On Thu, 16 Jun 2022 18:28:04 -0400, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid>
wrote:

>On 6/16/2022 5:08 PM, luke@invalid.com wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Jun 2022 16:54:02 -0400, "Mayayana"
>> <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>>
>>> <luke@invalid.com> wrote
>>>
>>> | That's why I said to hell with the whole "Security" thing. I don't
>>> | expect hardly anyone to go to the Toolwiz page -
>>> | http://www.toolwiz.com/lead/toolwiz_time_freeze/
>>> |
>>>
>>> That's a clunky method for dummies. Like system restore.
>>> It uses a lot of space and processing power. Meanwhile,
>>> there's no security. You've only got data backup. If you've
>>> got malware stealing your credit card info online you'll never
>>> know.
>>>
>>
>> That's a bunch of deceitful half truths I won't even bother
>> answering.
>>
>
>A review from 2012.
>
>https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/toolwiz-time-freeze.4045005/
>
> "I would recommend having a good image of your system before trying this
> program out as I will likely reload it in a bit...after some more testing
> of this program. I can't recommended it at this point however."
>
>https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/toolwiz-time-freeze.313299/page-30
>
> Aug 21, 2021
>
> "Toowiz TimeFreeze and Shadow Defender is a No , Don't do it ..use 1 or the other not both.. "
>
>I'm not finding reviews by sites like Tomshardware or the like for this.
>
> Paul

I just kinda browsed through the reviews. From what I saw, it seems
pretty much as I described in my post. However, it's not rocket
science to figure out if your machine was pre infected before Time
Freeze install, you're still stuck with that infection. That's not
Time Freeze's fault. The proper usage and protection provided by it
are clearly stated.

Even though I use the sandbox, I still *always* check a program
download file with Virus Total. Matter of fact, here is a Virus Total
page that works with my older 52.9.0 FFX browser.

https://www.virustotal.com/old-browsers/

Nobody, and nowhere, did anyone, including ToolWiz, claim a sandbox
was the ultimate cure for malware. However, if you do what you can
pre install to make sure your machine is clean, then Tool Freeze is
BETTER than all that "Security" crap combined. No more aggravating,
mostly false alerts, to keep bleeping up bugging you. Plus, it doesn't
need updating in order to protect against "new" malware. It simply
keeps the C: clean. Period.

I'm sure there are some ways around a sandbox, but it's rare to come
up against one. There are too many "AV/Firewall-Protected (?)
honeypots out there for the blackhats to f'k up. So far, too few
sandbox users to waste time on.

<luke@invalid.com> wrote

| > That's a clunky method for dummies. Like system restore.
| >It uses a lot of space and processing power. Meanwhile,
| >there's no security. You've only got data backup. If you've
| >got malware stealing your credit card info online you'll never
| >know.
| >
| | That's a bunch of deceitful half truths I won't even bother
| answering.

Emotional. It sounds like you own the company. Disk image
backup has been around for years. Backing up only changes
has also been around for years. I use disk image backup myself,
storing images of Windows with software installed. I also use
redundant disks for ongoing backup, and DVD backup. But
that's just backup. And your program is just an extreme of that,
blocking most file changes. I suppose a Linux boot OS would
also work that way. Clunky, but it will work.

Security is a different issue. It wouldn't make sense to trust
a program like TimeFreeze to block all malware when you're
nt making an effort to stop it getting onto your
machine in the first place. Beyond that there
are other issues. For example, if you willingly install a program
that's spyware and don't have a firewall program to block it,
your Freezer won't help. If you allow script in your browser,
TimeFreeze *might* prevent downloading ransomware, but it
won't help with your credit card number being stolen in transit
or from websites. There was a study just recently about how
what you type into forms could be read by numerous spy/ad
companies.

https://www.usenix.org/system/files/sec22fall_senol.pdf

Then there are issues like the person last week who stole
credit card data from Amazon in hopes of being a hero
whisteblower.

