why?! It's such a shame that they're unaware of, or too afraid to try, the vastly superior alternative that is Linux.

Apparently, people who use Windows think that adware, malware, spyware, viruses, bloatware, constant rebooting--for everything from installing software to recovering from yet another BSOD (blue screen of death, lockup, etc.)--and constantly paying for upgrades is just part of using computers. They're oh so wrong.

When you use an intelligent operating system, like Linux, you're free of the ridiculous nonsense that goes hand in hand with using Microsoft products. For example, there's no such thing as disk fragmentation; adware/malware/viruses and so on are virtually unheard of; the system cannot be brought down by outside attacks, as windows can, while being used by regular users; etc. Please refer to my earlier post for more info.

But because windows users think all that garbage is a normal part of using computers, they're constantly caught in a cycle of frustration and trying to figure out how to get things back to "normal" (whatever that is, when you're using a crappy OS!). And so they end up paying for services that promise to make their PC run fast again and to clean out all the junk their computer has acquired. Idiots!

Seriously, instead of wasting money on services/software that do nothing but put a band-aid on the actual problem, why not get rid of the problem? The problem is windows. Wake up, windows users! You've got a great alternative that is safer, more stable, more versatile, can be customized to YOUR liking (and if you think windows already lets you do that, you're showing your ignorance; see this post about the amazing things you can do with Linux running the KDE desktop environment for a glimpse at what you're missing), more powerful, and won't slow down to a crawl every few months. Reinstall the OS? Um, no, we don't waste time doing that--because unlike windoze the operating system doesn't get bogged down with garbage, therefore there is no need to reinstall it every few months. Registry errors? No such thing--Linux is intelligent, there is no registry, hence no registry errors.

Here's a short list of some Linux distros you might want to try; there are literally hundreds of Linux distributions out there, but these are among the most popular and well known. If you ever have questions or need any help, there are forums, newsgroups, IRC channels and more filled with knowledgeable Linux users just waiting to help--for FREE. I start with Kubuntu Linux because it's my personal favorite, and while I am not a windoze transitioner I recommend it to those who are. Its interface is truly so self-explanatory that anyone should be able to plunge right in and start using it efficiently.

Kubuntu
Ubuntu
Linux Mint
Debian/GNU Linux
Knoppix
Gentoo
Mandriva
RedHat Enterprise
Slackware
SuSE
Freespire
Xandros
Fedora

.

Windows trolls on Linux forums

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Sun, 10 Apr 2011 23:09:00 +0000

I read an amusing post on the Ubuntu Forums the other day and couldn't help responding sarcastically. The thing is, windoze trolls are a common sight on all Linux-related places such as forums, newsgroups, etc., so it's not like I'm unaccustomed to seeing them pop up now and again.

Well, this one comes along and posts, under the subject of "total beginner":

"Forgive me if I am treading on techy toes but I though Ubuntu was supposed to be easy. I have spent two days trying to install it and have decided Windows is far easier and far superior - it does what it says on the box! I may not be a big fan of Windows but at least I can use it - does anyone know an easy way to install Ubuntu. I used it a couple of years or so back and it was simple but now it just does not work and that does not bode well for a system and its followers that seem to now wrap themselves up in geekspeak! Can we have plain Englsh please!"

So after this part, "I have spent two days trying to install it and have decided Windows is far easier and far superior - it does what it says on the box!", I replied:

"Really? When did they put on the box 'gets infested with malware, adware, spyware and viruses, crashes constantly, needs to be rebooted after the most trivial things, like installing an application, and requires continual upgrading of hardware every time a new version is released'? I didn't know Micro$oft had become that honest!"

That got me to thinking: The windoze trolls who come along and spew their garbage about how windows does what it says, or works out of the box, or whatever, do they REALLY mean that? Do Microsoft boxes now include statements about how their [so-called] operating system inevitably becomes overrun by viruses, adware, spyware, malware, pop-ups, bloatware, and disk fragmentation that slow it down to a crawl? Do they now acknowledge that the user will probably have to spend extra money buying "protection" such as anti-virus software, or pay for services like MyFasterPC.com, SpeedUpMyPC.tv and DoubleMySpeed.com? No? Why am I not surprised!

The morons who flock to sites like the above because their computers have slowed down to a crawl should be aware of something: THERE'S A FUCKING ALTERNATIVE! It's called Linux. Its file structure is intelligent, having been modeled on the rock-solid, stable, secure UNIX operating system that's been around for 40+ years, and has been used for mission-critical applications ever since. The Linux file system is a thing of beauty--and security.

For one thing, there is no such thing as "disk fragmentation" in UNIX/Linux. That's because, unlike windoze, *nix handles its disk writing intelligently, so you don't end up with fragments of files spread out all over the drive.

For another, while it's certainly possible for a UNIX/Linux system to be hit by a virus, it's extraordinarily unlikely if its system administrator keeps a tight ship. Regular users do not have the permissions/authority to add, delete, modify, or overwrite system files; the worst a virus can do, if it's contracted by a regular user, is affect that user's personal space and, hey!, you're supposed to have good backups anyway, so that shouldn't really be an issue. But a virus cannot bring down a whole *nix system...unless someone is stupid enough to be logged in as root when they contract something with the ability to write system files.

So while companies that promise to "fix registry errors" and "speed up my PC!" are raking in the dough, intelligent computer users know that they have a vastly superior, more secure, more stable, FREE alternative, and its name is Linux. Instead of throwing good money after bad to companies that basically put band-aids on an inferior operating system--and its inherent, recurring problems--why not switch to an OS that's not only light-years ahead in terms of security but is also free?

