Zathras' Great Machine

I keep hearin' somethin' about Netscape (the folks who make Mozilla) goin' outta biz. I hope DMOZ goes outta biz. (that "volunteer" directory). I used to be an editor for it...real stinky place man...

sheeot - I gotta write a piece about it. $!$!$!%@@#$ too much to write about.

dig this:

I've been lookin' around searching for an alternate browser (as in something that is NOT IE or netscape).

99.9% of them require IE - as in that they do not run on their own code. They run on IE...it's like someone relabeling Coke and selling it as a different brand - "fern's favorite fizz" or something :(

Mozilla *isn't* Netscape. Netscape is a sub-build of Mozilla that happens to suck. You can't even exchange skins between them as of the last time I looked, because they're not the same product. Netscape 6/7 crashed constantly on my computer -- Moz .x/1.x runs near-flawlessly.

Opera is a fairly popular alternative browser that also runs on its own code, and I've heard good things about it. Problem is, it costs forty bucks.

I adore Opera. At least Opera 6 and lower. Opera 7 bites.

Skins? heck - I'm still tryin' to get the $!@#!# browser to load!

Time for the (off-topic) quote of the week:
(during an IM conversation with a photographer friend):

Andrea (the meow): what's weird is I do things like get really close to the ground and real close to insects now that I have a digital camera
Andrea (the meow): Iused to avoid them
shaw: why did you avoid them?
Andrea (the meow): duh
Andrea (the meow): insects:-O
Andrea (the meow): they bite, sting, annoy
shaw: thats what I say about people
shaw: and yet I still deal with them ;)

"Andrea (the meow): they bite, sting, annoy
shaw: thats what I say about people
shaw: and yet I still deal with them ;)"

The big question then is: why? ;^)

(I avoid them, often at all costs. Which explains why I only have two friends, and both are typically hundreds or thousands of miles away...lol)

Why?

Well - I've known many, many people in my (very short) lifetime. Some good, some bad, many complicated. I'll refrain from using the word "evil," because I don't believe there is such a thing...

I think the rewards in dealing with people outweigh all the negatives. There's some sort of warmth you get when you talk to them; when they tell you a funny story, an experience from the past, or even when they tell you about something bad that happened to them.

I have a few good friends here and there, and I appreciate 'em. I think they appreciate me back . . .

I dunno if this answers yer question...

"I think the rewards in dealing with people outweigh all the negatives. There's some sort of warmth you get when you talk to them; when they tell you a funny story, an experience from the past, or even when they tell you about something bad that happened to them."

That explains the difference! I only get positive feelings from a very select few, and all of them are online. So dealing with people aside from them isn't rewarding at all for me. :)

Well, we're kinda talkin' about two different things here. I think you're talkin' about friends, I'm talkin' about people in general.

I talk to people on all differnet levels (real life, phone, IM, letters, talk show host etc.) I think the best thing is diversity - just lotta different folks with a lotta different interests. Sometimes there are positives, sometimes there are negatives; but I'm good at forgettin' da negatives because I realize that perfection is so borin'. (Wrote "perfection is so borin'" as a line for a weird song I used to perform many centuries ago...)

I think you're talking about the same thing, Shaw, except what you get from people in general, Moggy only gets from friends.

I'm somewhere between the two of you. I can put on the happy face and make things smooth for up to twenty minutes with someone else who's also trying to make things smooth, but then I need a nap.

it doesn't take me that much energy to talk to people - unless they're being a jerk or they're an ex-girlfriend (or both).

"it doesn't take me that much energy to talk to people - unless they're being a jerk or they're an ex-girlfriend (or both)."

Yeah, see, I'm more like a severe version of Sparrow. It takes so much energy to interact with people in general that only really rare neat ones make me feel it's worthwhile. Even they tend to not hear from me (or only get excuses of some kind as to why I'm not spending the energy to interact with them) for days/weeks/months. (I have to include "excuses" because Parrish tends to get upset if I don't do at least that much!)

Well, some people talk in "codes" - y'gotta know what to say and what not to say to 'em. That sometimes takes out energy with me sometimes. I can see why it takes energy outta folks...

I find that most people talk in codes but don't even realize they're doing it. Far too often, when you ask them what they really meant, they get confused or even angry.