All of that is part of security. Personally, I think life is too short
to lock myself out of my own computer with clunky sandboxes in
order to stop malware, but it could be a partial help if you don't
mind the hassle...
Sorry to saddle you with so many interesting half-truths. But that's
what I was trying to say: Your approach might help but it's for people
who don't want to deal with the issue. It's like using uBlock Origin
extension for privacy. It's a lot better than nothing, but people use
it because they don't want any hassles, and they don't want to have to
understand all the details. They install uBO and then go to read their
gmail. That's not privacy.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2022 07:52:40 -0400, "Mayayana"
<mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:

><luke@invalid.com> wrote
>
>| > That's a clunky method for dummies. Like system restore.
>| >It uses a lot of space and processing power. Meanwhile,
>| >there's no security. You've only got data backup. If you've
>| >got malware stealing your credit card info online you'll never
>| >know.
>| >
>|
>| That's a bunch of deceitful half truths I won't even bother
>| answering.
>
> Emotional. It sounds like you own the company. Disk image
>backup has been around for years. Backing up only changes
>has also been around for years. I use disk image backup myself,
>storing images of Windows with software installed. I also use
>redundant disks for ongoing backup, and DVD backup. But
>that's just backup. And your program is just an extreme of that,
>blocking most file changes. I suppose a Linux boot OS would
>also work that way. Clunky, but it will work.

Emotional? Gee, is that like 'troll'? That's the usual label given
when a wannabe tekkie hasn't the social skills to communicate except
in one sided tekkie talk.

> Security is a different issue. It wouldn't make sense to trust
>a program like TimeFreeze to block all malware when you're
>nt making an effort to stop it getting onto your
>machine in the first place.

You're wrong again. Time Freeze *does* keep malware from getting into
the machine. Look it up again how a sandbox works.

>Beyond that there
>are other issues. For example, if you willingly install a program
>that's spyware and don't have a firewall program to block it,
>your Freezer won't help.

You are totally ignorant when it comes to sandboxes.

My wife hates any "rules" regarding security. She won't update AV's,
and she'd divorce me if I mentioned such stuff as firewalls and ports
to her. That's why I installed TrueWiz's Time Freeze on her machine a
couple of years back. She does what she wants on the Web. She has not
had a single problem from any malware or downloaded program in all
that time. Matter of a fact, another nice feature of a sandbox is
that you can install new programs and run them for a session to see
how they do. If you don't like them, reboot and they're gone. You
can also reinstall them over and over in the sandbox after each boot
to see if they really do last without finally conflicting with
something installed on the machine. It's SAFE to do that. And do
remember that I check every download with VirusTotal. My wife rarely
downloads stuff. She really doesn't know how. I do it for the rare
instance when she does want something. It's all just double
precaution.

> If you allow script in your browser,
>TimeFreeze *might* prevent downloading ransomware, but it
>won't help with your credit card number being stolen in transit
>or from websites.

Web sites being hacked isn't what Time Freeze is about. You keep
trying your deceitful argument of condemning Time Freeze because it
isn't All Things To All Men. That concept is what screwed up the
present day AVs and most other "Security" programs.

<There was a study just recently about how
>what you type into forms could be read by numerous spy/ad
>companies.
>
>https://www.usenix.org/system/files/sec22fall_senol.pdf

Are you flippin' serious? You think I'm reading all that crap? Who
cares? That ain't what Time Freeze is about. (More deceitful change
of subject matter, eh?)

>
> Then there are issues like the person last week who stole
>credit card data from Amazon in hopes of being a hero
>whisteblower.

Again - What in the heck does that have to do with Time Freeze? No
"security" crap on your machine is going to prevent all the nonsense
you're mentioning.

> All of that is part of security. Personally, I think life is too short
>to lock myself out of my own computer with clunky sandboxes in
>order to stop malware, but it could be a partial help if you don't
>mind the hassle...

Clunky sandbox? There is nothing "clunky" about Time Freeze. You
wouldn't even know it's there if you didn't look in the system tray
icon. (Another bit of deceit trying to match it up with those truly
"Clunky" AVs and All Things Under God "Security" programs?)

>Sorry to saddle you with so many interesting half-truths. But
>that's what I was trying to say: Your approach might help but
>it's for people who don't want to deal with the issue.

How is attending the problem with a sandbox 'not dealing with the
issue"? What issue? Every hackable *issue* under the sun? Ordinary
users like myself will leave the search for The Universal Hacking Cure
to wannabe tekkies like yourself.

