Home   |         NEW: (hypothetically starring) VIC REEVES as LUKE SKYWALKER .. in "Waiting for Godot, the hollywood version".

Perhaps some additional software on tvhobo, on the lines of something I had intended long ago and which this current software was intended to be {but over-estimated the intellectual and social mobility of the masses - where I'd imagined replying and rebutting and supporting my grid points would be a source of virality it turned out that nobody really wants to do those things, the virality was to be found, surprisingly, in the actual readership (and a little bit more, but I'll keep that to myself, because it is what some future growth of tvhobo certainly rests on)}.   Share:  
Thrust of argument: So this new software scheme is quite simple. Direction of resistance / implied resistance: Let's pretend that ignorant woman on the telly who was insulting Laura Pidcock over the 'leaked details' of the NHS sell-off and wanted mainly to talk to Laura about her, the annoying racist tv presenter's hatred of and mistrust of Russians, and Laura wanted to talk about evidence that the NHS is being financially gang-raped all the way to its death - let's pretend THAT ignorant woman (ie the one refusing to discuss the details of how the NHS is to be fucked and wanted to try and cast doubt on the 'race' of some source or other via which the information, one presumes from what she says, is alleged to have been acquired) agreed to prove that either she or I was right or wrong about a number of key issues, using proper rules of logic, reason, debate and science.

 

 

Enter your DOMAIN NAME to
collect this point:

 

Removal of resistance: She would brow beat me and be disdainful and ignore anything I said - the way most western people, particularly self-proclaimed 'elites' ('fake-elites' Pepe Escobar rightly calls them). It would be unproductive. As Chomsky said to Marr when Marr said "but Noamy Noamy - are you saying they're using mind control to make me obey them when I ask you the questions?" And Noamy says "all I'm saying is that if you were going to ask the right questions, you wouldn't have the job of asking the questions" (or words to that effect). These slackers, whether at school or on the telly, brow-beat you to 'win' the argument - they are children. Like the tories and others jeering in the commons as random MP in opposition benches raises some social issue. Jeering, because to them that's what adults do. On this topic, click through here as it is useful to pay attention to Mr Feynman's words in a television interview when summing up the problems at NASA which caused the Challenger disaster, in his opinion. The same situation - people like those petulant children refusing to conduct rational discourse prior to any sort of really-existing decision-making. Unification: So since I am more "technologically badass" than Zuckerberg, Gates, Jobs, the Google Twins or anyone else put together and times nine, other than many Koreans and so on (well, I may be able to master some areas rather better than 'the average' in 'our' society, but South Korea is far far far in advance of the west in terms of technological intelligence, that's clear. Israel seems to be western and ignorant, same with India, but other nations - well. There is clearly variation. And the west is on the dumb side. As are the west's "allies") - so since all that, to return to the opening part of this paragraph, the 'unfinished sentence' (only in writing - in speech that'd not be an 'error', not really, it's part of delivery - audience understands perfectly), an idea I had yonks ago would help totally obliterate (to use the NATO term) all such scum (to use the NATO term).

In short, viz and qua (don't know what that means, but Wodehouse is slowly drilling it into me like a Latin teacher) the bollocks such ignorant people spout this is how my software would work:

bollocks-spouter: here is the bollocks murdoch or the bbc or guardian or indy or channel 4 or whoever paid me to spout, i am a brainless pratt, and i spout for a living; bollocks bollocks bollocks;

me: that's bollocks

them: you swore. ha ha. what a liar. ignore him audience, he is breaking our community rules.

me: bollocks to you bollocks brain. okay, then. i will ask you 10 questions and we will both reply, if necessary back and forth until we agree one of us is wrong or we agree we disagree. with all disagreements we will then give everyone else here, say 20 people, the choice of who is right or wrong, and we will score the overall result. if we do it with software and worldwide audiences, potentially logged in, the scope is huge for how accurately i can prove EVERY TIME that you speak bollocks you bollocks-spouting ignorant ugly sour racist imperialist walking turd.

bollocks-spouter: that's not acceptable; you are rude; we sentence you to guantanamo bay, or at least treatment as though you were a genuinely convicted prisoner therein, convicted with real evidence (not sure that even happens there).

Alternative universe: bollocks-face has no choice but to face the fair grilling. Any question I place, I go to bollocks-face and all other news 'presenters' and 'writers' and just paraphrase their points in and give my readers both sides of all such 'debates', ie lay it out honestly, showing 'my side' and ALL the side of their side ALL of them spout in their bollocks media. My readers, the way the internet works, naturally vote, naturally select, naturally balance - and in the end we see, with clarity, how much utter bollocks the bollocks-face bollockses bollock on about like a bunch of bollocking-on bollocks-heads. Too much fucking bollocks, is my point. Wall to wall 'articulate' 'educated' (not necessarily the institutional way) bollocks merchants paid by society to produce millions of hours of entirely useless bollocks. Wasting their lives and our time.

Anyway, so this software, as the example shows, is the bollocks. Can I be bothered to write it? Not really. But I will. Give me some time, I'll sort it out. Originally the 'grid' itself was supposed to end up as something like that, but it took a different, also needed, route.