I especially loathe the codes that people use when they're sexually interested in someone else. I've straight out asked "are you trying to have sex with me? It's okay if you are, but I just wanted to know for sure what's going on." and they swear that they weren't trying to have sex with me but then ten minutes later they're grabbing all over my body so I end up getting away from them any way I can, even hitting or biting them if I have to and never talking to them again. The stupid thing is that in most cases if they had been honest and said yes that htey were flirting with me and hoping to have sex, I probably would have had sex with them but then when they're dishonest and those codes people use already frustrate me so much, I just hate them when it turns out that they were using codes and didn't even have the decency to be honest about it.

But it's not just sex that makes people talk in codes. People do it all the time and for no reason. The most basic human interactions are codes. When I go to the store and the cashier says, "how are you?" she doesn't *really* want to know how I am. She's using a code that means "I acknowledge your presence in my line and I am saying hello and that I hope you are comfortable shopping in this establishment and don't turn me in to my boss for being rude."

The sad thing is how many years it took me to realize what the secret meaning of "how are you" was. Now when I go to the store and the cashier says, "how are you?" I respond with "hello" because that's the real answer to what she's really saying which is just "hello, I see you. I'm ready to ring up your order now."

I've been responding with "hello" for a couple of years now and only one cashier has ever noticed that I didn't respond with "fine" or "good" or something similar so I've either cracked that code or else cashiers don't really hear what people say to them.

Social interaction is a choreographed dance with certain steps expected in response to certain other steps but it's harder to learn than the foxtrot because the steps change order and each step has several possible responding steps, each of which can set the dance off in a new direction.

The choreographed nature of social interaction appears to be nearly invisible to most people who engage in it. It has a rigid, but changeable, structure and only some people some times can break that structure and get away with it socially. And much of what takes place is in code or otherwise choreographed to give a certain impression to the people involved in the dance.

It's just exhausting to me.

I can see how it is exhausting; there is no set "dance" for anything.

The problem with the "dance" for sex is that there's always several shades of fear/nervousness about it. Most men don't just go "Hey baby! Let's fuck!" (most women don't either - at least, most women that I've known). Usually it just happens, like lightning hitting the ground - if it's forced it usually never works. Way too many steps by one partner and you'll scare the other person away . . .

Cashiers are programmed to say "how are you?" by their bosses. They don't say it out of concern - they just say it to keep their jobs.

It's all invisible - but things just happen so fast that it's tough to take into consideration everything that happens...

It's exhausting, but it's also rewarding. I've tried isolating myself from people before - doesn't work. I still dig 'em with all their faults and strengths.

that's because you're probably an extravert. I'm a heavy-duty introvert and can happily go days or even weeks without talking to another human being. (And have done so during a phase of my life when I spent a lot of time living in the forest.)

I "need" people in a society sense. You know, I need the butcher to make my meat, I need the policeman to protect my rights, I need the truck driver to ship my vegetables ... though none of these are inherent needs but rather needs based on the way civiliation functions. But I have a very low inherent need of people. I don't think I'd be pleased to go an entire year without interacting with another human, but I am not the sort of person who has an inherent need to interact with others on a daily or even weekly basis.

Well - I'm not exactly an extravert. I'm not even a introvert or even a pervert (as a few folks have accused me of being).

You don't exactly need to have people - I don't "need" them either. I just think they're cool to have around. *Breaks into a chorus Bette Midler's "Friends"*

I mean, I don't exactly need them either - and you don't need the butcher and/or the policeman to do all those things for you when you can do all of those yourself. It's not exactly fun to do all of 'em yerself though...still...

"I'm a heavy-duty introvert and can happily go days or even weeks without talking to another human being."

Same here. If I didn't share a house with my mother, I *would* be going for weeks or even months without speaking to anybody in real life. I'm so severely introverted that I qualify watching television (particularly drama) as a form of social contact because it involves listening to people speak. (Or perhaps more accurately, I'm so severely introverted that I find watching television uncomfortable/boring *because* it seems like a form of social contact to me.)

Oh, hey, Shaw, speaking of introverts/extroverts... Which one would you say Parrish was during college? Obviously you wouldn't know now, as you said that you haven't physically been around him in years... :)

Well, I would have to say extroverted. He had a group of friends that he talked with and such. Also, he was a writing tutor. To do that you had to, of course, deal with some really obnoxious people (like me, for example).

He was introverted after he left and during that whole mess he went through in Brattleboro. Once during that time period (and I dunno if he remembers this), I wrote him a friendly email, and he responded with an email that said:

"blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah."

That's EXACTLY what he wrote. I figured he wasn't in the mood to talk. I guess (?!) I dunno. To this day I still wonder why he was feeling so "blah" (?!?!?!)