>It's like using uBlock Origin extension for privacy. It's a lot
>better than nothing, but people use it because they don't want
>any hassles, and they don't want to have to understand all the
>details. They install uBO and then go to read their gmail.
>That's not privacy.

What in the hell does this uBlock thingy have to do with sandboxes?

Jeez! Why don't you empty your head of all extraneous garbage before
beginning a discourse on a subject?

Let us know when you do find the Universal Answer To All Things
Hackable.

<luke@invalid.com> wrote

| Web sites being hacked isn't what Time Freeze is about.

Exactly. That's all I'm saying. I'm not condemning sandboxes.
I'm just saying they're clunky, resource-hungry measures for
people who can't or won't understand security.

| >https://www.usenix.org/system/files/sec22fall_senol.pdf
| | Are you flippin' serious? You think I'm reading all that crap?

No, I actually don't. :) That's why you need TimeFreeze. But this
is a piblic forum, and for anyone concerned with privacy/security,
it may be a very interesting read.

luke,

> Time Freeze *does* keep malware from getting into
> the machine. Look it up again how a sandbox works.

Luke, if you have no clue what the difference between a sandbox and a
product like "Time Freeze" is you should really refrain from opening your
mouth. At all.

FYI, a sandbox tries to put a wall between the sand /in/ the box and the
world /outside/ it. As such *it shields* the OS, its connections with the
outside world and its attached hardware from being communicated with -
unless you configure otherwise.

A product like "Time Freeze" ? All it does is *restoring some files* when
you tell it to. And as mayayana tried to explain to you, in the mean time
any malware that gets loaded is free to do as it pleases.

And yes, that includes calling home with whatever tasty bits it can find on
your HDs, accessing your printers and other hardware, even zombifying your
machine to send massive loads of spam, DDOSing other machines and so on.

tl;dr:
You are suggesting Mayayana to read up on stuff ? I suggest you do that
yourself.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

On Fri, 17 Jun 2022 22:03:34 +0200, "R.Wieser" <address@not.available>
wrote:

>luke,
>
>> Time Freeze *does* keep malware from getting into
>> the machine. Look it up again how a sandbox works.
>
>Luke, if you have no clue what the difference between a sandbox and a
>product like "Time Freeze" is you should really refrain from opening your
>mouth. At all.
>
>Regards,
>Rudy Wieser
>

Keep playing with words, wannabe tekkies. The final fact is that Time
Freeze works. It works better and more easily than all your crappy
over-programmed AVs and all those other "Ultimate Security" proggies -
and the least knowledgeable of users can use it for damn near
"Ultimate Security" without knowing all that tekkie crapola you
wannabe tekkies pretend to know so well.

https://fixthephoto.com/best-free-sandbox-software.html

Top 7 Free Sandbox Software

Sandboxie - Open-source
Avast Internet Security - Built-in sandbox support
Malwarebytes - Anti-malware protection
Reboot Restore Rx - For public access PCs
Comodo Firewall - With integrated firewall
Time Freeze - With sandbox mode
Shade Sandbox - Integrates with security tools
========
https://www.techwhoop.com/sandbox-software/

Sandbox Software List Of 14 Best For Windows | 2022

Contents

1 Top 14 Freebox Sandbox Applications To Get In 2022
1.1 Turbo.net (Sandbox Software)
1.2 ToolWiz Time Freeze
1.3 Sandboxie
1.4 GeSWall
1.5 Shade Sandbox
1.6 BitBox (Sandbox Software)
1.7 R&S Browser
1.8 Windows Sandbox
1.9 Comodo Firewall (Sandbox Software)
1.10 Bufferzone
1.11 Shadow Defender In Sandbox Software
1.12 EvaLaze
1.13 Deep Freeze
1.14 Create your Virtual Machine In Sandbox Software
===========
https://www.maketecheasier.com/best-sandbox-applications-windows10/

6. Toolwiz Time Freeze

Toolwiz Time Freeze works very differently from the above sandbox
applications. When you install Toolwiz Time Freeze, it creates a
virtual copy of your entire system settings and files and saves the
state. After using the application you want to test, just reboot the
system, and it will be automatically restored. This type of
application is pretty useful when you want to thoroughly test a
program with no limitations but don’t want the program to make any
changes to the host operating system.
===========
https://sourceforge.net/software/sandbox/windows/

