On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html

Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
Apple's free rent in Rich's head.

PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
> On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
>
> Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
> Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
>
> PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.

I'm getting this when I click on the link:

Browser Blocked

We apologize, but your web browser is configured in such a way that it
is preventing this site from implementing required components that
protect your privacy and allow you to view and change your privacy
settings. This functionality is required for privacy legislation in your
region.

We recommend you use a different browser
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras forum at
https://groups.io/g/myolympus
https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
> Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
>> On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
>>
>> Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
>> Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
>>
>> PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
>
> I'm getting this when I click on the link:
>
>  Browser Blocked

No issue here.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne wrote:
>> On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
>>> Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
>>>> On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
>>>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
>>>>
>>>> Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
>>>> Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
>>>>
>>>> PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
>>>
>>> I'm getting this when I click on the link:
>>>
>>> Browser Blocked
>> No issue here.
>> --
>> “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
>> - John Maynard Keynes.
>
> There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network) lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access stories, that kind of thing. That's with Opera anyway.

CNN has free rent in your head too?

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

On 19/01/2024 2:23 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
>> On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne wrote:
>>> On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
>>>> Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
>>>>> On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
>>>>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
>>>>> Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
>>>>>
>>>>> PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
>>>>
>>>> I'm getting this when I click on the link:
>>>>
>>>>   Browser Blocked
>>> No issue here.
>>> --
>>> “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
>>> - John Maynard Keynes.
>>
>> There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network)
>> lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access
>> stories, that kind of thing.  That's with Opera anyway.
>
> CNN has free rent in your head too?
>

It seems even Rich has a predelection for objective news like CNN or
BBC, rather than the tragi-comedy that is Faux News.

geoff

On Jan 18, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<3HSdnWPE5rKoPjT4nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com>):

> On 19/01/2024 2:23 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> > On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne wrote:
> > > > On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
> > > > > Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
> > > > > > On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
> > > > > > > https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
> > > > > > Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm getting this when I click on the link:
> > > > >
> > > > > Browser Blocked
> > > > No issue here.
> > > > --
> > > > “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
> > > > - John Maynard Keynes.
> > >
> > > There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network)
> > > lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access
> > > stories, that kind of thing. That's with Opera anyway.
> >
> > CNN has free rent in your head too?
>
> objective news like CNN or
> BBC,
>
> Geoff

Hilarious. I always appreciate a sense of humor.

On 2024-01-18 17:16, geoff wrote:
> On 19/01/2024 2:23 am, Alan Browne wrote:
>> On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>> On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
>>>>> Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
>>>>>> On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
>>>>>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
>>>>>> Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm getting this when I click on the link:
>>>>>
>>>>>   Browser Blocked
>>>> No issue here.
>>>> --
>>>> “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
>>>> - John Maynard Keynes.
>>>
>>> There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network)
>>> lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access
>>> stories, that kind of thing.  That's with Opera anyway.
>>
>> CNN has free rent in your head too?
>>
>
> It seems even Rich has a predelection for objective news like CNN or
> BBC, rather than the tragi-comedy that is Faux News.

Other than you misspelling predilection, you seem to have gotten the
sense backwards as well...

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

On 20/01/2024 4:16 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2024-01-18 17:16, geoff wrote:
>> On 19/01/2024 2:23 am, Alan Browne wrote:
>>> On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
>>>>>> Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
>>>>>>> On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
>>>>>>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
>>>>>>> Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm getting this when I click on the link:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Browser Blocked
>>>>> No issue here.
>>>>> --
>>>>> “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
>>>>> - John Maynard Keynes.
>>>>
>>>> There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network)
>>>> lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access
>>>> stories, that kind of thing.  That's with Opera anyway.
>>>
>>> CNN has free rent in your head too?
>>>
>>
>> It seems even Rich has a predelection for objective news like CNN or
>> BBC, rather than the tragi-comedy that is Faux News.
>
> Other than you misspelling predilection, you seem to have gotten the
> sense backwards as well...

Come on - you come from a nation that can't even spell humour right.

You don't think that the style and content of most of Fox News, its
presenters, its columnists, and 'journalists', is not dissimilar to a
tragi-comedy ?

And you don't think the Beeb, CNN, ABC, etc are hugely more objective ?

The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.

geoff

On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<unydnVA2UPgMTzH4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>):

> On 20/01/2024 4:16 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> > On 2024-01-18 17:16, geoff wrote:
> > > On 19/01/2024 2:23 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> > > > On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne wrote:
> > > > > > On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
> > > > > > > Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
> > > > > > > > On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
> > > > > > > > > https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
> > > > > > > > Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm getting this when I click on the link:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Browser Blocked
> > > > > > No issue here.
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
> > > > > > - John Maynard Keynes.
> > > > >
> > > > > There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network)
> > > > > lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access
> > > > > stories, that kind of thing. That's with Opera anyway.
> > > >
> > > > CNN has free rent in your head too?
> > >
> > > It seems even Rich has a predelection for objective news like CNN or
> > > BBC, rather than the tragi-comedy that is Faux News.
> >
> > Other than you misspelling predilection, you seem to have gotten the
> > sense backwards as well...
>
> Come on - you come from a nation that can't even spell humour right.
>
> You don't think that the style and content of most of Fox News, its
> presenters, its columnists, and 'journalists', is not dissimilar to a
> tragi-comedy ?
>
> And you don't think the Beeb, CNN, ABC, etc are hugely more objective ?
>
> The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
> petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.
>
> Geoff
And you don’t seem bright enough to see the difference among “Fox
News”, Fox “news”, and Fox “commentary”. Not at all surprising for
a liberal. You also clearly are not bright enough to understand that there
isn’t a single “objective” source of news anywhere, which makes
“hugely more objective" a bit meaningless. Please explain how your
perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at all.