"Well, I would have to say extroverted. He had a group of friends that he talked with and such. Also, he was a writing tutor. To do that you had to, of course, deal with some really obnoxious people (like me, for example)."

*snicker* I keep getting the feeling he's an extrovert at heart too, though he says he is a severe introvert, which just baffles me. It's good to know I'm not just nuts. Or that I'm not alone in being nuts... ;^)

"He was introverted after he left and during that whole mess he went through in Brattleboro."

Yeah -- the impression I've gotten is that he was an extrovert, then all hell broke loose, he retreated into his shell for a few years, then has slowly been coming back since then. That's just based on the running commentary he's been giving me on his life since '98 though, so I could be totally wrong.

"Once during that time period (and I dunno if he remembers this), I wrote him a friendly email, and he responded with an email that said:

"blah blah blah..."

That's EXACTLY what he wrote."

LOL... Okay, I have to admit, I'd be wondering what caused a response like that too!

"I figured he wasn't in the mood to talk. I guess (?!) I dunno. To this day I still wonder why he was feeling so "blah" (?!?!?!)"

When was it? If it was after September 1998, I might know, considering I seemed to be his electronic diary at times. If I find anything particularly private, of course, I won't post it. I'm curious to know why he'd send so bizarre a reply too!

It was around '96. I still dunno why he wrote it! I dunno if he remembers . . .

I don't think he's an introvert. Keeps to himself sometimes, maybe . . . nothing wrong with that. He also can be a good conversationalist (although he might disagree with me on that one for some reason).

When hell breaks loose (whether it be with friends or family) it changes you after awhile. You stop talkin', stop doin' - talking to friends have pretty much helped me get outta da rut I've been in after the tragedies I've seen. Of course, Parrish went through a different kind of hell than I did - but hell is hell, no matter what it is or how it is

I test as an INTP on all the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator tests that I've taken, with a couple of exceptions where I tested as an INTJ. I've taken these tests repeatedly for close to ten years now, and they all indicate *very* pronounced introversion.

Shaw, if you'll recall, the bulk of my time spent socializing in college was sitting at a table with Steve and Dario discussing philosophy... it's true that that's human interaction, but the subject matter isn't exactly typical of extroversion. In my opinion, that's not as much of a form of social interaction. It's social, but not really, if you follow me. I guess I'm not being very clear here. "It's sort of social. Demented and sad, but social." *grin*

The exceptions were people like Anna, whom I visited a lot and actually *did* socialize with. There weren't too many of those. And being a writing tutor is *not* a social occasion, believe me.

I once did a little thought experiment a few years ago: If I woke up one morning, and every other human being on the face of the planet had vanished, how many people are there whom I would actually miss? I thought about that for about 45 minutes, and I came up with only three people, and even two of those were a little "iffy". That's not extroverted. :-)

Finally, as to the "blah blah" email, no, I don't remember that, and it's not in my email archives. Are you sure it was me? That doesn't sound like something I'd write... it sounds more like Stefan.

ANy kind of discussion is extroversion - yer being outgoing and talking to other people; it doesnt matter what you're talking about (from philosophy to the babe currently on the cover of playboy). Everyone visited Anna and her gang - she prob. was (and still is) one of the friendliest folks I've met.

" once did a little thought experiment a few years ago: If I woke up one morning, and every other human being on the face of the planet had vanished, how many people are there whom I would actually miss? I thought about that for about 45 minutes, and I came up with only three people, and even two of those were a little "iffy". That's not extroverted. :-)"

No man, that's an episode of the Twilight Zone with Burgess Meredith. Ever see it?

08/25/96 Parrish S. Knight Blah blah blah...

I'm trying to open the email but the new $!#@ system isn't letting me...

"I thought about that for about 45 minutes, and I came up with only three people, and even two of those were a little "iffy"."

That could be a function more of the kind of people you know -- whether they're appealing to you or not -- than your level of extroversion. It wouldn't take a serious introvert 45 minutes to think about it as most of us don't have all that many people to think about.

"ANy kind of discussion is extroversion - yer being outgoing and talking to other people; it doesnt matter what you're talking about (from philosophy to the babe currently on the cover of playboy)."

Yep, that's what I tend to think too. I've never heard of talking to other people being an introverted activity; it sounds rather contradictory to me.

I didn't say talking to other people was an *introverted* activity, just that there are different degrees of extroversion. Using that standard, Denise qualifies as more extroverted than I am because she has more friends online than I do; I'm sure she will find some way to reject *that* characterization right off the bat.