Here's a short list of some Linux distros you might want to try; there are literally hundreds of Linux distributions out there, but these are among the most popular and well known. If you ever have questions or need any help, there are forums, newsgroups, IRC channels and more filled with knowledgeable Linux users just waiting to help--for FREE. I start with Kubuntu Linux because it's my personal favorite, and while I am not a windoze transitioner I recommend it to those who are. Its interface is truly so self-explanatory that anyone should be able to plunge right in and start using it efficiently.

Kubuntu
Ubuntu
Linux Mint
Debian/GNU Linux
Knoppix
Gentoo
Mandriva
RedHat Enterprise
Slackware
SuSE
Freespire
Xandros
Fedora

.

The LA Times and their idiotic "Facebook only" commenting system

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Fri, 08 Apr 2011 19:42:00 +0000

The LA Times has launched a test on some of its blogs whereby a reader can only post comments if they're a Facebook user. You can read about the [so-called] logic behind this concept in their Testing a new system for online comments article, or at the end of this post where I've pasted it in.

If you're not sure what the big deal is, stop and think about it for a moment. For one thing, being forced to have a Facebook account in order to post comments on the LA Times is just counter-intuitive--the two sites are in no way related. Second, if you're forced to post using your Facebook account, but you don't want your real identity known...well, you're fucked! You can either post and let everybody and their brother know that it's you, or you can not post. Some of us like the relative anonymity provided by aliases and would rather keep that separate from our REAL identities.

Here's the comment I posted at the LA Times article:

"I don't use Facebook. I hated it, so I deleted my account last year. And now I'm locked out of posting comments on the LA Times? Why? What the hell does the LA Times have to do with Facebook? It's like saying, well, if you want to use your Bank of America debit card at Bank of America, first you have to go to Wells Fargo and open an account there. Huh? What kind of logic is that?

This truly sucks.

By the way, I've been online with the LA Times since its "TimesLink" days on Prodigy. Yes, really, that long. And now, instead of seeing LAT as the innovator it's always been, I'm seeing it as something...well, entirely different...and I don't like it.

The old system of requiring registration--and then staying logged in, instead of constantly having to log in to assorted services to post--worked great. Why screw around with something that worked fine?

Please just go back to a registration system for the site and have *ALL* comments fall under its registration."

I really like my Bank of America/Wells Fargo analogy, and wish the LA Times would see that that's what they're saying: If you want to use OUR site and post comments on it, first you have to be a member SOMEWHERE else. It just makes no sense.

If you're unhappy with this idiotic plan, please go to the article about it and leave a comment--which, for now, anyway, can be done without having a Facebook account.

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

LA Times article:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/readers/2011/03/testing-a-new-system-for-online-comments.html

Testing a new system for online comments

March 15, 2011 | 11:46 am

Having our site built on different content management systems provides some hurdles. One is our commenting system -- there’s not much uniformity.

Some of our stories require registration; some do not. Some of our comments appear right away, while others languish for a moderator to approve or deny. Still others disappear after one day, never to be seen again.

It's not a good practice to make you wait to see your comments. It's also not a good practice to have your comments vanish from an article. All issues we're dealing with.

We need uniformity. And reader engagement is a high priority. Can we get some uniformity? What's the best way to get there?

Facebook has a new commenting system that we're interested in. It allows for "right away" commenting while providing an authentication system no one else can match.

Both are important. By allowing comments to go up in real time, it provides instant interaction among readers. By requiring a Facebook registration, it will cut down on the mean-spirited, profane and sometimes useless responses because one's friends will also see the comments in their newsfeeds.

Sites that have initiated this commenting system have received criticism for being Facebook-centric. The comments have also been seen by critics as being much more sterile.

We're going to test it on two blogs: Technology and the Fabulous Forum. These are two of our more active blogs, and the editors are willing to be guinea pigs. Technology is going to go first (sometime Tuesday), with Fabulous Forum later this week.

Will this move be a "troll-killer" or will it make our blogs seem hollow? We don't know, but we're going to give it a shot. You tell us.

-- Jimmy Orr, managing editor/online

Email: readers.representative@latimes.com
Twitter: @latreadersrep
Facebook: latimes

Update on my new boy

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Sat, 22 Jan 2011 02:45:00 +0000

It's been a little over a month now since Justin Hayward, the Great Dane, joined my household. As detailed in this post from last month, I got Justin from Gentle Giants Rescue, and he was just over a year old.

I knew there would be a period of adjustment--for BOTH of us--and I'd say we're still in it, although things are moving along nicely.

Justin had terrible separation anxiety issues, completely understandable considering how he'd been--in HIS mind--abandoned more than once. (It's unfortunate that pets can't have things explained to them, like "your mom is dying of cancer and THAT'S why she has to give you up, not because she doesn't love you or you've done anything wrong," and instead they just know that the person(s) they loved abandoned them.) The first day I had him he literally couldn't stay on the other side of the bathroom door when I'd go in there. Then over the next few days I made sure I shut the door so he had to wait on the other side--and he did, but whining a pitiful whine. A few more days and he stopped whining and just settled down on the carpet and waited for me to reappear. NOW he doesn't even bother following me at times!

He reacted similarly when I'd move out of his line of sight by going outside, like to turn the sprinklers on or put something in the trash. He'd watch through the window until losing sight of me, then he'd start whining and yelping, running around the house trying to get a glimpse of me.

Proud "parent" of a rescued dog merchandise
Leaving him home for short trips out, like doctor appointments or picking up prescriptions, was a BIG DEAL. My mom would stay here with him, but the moment he'd lose sight of me as I backed out of the driveway, he'd start running wildly around the house, yelping and whining and barking. Twice he pooped...in the house. *sigh* (Trust me on this, there's just NOTHING like Great Dane shit in the house!)