On 2024-01-21 03:15, geoff wrote:
> On 20/01/2024 4:16 am, Alan Browne wrote:
>> On 2024-01-18 17:16, geoff wrote:
>>> On 19/01/2024 2:23 am, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>> On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
>>>>>>> Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
>>>>>>>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
>>>>>>>> Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm getting this when I click on the link:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   Browser Blocked
>>>>>> No issue here.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
>>>>>> - John Maynard Keynes.
>>>>>
>>>>> There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network)
>>>>> lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access
>>>>> stories, that kind of thing.  That's with Opera anyway.
>>>>
>>>> CNN has free rent in your head too?
>>>>
>>>
>>> It seems even Rich has a predelection for objective news like CNN or
>>> BBC, rather than the tragi-comedy that is Faux News.
>>
>> Other than you misspelling predilection, you seem to have gotten the
>> sense backwards as well...
>
> Come on - you come from a nation that can't even spell humour right.

In Canada we generally spell it humour, but American media influence is
eroding that. OTOH, we're slowly infecting them with the metric system.

But you get points for flying objects.

>
> You don't think that the style and content of most of Fox News, its
> presenters, its columnists, and 'journalists', is not dissimilar to a
> tragi-comedy ?

I've seen the "real news" side of Fox correctly presented and fairly
centrist. (However, they do pick their stories...).

Since Fox is not a broadcast network (it is "cable") it is not beholden
to the standards of broadcast journalism. They tend to skip that whole
fact checking burden...

Their "hosted content" is of course right wing babble.

> And you don't think the Beeb, CNN, ABC, etc are hugely more objective ?

I'd put the BBC as more objective than many. CNN to the left a little;
ABC, CBS, NBC - centre left, etc.

There is a site called Ground News that weigh stories according to
presentation by various sources - so they will indicate if it is left or
right leaning and how much. Subscription service alas.

>
> The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
> petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.

Americans are extremely polarized these days to the point that when Fox
actually tells it like it is the "network" gets threatening calls and
letters.

You may recall the Clinton (SecState) era Uranium One debacle. This
was a favourite issue to criticize Clinton. Shep Smith (a host on Fox)
clarified the whole thing which exonerated Clinton from any impropriety.
This angered the "right". But took the issue off of the table (even
Trump shut up about it.

He "left" Fox soon after ...

A summary vid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8G1z6Rh2N4M (2:04).

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

On 2024-01-21 11:59, Bill W wrote:
> On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote

>> The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
>> petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.
>>
>> Geoff
> And you don’t seem bright enough to see the difference among “Fox
> News”, Fox “news”, and Fox “commentary”. Not at all surprising for

Even its most "neutral" news (real news) leans right. While more
accurate and factual (and not extrapolating nonsense as its "hosts" tend
to do on their programs), Fox real news is right leaning, often by omission.

> a liberal. You also clearly are not bright enough to understand that there
> isn’t a single “objective” source of news anywhere, which makes
> “hugely more objective" a bit meaningless. Please explain how your
> perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at all.

Painting one as a liberal is a pretty weak argument.

I'm conservative, but I certainly would never vote for most GOPers -
they are not conservative at all - they just want low taxes and for the
government to spend money on what concerns them and not what concerns
others.

(Rightwing Americans would probably paint me as "liberal" too, but such
terms have been abused so much that they've lost real meaning).

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

On Jan 21, 2024, Alan Browne wrote
(in article <docrN.240106$c3Ea.106331@fx10.iad>):

> On 2024-01-21 11:59, Bill W wrote:
> > On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
>
> > > The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
> > > petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.
> > >
> > > Geoff
> > And you don’t seem bright enough to see the difference among “Fox
> > News”, Fox “news”, and Fox “commentary”. Not at all surprising for
>
> Even its most "neutral" news (real news) leans right. While more
> accurate and factual (and not extrapolating nonsense as its "hosts" tend
> to do on their programs), Fox real news is right leaning, often by omission.
>
> > a liberal. You also clearly are not bright enough to understand that there
> > isn’t a single “objective” source of news anywhere, which makes
> > “hugely more objective" a bit meaningless. Please explain how your
> > perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at all.
>
> Painting one as a liberal is a pretty weak argument.

It’s not intended as an argument. It was intended only as bashing an
arrogant liberal (redundancy) who has been taking shots at conservatives for
as long as I can remember. I always ignored it to avoid contributing to the
infestation of politics on this group. But this group, like pretty much all
of usenet, is near death now, so what the hell.

> I'm conservative, but I certainly would never vote for most GOPers -
> they are not conservative at all - they just want low taxes and for the
> government to spend money on what concerns them and not what concerns
> others.
>
> (Rightwing Americans would probably paint me as "liberal" too, but such
> terms have been abused so much that they've lost real meaning).

I can respect liberals, just not asshole liberals. Same with conservatives.

On 2024-01-21 13:09, Bill W wrote:

> arrogant liberal (redundancy)
Proving my point. Not worth discussing with you.

