Before I dispense with this nonsense over the "new" Google OS, which doesn't officially exist, which won't be "new" once it does, and which will barely be an OS once it's released, I'd like to point one thing out: how arrogant you have to be to run an advertising company that makes most of its money off of just one platform that is far from perfect or even "good enough" - search - that knows nothing about the world of operating systems and never will because their future operating system is being farmed out to no-cost Linux laborers, yet to still have the gall to act like you've been in the OS industry for years as you let the rest of us know that:

"We hear a lot from our users and their message is clear — computers need to get better. People want to get to their email instantly, without wasting time waiting for their computers to boot and browsers to start up. They want their computers to always run as fast as when they first bought them. They want their data to be accessible to them wherever they are and not have to worry about losing their computer or forgetting to back up files. Even more importantly, they don't want to spend hours configuring their computers to work with every new piece of hardware, or have to worry about constant software updates. And any time our users have a better computing experience, Google benefits as well by having happier users who are more likely to spend time on the Internet."

This is exactly the sort of message you'd expect to hear from Microsoft, not Google. Google's primary businesses are, in this order: advertising, search, and dabbling in a low-quality online email system who's spam filters (the only good thing about GMail, from what I hear, outside of your ability to sort email, is the spam filters) are at least somewhat courtesy of Postini.

It takes a special kind of in-your-face-ballsiness to claim your users (your ad platform, search, and email users? come on) are voluntarily contacting you with this much info about what they want in a future operating system - one type of software Google has never made. Isn't it more likely that Google is grasping at what people want through a more than occasional trip through mounds of stored-up data kept on every Google user on the planet and less likely they're being overloaded with email/phone calls/blog comments/whatever from angry users contacting them with computer complaints and operating system wish lists? Yet Google phrases this paragraph in a way that suggests everyone is practically begging them for such things. Puhhh-lease.

To dispense with the rest of this nonsense, as I promised to do in the first paragraph:

Hello, vaporware.

The operating system Google plans on releasing isn't ready yet. It may or may not exist yet as a complete, working OS, so please calm down. No one knows how much of it is done, and here in the real world (away from the Valley, NY's Alley, and a handful of smaller tech spots) no one cares. I don't care. My neighbor who doesn't even use the Internet doesn't care. The guy two doors down, who is crack-addicted to the Net, doesn't care, either (he uses IE like anything else is blasphemy). Neither does anyone I hang out with. I bet one or 2 people out of dozens on my LJ flist gives a crap. On and on it goes, millions of people around the world who simply don't give a damn, and never will, not even once it's out, infecting netbooks everywhere with ads (how else do you think Google will make money on this?).

It's not "their" operating system, it's not "new", and it's not a real OS.

It's just another version of open-source, free-as-in-speech-and-beer Linux, one designed specifically to run Chrome, the browser Google forgot to finish designing and forgot to not release before it was done. Google thinks they have something with Chrome because it's fast, even though market share is not playing into their delusion. It's fast because it doesn't do anything - except load web pages.

The OS Linux devs will make to run Chrome won't do much else but run Chrome. That can be a pain in the ass for any of you who plunk down say, $300 for your next netbook with the Google Chrome OS on it, only to realize you can't use anything except Google Apps and Google Gears on it, and that neither one of those app platforms will ever do much to satisfy your simpler offline needs. If you're anything like most people I know, you have to look up "Google Gears" and "Google Apps" in Google just to know what the hell I'm talking about. Even I don't know much about either platform, and I'm the only person I know who has any interest at all in these things.

Google dropped a nuclear yawn, and all over Microsoft's Redmond campus, people are LOLBBQing. Or they should be.

If Microsofties aren't chuckling out loud or at least softly under their breath at this "news" while repeating the words "Windows 7", "Midora", and "Gazelle" to remind each other that the Chrome OS isn't even important, much less the end of the world, they should be. This might be the most hilarious non-news to come out of Google in years and will benefit Microsoft immensely by giving them a willing audience now, way ahead of release dates, for competing products that are already well in the works.

So I went and got confused on The Fulcrum the other night and rather than explain exactly what had confused me (at the moment that I got confused I wasn't sure which part of the latest tutorial there confused me the most) instead I went and tried to explain how I upload images for layouts, which is what the tutorial was about. I guess that was a big no-no. Immediately (it seemed that way, but maybe not) everyone (it seemed like everyone, but maybe it wasn't) was jumping down my throat with let's say, unfriendly comments in reply. To this minute I don't understand it. I was outlining how I do it to see if it made sense to anyone else but me, and I was annoyed with myself to the extreme because I could not understand Liz's method, but I wanted to, since it seemed like something I should just "get".