I made it a point to work on his separation anxiety by gradually increasing the number of short trips I made. Prior to leaving I'd make sure my mom had a nice big snack--something Justin could chew on for a long time--to give him shortly after I left. And when I'd get home--and he'd be FRANTICALLY running around me, yelping and nipping at me because he was so happy to see me--I'd very calmly walk in, say in a calm, soft voice "come on, Justin, let's go outside," and we'd go out and let him calm down. I knew that, over time, as he saw the pattern of "Mommy goes out, Mommy comes back," he'd calm down and not worry any more, and we're ALMOST there. I was out for over two hours yesterday and my mother reported that he was the best he's been so far. He watched me leave but settled down quickly. Also, when I get home now he's no longer frantically excited. He's still happy to see me, but it's just a lot calmer!

Let's see, what else? Oh, I bathed him for the first time yesterday--and he loved it. He's going to be a lot of fun this summer--I'll get him a wading pool and let him have at it. When I'm TRYING to fill up the birdbaths Justin insists on darting in and out between the nozzle and the birdbath, biting at the water stream and trying to get wet. Of course when he does that, the water bounces off of him and onto me. Oh well, I'm waterproof.

He had his first official visit with my vet today. (I'd taken him in earlier this month just to introduce him and weigh him.) There's an area on his neck/chest that's been itching for a couple days, and he's scratched/licked it raw. The vet took scrapings but didn't find anything, so we're treating it topically with Betagen and we'll revisit it in a week if he's not better. We tried to get his weight, but he refused to stay still and/or not lean on the wall long enough to get an accurate reading! Based on how much he'd gained earlier this month, they recorded his weight as 138--which is a 15 pound gain since I got him on December 12. Like I said, we know that's not accurate, but he's somewhere in the 130s.

When it comes to clipping his nails, Justin is the easiest dog I've EVER had. He just lies there and doesn't act fazed by it at all. I thought my beautiful Freddie was pretty good about it, but Justin is amazing.

Also today we had our first outing to Petco.

It's so weird having an [almost] adult Dane whose behavior in any given situation is an unknown to me. I mean, he's VERY sweet and friendly, but I don't feel that I truly KNOW yet how he'll react to strangers, either human or non-human. So I made it a point both at the vet's office and Petco to tell people I've only had him a month, and I'm unsure of what to expect. He was good with the dogs he met today, and he's always good with people he meets.

I'll post some new pics of Justin one of these days. I'm too lazy right now to dump them from my camera, so it'll have to wait!

.

It's a boy! A really BIG one :)

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 22:04:00 +0000

After my beautiful Freddie Mercury, a black Great Dane, died on October 16, 2008, I was so heartbroken and missed him so badly I was inconsolable. Within months of his death I was [finally] diagnosed with the brain tumor that had turned my life upside down for 5+ years, making it impossible to work and, ultimately, impossible to stand up [without falling over], drive, or do most anything else.

In April 2009 I had middle fossa craniotomy brain surgery to remove the tumor. I knew the surgery was a big deal going in, but even so I didn't expect its recovery to be so long and so difficult. But it has been.

Between the two things, i.e., losing Freddie [and missing him so much] and having profoundly debilitating brain surgery [and its very long, difficult recovery], I couldn't even THINK about adopting another dog...until now. I've finally accepted that my physical issues are not going to improve much more, if at all. The exhaustion I feel every single day--which makes a nap a necessity--is, I think, permanent. As are the vision problems, some residual facial paralysis, etc.

So I got to thinking about adopting a new dog, a Great Dane (they're my favorite and I just really, strongly prefer them), and how that would play out all things considered. I applied at Gentle Giants Rescue more than a year ago, knowing full well that at that time I wasn't even CLOSE to being physically well enough to have a new dog. But I figured I'd get the application process out of the way, and then adopt when I was ready. I was approved, but then the clock kept ticking and months went by, and I still wasn't physically--or emotionally--ready to bring a new dog into my life. In July of this year I felt ready, so I contacted Burt [Ward, yes THAT Burt Ward--he and his amazing wife Tracy run Gentle Giants Rescue] to let him know I was ready. I hadn't realized that the application approval was only good for 6 months...so I did it again! It's a DAUNTING process--it took me at least three hours to fill out the application--but there isn't one thing I'd change about it. They're absolutely committed to doing the right thing for the dogs they rescue and adopt out, and I LOVE that they're so detail-oriented and want to know the same kinds of things I'd want to know about prospective adoptive parents.

Long story short, I was approved again and was all ready to go...then my little girl, Joy Noelle (she's a cat, but thinks she's a Great Dane...oh, she's a rescue, too), became deathly ill. It took a long time, many visits to our vet, lots of medication and special food and forced feeding to get her well, and in the meantime I didn't want to stress her by bringing in a new family member. So I waited!

Finally, it was time. I was ready, Joy was healthy, it was time.

I had my heart set on a puppy. In my LONG experience, puppies are just so special. They're cute and sweet and, oh!, that puppy breath. I had mixed feelings about bringing an adult Dane home...it's hard to explain, but I felt like he'd be invading Freddie's territory somehow. Besides, when you get a puppy they bond with you and...I don't know. I just thought I wanted a puppy. But GGR didn't have any right now. I decided to go take a look anyway, knowing there were only adult Danes available at the moment.

My mom came with me and we headed out there on Saturday, December 11. Burt and Tracy were warm and gracious and made us feel right at home. The first dog I saw was an almost 3 year old Harlequin male, and I liked him a lot. The second was a 1 year old black female who looked eerily like my favorite female Dane of all time, Star (I'd even brought a picture with me, which coincidentally showed Star when she was about the same age, and they could've been twins...except Star died in 1986). I didn't want a black (couldn't even consider it because of Freddie) and I didn't want a female, so I dismissed this sweet girl. Then it happened.