Less so in this group.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

On 22/01/2024 5:59 am, Bill W wrote:
> On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
> (in article<unydnVA2UPgMTzH4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>):
>
>> On 20/01/2024 4:16 am, Alan Browne wrote:
>>> On 2024-01-18 17:16, geoff wrote:
>>>> On 19/01/2024 2:23 am, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
>>>>>> On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
>>>>>>>>> Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm getting this when I click on the link:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Browser Blocked
>>>>>>> No issue here.
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
>>>>>>> - John Maynard Keynes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network)
>>>>>> lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access
>>>>>> stories, that kind of thing. That's with Opera anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>> CNN has free rent in your head too?
>>>>
>>>> It seems even Rich has a predelection for objective news like CNN or
>>>> BBC, rather than the tragi-comedy that is Faux News.
>>>
>>> Other than you misspelling predilection, you seem to have gotten the
>>> sense backwards as well...
>>
>> Come on - you come from a nation that can't even spell humour right.
>>
>> You don't think that the style and content of most of Fox News, its
>> presenters, its columnists, and 'journalists', is not dissimilar to a
>> tragi-comedy ?
>>
>> And you don't think the Beeb, CNN, ABC, etc are hugely more objective ?
>>
>> The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
>> petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.
>>
>> Geoff
> And you don’t seem bright enough to see the difference among “Fox
> News”, Fox “news”, and Fox “commentary”. Not at all surprising for
> a liberal. You also clearly are not bright enough to understand that there
> isn’t a single “objective” source of news anywhere, which makes
> “hugely more objective" a bit meaningless.

Clearly I am wrong in imagining that some sources can be more or less
objective than others.

Please explain how your
> perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at all.
>

What is real versus bullshit. May not matter to you. Essential for the
likes of Trump and Putin.

Every aspect of Fox, even the weather, is perceived as somewhere between
bizarre and terrifying by much of the world.

geoff

On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<6cOdnQDuuZQsDDD4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com>):

> On 22/01/2024 5:59 am, Bill W wrote:
> > On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
> > (in article<unydnVA2UPgMTzH4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>):
> >
> > > On 20/01/2024 4:16 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> > > > On 2024-01-18 17:16, geoff wrote:
> > > > > On 19/01/2024 2:23 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> > > > > > On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
> > > > > > > > > > On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
> > > > > > > > > > Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'm getting this when I click on the link:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Browser Blocked
> > > > > > > > No issue here.
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain
> > > > > > > > solvent.”
> > > > > > > > - John Maynard Keynes.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network)
> > > > > > > lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access
> > > > > > > stories, that kind of thing. That's with Opera anyway.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > CNN has free rent in your head too?
> > > > >
> > > > > It seems even Rich has a predelection for objective news like CNN or
> > > > > BBC, rather than the tragi-comedy that is Faux News.
> > > >
> > > > Other than you misspelling predilection, you seem to have gotten the
> > > > sense backwards as well...
> > >
> > > Come on - you come from a nation that can't even spell humour right.
> > >
> > > You don't think that the style and content of most of Fox News, its
> > > presenters, its columnists, and 'journalists', is not dissimilar to a
> > > tragi-comedy ?
> > >
> > > And you don't think the Beeb, CNN, ABC, etc are hugely more objective ?
> > >
> > > The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
> > > petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.
> > >
> > > Geoff
> > And you don’t seem bright enough to see the difference among “Fox
> > News”, Fox “news”, and Fox “commentary”. Not at all surprising for
> > a liberal. You also clearly are not bright enough to understand that there
> > isn’t a single “objective” source of news anywhere, which makes
> > “hugely more objective" a bit meaningless.
>
> Clearly I am wrong in imagining that some sources can be more or less
> objective than others.

It’s not a matter of whether you’re right, what matters is whether it
makes any difference. If you can’t completely trust a source, then you
can’t really trust them, period. That’s why it’s important to have many
sources, and to have some concept of plausibility.

> Please explain how your
> > perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at all.
>
> What is real versus bullshit. May not matter to you. Essential for the
> likes of Trump and Putin.

And you decide what’s real, right? And you do it with 100% objectivity. I
have no doubt you do it with 100% certainty, like all arrogant liberals. You
just “know”.

> Every aspect of Fox, even the weather, is perceived as somewhere between
> bizarre and terrifying by much of the world.

As is every aspect and trait of everyone on the left. There are two sides,
you know. Or should know.

On 22/01/2024 1:31 pm, Bill W wrote:
> On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
> (in article<6cOdnQDuuZQsDDD4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com>):
>
>> On 22/01/2024 5:59 am, Bill W wrote:
>>> On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
>>> (in article<unydnVA2UPgMTzH4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>):
>>>
>>>> On 20/01/2024 4:16 am, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-01-18 17:16, geoff wrote:
>>>>>> On 19/01/2024 2:23 am, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
>>>>>>>>>>> Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm getting this when I click on the link:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Browser Blocked
>>>>>>>>> No issue here.
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain
>>>>>>>>> solvent.”
>>>>>>>>> - John Maynard Keynes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network)
>>>>>>>> lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access
>>>>>>>> stories, that kind of thing. That's with Opera anyway.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> CNN has free rent in your head too?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems even Rich has a predelection for objective news like CNN or
>>>>>> BBC, rather than the tragi-comedy that is Faux News.
>>>>>
>>>>> Other than you misspelling predilection, you seem to have gotten the
>>>>> sense backwards as well...
>>>>
>>>> Come on - you come from a nation that can't even spell humour right.
>>>>
>>>> You don't think that the style and content of most of Fox News, its
>>>> presenters, its columnists, and 'journalists', is not dissimilar to a
>>>> tragi-comedy ?
>>>>
>>>> And you don't think the Beeb, CNN, ABC, etc are hugely more objective ?
>>>>
>>>> The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
>>>> petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.
>>>>
>>>> Geoff
>>> And you don’t seem bright enough to see the difference among “Fox
>>> News”, Fox “news”, and Fox “commentary”. Not at all surprising for
>>> a liberal. You also clearly are not bright enough to understand that there
>>> isn’t a single “objective” source of news anywhere, which makes
>>> “hugely more objective" a bit meaningless.
>>
>> Clearly I am wrong in imagining that some sources can be more or less
>> objective than others.
>
> It’s not a matter of whether you’re right, what matters is whether it
> makes any difference. If you can’t completely trust a source, then you
> can’t really trust them, period. That’s why it’s important to have many
> sources, and to have some concept of plausibility.
>
>> Please explain how your
>>> perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at all.
>>
>> What is real versus bullshit. May not matter to you. Essential for the
>> likes of Trump and Putin.
>
> And you decide what’s real, right? And you do it with 100% objectivity. I
> have no doubt you do it with 100% certainty, like all arrogant liberals. You
> just “know”.