In the meantime as comments kept coming in one commenter got particularly nasty with me. This commenter went on, after I reproached him or her for it, to claim I had showed myself as an "ingrate" in the community in the past. I reproached this person again, said that wasn't true, but was promptly told to "shut up" (but he or she wants you to know that at least they said "please" first). Again I reproached this person and said that if the person who runs the community had a problem with me the person who runs the community could say so. I also filed an LJ Abuse complaint over the fact that this person stirred up trouble needlessly and would not stop interfering.

The owner of the community, Liz, replied to all of it by saying that since she was uncertain of my "tone" in the first comment, she didn't know what to tell me about everyone else's reactions. So in other words, when you run a community and you're not sure about somebody's tone, you don't ask them, you don't take their word they're confused, you just let everyone else eat them alive because you don't get it.

Before I could even work that concept out Liz replied to my reply to the user who was hounding me that (now I'm quoting): "Then let me take this opportunity to tell you officially that you're being obnoxious in this community. This is an ongoing and long term thing dating back to god knows how long and includes your many flounces, general petulance, and the hilarious occasion where you claimed I was censoring people. I've never banned someone from commenting in any of my communities, but you've pushed me dangerously close several times."

So I went and re-read every comment I've ever made in her community and yeah, I know exactly what she's talking about; two years have gone by since any of what she mentions happened, I've continued to comment in the community continuously, and me and her seemed to have a lot of very civilized exchanges marked by not one rude word between either of us in those two years. So we're mad now about two years ago.

Since I wanted the back and forth to stop between me and the user who was hounding me in this thread, I ended my last exchange with that person by saying I hoped at that point that Liz would ban me just to make the exchange stop. It was not that I didn't feel able to maintain control of who I reply to on the Internet, as Liz claimed when she took me up on that offer, it was that if she banned me, the user bothering me would no longer be able to. I knew what I was doing, why I wanted it done, and why it was probably the best thing for my peace of mind, so Liz went and did it...and banned all my other user names, too.

I know I got me off to a bad start in that community years ago; I was nervous, impolite, sometimes tried too hard, was quite obliviously obnoxious more than once, you name it. I was a train-wreck. But two years have gone by since then which were just tranquil in comparison so I thought Liz was well over it. I guess not, and I guess I'm not going to rack my brains much more than I already have trying to understand how my amply explained confusion over a tutorial the other night could bring two years ago back for her like it was just yesterday...somehow it did, and somehow I'm supposed to accept that as completely rational and right no matter how bizarre it seems and just move on. I'm sure it's better this way, since I had no idea I was being secretly hated on every time I left a comment there, but now that I know...yeah, it's just better this way.

I have no experience with Percocet, so I can't speak to the effects of a ban on it, but I imagine there will be near-rioting in the streets followed by an instant and thriving black market for Vicoden if the recommendation that both drugs be pulled off the market flies.

For anyone who's never used Vicoden you have no idea what you're missing, dudes you might not know that it can be quite addictive. I had a hard time getting off of it years ago...not so hard that I went back to it after my last script ran out...just hard enough that I went around moaning, "Damn why can't I have anymore" for a week or two before the worst of my body's craving for it passed.

After crushing my finger in a 50-ton hydraulic metal welder (just one finger - on my right hand - and I'm a lefty - now *that's* lucky) a few summers ago (9, to be exact) I stayed on Vicoden prescribed by my hand surgeon before and after surgery and while my hand healed (if I hadn't been somewhat allergic to morphine they would've kept me on that - that's how bad my pain was).

No one who's never caught an appendage inside a 50-ton welder can imagine what it feels like to have crushed, ground-up bone flakes where your entire bone used to be, nor how much metal pins sticking out of you can hurt, especially when you bang them on something by accident, nor how much better Vicoden will make you feel after that kind of injury, nor how addicting Vicoden is because it not only quells the pain, it makes you feel like a new person.

Good luck to the FDA on this one. I'm not happy to hear Vicoden possibly damaged my liver, since I took Vicoden for months, and was weaned off it with a switch to an ibuprofen/Vicoden combo after my pin was removed, but on the other hand, there was my hand, my finger, and the pain I was in because of it. I would've died from how much it hurt without Vicoden.

Because the people who post questions in them? This is how they are.

They just barely describe whatever problem it is that they're having, but they usually won't tell you which computer, operating system, browser, or anti-malware programs they own, then they sit back, cross their fingers, and wait for those of us who actually know what the hell we're doing half the time to send distinct "Poof!" sounds through the air to their homes or workplaces as we wave our magic wands and heal their computers through simple acts of mind control, which we can also perform in our sleep.

In tonight's episode of Do It For Me Or Die, Bitch, a computer user cannot enable her screen saver by any normal means, so I suggest three ways to determine if a program running in the background may be causing the problem: open Task Manager and check for running background processes, use HijackThis, and use Process Explorer if needed. This after I simply suggested she check her Task Manager's list of running processes for any auto-running programs, which clearly she never did, not before, during or after our little chat.