The INSTANT Tracy brought the next dog out, I KNEW. I mean really, just like that. He's just over a year old and is a Mantle (one of the unofficial Great Dane colors--black and white, but not like a Harlequin; Mantles have big areas of black and white and may, as this one does, have some spotting as well). In just minutes I asked Tracy if she'd think it was weird if I said I already knew this was the one, and she said no, not at all. I told her, "I'm done! I don't need to see any more!"

This boy is as sweet as can be, and when you look in his eyes you see an old soul. (Freddie was like that, too.) He's thin right now because he's been stressed (family issues that led to him being given up), but *TALL* and sweet and beautiful. Once he gains back his weight and finishes growing, he's going to be spectacular.

(As I'm typing this--with my laptop in my lap on my bed--he's pushing my arms constantly as he stretches while dozing...on my bed, of course.)

I know I keep referring to him as "he" and there's a reason for that--I don't have a name yet. He's already had two names, Lieutenant and Zen, neither of which does anything for me, but once we've spent a little time together something will jump up and hit me as the right name. UPDATE: 12/14/10 -- We have a name! From the same woman who came up with Freddie Mercury and Queen for her last two Great Danes, I'd like to introduce...Justin Hayward (yes, as in the Moody Blues). Perfect!

Because it was late Saturday before Tracy could take him in for his pre-release vet check, we decided that we'd wait until the next day to come pick him up. And yesterday that's exactly what we did. He was great on the ride home--about 50 miles, settling down on the blanket I'd put in the back of my RAV4, and snuggling up with the toy I'd bought him just before heading out there.

When we got home I took him straight into the backyard, on lead, and let him sniff and explore as much as he wanted. Then we headed inside--where my cats were waiting, oblivious to the fact they'd just acquired a "little" brother! They had varied reactions ranging from puffing out their tails like bottle brushes, to hissing, to hiding up on the highest bookcases and giving the dog death glares (Joy Noelle!), to downright indifference. One of the cats swatted at his face when he got too close, and he jumped back and yelped. (He was not hurt.) They'll work it out. I've been doing this for MANY, many years and my pets always get along. It's a house rule!

Here are some pics. First, Freddie with his favorite toy, Teddy Bear:

Freddie contemplating life near the end of his...I took this picture just a few weeks before he died:

This is how I like to picture my Fredster now. This picture was taken up in the mountains above Azusa, but I like to think of him standing like that, gazing out from his vantage point now at Rainbow Bridge:

And now, drumroll please!, my new boy. These were taken moments after arriving home with him yesterday. To me, it looks like he's wondering "...is this one it? is this my home now? or is she going to give me back?":

These are from last night, after he'd come inside and had a chance to figure it all out:

His favorite of two new toys I bought yesterday; we've named the toy Rocky J Squirrel:

"Uh-oh! What's that?! Oh, it's a CAT!!" (This was RIGHT before he ran over to the cat--who promptly swatted his face.):

Freddie's food/water stand a couple days after he died. It took a while before I could bring myself to empty the few morsels of food Freddie left in the bowl that last night before he died.

Same place, different stand and bowls; my new boy's first dinner at home:

"Good morning, Mommy! Wow, I slept really well. OUR bed is super comfy!"

So there you have it. For now! I couldn't be more thrilled with the gorgeous, sweet, loving boy I've been blessed with--and if you're thinking about getting a pet, PLEASE adopt. There are millions...really, millions...of cats, dogs, birds, ferrets and many other domesticated animals waiting for good homes. It's so worth it--for BOTH parties.

And last but not least: HAVE YOUR PETS SPAYED OR NEUTERED

.

Michael "the killer of innocent beings" Vick and his disgusting, moronic fans

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Thu, 18 Nov 2010 07:06:00 +0000

[JUMP TO ANTI-MICHAEL VICK MERCHANDISE?]

There was an excellent article about one of Michael Vick's dogs in the LA Times the other day, and I posted the following comment on it:

Michael Vick is the most disgusting, despicable excuse for a human being on this earth--and his fans are close behind. Every time I see "Mike Vick" trending on Twitter, I throw in my opinion--that he's a heartless piece of scum who TORTURED AND KILLED innocent animals. Then, invariably, I'm bombarded by his moronic fans not only defending him, but telling me that if I'm so bothered by what he did to the dogs I should be REALLY concerned about Kobe Bryant and women. Huh? Just how stupid are Michael Vick fans? Do they not understand the difference between TORTURING, DROWNING, ELECTROCUTING, KILLING sentient beings and having--what was PROVEN to be--consensual sex with another adult? IDIOTS.

I, for one, will NEVER forgive Vick the Dick. I don't care if he walks on water, it will NOT undo the heinous abuse he inflicted on other sentient beings. I hope he burns in hell...and I'm quite sure he will.

Hey, Michael, how would you like to be hung, electrocuted or drowned for not performing well enough? You heartless piece of scum...

Although that's a good summary of how I feel about Michael Vick and his pathetic fans, there's a lot more I'd have written had there been room! So here's some more...

As I said, whenever I see "Mike Vick" trending on Twitter, I jump in and post my opinion of him--that he's a worthless, gutless, heartless, vicious piece of shit. Then, without fail!, I get attacked by his clueless, moronic fans. Want to know how stupid they are? They equate Kobe Bryant having consensual sex with an adult woman with torturing and killing dogs. Really. They're that stupid. I guess they don't know how to read and/or comprehend what they read or hear, because Kobe Bryant was never convicted of anything--he wasn't even TRIED for anything. The woman involved clearly wanted money/fame and Kobe was her ticket. (I am a victim of rape--so do NOT accuse me of taking rape lightly. This woman was not raped. She had consensual sex with a famous, wealthy athlete so she could turn around and yell "rape!" in order to ride the gravy train to fame and fortune herself.)

So anyway, Vick the Dick's fans continually pull the same tired "logic" out of their asses when I point out what an evil monster he is. They ALWAYS say "if you're so worried about what Vick did to the dogs, you should be REALLY concerned about Kobe Bryant and women!" STUPID FUCKING MORONS.