I certainly feel able to differentiate better than some who have an
agenda based on privilege, greed, and hate.

>
>> Every aspect of Fox, even the weather, is perceived as somewhere between
>> bizarre and terrifying by much of the world.
>
> As is every aspect and trait of everyone on the left. There are two sides,
> you know. Or should know.

My car is blue. Are there two sides to that ?

Trump is most would consider a vile person. There could be two sides to
that argued, but one is demonstrably false.

geoff

On Tuesday 23 January 2024 at 01:14:14 UTC, geoff wrote:
> On 22/01/2024 1:31 pm, Bill W wrote:
> > On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
> > (in article<6cOdnQDuuZQsDDD4...@giganews.com>):
> >
> >> On 22/01/2024 5:59 am, Bill W wrote:
> >>> On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
> >>> (in article<unydnVA2UPgMTzH4...@giganews.com>):
> >>>
> >>>> On 20/01/2024 4:16 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> >>>>> On 2024-01-18 17:16, geoff wrote:
> >>>>>> On 19/01/2024 2:23 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
> >>>>>>>>>>> Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I'm getting this when I click on the link:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Browser Blocked
> >>>>>>>>> No issue here.
> >>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>> “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain
> >>>>>>>>> solvent.”
> >>>>>>>>> - John Maynard Keynes.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network)
> >>>>>>>> lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access
> >>>>>>>> stories, that kind of thing. That's with Opera anyway.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> CNN has free rent in your head too?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It seems even Rich has a predelection for objective news like CNN or
> >>>>>> BBC, rather than the tragi-comedy that is Faux News.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Other than you misspelling predilection, you seem to have gotten the
> >>>>> sense backwards as well...
> >>>>
> >>>> Come on - you come from a nation that can't even spell humour right.
> >>>>
> >>>> You don't think that the style and content of most of Fox News, its
> >>>> presenters, its columnists, and 'journalists', is not dissimilar to a
> >>>> tragi-comedy ?
> >>>>
> >>>> And you don't think the Beeb, CNN, ABC, etc are hugely more objective ?
> >>>>
> >>>> The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
> >>>> petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.
> >>>>
> >>>> Geoff
> >>> And you don’t seem bright enough to see the difference among “Fox
> >>> News”, Fox “news”, and Fox “commentary”. Not at all surprising for
> >>> a liberal. You also clearly are not bright enough to understand that there
> >>> isn’t a single “objective” source of news anywhere, which makes
> >>> “hugely more objective" a bit meaningless.
> >>
> >> Clearly I am wrong in imagining that some sources can be more or less
> >> objective than others.
> >
> > It’s not a matter of whether you’re right, what matters is whether it
> > makes any difference. If you can’t completely trust a source, then you
> > can’t really trust them, period. That’s why it’s important to have many
> > sources, and to have some concept of plausibility.
> >
> >> Please explain how your
> >>> perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at all.
> >>
> >> What is real versus bullshit. May not matter to you. Essential for the
> >> likes of Trump and Putin.
> >
> > And you decide what’s real, right? And you do it with 100% objectivity. I
> > have no doubt you do it with 100% certainty, like all arrogant liberals.. You
> > just “know”.
> I certainly feel able to differentiate better than some who have an
> agenda based on privilege, greed, and hate.
> >
> >> Every aspect of Fox, even the weather, is perceived as somewhere between
> >> bizarre and terrifying by much of the world.
> >
> > As is every aspect and trait of everyone on the left. There are two sides,
> > you know. Or should know.
> My car is blue. Are there two sides to that ?

I guess we're lucky as there is only one colour of blue.

Just like in photography there's black and white photography and colour photography :-D

>
> Trump is most would consider a vile person. There could be two sides to
> that argued, but one is demonstrably false.

Most side could be vile while the other is evil.

I aslo believe that most things have more than two sides. Unless you live in 2 dimentional space

>
> geoff

On Jan 22, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<LM6cnVQwcoRLjzL4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>):