ToolWiz Time Freeze

ToolWiz
Create a virtual environment as a copy of the real system where allows
an unmodified operating system with all of its installed software to
run, keeping your actual system frozen and away from unwanted changes
and malicious threats. Nothing bad can happen to your PC while Toolwiz
Time Freeze is up and running. Run multiple operation systems
===========
https://sourceforge.net/software/product/ToolWiz-Time-Freeze/

About ToolWiz Time Freeze

Create a virtual environment as a copy of the real system where allows
an unmodified operating system with all of its installed software to
run, keeping your actual system frozen and away from unwanted changes
and malicious threats. Nothing bad can happen to your PC while Toolwiz
Time Freeze is up and running. Run multiple operation systems
(real&virtual systems) at the same time on the same PC without reboot
and easily switch between them to optimize your PC resources and
improve efficiency. Consolidate the management and utilization of your
system’s resources to help you build a more flexible and responsive IT
infrastructure. No matter what changes are made, no matter what
happens, a simple restart will return things to the way they were.
Modifications made to the settings can be undone, files downloaded
from the web can be removed, and other unwanted changes will all can
be undone when you restart your PC.
=======

This farce of a "discussion" is over.

On 6/17/2022 4:03 PM, R.Wieser wrote:
> luke,
>
>> Time Freeze *does* keep malware from getting into
>> the machine. Look it up again how a sandbox works.
>
> Luke, if you have no clue what the difference between a sandbox and a
> product like "Time Freeze" is you should really refrain from opening your
> mouth. At all.
>
>
> FYI, a sandbox tries to put a wall between the sand /in/ the box and the
> world /outside/ it. As such *it shields* the OS, its connections with the
> outside world and its attached hardware from being communicated with -
> unless you configure otherwise.
>
> A product like "Time Freeze" ? All it does is *restoring some files* when
> you tell it to. And as mayayana tried to explain to you, in the mean time
> any malware that gets loaded is free to do as it pleases.
>
> And yes, that includes calling home with whatever tasty bits it can find on
> your HDs, accessing your printers and other hardware, even zombifying your
> machine to send massive loads of spam, DDOSing other machines and so on.
>
> tl;dr:
> You are suggesting Mayayana to read up on stuff ? I suggest you do that
> yourself.
>
> Regards,
> Rudy Wieser

It seems to be an overlay file system, and these may be
referred to as "Internet Cafe" software or "Public Library"
software, such as the version my library uses.

As far as I know, they're not necessarily bulletproof,
because library computers do occasionally need to be
nuked and paved. And I'm sure our two librarians at
the local branch have had to do these before. The library is
still using Core2 processors on their systems, and plain
old hard drives.

The library software restores to the pristine state, by
rebooting between customers. And somewhere in that
sequence, is when the overlay is dealt with.

Microsoft has a kind of overlay file system, for dealing
with 32GB eMMC tablets and making the storage stretch further.
Patches are not applied to the original image, and patches
are a delta on top of the original (something like a 4GB blob
in flash). It's not quite the same thing as Internet Cafe
software. Microsoft has used more than one scheme, as they
weren't happy with the overall storage performance (given
enough patches, it begins to get bloated).

Their current OS doesn't have a block diagram, showing all
the features in virtualization space. There is an actual
sandbox, with an ~2.6GB blob representing a pared down OS,
and a copy of that blob is what the sandbox uses when
you request such an operation. Since the blob is immutable,
the OS can make copies of it, and run more than one sandbox
at a time. I've never seen any practical articles on this
with details we could use. (Perhaps Win10 or Win11 Pro has this,
I'm running Win11 Home at the moment, but have another disk
with Win11 Pro on it. It's not in the Home version Windows Features.
Neither is HyperV hosting.)

Paul

Paul,

> It seems to be an overlay file system, and these may be
> referred to as "Internet Cafe" software or "Public Library"
> software, such as the version my library uses.

AFAIK its early demographic was shared computers at schools. In its
earlier days (on DOS) it often came with/needed some add-on cards (between
the 'puter and its HD) to be effective.

> As far as I know, they're not necessarily bulletproof,
> because library computers do occasionally need to be
> nuked and paved.