There's another argument Vick the Dick's fans continually use, and it goes something like this: "You people who are so concerned about dogs, why don't you care about PEOPLE? why don't you care about all the starving children in the world?!" Again...STUPID FUCKING MORONS. I guess their pea-sized brains don't have the capacity to understand that caring about non-human animals, such as dogs and cats, and caring about humans are not mutually exclusive. I'm also willing to bet that I've done more in terms of philanthropic and volunteer work for humans than the average Vick fan will ever dream of doing, so it's kind of ironic that they're so quick to use their tired, stupid argument yet probably have never lifted a finger for another human being.

I'm posting the content of the LA Times article mentioned above, and I truly hope anyone who idolizes Michael Scumbag Vick will read it. If you care about animals at all, how can you be informed about what Vick did and still admire him?

latimes.com/sports/la-sp-plaschke-20101117,0,5163298.column

latimes.com

Dog owner can't forgive Michael Vick

Quarterback shows greatness on the field, but evidence of former cruelty remains.

Bill Plaschke
8:27 PM PST, November 16, 2010

While Michael Vick was screaming toward the sky, a black pit bull named Mel was standing quietly by a door.

On this night, like many other nights, Mel was waiting for his owners to take him outside, but he couldn't alert them with a bark. He doesn't bark. He won't bark. The bark has been beaten out of him.

While Michael Vick was running for glory, Mel was cowering toward a wall.

Every time the 4-year-old dog meets a stranger, he goes into convulsions. He staggers back into a wall for protection. He lowers his face and tries to hide. New faces are not new friends, but old terrors.

While Michael Vick was officially outracing his past Monday night, one of the dogs he abused cannot.

"Some people wonder, are we ever going to let Michael Vick get beyond all this?" said Richard Hunter, who owns Mel. "I tell them, let's let Mel decide that. When he stops shaking, maybe then we can talk."

I know, I know, this is a cheap and easy column, right? One day after the Philadelphia Eagles' quarterback officially becomes an American hero again, just call the owner of one of the dogs who endured Vick's unspeakable abuse and let the shaming begin.

Compare Vick's 413 total yards, four touchdown passes and two rushing touchdowns against the Washington Redskins to the 47 pit bulls who were seized from Bad Newz Kennels, his interstate dogfighting ring. Contrast one of the best three hours by a quarterback ever to the 21 months he spent in prison.

Cheap and easy, right? Not so fast. Vick's success is raising one of the most potentially costly and difficult perceptual questions in the history of American sports.

If he continues playing this well, he could end up as the league's most valuable player. In six games, he has thrown for 11 touchdowns, run for four more touchdowns, committed zero turnovers and produced nearly 300 total yards per game. Heck, at this rate, with his Eagles inspired by his touch, he could even win a Super Bowl, one of the greatest achievements by an American sportsman.

And yet a large percentage of the population will still think Michael Vick is a sociopath. Many people will never get over Vick's own admissions of unthinkable cruelty to his pit bulls — the strangling, the drowning, the electrocutions, the removal of all the teeth of female dogs who would fight back during mating.

Some believe that because Vick served his time in prison, he should be beyond reproach for his former actions. Many others believe that cruelty to animals isn't something somebody does, it's something somebody is.

Essentially, an ex-convict is dominating America's most popular sport while victims of his previous crime continue to live with the brutality of that crime, and has that ever happened before?

Do you cheer the player and boo the man? Can you cheer the comeback while loathing the actions that necessitated the comeback? And how can you do any of this while not knowing if Vick has truly discovered morality or simply rediscovered the pocket?

If you are Richard Hunter, you just don't watch football.

"When you look at Mel," said Hunter, a radio personality from Dallas, "you just don't think about how Michael Vick is a great football player."

A couple of years ago, Hunter and his wife Sunny were watching a documentary on Best Friends Animal Society, the Utah sanctuary where the court sent 22 of Vick's 44 seized dogs. It was after 1 a.m. when the show featured a Vick victim that had been so badly abused, it refused to move, behaving as if paralyzed.

"My wife said, 'Get out of bed, get on the computer and e-mail those people, I want one of those dogs,' " Hunter recalled.

Nearly 18 months later, they became one of six people to adopt one of the dogs. The process included a home visit by caseworkers, an extended visit to the southwest Utah sanctuary, home monitoring by a dog trainer and a six-month probation period.

"These dogs were scarred in many ways both emotional and physical," said John Polis, Best Friends spokesman. "It was something we had never really seen before."

Hunter and his wife quickly saw Mel's scars. The dog wouldn't bark, wouldn't show affection, and would spend nearly an hour shaking with each new person who tried to touch him.

It turns out that Mel had been a bait dog, thrown into the ring as a sort of sparring partner for the tougher dogs, sometimes even muzzled so he wouldn't fight back, beaten daily to sap his will. Mel was under constant attack, and couldn't fight back, and the deep cuts were visible on more than just his fur.

"You could see that Michael Vick went to a lot of trouble to make Mel this way," Hunter said. "When people pet him, I tell them, pet him from under his chin, not over his head. He lives in fear of someone putting their hand over his head."

On Monday night, no, Mel was not hanging out by the televised football game. He was hanging on his owner's bed as they watched something on HBO.

"How can you support football when you know one of their stars did this to a dog?" Hunter said. "If more people saw Mel at the same time as they saw Michael Vick, he wouldn't be so lauded."

Meanwhile, in Philadelphia, the lessons learned from Vick's crimes were on display in a postgame quote from Eagles star receiver DeSean Jackson.

"We were like pit bulls ready to get out of the cage," he told reporters.