As to thinking about it for 45 minutes, two things: first, I was thinking about every single human being I had ever even met and known, however casually, throughout my entire life, and I was trying very hard to be thorough. That's the only reason it took so long.

I'd appreciate it if everyone would refrain from questioning my introversion, please. I find this line of discussion offensive; I don't like people questioning me when I tell them who and what I am. Thank you.

"Using that standard, Denise qualifies as more extroverted than I am because she has more friends online than I do; I'm sure she will find some way to reject *that* characterization right off the bat."

You'd have to define "friend" for me first, but I am pretty sure that you have more friends than I do. I know that you chat with more people than I do by a considerable margin, I believe you have more pen-pals...

"I find this line of discussion offensive..."

As you're offended by the suggestion that you're not an introvert, does this mean you feel that being an extrovert is bad?

No, what I find offensive is being questioned when I tell someone what I am, and the person insists that it must not be the case.

Good example: as you all know, I majored in philosophy. One of the philosophical positions that I ended up taking was "materialism", which is the doctrine that everything that exists is matter or energy (as opposed to, say, "dualism", which believes that, in addition to matter, there also exist things that are *not* made of matter). I told Laura about this once, and she frowned at me and said that there was "just no way" that I could possibly believe that matter was all that existed. That made me angry: explaining something about who I am, and having it be dismissed.

Similarly, when I say that I'm an introvert, I don't like being told that I'm actually an extrovert. I have nothing at all against extroverts. It's just that I don't happen to be one, and I resent it when someone suggests that I'm something that I'm not.

As to how many people I IM with, let's see... *counts quietly to himself*... I count four altogether, including Denise and Shaw, and the other two aren't much more than passing acquaintances (I chat with them perhaps once or twice a month, and it's typically along the lines of "how's the weather?").

Penpals... *counts quietly to himself again*... I count five (again, including Denise and Shaw), and again, the others are pretty much just passing acquaintances -- a letter once or twice a month, again, typically along the lines of "how's the weather?"

I also have two friends that I hang out with IRL from time to time. I see one of them about two or three times a year, for a few hours on each occasion. I usually see the other one once or twice a month, again, typically for a few hours, except that lately, he's been too busy with work, and it's been more like once every two months or so.

So no, I don't consider myself "extroverted", not by any stretch of the imagination.

"I'm so severely introverted that I qualify watching television (particularly drama) as a form of social contact because it involves listening to people speak."

I'm almost embarassed to admit it, but when I enjoy a television show, watching it feels like I've had a good visit with friends. Reading a good book is that way for me, too. Vicariously experiencing the lives of artificial people is enough social interaction to keep me "topped up" on socializing.

Characters in books, movies and television show that resonate with me feel much more like a family to me than my blood family ever did.

"Well, I would have to say extroverted. He had a group of friends that he talked with and such. Also, he was a writing tutor. To do that you had to, of course, deal with some really obnoxious people (like me, for example)."

I hope that you don't have to be extroverted to be a tutor because I'm planning on being a math tutor at ISU and I'm pretty far from extroverted. I'm also strongly considering working as a university professor (assuming I can make it all the way through a doctorate!) and I know that I've met professors who were good teachers but not at al extroverted so I'm hoping that I can fit in to the professorial lifestyle well.

"No man, that's an episode of the Twilight Zone with Burgess Meredith. Ever see it?"

That's my favorite Twilight Zone episode. It made me cry the first time I saw it. To get the one thing you've always wanted but could never have and then to have it snatched away before you can enjoy it. (And time enough to read everything ever written is a pretty great fantasy in my book. (pun intended.))

"As to how many people I IM with, let's see... *counts quietly to himself*"

I used to ICQ with two people but one of them hasn't messaged me in about a month so I don't know if I ICQ with her anymore. The other is my partner. We frequently have ICQ conversations across the room.

"I also have two friends that I hang out with IRL from time to time."

Right now I have one person I hang out with IRL and that's my partner. That will probably change when school starts, though. I'm planning on joining the Math/CS club, possibly a couple of other clubs (though one clashes with my class schedule and the other I'm iffy about) and finding out if there's a place on campus where I can expect a good chess game from time to time. Being a student again will increase my social life by an estimated 1000% :-)

"So no, I don't consider myself "extroverted", not by any stretch of the imagination."

You don't sound very extroverted to me (and never have.) There's a distinct difference between "introvert" and "hermit." :-) Besides, by the Jungian definition of introvert, you automatically classify by being INTP. (I'm INXP, by the way.) Plenty of INTPs have friends and socialize. They just don't have TONS of friends and their life tends to be more internal than external, even when surrounded by people.