So while I'm cooking that up, what, you wonder (well you don't), are the bollocks-merchants planning next? Well, there is no wondering. It's always the same. More bollocks.
Rebut this point   Support this point   Edit this point

(TVhobo's estimated size of readership since 2013, mainly in the UK and USA, with Germany in third place:
over 200,000 readers across approximately 200 cities/towns

 

Copy/paste point into your work:

Type: Open statement

6 versions:

1. Server time: 20:36:25 on 4/12/2019
2. Server time: 20:36:48 on 4/12/2019
3. Server time: 20:37:41 on 4/12/2019
4. Server time: 20:39:47 on 4/12/2019
5. Server time: 20:42:12 on 4/12/2019
6. Server time: 0:20:39 on 5/12/2019

Related points:

References:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c_Yg8azAi0

 

 

previous point on the grid   |   next point on the grid

 

Click here to read about Shams Pirani, the editor and chief author on this grid - note, if you can actually prove anything written above wrong, I would gladly, if the proof is sufficient, correct what I've written and what I think - if I could, however, prove your attempted proof wrong, then I would accordingly say so and maintain whatever point of view is completely based on fact and proof.

Simple text version.

Perhaps some additional software on tvhobo, on the lines of something I had intended long ago and which this current software was intended to be {but over-estimated the intellectual and social mobility of the masses - where I'd imagined replying and rebutting and supporting my grid points would be a source of virality it turned out that nobody really wants to do those things, the virality was to be found, surprisingly, in the actual readership (and a little bit more, but I'll keep that to myself, because it is what some future growth of tvhobo certainly rests on)}.

So this new software scheme is quite simple.

Let's pretend that ignorant woman on the telly who was insulting Laura Pidcock over the 'leaked details' of the NHS sell-off and wanted mainly to talk to Laura about her, the annoying racist tv presenter's hatred of and mistrust of Russians, and Laura wanted to talk about evidence that the NHS is being financially gang-raped all the way to its death - let's pretend THAT ignorant woman (ie the one refusing to discuss the details of how the NHS is to be fucked and wanted to try and cast doubt on the 'race' of some source or other via which the information, one presumes from what she says, is alleged to have been acquired) agreed to prove that either she or I was right or wrong about a number of key issues, using proper rules of logic, reason, debate and science.

She would brow beat me and be disdainful and ignore anything I said - the way most western people, particularly self-proclaimed 'elites' ('fake-elites' Pepe Escobar rightly calls them). It would be unproductive. As Chomsky said to Marr when Marr said "but Noamy Noamy - are you saying they're using mind control to make me obey them when I ask you the questions?" And Noamy says "all I'm saying is that if you were going to ask the right questions, you wouldn't have the job of asking the questions" (or words to that effect). These slackers, whether at school or on the telly, brow-beat you to 'win' the argument - they are children. Like the tories and others jeering in the commons as random MP in opposition benches raises some social issue. Jeering, because to them that's what adults do. On this topic, click through here as it is useful to pay attention to Mr Feynman's words in a television interview when summing up the problems at NASA which caused the Challenger disaster, in his opinion. The same situation - people like those petulant children refusing to conduct rational discourse prior to any sort of really-existing decision-making.

So since I am more "technologically badass" than Zuckerberg, Gates, Jobs, the Google Twins or anyone else put together and times nine, other than many Koreans and so on (well, I may be able to master some areas rather better than 'the average' in 'our' society, but South Korea is far far far in advance of the west in terms of technological intelligence, that's clear. Israel seems to be western and ignorant, same with India, but other nations - well. There is clearly variation. And the west is on the dumb side. As are the west's "allies") - so since all that, to return to the opening part of this paragraph, the 'unfinished sentence' (only in writing - in speech that'd not be an 'error', not really, it's part of delivery - audience understands perfectly), an idea I had yonks ago would help totally obliterate (to use the NATO term) all such scum (to use the NATO term).

In short, viz and qua (don't know what that means, but Wodehouse is slowly drilling it into me like a Latin teacher) the bollocks such ignorant people spout this is how my software would work:

bollocks-spouter: here is the bollocks murdoch or the bbc or guardian or indy or channel 4 or whoever paid me to spout, i am a brainless pratt, and i spout for a living; bollocks bollocks bollocks;

me: that's bollocks

them: you swore. ha ha. what a liar. ignore him audience, he is breaking our community rules.

me: bollocks to you bollocks brain. okay, then. i will ask you 10 questions and we will both reply, if necessary back and forth until we agree one of us is wrong or we agree we disagree. with all disagreements we will then give everyone else here, say 20 people, the choice of who is right or wrong, and we will score the overall result. if we do it with software and worldwide audiences, potentially logged in, the scope is huge for how accurately i can prove EVERY TIME that you speak bollocks you bollocks-spouting ignorant ugly sour racist imperialist walking turd.

bollocks-spouter: that's not acceptable; you are rude; we sentence you to guantanamo bay, or at least treatment as though you were a genuinely convicted prisoner therein, convicted with real evidence (not sure that even happens there).

Alternative universe: bollocks-face has no choice but to face the fair grilling. Any question I place, I go to bollocks-face and all other news 'presenters' and 'writers' and just paraphrase their points in and give my readers both sides of all such 'debates', ie lay it out honestly, showing 'my side' and ALL the side of their side ALL of them spout in their bollocks media. My readers, the way the internet works, naturally vote, naturally select, naturally balance - and in the end we see, with clarity, how much utter bollocks the bollocks-face bollockses bollock on about like a bunch of bollocking-on bollocks-heads. Too much fucking bollocks, is my point. Wall to wall 'articulate' 'educated' (not necessarily the institutional way) bollocks merchants paid by society to produce millions of hours of entirely useless bollocks. Wasting their lives and our time.

Anyway, so this software, as the example shows, is the bollocks. Can I be bothered to write it? Not really. But I will. Give me some time, I'll sort it out. Originally the 'grid' itself was supposed to end up as something like that, but it took a different, also needed, route.

So while I'm cooking that up, what, you wonder (well you don't), are the bollocks-merchants planning next? Well, there is no wondering. It's always the same. More bollocks.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c_Yg8azAi0