Cheap and easy, huh?

bill.plaschke@latimes.com

twitter.com/billplaschke

Copyright © 2010, Los Angeles Times

Looking for anti-Vick merchandise? We've got you covered! All sorts of shirts plus lots of other merchandise, including bumper stickers, coffee mugs, buttons and dog t-shirts. Select any of the images to see the goodies:

.

Microsoft sucks so much... Bing results are OPPOSITE what they should be

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Tue, 16 Nov 2010 18:57:00 +0000

Jump to 02/02/11 update showing Microsoft visiting this post.

Anyone with an IQ above room temperature should know that Microsoft specializes in products that do the opposite of what you'd expect. For example, operating systems are supposed to keep computers humming along, ready to do whatever you want whenever you want. But with Microsoft's [so-called] operating systems, the user spends a great deal of time recovering from crashes, lockups, constant reboots [for everything from installing software to recovering from another lockup], and so on. Not exactly productive! As one anti-windows slogan says, "When will Microsoft make something that doesn't suck? When they start making vacuum cleaners!"

So today I was backtracking from some incoming links in my site logs to see how visitors had arrived at my site, and I saw this one:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=anti-windows+merchandise&go=&form=QBRE&qs=n&sk=

As you can see the search was for "anti-windows merchandise." Now, since Bing is Microsoft's attempt at being a viable search engine, you'd THINK it would provide accurate results, right? Well...think again! They're so Linux-phobic at Microsoft (and rightly so, since nothing they've ever come up with can compete with Linux) that even their so-called search engine spits out biased, anti-Linux results!

Look at these screenshots (select the images to see large, clear versions):

See how the search is very clearly for ANTI-windows merchandise? Well, glance at the areas I've framed and written about in black. See the PRO-windows results? Fucking morons. And people actually think Bing is a good choice as a search engine? Fucking idiots.

UPDATE 02/02/11: We're honored...*cough*...that Microsoft came here to read this post! They followed links in comments I'd posted on newspaper sites reporting that Bing copies Google. Select the image for a bigger, clearer view with commentary:

.

Obama. A legend in his own mind.

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 03:04:00 +0000

Now that the public has spoken, and the GOP made great strides in the November 2010 elections, it should be obvious that Barack Hussein Obama really is the empty suit I kept saying he was prior to November 2008. Duh! Why, oh why, didn't more people figure out that Hillary Clinton was the right choice?! Why did so many ignorant morons jump on the Obama bandwagon? (I know: Because they're ignorant morons!) Well, I hope they're happy now--the economy in the toilet, whites/females/Democrats/Independents turning their backs on the Democratic party, and Obama looking like the pathetic, unqualified excuse for a candidate...er, president...he really is.

It's clear now that Obama is nothing but a legend in his own mind--and we have a new line of merchandise that says just that! If you're as disgusted with Mr Empty Suit as I am, what are you waiting for? Get some of this anti-Obama merchandise now! Here are a few samples (select any image to go to the merchandise):

.

Ringling Brothers Circus abuses animals

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 02:23:00 +0000

Thinking about taking the family to Ringling Brothers circus? If you have even an ounce of compassion for animals in your heart, you really need to reconsider. Did you know that the so-called "trainers" at Ringling beat, shock, tie up, and slam to the ground baby elephants? Well, they do. That's how they get these magnificent, intelligent WILD animals to comply and do the stupid parlor tricks Ringling forces on them. Do you REALLY want to see magnificent elephants--that should be roaming hundreds of miles a day in the wild and forming familial relationships with other elephants--standing on their heads? Especially knowing that they've been brutally "trained?"

If you're even considering attending a Ringling circus [or any other circus that uses animals], please visit this page for lots of information on the facts about how Ringling's animals are trained. There are also photographs taken by an undercover PETA worker showing the brutality and cruelty inflicted on innocent animals by Ringling's "trainers."

Most importantly, after you're aware of the facts I hope you'll sign the letter to the USDA asking for immediate revocation of Ringling's license and to pursue criminal prosecution of Ringling's handlers. If you don't speak up for these abused animals, who will?

If you're in or near a city where Ringling [or any circus that uses animals] performs, please consider showing up with anti-circus signs, shirts, buttons, whatever and help inform those who don't know the facts. Implore them to boycott cruelty, boycott the circus.

.

Joel Burns for governor of Texas

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Fri, 15 Oct 2010 05:09:00 +0000

Did you see the speech Joel Burns made at a Fort Worth city council meeting recently? It was an impassioned, candid, and very personal speech about being gay, being bullied, feeling like you're different, and the recent rash of suicides among gay youths. Burns is a city councilman and, as far as I know, is not running or planning to run for governor of Texas. But why not show your support for Burns, an openly gay man--and believe me, Texas is NOT a place for politicians (or anyone else) to be openly gay--by making this statement: Joel Burns for Governor. This rainbow colored design is available on t-shirts, bumper stickers and a lot of other merchandise.

If you haven't seen the speech referred to above, you can view it here. It's definitely worth a few minutes of your time--and if you know anyone who is anti-gay, homophobic, etc., pass the link along to them. It should be required viewing for those who wish homosexuals would just go away.

.

Fur hurts

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Sun, 26 Sep 2010 18:49:00 +0000

Thinking about wearing fur? Not sure what all the fuss is about? Wonder why animal rights activists [like me] are so passionately anti-fur?

Well, if you're not already aware of the horrifyingly cruel treatment of animals in the fur industry, here's a video that can help explain it to you. Musician Dave Navarro bares all (and he's cute! wouldn't you like to see him naked?) to help spread the truth about fur.

If you're already enlightened and do not wear fur, but know someone who does--or is thinking about it--kindly send them the link to this video so they can see what they're participating in.

Remember, fur hurts. Why would anyone with a conscience want to participate in such cruelty?

.

A Linux user wonders, can Windows do this?