Indeed. Its just that "Trime Freeze" and its ilk where (normally) quite a
bit faster than a full restore (done automatically in the evenings or
weekends), especially when done over a (slowish) LAN while patrons where
using it.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Luke,

> Keep playing with words, wannabe tekkies.

Just keep throwing words, noob.

That you do not start out with knowing everything (are a novice) is a fact
of life. That you activily reject information when its offered to you makes
you a willfully ignorant person (a noob).

> The final fact is that Time Freeze works.

So does using a hammer to drive a screw into some wood, or using a
screwdriver to get a nail outof the same. Neither is a good idea, and for
both there are more apropriate and effective tools available.

> Time Freeze - With sandbox mode

As far as I'm concerned "Time Freeze" does not belong in that list at all,
as its not a sandbox at all.

The below quote is from the ToolWiz site itself :

"Turnning on the Time Freeze mode, the whole system is running in the
"sandbox".

Which is exactly what I've been telling you, and why the "sandbox" mode of
that product is a lie. Nothing is kept inside. IOW, a bit or marketing
spin, aimed at the unweary (you).

As for those links ? The first link spews gibberish :

"Verdict: With the new sandboxing feature, Time Freeze will not be able to
do its malicious objectives because of the limitations that will be placed
on it. With the virtualization technology, Time Freeze cannot sandbox itself
and this means it cannot run any harmful programs on your computer."

'Time Freeze' has got "malicious objectives" ? "it (Time Freeze) cannot
run any harmful programs" ? What the actual F*ck ?

All the others do not even mention actual sandboxing capabilities - Other
that it "works very differently". No sh*t sherlock!

Bottom line :
'Time Freeze' Doesn't *protect* you from malware - it just shorthens its
lifespan (1) - and it certainly doesn't protect others (2) when your
"sandbox" is infected.

(1) I wonder where you store the files that you want to keep ... On an USB
stick perhaps ? Which you no doubt (by accident?) also use when your
machine is /not/ in "Time Freeze" mode - as well as on other computers ?
Yeah, right ....

(2) Attacking your own routers is /much/ easier when done from the LAN side.
Same goes for attacking any other machine (computer or otherwise) on your
LAN. Besides not being stopped in any way from going out to the internet
ofcourse.

Kid, I'm sure that you think your solution works for you. But looking at
the links you provided and how you think that those support your stance
while they actually don't I don't think I will take your advice on the
subject.

> This farce of a "discussion" is over.

Looking at how you respond to any information not in line with your own
convictions I think I can say that there never was a discussion to begin
with (look up the word and what it actually means).

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

"R.Wieser" <address@not.available> wrote

|
| That you do not start out with knowing everything (are a novice) is a fact
| of life. That you activily reject information when its offered to you
makes
| you a willfully ignorant person (a noob).
|

If I have my facts straight, according to the noted linguist
and silly word expert, VanguardLH, a noob is someone lacking
experience, while a willfully ignorant person is referred to as
a "boob" in family-friendy newsgroups. (From the Middle
English "boobe", to act like a breast, originally derived from the
Latin "dipshit".)

Mayayana,

> If I have my facts straight, according to the noted linguist
> and silly word expert, VanguardLH, a noob is someone lacking
> experience,

Than I wonder than what he thinks a "novice" is ...

> while a willfully ignorant person is referred to as a "boob"
> in family-friendy newsgroups. (From the Middle English "boobe",
> to act like a breast, originally derived from the Latin
> "dipshit".)

I have no problem with calling anyone a "dipshit" (or similar), but I'm
quite sure that if I nowerdays call /anyone/ a "boob" (outside of england) I
would quite likely get angry PC-correct and gender anti-discrimination mobs
carrying pitchforks and tar on my trail, so I'll pass on that one. :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

"R.Wieser" <address@not.available> wrote

| Than I wonder than what he thinks a "novice" is ...
|

A novice is a noob, or newb, or newbie. Personally I dislike
those cutesy terms. That includes "proggy" for program.

| I have no problem with calling anyone a "dipshit" (or similar), but I'm
| quite sure that if I nowerdays call /anyone/ a "boob" (outside of england)
I | would quite likely get angry PC-correct and gender anti-discrimination
mobs
| carrying pitchforks and tar on my trail, so I'll pass on that one. :-)
|

I've never actually heard it from anyone other than V.
It never occurred to me that he might be British.
It's also a very archaic slang in the US. For example, the
cultural satire movie Boob Tube in the 70s. Boob Tube
referred to TV and the idea that it made people stupid.

