GOP (Get OverPopulation)

[6.22: summary:
. the highlight of this post was the realization that
GOP had the same initials as Get OverPopulation;
but the main theme is overpopulation's causes,
and ideas for humane solutions .
. inflation and unemployment together
are symptoms of overpopulation relative to
the labor needs of capitalism .
. when the GOP says "(we don't have the money)
they mean they don't need our labor;
and, all of their cost-cutting measures
are attempts to get overpopulation
by making us feel like we can't afford children .
. they don't feel like they're being heard though,
because they are the party of church values,
but they keep reminding us of family values
and hope we get the hint:
if your family doesn't have a job for your children
your family should at least have a spare bedroom .
. most of all they talk about reaganomics,
but you must know there are no more jobs
because they Get OverPaid too!
. not only are those jobs not coming back,
we are just a few years from intelligent automation;
so as we have more people needing a free lunch,
shouldn't we pay people to stop reproducing? ]

better wages needed? for not reproducing

5.22: co.g'+/pol/purges/unemployment/
we need more than better wages:
Sheila Nagig:

The trouble nowadays is that
nobody has much in the way of disposable
income to spend on much beyond the necessities of life.
It's why furniture stores go out of business in a recession.

me:

I was wondering if you could undepress me;
I was sure the trouble nowadays was that our overpopulation
is finally colliding with our capitalistic value enhancements .
. the republicans don't believe in job creation either;
they just solidly reject the other myth:
that socialistic handouts can save the
bottomless pit of population expansion that we are .
. can you show me how I'm deluded?

who's economy? obama's or private parenting?

5.29: co.apt/pol/purges/reaganomic/
neolib's are not job creators:

. I am a neolib, and I'm just warning you,
if you think romney is about jobs,
both the repub's and the dem's are also neolibs
giving your jobs to the needy globally;
so, if you give them a tax break,
they are only giving more jobs to india and china .
. just remember, you're the 60% who actually
owns something in america besides a birth certificate
-- crappy commoners .

5.10: news.pol/purges/reaganomics/
it's obama's economy:
andy dean conservative radio:
. he has this subservient lesbian sidekick
who when asked what she thought of
obama's lackluster economy,
said she doesn't believe in the 99%
-- said a person's job prospects are
up to the individual;
so it doesn't matter what obama did .
. the 99% is hiding the elephant of overpopulation,
and that is indefensible;
but, why isn't an obama supporter like herself
pointing out that the economy has
nothing to do with the president?
. obama isn't even allowed to touch
the root cause of our unemployment
which is globalized capitalism
-- that is nothing less than the unstoppable
perfection of the american way!
. if you believe in capitalism at all,
you believe in eventual automation,
so you must believe in massive unemployment
-- inevitably!
so stop dreaming about economic expansion,
and think about the homeless you generate
breeding like you want to .

5.1: pol/purges/reaganomics/
family values is dictatorship just like communism:

redistribute wealth only for population reductions

[6.21: summary:
. after watching both lib's and conservatives
creating wildly delusional videos on youtube,
I debated several other viewers
about whether the real issue was
socialism had been a proven failure
or we had never tried what works:
there can be no wealth or security
without state control of population size .]

5.11: co.youtube/pol/purges/reaganomics/
socialism is a proven failure:
The Critique of the Crisis of Capitalism Critique
by HowTheWorldWorks

google-plus's "(just the right people)

5.28: pos.cyb/net.g'+/blocked/
stay popular to prevent thread erosion:
. if you get blocked from anyone,
you can't see them on
any threads they participate in,
so then this has the effect of
blocking your view of other posts,
because they expect you can see
who they're responding to:
. so keep remembering,
g'+ is not the place for free speech;
it's the place to listen, and learn!
. you'll need to walk softly,
and carry your big stick elsewhere,
or on a dual g'+ account (haven't tried that yet). 

5.26: mis.cyb/net.g'+/being blocked 
hides posts in threads you can still see:
. while googling for g'plus news,
searching for myself on plus.topsy.com,
I found some comments directed at me
that g'plus didn't inform me of? :

beautiful photostitching in Linux

5.5: web.cyb/mac#lion/photo stitch replacement:
. the new Lion system doesn’t include Rosetta,
which means the older PowerPC-only programs
can’t run on it;
so, I'm going to be out Canon's Photo Stitch?
what are some linux replacements?
. another term for Photo Stitching is Panoramas .
[6.11:
... and if linux doesn't work out;
Canon upgraded the PhotoStitch to work with Lion
(freeware -- not just an upgrade).

 6.19: have the cd?:
. there is also a version for Windows,
but it's only an upgrade,
you'll need the cd that came with your Canon .]

[6.19: tried the linux openware:
. after installing Hugin on linux
with Ubuntu's Software Center,
the tips suggested I see the tutorial;
and, trying that out, it was truly amazing .
. someone in 2007 said you had to install Enblend too,
but that seems to be already in place now .]

moving vmwares to mac's external drive

5.5: sci.cyb/vmware/
sharing vm's in Share acct not possible:
 
[6.13: summary:
. mac permissions are a big hassle!
you're supposed to have 3 user folders:
one for your restricted user's personal use,
one for admn's personal use,
and a shared folder that is accessible by everyone .
. but shared access means read-only,
and read-only affects the running of
 vm's [Virtual Machines].
. I had created a 2nd restricted user's acct,
and I thought I could use the same vm's
since they were in the Shared folder,
but when I tried to run the vm's
it said I didn't have permission,
because running the vm implies modifying its files .
. if you want user accts to share completely,
you have to store the files in an external drive .]