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Sat, 18 Sep 2010 07:20:00 +0000

Let me get this out of the way: I don't use Windows; I have no knowledge of its current features, capabilities, etc. However, every time in the past 15+ years that I had the displeasure of touching a Windows PC, the predominant thoughts in my mind were, "This is archaic! How do I get to another desktop? How do I do X, Y, Z?!", only to find out YOU CAN'T. The point of this post is to show some nifty and useful things that Linux can do--and that I highly doubt Windows can WITHOUT buying anything extra. But feel free to correct me if I'm wrong!

(Jump to pictures)

First a very brief history/description of Linux. Linux is a UNIX-like operating system; UNIX is a powerful, stable, secure OS that's been around for over 40 years. The Internet was built on UNIX, and it's been used for mission-critical applications by the government, huge corporations, the space program, etc., for decades. Unlike Windows, UNIX was built from the ground up to be multi-tasking, multi-user, networked, secure, and extremely stable. Blue screen of death? Um, no!

In 1991, a young man named Linus Torvalds started working on an operating system that would be like UNIX, but would have people all over the world contributing to its development--and it would be free. And so Linux was born.

Within a few years various "distros" (distributions from different sources) started appearing; now there are so many, it's impossible, for me at least, to keep track of them all. There is undoubtedly a "flavor" (distro or variation of a distro) out there to suit everyone--if they'd only try them! My favorite is Kubuntu, or Ubuntu with KDE as its desktop environment. Unlike Windows, with Linux it's up to the user to decide what their environment consists of, so you can choose from various desktop environments such as KDE, Gnome, XFCE, IceWM, and more. Since I use KDE, that's what I will focus on, and that's what you'll see in images on this page.

One persistent Linux myth I absolutely MUST dispel is this: "If you're not a geek/guru, you can't use Linux--you have to know how to do things with cryptic commands at a command line!" WRONG. Back in the days before the GUI (graphical user interface) was invented, all operating systems relied on the command line. The biggest difference between UNIX and DOS was that UNIX was powerful and had thousands--really an infinite number--of commands, while DOS did not. With DOS, its library of commands was limited and limiting. (I was doing things with UNIX 25 years ago that Windows STILL can't do today. Seriously.) So, yes, when Linux started it was command line based, just like DOS was--but those days are long gone. Modern Linux is an awe-inspiring sight, and a user needs have no knowledge of using a command line, or even what a command line is!

My mother uses Linux all day, every day--she's glued to her computer now, whereas when she had Windows she rarely ever used it. She has no idea what a "command prompt" is, nor does she need to. Trust me, if SHE can use Linux so easily and effortlessly, ANYONE can.

When I buy a new computer the first thing I do is wipe Windows off its drive and install Linux. I can do a new installation, complete with hundreds of applications ready to go, in 12-15 minutes. Let's see anyone do that with Windows.

Speaking of applications, there are thousands of applications available for Linux--free. Don't be fooled by the cost...er, lack thereof! These programs, including OpenOffice (a full suite of office apps--word processor, spreadsheet, etc.), the GIMP (a graphics app similar to Photoshop), digiKam (an image app for use with digital cameras), and Pidgin (an IM client) are at least as good as--and often better than--their pricey Windows equivalents. Want the latest and greatest version when it's released? Great--just grab it and install it.

And with all that said, let's move on!

The first feature I want to describe is "multiple desktops." In the *nix (UNIX, Linux, and similar OSes) world, we've had multiple desktops for DECADES. Last I heard Microsoft hadn't copied this yet, so Windows users may not be able to visualize what I'm talking about. Basically, picture your desktop. Now picture having 3, 5, 10 or more other monitors hooked up to your computer, but with DIFFERENT desktops on each of them, each desktop configured with different widgets, themes, colors, etc. Okay, now take away the physical monitors, and imagine all those desktops available to you on your one monitor. That's what I'm talking about!

Look at these two screenshots:

CLICK IMAGES FOR LARGE VERSIONS WITH DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS

These are two different desktops on one computer. They're completely independent of each other--each is configured with its own widgets, its own theme, and so on.

Changing the number of desktops is a cinch:

CLICK IMAGE FOR LARGE VERSION WITH DETAILED DESCRIPTION

But, you're asking, how do you get from one desktop to another? Easy! As with all things in *nix, there are a variety of options so you can choose whichever you prefer. If you look closely just to the right of the taskbar clock in the screenshots, you'll see nine little boxes in two columns--each box represents one of the desktops, and clicking on a box takes you to its respective desktop. But my preferred way of navigating is via certain desktop effects, specifically desktop cube and desktop grid.

CLICK IMAGES FOR LARGE VERSIONS WITH DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS

The desktop cube can be rotated in every imaginable direction by dragging it with your pointer; simply stop on the desktop you want, right click, and you're there. With the desktop grid, just click on the desktop you want to go to.

To activate these desktop effects, again, with Linux you have multiple ways of accomplishing this task. I like using screen edges:

CLICK IMAGE FOR LARGE VERSION WITH DETAILED DESCRIPTION

There are eight areas along the edge of the screen that can be configured to perform various actions when your pointer enters them. I have two of mine set up to trigger desktop cube and desktop grid.

You'd think that switching between applications would be pretty boring, right? Wrong! Not on Linux. Here are a few desktop effects you can choose:

CLICK IMAGES FOR LARGE VERSIONS WITH DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS

This final screenshot shows the effect called taskbar thumbnails, which let you see, in real time, a small version of the application you're hovering over:

CLICK IMAGE FOR LARGE VERSION WITH DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Honestly, there are SO MANY desktop effects, so many features, so much versatility and power, that it would take hundreds of screenshots to even attempt to do them justice. Instead, I'm going to wrap this up with the suggestion that you do yourself a favor and try Linux--as soon as possible! Many Linux distros are available as a "live CD" which you can boot from without altering or installing anything on your computer. You can give Linux a test drive, see if you like its look and feel, check that your hardware is correctly recognized and configured, and so on. (Unlike Windows, you won't need installation CDs for your peripherals--Linux will generally see, recognize, and configure your hardware on its own.) If you like it, click the "install" button. If you don't, take out the CD, reboot to Windows and that's that.