> On 22/01/2024 1:31 pm, Bill W wrote:
> > On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
> > (in article<6cOdnQDuuZQsDDD4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com>):
> >
> > > On 22/01/2024 5:59 am, Bill W wrote:
> > > > On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
> > > > (in article<unydnVA2UPgMTzH4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>):
> > > >
> > > > > On 20/01/2024 4:16 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> > > > > > On 2024-01-18 17:16, geoff wrote:
> > > > > > > On 19/01/2024 2:23 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.htm
> > > > > > > > > > > > > l
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
> > > > > > > > > > > > Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I'm getting this when I click on the link:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Browser Blocked
> > > > > > > > > > No issue here.
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain
> > > > > > > > > > solvent.”
> > > > > > > > > > - John Maynard Keynes.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network)
> > > > > > > > > lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access
> > > > > > > > > stories, that kind of thing. That's with Opera anyway.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > CNN has free rent in your head too?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It seems even Rich has a predelection for objective news like CNN or
> > > > > > > BBC, rather than the tragi-comedy that is Faux News.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Other than you misspelling predilection, you seem to have gotten the
> > > > > > sense backwards as well...
> > > > >
> > > > > Come on - you come from a nation that can't even spell humour right.
> > > > >
> > > > > You don't think that the style and content of most of Fox News, its
> > > > > presenters, its columnists, and 'journalists', is not dissimilar to a
> > > > > tragi-comedy ?
> > > > >
> > > > > And you don't think the Beeb, CNN, ABC, etc are hugely more objective ?
> > > > >
> > > > > The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
> > > > > petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.
> > > > >
> > > > > Geoff
> > > > And you don’t seem bright enough to see the difference among “Fox
> > > > News”, Fox “news”, and Fox “commentary”. Not at all surprising
> > > > for
> > > > a liberal. You also clearly are not bright enough to understand that there
> > > > isn’t a single “objective” source of news anywhere, which makes
> > > > “hugely more objective" a bit meaningless.
> > >
> > > Clearly I am wrong in imagining that some sources can be more or less
> > > objective than others.
> >
> > It’s not a matter of whether you’re right, what matters is whether it
> > makes any difference. If you can’t completely trust a source, then you
> > can’t really trust them, period. That’s why it’s important to have
> > many
> > sources, and to have some concept of plausibility.
> >
> > > Please explain how your
> > > > perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at all.
> > >
> > > What is real versus bullshit. May not matter to you. Essential for the
> > > likes of Trump and Putin.
> >
> > And you decide what’s real, right? And you do it with 100% objectivity. I
> > have no doubt you do it with 100% certainty, like all arrogant liberals. You
> > just “know”.
>
> I certainly feel able to differentiate better than some who have an
> agenda based on privilege, greed, and hate.

Sure. Pretty much all of us “feel able to” do lots of very good things.
And we all tend to feel we do and think the “right’ things. All very
objective.

> > > Every aspect of Fox, even the weather, is perceived as somewhere between
> > > bizarre and terrifying by much of the world.
> >
> > As is every aspect and trait of everyone on the left. There are two sides,
> > you know. Or should know.
>
> My car is blue. Are there two sides to that ?

I consider you intelligent. That comment is objectively stupid.

> Trump is most would consider a vile person. There could be two sides to
> that argued, but one is demonstrably false.

Politicians tend to be quite vile, but many of them hide that under their
statesman-like posing. Objective people who make the effort to expose
themselves to varied sources are all aware of that. Your sources are clearly
limited. It’s a shame. You are clearly capable of learning, but choose not
to.

On 24/01/2024 6:42 am, Bill W wrote:
> On Jan 22, 2024, geoff wrote
> (in article<LM6cnVQwcoRLjzL4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>):
>
>> On 22/01/2024 1:31 pm, Bill W wrote:
>>> On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
>>> (in article<6cOdnQDuuZQsDDD4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com>):
>>>
>>>> On 22/01/2024 5:59 am, Bill W wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
>>>>> (in article<unydnVA2UPgMTzH4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>):
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 20/01/2024 4:16 am, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2024-01-18 17:16, geoff wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 19/01/2024 2:23 am, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.htm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> l
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm getting this when I click on the link:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Browser Blocked
>>>>>>>>>>> No issue here.
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain
>>>>>>>>>>> solvent.”
>>>>>>>>>>> - John Maynard Keynes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network)
>>>>>>>>>> lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access
>>>>>>>>>> stories, that kind of thing. That's with Opera anyway.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> CNN has free rent in your head too?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It seems even Rich has a predelection for objective news like CNN or
>>>>>>>> BBC, rather than the tragi-comedy that is Faux News.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Other than you misspelling predilection, you seem to have gotten the
>>>>>>> sense backwards as well...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Come on - you come from a nation that can't even spell humour right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You don't think that the style and content of most of Fox News, its
>>>>>> presenters, its columnists, and 'journalists', is not dissimilar to a
>>>>>> tragi-comedy ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And you don't think the Beeb, CNN, ABC, etc are hugely more objective ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
>>>>>> petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Geoff
>>>>> And you don’t seem bright enough to see the difference among “Fox
>>>>> News”, Fox “news”, and Fox “commentary”. Not at all surprising
>>>>> for
>>>>> a liberal. You also clearly are not bright enough to understand that there
>>>>> isn’t a single “objective” source of news anywhere, which makes
>>>>> “hugely more objective" a bit meaningless.
>>>>
>>>> Clearly I am wrong in imagining that some sources can be more or less
>>>> objective than others.
>>>
>>> It’s not a matter of whether you’re right, what matters is whether it
>>> makes any difference. If you can’t completely trust a source, then you
>>> can’t really trust them, period. That’s why it’s important to have
>>> many
>>> sources, and to have some concept of plausibility.
>>>
>>>> Please explain how your
>>>>> perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at all.
>>>>
>>>> What is real versus bullshit. May not matter to you. Essential for the
>>>> likes of Trump and Putin.
>>>
>>> And you decide what’s real, right? And you do it with 100% objectivity. I
>>> have no doubt you do it with 100% certainty, like all arrogant liberals. You
>>> just “know”.
>>
>> I certainly feel able to differentiate better than some who have an
>> agenda based on privilege, greed, and hate.
>
> Sure. Pretty much all of us “feel able to” do lots of very good things.
> And we all tend to feel we do and think the “right’ things. All very
> objective.
>
>>>> Every aspect of Fox, even the weather, is perceived as somewhere between
>>>> bizarre and terrifying by much of the world.
>>>
>>> As is every aspect and trait of everyone on the left. There are two sides,
>>> you know. Or should know.
>>
>> My car is blue. Are there two sides to that ?
>
> I consider you intelligent. That comment is objectively stupid.
>
>> Trump is most would consider a vile person. There could be two sides to
>> that argued, but one is demonstrably false.
>
> Politicians tend to be quite vile, but many of them hide that under their
> statesman-like posing. Objective people who make the effort to expose
> themselves to varied sources are all aware of that. Your sources are clearly
> limited. It’s a shame. You are clearly capable of learning, but choose not
> to.
>
>