> a place on campus where I can expect a good chess game

I'm a life member of the USCF myself, and was once a tournament player, although I haven't done a tournament in a long time. I'm rated Class C, although most "higher level" folks have told me that I actually play Expert strength. Not sure whether they're right or not, but I'd like to think I am. :-) They might be... I usually give Experts a good run for their money, and I have even beaten Masters (not very often, but it does happen).

If you'd be willing to accept a rather slow "time control", we could do a game thru email. *smiles happily*

If you're willing to accept a game with a "skilled beginner" with no official ranking, you're on.

I probably won't be much of a challenge for you. But I do enjoy the game, even when I'm losing. :-)

One thing I should've added to a post way way way long time ago is that I don't think there's such a thing as "intraverted" or "extraverted". There's just no such thing anymore for anything. This is what I always hated about Sociology - just some really outdated obscure adjectives to describe everything. That and I hated the Thorstein Veblin books my Sociology professor shoved down my throat.

Thus, being the case, I don't think Parrish is extraverted, intraverted, leftverted, rightverted, middleverted, etc.

I always looked at people as just that, people. No more, no less...

"...just some really outdated obscure adjectives to describe everything."

Only problem w/not using labels to describe people is that there is no way to have any idea of what can reasonably be expected of them. It can cause much larger problems for some people than you'd think. For example, if you know a person has autism, as I do, then you can be aware that I naturally communicate *very* differently from non-aut
e people -- I am unable to read body language, for one thing. So if we were hanging out together, you used the body lang. to show you were sad, and I didn't react' ii you knew about my brain type you'd realize it was because I didn't know you were sad, while if you *didn't* know about autism, you might think I was deliberately ignoring your sorrow. It's the difference between being upset by people that have no choice but to act very differently, and knowing they mean no harm -- and that in itself can be the difference between a good friendship and a feud!

All I'm saying, anyway, is that you can accept and like everyone without rejecting *appropriate* labeling-adjectives.
(I'm posting from my Clie in bed, so apologies if this comes out weird!)

"I always looked at people as just that, people. No more, no less..."

On the one hand, that's admirable because it implies that you have no racism, sexism, etc-ism. On the other hand, it implies a sort of one-size-fits-all theory that doesn't work when applied to the real world.

Different people have different needs, wants, desires, etc. To say that we're all just people is to insinuate that there are no differences among us.

Some people love rollercoasters. Other people are terrified by them and hate them. If we're all just people, then everyone should love rollercoasters or not love rollercoasters. There's a difference - are you a rollercoaster lover, a rollercoaster hater or rollercoaster indifferent? If you say "I'm just a person" then I don't know whether it's appropriate to give you a free coupon pack for King's Island or Six Flags.

I don't like parties. That's easily explained by the facts that I'm an introvert and an aspie. But if we refuse to label me and say that people are "just people" and I am in love with someone who adores parties, do I have to endure the suffering and go? If I'm "just people" and my partner loves parties, I must love them too because we're both "just people."

If I refuse to go to the party, I must be punishing him in some way or embarassed to be seen in public with him or something. Because I'm "just people" there is no reason to consider that I might have different needs.

I forget who said it, but there's a semi-famous quote about psycholinguistics that says that humans cannot understand a concept until they can name it. Even if we decided to name it "Sparrow hates parties" we've suddenly stepped out of the realm of "just people" because now my partner would be "people who love parties" and I would be "people who hate parties."

Just as there are people who love parties more than others who love parties or people who hate parties more than others hate parties, there are people who are more or less introverted or extroverted. People who love parties are not expected to also be people who love rollercoasters unless they say so. People can have one label and not automatically be just like everyone else with that label because there are other labels for other aspects of their being.

But if we remove all the labels and say that the only valid label is "just people" then we remove all those subtle shades of difference, too.

Excellent post... I'm going to archive a copy to remind myself of the best way to describe it to bit^H^H^H *cough* people that refuse to acknowledge...oh to hell with it, I'll just say "neuroprejudiced judgmental averagist morons" and have it out. (No, Shaw, not referring to you.)

"Excellent post"

Thanks. I didn't think I had a response to "just people" and went off to bed. When I woke up, the whole thing was just there in my head. I came here and saw that you'd already replied but figured I'd reply too, to get the words in my head to shut up. :-)

(Not trying to double-tackle you, Shaw. Like I said, I do highly respect the aspect of "just people" that suggests that you're not racist, sexist, ablist, etc.)