This interesting link indicates entirely separate origins
for the two meanings of the word:

https://www.etymonline.com/word/boob

Mayayana,

> A novice is a noob, or newb, or newbie.

Ah, ofcourse. I must say that I find "novice" sound a bit friendlier
(though more detached) than even "newbie".

Though I understood from long ago that "noob" was rather derogatory, with
the meaning I described - a "novice" unwilling to learn. Having said that,
do you perhaps know of a current word for it ?

> Boob Tube referred to TV and the idea that it made people
> stupid.

I have heard that one a number of times, but never knew the origin of it.
At some point I assumed to be referring to the kids looking at it, keeping
them content - as happens to babies suckling their mothers tit.

> This interesting link indicates entirely separate origins
> for the two meanings of the word:
>
> https://www.etymonline.com/word/boob

Thanks for that. A short (as I like it) but interresting read.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

"R.Wieser" <address@not.available> wrote

|
| Though I understood from long ago that "noob" was rather derogatory, with
| the meaning I described - a "novice" unwilling to learn. Having said
that,
| do you perhaps know of a current word for it ?
|

Your English literacy is remarkable.

You want a word for a stubborn novice who doesn't
want to learn? I'm not sure there's a single word for that.
I guess there should be. Hardheaded. Pigheaded. But of
course those are adjectives. "Youth" comes close. :)
I notice that more as I get older. Young men need to prove
themselves to themselves. By their nature they often bristle
at assistance or advice ad feel a need to outdo oldtimers.

There's a famous quote from Mark Twain that goes something
like: "When I was 14 I couldn't believe what a fool my father was.
By the time I was 21, I was amazed how much the old man had
learned in just a few years."

(Remembering that 40 is the new 21.)

My own father used to have that taped to his refrigerator,
letting us know that he still resented his expertise not being
valued by his upstart offspring.... I guess "upstart" is a good
word, but it really refers to someone who has attained some
kind of power beyond their wisdom. Like the boss's son being
promoted to manager.

Mayayana,

> Your English literacy is remarkable.

Thank you. Having read book stories in the language (I ran out of
translated ones) might have had something to do with it.

> You want a word for a stubborn novice who doesn't want to learn? I'm not
> sure there's a single word for that. I guess there should be. Hardheaded.
> Pigheaded. But of > course those are adjectives. "Youth" comes close. :)

Although youth almost always go thru a period where they think they know
everything, my definition of the word is more about the "refuses to learn"
part (or perhaps just "refuses to listen"), which is ageless.

I'm frequenting a website ( https://notalwaysright.com/right ) which has a
lot of stories. Some of them are about higly-educated (quoted and unquoted)
persons having a problem with their computers malfunctioning in some way and
than demand the IT department to come an fix it.

And than the IT guy just switches on the "space heater" (the actual
computer), swapss the mis-layed keyboard or mouse with the computer next to
him, takes the book off of the "ESC" (or other) key, puts a new battery into
a wireless keyboard or mouse, etc. IOW, dumb stuff.

The worst story was about someone who moved his computer to the other side
of his cubicle for which he had to unplug a few cables (network among them)
and could not figure out why he couldn't log into his computer anymore - and
not having enough consciousness to retrace/reverse his steps to try to
locate the problem that way.

> There's a famous quote from Mark Twain that goes something
> like: "When I was 14 I couldn't believe what a fool my father was.
> By the time I was 21, I was amazed how much the old man had
> learned in just a few years."

:-) Doesn't his youthfull arrogance just explodes outof that saying ? Its
not him who changed, but his father.

> My own father used to have that taped to his refrigerator,
> letting us know that he still resented his expertise not
> being valued by his upstart offspring....

I wonder if he ever thought about the reverse happening as well ...

> I guess "upstart" is a good word, but it really refers to someone
> who has attained some kind of power beyond their wisdom.

I don't think that applies to our Luke here.