I believe that my sources and opinions are based on a wider and more
varied gammut than yours, and/or you choose to only acknowledge what
suits your right-wing pred*i*lections.

geoff

On Jan 23, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<4PednU1bDcWgry34nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@giganews.com>):

> On 24/01/2024 6:42 am, Bill W wrote:
> > On Jan 22, 2024, geoff wrote
> > (in article<LM6cnVQwcoRLjzL4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>):
> >
> > > On 22/01/2024 1:31 pm, Bill W wrote:
> > > > On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
> > > > (in article<6cOdnQDuuZQsDDD4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com>):
> > > >
> > > > > On 22/01/2024 5:59 am, Bill W wrote:
> > > > > > On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
> > > > > > (in article<unydnVA2UPgMTzH4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 20/01/2024 4:16 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 2024-01-18 17:16, geoff wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On 19/01/2024 2:23 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.h
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tm
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > l
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm getting this when I click on the link:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Browser Blocked
> > > > > > > > > > > > No issue here.
> > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain
> > > > > > > > > > > > solvent.”
> > > > > > > > > > > > - John Maynard Keynes.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network)
> > > > > > > > > > > lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access
> > > > > > > > > > > stories, that kind of thing. That's with Opera anyway.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > CNN has free rent in your head too?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It seems even Rich has a predelection for objective news like CNN or
> > > > > > > > > BBC, rather than the tragi-comedy that is Faux News.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Other than you misspelling predilection, you seem to have gotten the
> > > > > > > > sense backwards as well...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Come on - you come from a nation that can't even spell humour right.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You don't think that the style and content of most of Fox News, its
> > > > > > > presenters, its columnists, and 'journalists', is not dissimilar to a
> > > > > > > tragi-comedy ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > And you don't think the Beeb, CNN, ABC, etc are hugely more objective ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
> > > > > > > petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > And you don’t seem bright enough to see the difference among “Fox
> > > > > > News”, Fox “news”, and Fox “commentary”. Not at all surprising
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > a liberal. You also clearly are not bright enough to understand that
> > > > > > there
> > > > > > isn’t a single “objective” source of news anywhere, which makes
> > > > > > “hugely more objective" a bit meaningless.
> > > > >
> > > > > Clearly I am wrong in imagining that some sources can be more or less
> > > > > objective than others.
> > > >
> > > > It’s not a matter of whether you’re right, what matters is whether it
> > > > makes any difference. If you can’t completely trust a source, then you
> > > > can’t really trust them, period. That’s why it’s important to have
> > > > many
> > > > sources, and to have some concept of plausibility.
> > > >
> > > > > Please explain how your
> > > > > > perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at
> > > > > > all.
> > > > >
> > > > > What is real versus bullshit. May not matter to you. Essential for the
> > > > > likes of Trump and Putin.
> > > >
> > > > And you decide what’s real, right? And you do it with 100% objectivity.
> > > > I
> > > > have no doubt you do it with 100% certainty, like all arrogant liberals.
> > > > You
> > > > just “know”.
> > >
> > > I certainly feel able to differentiate better than some who have an
> > > agenda based on privilege, greed, and hate.
> >
> > Sure. Pretty much all of us “feel able to” do lots of very good things.
> > And we all tend to feel we do and think the “right’ things. All very
> > objective.
> >
> > > > > Every aspect of Fox, even the weather, is perceived as somewhere between
> > > > > bizarre and terrifying by much of the world.
> > > >
> > > > As is every aspect and trait of everyone on the left. There are two sides,
> > > > you know. Or should know.
> > >
> > > My car is blue. Are there two sides to that ?
> >
> > I consider you intelligent. That comment is objectively stupid.
> >
> > > Trump is most would consider a vile person. There could be two sides to
> > > that argued, but one is demonstrably false.
> >
> > Politicians tend to be quite vile, but many of them hide that under their
> > statesman-like posing. Objective people who make the effort to expose
> > themselves to varied sources are all aware of that. Your sources are clearly
> > limited. It’s a shame. You are clearly capable of learning, but choose not
> > to.
>
> I believe that my sources and opinions are based on a wider and more
> varied gammut than yours, and/or you choose to only acknowledge what
> suits your right-wing pred*i*lections.
>
> Geoff
What have I said that is right-wing?