. using vm's from another acct doesn't work
even when it's the shared acct
with permissions set to everyone can read and write .
[... because
acl's are enforcing Owners Enabled ]
. after getting all the vm's set up,
I then undid it for the experiments,
to see if the problem was sharing when
the vm's were using suspends or snapshots
(that was one problem but there were others).
. finally redid everything back to normal
but what if I wanted to work in a new acct ?

sci.cyb/vmware/sharing vm's in usb drive is possible:
. try sharing an xp and xu from the dos-formatted drive
that likely won't have acl's attached to it?
yes, that does work;
if it's the acl's, they don't seem to matter on
one partition of my firewire drive;
I have that partition named as if it's exfat-formatted,
but disk utility says the current format is Mac Journaled;
the key difference is [owners enabled: no]
the partition used by Apple`timemachine on that same drive
has answered yes to that .

5.6: proj.cyb/vmware/vm's on external drive:

( earlier,
I'd done an experiment on vmware:
can I access a vm from a new acct?
no because it's shared with an old acct
...)
. I missed the point of the experiment!
it wasn't to share vm's between accts,
it was to see if a transfer of vm's between accts
would work at all .
. what the experiments told us was that
moving the vm to the external drive
(a drive that is not Owner Enabled)
makes the vm exist without ACL-owned complications
so then after getting a copy from the external drive,
it can be run by any acct .
. and if you do want sharing
then keep it on the external drive;
but, if you don't want sharing,
then first get the vm from the external,
and copy it to the acct's drive .
. if you're not concerned that
the acct isn't owning a vm,
then keep in mind that
if using conventional disk drives
rather than solid state devices,
and if the host OS is on the internal drive
then the vm will run more efficiently on
the external drive
since the host and guest OS's
won't be having to compete for
the location of the disk's read-write arm .

. if the bank.vm should be encrypted
it could stay on the internal drive .
[6.13: (considering Lion's encryption;
later decided to stay with just encrypting data) ]

. for timemachine to work on an external drive,
you need a 2nd drive;
. you can still benefit from timeMachine's
multiple snapshots feature,
but you have to manually copy changed parts
over to the internal drive that timemachine is backing .
[6.13:
. a 3rd possibility that I finally decided on
was to put the vm on the same external drive as timeMachine,
and then put the data on the internal drive .]

. rename the external drive as Primary .
(the reason it was named exfat
is that I had it formatted to exfat
until it was found that my xp laptop
couldn't read the drive anyway
because the drive was partitioned .
. linux on the laptop can both see partitions
and read mac format .

5.8: proj.cyb/vmware/moving to new system:
. in the new system,
all vm's are on the external drive,
and prep for this includes the usual
pulling out snapshots, and shutting them down
instead of suspending them .
. inside vmware's library all the links will be bad,
so I have to delete them all and reopen each vm,
to have it listed by the library .
[...,
. if I change the name of the drive,
the library links are again shot,
so, I'd want to make sure the drive's name is ok .]

5.6: mis.cyb/vmware/easy mistake wastes a lot of time:
. I messed up the decision of
whether to say the vm was moved or copied;
I should have said I copied it
because I need to be using both instances at once,
once I answered it wrong,
I didn't see any way to undo it,
so I had to recopy the huge thing .
may have also needed to change the name
of the enclosing folder?
(you can't change the name of the vm itself
because that makes it unusable
unless you know how to patch the internal param file).

elucidate wiki's account of WTC destruction

6.12:
. this is in reference to an earlier blog post
in which I was concerned that skyscrapers are using
controlled demolition as means of
emergency fire suppression
without telling either the public or firefighters .

6.10: co.apt/pol/purges/controlled demolition/automated:
. why didn't they tell the firefighters to leave
if they controlled when the building would fall down?
perhaps the demolition system is automated:
ie, the building could be sensing when its
electrical coordination system is about to get
compromised by the fire,
thereby allowing it to avoid a controlled demolition
up until the point at which the fire damage would
render the system unable to execute a demolition .

5.3: proj.cyb/net.wiki/World_Trade_Center#Destruction:
. I need to include in the tower destruction page
that the way it was destroyed has been disputed .
description of  edits:
/* Destruction */ linking to a related article: 
World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories
/* Destruction */ remove accidental insertion,
and move addition out of previous ref's scope
the result is this paragraph:

wiki's World_Trade_Center Destruction

Main articles: September 11 attacks,
American Airlines Flight 11,
United Airlines Flight 175, and
Collapse of the World Trade Center

At 9:59 a.m., the South Tower collapsed
after burning for approximately 56 minutes.
The fire caused steel structural elements,
already weakened from the plane impact,
to fail.
The north tower collapsed at 10:28 a.m.,
after burning for approximately 102 minutes.^[118]
At 5:20 p.m.^[119] on September 11, 2001,
7 World Trade Center started to collapse
with the crumble of the east penthouse,
and it collapsed completely at 5:21 p.m.^[119]
owing to uncontrolled fires
causing structural failure.^[120]
This account of the collapse's cause
was disputed by proponents of
World Trade Center controlled demolition
conspiracy theories.