Well, with the absense of a new word for "a novice" refusing to learn" I
will probably just keep using the old one.

Hey, do you think that if I keep doing that long enough it will come back
into fashion ? :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

"R.Wieser" <address@not.available> wrote

| Well, with the absense of a new word for "a novice" refusing to learn" I
| will probably just keep using the old one.
| | Hey, do you think that if I keep doing that long enough it will come back
| into fashion ? :-)
|

I don't think it was ever in fashion, so I'm not
sure people will understand you. Threre is always
"know-it-all". Or my favorite: " A person with limited
self knowledge who believes that 'holding their own' in
an online discussion means flinging crude insults, being
mean, and generally disrespecting others."

There's a lot of that these days. It seems to be
loosely based on a theory that if you sink all other
ships, your own will end up floating the highest. That,
and a tendency to have tantrums easily. I attribute that
latter quality to mothers routinely letting their kids reject
the meal being served. The kids then learn that tantrums
are a good way to get more attention and to generally
improve experience. A tantrum will magically turn oatmeal
into cocoa puffs; brocolli into pizza. So the kids grow up
thinking that tantrums are an important life skill.

What are the mothers thinking? Beats me. They seem to
believe that their unfailing service to their little princes
and princesses demonstrates their dedication as mothers.

Mayayana,

> I don't think it was ever in fashion, so I'm not
> sure people will understand you.

In that case those will just think I'm using an alternate to "novice", which
isn't all that bad either. I don't think I will use "willfully ignorant"
to much ...

> There's a lot of that these days. It seems to be
> loosely based on a theory that if you sink all other
> ships, your own will end up floating the highest.

Translation : If someone gets all others to leave (by whatever means) than
he must have been the one that was right. Yeah, some people have a mental
defect that makes them use that kind of logic.

The odd thing is that I've met people like that who actually do come over as
intelligent enough to build a case for/against something (and from it have a
decent discussion) - but they don't, and I can't figure out why ...

> So the kids grow up thinking that tantrums are an important
> life skill.

They certainly learn that they can bend others to their will by acting outof
the ordinary that way. Not good.

> What are the mothers thinking? Beats me. They seem to
> believe that their unfailing service to their little princes
> and princesses demonstrates their dedication as mothers.

I'm assuming that you are talking about mothers who get sucked into that
behaviour(1), and not the ones who activily support it (2).

(1) its hard to determine when to start to say "no" to a bundle of innocence
that life starts out as. That, and the urge to placate a toddler which
does that - either in a false sense of not wanting him/her to suffer, or
just to end the theatrics because shopping-time runs out.

(2) The website I spoke of earlier also has that kind of stories.
Upto-and-including some woman dumping a stranger outof his *private*
wheelchair because her kid had sore feet (yeah, really) and the
store-provided wheelchairs where "not good enough".

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

More fun words:

Whippersnapper. Somewhat archaic, but it basically means
a wiseass young person. Disrespectful and always having a
comeback. I'm fond of "wiseacre", but that word
is not widely known in the modern dialect. It refers to someone
who talks a lot, with gravity, about nothing much. Like political
commentators on TV. Or self-appointed experts.

My thesaurus lists wiseacre under "ignoramus" and whippersnapper
under a subcategory of "infant".

"Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> on Mon, 20 Jun 2022 08:30:49
-0400 typed in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general the following:
>More fun words:
>
> Whippersnapper. Somewhat archaic, but it basically means
>a wiseass young person. Disrespectful and always having a
>comeback. I'm fond of "wiseacre", but that word
>is not widely known in the modern dialect. It refers to someone
>who talks a lot, with gravity, about nothing much. Like political
>commentators on TV. Or self-appointed experts.

"Walking Bicylopedia of Misinformation" was my grandfather's
expression.
>
> My thesaurus lists wiseacre under "ignoramus" and whippersnapper
>under a subcategory of "infant".
>
--
pyotr filipivich
This Week's Panel: Us & Them - Eliminating Them.
Next Month's Panel: Having eliminated the old Them(tm)
Selecting who insufficiently Woke(tm) as to serve as the new Them(tm)

"pyotr filipivich" <phamp@mindspring.com> wrote

| "Walking Bicylopedia of Misinformation" was my grandfather's
| expression.

I like that one.