On 24/01/2024 12:03 pm, Bill W wrote:
> On Jan 23, 2024, geoff wrote
> (in article<4PednU1bDcWgry34nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@giganews.com>):
>
>> On 24/01/2024 6:42 am, Bill W wrote:
>>> On Jan 22, 2024, geoff wrote
>>> (in article<LM6cnVQwcoRLjzL4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>):
>>>
>>>> On 22/01/2024 1:31 pm, Bill W wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
>>>>> (in article<6cOdnQDuuZQsDDD4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com>):
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 22/01/2024 5:59 am, Bill W wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
>>>>>>> (in article<unydnVA2UPgMTzH4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 20/01/2024 4:16 am, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-01-18 17:16, geoff wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 19/01/2024 2:23 am, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index.h
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> l
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which is either an important photography issue or more evidence
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm getting this when I click on the link:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Browser Blocked
>>>>>>>>>>>>> No issue here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain
>>>>>>>>>>>>> solvent.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - John Maynard Keynes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network)
>>>>>>>>>>>> lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to access
>>>>>>>>>>>> stories, that kind of thing. That's with Opera anyway.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> CNN has free rent in your head too?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It seems even Rich has a predelection for objective news like CNN or
>>>>>>>>>> BBC, rather than the tragi-comedy that is Faux News.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Other than you misspelling predilection, you seem to have gotten the
>>>>>>>>> sense backwards as well...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Come on - you come from a nation that can't even spell humour right.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You don't think that the style and content of most of Fox News, its
>>>>>>>> presenters, its columnists, and 'journalists', is not dissimilar to a
>>>>>>>> tragi-comedy ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And you don't think the Beeb, CNN, ABC, etc are hugely more objective ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
>>>>>>>> petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Geoff
>>>>>>> And you don’t seem bright enough to see the difference among “Fox
>>>>>>> News”, Fox “news”, and Fox “commentary”. Not at all surprising
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> a liberal. You also clearly are not bright enough to understand that
>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>> isn’t a single “objective” source of news anywhere, which makes
>>>>>>> “hugely more objective" a bit meaningless.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Clearly I am wrong in imagining that some sources can be more or less
>>>>>> objective than others.
>>>>>
>>>>> It’s not a matter of whether you’re right, what matters is whether it
>>>>> makes any difference. If you can’t completely trust a source, then you
>>>>> can’t really trust them, period. That’s why it’s important to have
>>>>> many
>>>>> sources, and to have some concept of plausibility.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Please explain how your
>>>>>>> perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at
>>>>>>> all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is real versus bullshit. May not matter to you. Essential for the
>>>>>> likes of Trump and Putin.
>>>>>
>>>>> And you decide what’s real, right? And you do it with 100% objectivity.
>>>>> I
>>>>> have no doubt you do it with 100% certainty, like all arrogant liberals.
>>>>> You
>>>>> just “know”.
>>>>
>>>> I certainly feel able to differentiate better than some who have an
>>>> agenda based on privilege, greed, and hate.
>>>
>>> Sure. Pretty much all of us “feel able to” do lots of very good things.
>>> And we all tend to feel we do and think the “right’ things. All very
>>> objective.
>>>
>>>>>> Every aspect of Fox, even the weather, is perceived as somewhere between
>>>>>> bizarre and terrifying by much of the world.
>>>>>
>>>>> As is every aspect and trait of everyone on the left. There are two sides,
>>>>> you know. Or should know.
>>>>
>>>> My car is blue. Are there two sides to that ?
>>>
>>> I consider you intelligent. That comment is objectively stupid.
>>>
>>>> Trump is most would consider a vile person. There could be two sides to
>>>> that argued, but one is demonstrably false.
>>>
>>> Politicians tend to be quite vile, but many of them hide that under their
>>> statesman-like posing. Objective people who make the effort to expose
>>> themselves to varied sources are all aware of that. Your sources are clearly
>>> limited. It’s a shame. You are clearly capable of learning, but choose not
>>> to.
>>
>> I believe that my sources and opinions are based on a wider and more
>> varied gammut than yours, and/or you choose to only acknowledge what
>> suits your right-wing pred*i*lections.
>>
>> Geoff
> What have I said that is right-wing?
>

Labeling anything just one or two goose-steps to the left of (the likes
of) GOP attitudes as left-wing and arrogantly liberal gives some sort of
hint.

geoff

On Jan 24, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<QoCdnfld6IbNfiz4nZ2dnZfqn_SdnZ2d@giganews.com>):