Here's a very partial list of some Linux distros you might want to try. Oh, did I mention they're all FREE? And if you ever have questions or need any help, there are forums, newsgroups, IRC channels and more filled with knowledgeable Linux users just waiting to help--for FREE.

Kubuntu
Ubuntu
Linux Mint
Debian/GNU Linux
Knoppix
Gentoo
Mandriva
RedHat Enterprise
Slackware
SuSE
Xandros
Fedora

PS In case you're wondering, the dogs and cats pictured in the desktop screenshots are, or were, mine. The beautiful black Great Dane, Freddie Mercury, and his sister, Queen, the merle Great Dane, died on October 16 and 17 three years apart. (And, yes, I'm a huge Freddie Mercury and Queen fan!) The gorgeous Maine Coon cat was Wilshire Coronado, my favorite pet of all time (tied with Freddie). The black and white kitten is my baby Joy Noelle, who will be six next month; I adopted her when she was five weeks old. I'm not only a Linux geek and advocate, but also a longtime vegetarian, animal rights activist, and pet rescuer. As I write this [on September 17, 2010] I'm close to adopting a new Great Dane! Oh, don't forget: HAVE YOUR PETS SPAYED OR NEUTERED.

.

KFC -- Kentucky Fried Cruelty

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Sat, 14 Aug 2010 05:20:00 +0000

If you're not vegan or vegetarian, like I am, you're probably not aware of the horrific cruelty inflicted on chickens killed for KFC, otherwise known as Kentucky Fried Cruelty. Although my preference would be for everyone to stop participating in animal cruelty--which is what you're doing if you eat meat--at the very least, please boycott KFC.

Pamela Anderson has recorded an informative video, and I highly recommend that you view it. Then pledge to boycott KFC.

Please join Pamela Anderson, Sir Paul McCartney, His Holiness the Dalai Lama, The Rev. Al Sharpton, and countless other kind people worldwide by not eating at KFC.

Watch more videos at KentuckyFriedCruelty.com.

.

Vegan/vegetarian alternatives to popular foods

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 05:42:00 +0000

I have a Squidoo lens--that's a work in progress--about vegan and vegetarian alternatives to popular, familiar foods. If you're newly veggie or you're thinking about going veg, you may not realize that you don't have to give up foods you love. Being vegan or vegetarian does not mean eating boring, raw, unsatisfying foods! You can enjoy everything from chili to pizza to spaghetti and much more--but without the guilt. (And you SHOULD feel guilty if you're not vegetarian. The animal abuse and cruelty involved in the meat industry is appalling. Why participate in that?) And I'm not talking about disgusting "healthy" versions that make you want to puke! I'm talking about satisfying, authentic-tasting foods that will please veggies and meat eaters alike.

Take a look at DELICIOUS vegetarian alternatives to popular foods for lots of info including brand suggestions for items like meat alternatives and yummy prepared foods like vegetarian chili.

If you're looking for vegan/vegetarian merchandise, please visit our shop for vegan and vegetarian themed t-shirts, bumper stickers and more.

.

Funny anti-Obama merchandise

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 22:11:00 +0000

I've come up with a number of--in my opinion!--funny anti-Obama designs for our merchandise. For example, I really like Barack Hussein Obama makes Dan Quayle look like Einstein. But I've just added a new design to our anti-Obama merchandise that strikes me as hilarious: I may not be a gastroenterologist but I know Obama is full of shit. The visual in my head just cracks me up.

Here are a few samples of this design on various products; select any image to go to our shops and see our full line of products:

If you're looking for some funny anti-Obama pics, check out our collection! Funny anti-Obama pictures and images. It hasn't been updated with new pics lately, but the ones that are there will make you laugh your ass off.

.

Courage, the dog: Abuser's preliminary hearing coming up

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Fri, 11 Jun 2010 02:39:00 +0000

If you're in Southern California and want to see justice done for a horribly abused dog, please try to attend the abuser's preliminary hearing on June 15 at Bellflower Superior Court.

The abuser, Kimberly Nizato, starved Courage, a German Shepherd Dog, to the brink of death. Desperate for food he actually ate dirt to try to stay alive. She did not provide food or water, and kept him confined in a cage. When he was rescued in April he weighed only 37 pounds and was too weak to stand up; I'm happy to report that he is now nearing 80 pounds and is with a loving new family.

Nizato was released on $20,000 bail--not NEARLY enough, in my humble opinion. I'm afraid that it's a sign of a much too lenient sentence to come. We cannot let this vicious monster get off lightly.

If you attend the hearing, whether you're inside or outside of the courtroom, please be polite and respectful, but make clear why you're there--to speak up for Courage, since he cannot speak for himself.

.

If the fetus you save is gay, will you still fight for its rights?

noreply@blogger.com (blog owner) — Sat, 15 May 2010 07:25:00 +0000

Looking for "If the fetus you save is gay, will you still fight for its rights?" merchandise? Visit our shop for t-shirts, bumper stickers, buttons and much more!

Something odd has happened in the past few weeks that I can't explain, but I'm not complaining about either! A "hub" I'd written a while back on HubPages, If the fetus you save is gay, will you still fight for its rights? suddenly started getting a lot of hits. With those hits came a HUGE increase in sales of our If the fetus you save is gay, will you still fight for its rights? merchandise. It's weird because I wrote that hub a year and a half ago! I don't know of anything that might have sparked this sudden upswing in interest, but I'm glad for the traffic regardless.

Here are a few samples of this line of merchandise; select any item to visit our shop:

.