> On 24/01/2024 12:03 pm, Bill W wrote:
> > On Jan 23, 2024, geoff wrote
> > (in article<4PednU1bDcWgry34nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@giganews.com>):
> >
> > > On 24/01/2024 6:42 am, Bill W wrote:
> > > > On Jan 22, 2024, geoff wrote
> > > > (in article<LM6cnVQwcoRLjzL4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>):
> > > >
> > > > > On 22/01/2024 1:31 pm, Bill W wrote:
> > > > > > On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
> > > > > > (in article<6cOdnQDuuZQsDDD4nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com>):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 22/01/2024 5:59 am, Bill W wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Jan 21, 2024, geoff wrote
> > > > > > > > (in article<unydnVA2UPgMTzH4nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>):
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 20/01/2024 4:16 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On 2024-01-18 17:16, geoff wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On 19/01/2024 2:23 am, Alan Browne wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 2024-01-17 19:26, Rich wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday 17 January 2024 at 09:44:03 UTC-5, Alan Browne
> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2024-01-16 12:34, Alfred Molon wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Am 16.01.2024 um 14:36 schrieb Alan Browne:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2024-01-15 23:58, Rich wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/15/tech/apple-watch-ban-fix/index
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .h
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tm
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > l
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which is either an important photography issue or more
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > evidence
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Apple's free rent in Rich's head.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > PS: the kerfuffle so far applies solely to the US.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm getting this when I click on the link:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Browser Blocked
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > No issue here.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > “Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > solvent.”
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > - John Maynard Keynes.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > There has been some weirdness with CNN (Communist News Network)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > lately, reporting of failed server responses when trying to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > access
> > > > > > > > > > > > > stories, that kind of thing. That's with Opera anyway.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > CNN has free rent in your head too?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > It seems even Rich has a predelection for objective news like CNN
> > > > > > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > > > BBC, rather than the tragi-comedy that is Faux News.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Other than you misspelling predilection, you seem to have gotten the
> > > > > > > > > > sense backwards as well...
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Come on - you come from a nation that can't even spell humour right.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > You don't think that the style and content of most of Fox News, its
> > > > > > > > > presenters, its columnists, and 'journalists', is not dissimilar to a
> > > > > > > > > tragi-comedy ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > And you don't think the Beeb, CNN, ABC, etc are hugely more
> > > > > > > > > objective ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The rest of the world laughs at Fox. Or is it 'cringes'? And is
> > > > > > > > > petrified because so many Americans don't recognise this.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Geoff
> > > > > > > > And you don’t seem bright enough to see the difference among “Fox
> > > > > > > > News”, Fox “news”, and Fox “commentary”. Not at all
> > > > > > > > surprising
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > a liberal. You also clearly are not bright enough to understand that
> > > > > > > > there
> > > > > > > > isn’t a single “objective” source of news anywhere, which makes
> > > > > > > > “hugely more objective" a bit meaningless.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Clearly I am wrong in imagining that some sources can be more or less
> > > > > > > objective than others.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It’s not a matter of whether you’re right, what matters is whether
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > makes any difference. If you can’t completely trust a source, then you
> > > > > > can’t really trust them, period. That’s why it’s important to have
> > > > > > many
> > > > > > sources, and to have some concept of plausibility.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please explain how your
> > > > > > > > perceived level of objectivity manifests itself, or why it matters at
> > > > > > > > all.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What is real versus bullshit. May not matter to you. Essential for the
> > > > > > > likes of Trump and Putin.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And you decide what’s real, right? And you do it with 100%
> > > > > > objectivity.
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > have no doubt you do it with 100% certainty, like all arrogant liberals.
> > > > > > You
> > > > > > just “know”.
> > > > >
> > > > > I certainly feel able to differentiate better than some who have an
> > > > > agenda based on privilege, greed, and hate.
> > > >
> > > > Sure. Pretty much all of us “feel able to” do lots of very good
> > > > things.
> > > > And we all tend to feel we do and think the “right’ things. All very
> > > > objective.
> > > >
> > > > > > > Every aspect of Fox, even the weather, is perceived as somewhere
> > > > > > > between
> > > > > > > bizarre and terrifying by much of the world.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As is every aspect and trait of everyone on the left. There are two
> > > > > > sides,
> > > > > > you know. Or should know.
> > > > >
> > > > > My car is blue. Are there two sides to that ?
> > > >
> > > > I consider you intelligent. That comment is objectively stupid.
> > > >
> > > > > Trump is most would consider a vile person. There could be two sides to
> > > > > that argued, but one is demonstrably false.
> > > >
> > > > Politicians tend to be quite vile, but many of them hide that under their
> > > > statesman-like posing. Objective people who make the effort to expose
> > > > themselves to varied sources are all aware of that. Your sources are
> > > > clearly
> > > > limited. It’s a shame. You are clearly capable of learning, but choose
> > > > not
> > > > to.
> > >
> > > I believe that my sources and opinions are based on a wider and more
> > > varied gammut than yours, and/or you choose to only acknowledge what
> > > suits your right-wing pred*i*lections.
> > >
> > > Geoff
> > What have I said that is right-wing?
>
> Labeling anything just one or two goose-steps to the left of (the likes
> of) GOP attitudes as left-wing and arrogantly liberal gives some sort of
> hint.
>
> Geoff

On 25/01/2024 5:33 pm, Bill W wrote:
> On Jan 24, 2024, geoff wrote

>>>> I believe that my sources and opinions are based on a wider and more
>>>> varied gammut than yours, and/or you choose to only acknowledge what
>>>> suits your right-wing pred*i*lections.
>>>>
>>>> Geoff
>>> What have I said that is right-wing?
>>
>> Labeling anything just one or two goose-steps to the left of (the likes
>> of) GOP attitudes as left-wing and arrogantly liberal gives some sort of
>> hint.
>>
>> Geoff
>
> So I assume it’s okay to call you left-wing?
>
>

As you like. If that means that I have a problem with inequality,
inequity, xenophobia, racism, misogyny, greed, etc - then OK.

But as the general perception of political and philosophical outlooks in
the USA tends to term as 'extreme left-wing' anything vaguely to the
left of the mainstream right-wing, whereas most of the world would
consider those commonly such described as 'centre', or slightly
left-of-centre' at the most, such labels are rather meaningless in that
context.

geoff

On Jan 25, 2024, geoff wrote
(in article<Nbicncklbfd_SS_4nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com>):

> On 25/01/2024 5:33 pm, Bill W wrote:
> > On Jan 24, 2024, geoff wrote
>
> > > > > I believe that my sources and opinions are based on a wider and more
> > > > > varied gammut than yours, and/or you choose to only acknowledge what
> > > > > suits your right-wing pred*i*lections.
> > > > >
> > > > > Geoff
> > > > What have I said that is right-wing?
> > >
> > > Labeling anything just one or two goose-steps to the left of (the likes
> > > of) GOP attitudes as left-wing and arrogantly liberal gives some sort of
> > > hint.
> > >
> > > Geoff
> >
> > So I assume it’s okay to call you left-wing?
>
> As you like. If that means that I have a problem with inequality,
> inequity, xenophobia, racism, misogyny, greed, etc - then OK.

If you have wondered why I keep using the term “arrogant liberal”, all
you need to do is read what you just wrote up there. All I can say is golly
gee, you are against bad things. In your mind that makes you special. You are
special. All liberals are special. You all know to say the right things, and
you never stop saying them. It is oh so important for everyone to know just
how good and smart y’all are. I’m convinced. But I do wonder if you’ve
ever asked yourself if conservatives might also be against bad things, or if
some liberals might actually not be against those things, and are all talk.

> But as the general perception of political and philosophical outlooks in
> the USA tends to term as 'extreme left-wing' anything vaguely to the
> left of the mainstream right-wing, whereas most of the world would
> consider those commonly such described as 'centre', or slightly
> left-of-centre' at the most, such labels are rather meaningless in that
> context.
I’m pretty sure you don’t know much of anything about the US of the real
world. I think of you as an MSNBC scholar.

On 2024-01-25 17:47, Bill W wrote:

>
> If you have wondered why I keep using the term “arrogant liberal”, all
(Bill: when you've dug yourself into a hole, CW holds the first thing to
do is: stop digging).

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.