Finally she tells me she "doesn't even know what any of those programs are" (I assume she means she doesn't know what Task Manager is, either...which made me howl with laughter) then she deletes her post. And while you may be thinking that I was thinking, "Well, good riddance", I wasn't. I felt bad for her - but I resented her attitude at the same time. I'm not a magician...some things you are going to have to learn to do for yourself. All I can do is suggest what you can do and how to go about doing it, if needed.

Woefully, that's just the millionth chapter in an online series of pain and computer betrayal that makes trying to help people with computer problems more frustrating than simply turning a blind eye to their difficulties. Is it mean of me to feel that way?

I also get the feeling that if you're not entirely emotionless or don't share genetic material with Mother Theresa, there is no way you can stay in the business of troubleshooting people's computer woes for too long. I'd imagine the burn-out rate, compared to those of other service industries, is off the charts. And since this does touch somewhat on the topic of my helping people with AOL's software, no, there is no correlation. AOL users are nowhere near as frustrating - or generally speaking, as rude - as computer-illiterate people are in general.

My friends list reading is tragic lately for the sheer amount of misinformation concerning Michael Jackson's health before he died, so I figured since I'm the only one who knows any better, I'm the only one who can clear it up. I'd like to post this on the front page of every journal on my friends list:

FACT: Michael Jackson is assumed to have been in perfect health before he died.

Seriously, sick people don't schedule 50 practically back-to-back concerts that they're going to perform as vigorously as Michael Jackson would perform them. One day in his shoes spent rehearsing and practicing like he did would probably kill the rest of us; he went at it like an athlete, and pushed himself just as hard, if not harder, sometimes not sleeping at all during the week leading up to a concert or a big performance date.

More FACTS

Michael Jackson was "healthy, energetic"...

Michael Jackson passed 50 vigorous health tests...

Michael Jackson not only passed them but passed them with "flying colors"...

The cardiac arrest may have been caused by a shot of Demoral given to him by his personal doctor, family asserts...

May I just roll my eyes now at all the misinformation floating around out there?

Saw the news on Yahoo when I checked my email about 5:30 - "Michael Jackson Dead at 50" - and jumped out of my chair shouting, "No, no, no - it can't be!" as I stumbled across the house - I know not where - there are minutes I can't account for after that. "He can't die!" I shouted at my mom in the kitchen. " He can't! He's only 50!"

Yahoo's so-called "coverage" - it was the AP's coverage, reprinted - is why I hate mainstream media. They are vile. Hateful. Devoted to snark. They're worse than bloggers - how dare they talk about us?

The man is dead! But give him some peace? Never. They continue castigating and humiliating him...that's how modern-day mainstream media works; it's the only way it knows how to pay its respects.

Stop re-hashing for the trillionth time that he did this and got accused of that, looked like this and did that? Never. That's "fun" and profit and under the guise of "balanced" reporting no one will ever take it away from them. I hope they rot in hell.

No true fan believes the more serious accusations against him - and those accusations, whether true or untrue, can never take away the immense and amazing talent he was kind enough to share with us, people who did not deserve to see anything as spectacular as his performances in our lifetimes - he was stunningly gifted as a singer, a dancer, and a composer.

My mom wanted to know how he died, so she had me read the Yahoo article to her after I'd been crying for a few minutes. So I looked at it, at what these parasites had written about him (nothing good), turned my head and started crying again.

My mom, in her unintentionally cruel way, waited, so I put my head up and read the part where they took him to the hospital, since they didn't list a cause of death and wrote nothing else about him but thinly disguised snark. Then I told her everything else they'd written was crap and started crying again. I don't know how to stop.

The media, that vile, despicable machine devoted to tearing down others for snark and profit, cannot take my memories of Michael Jackson away from me no matter how valiantly they try to dredge up the lowest filth to ensure they thoroughly sully his name forever. I had a crush on him as a 13 year old that I never got over until his appearance changed so drastically that I simply could not crush on him anymore, but my respect for his talent and my love for his music burn as brightly now as they did then.

This is how I will remember Michael Jackson - singing and Moonwalking over some tart named Billie Jean as I sat on the living room floor in front of the TV crying in shock and joy as the crowds screamed for him.

This is how I will remember Micheal Jackson, as I flicked on MTV and watched him Beat the crap out of every other dancer who wanted to own the funkiest, most irrepressible moves and beats ever.

This is how I will remember Michael Jackson, the Man in the Mirror who knew he had to, but who ultimately could not change even if he still wanted to, once his life was cut short.

No matter what his shortcomings were, what I will always remember about Michael Jackson is why I loved him.

Update: Yahoo might have become sensitive to the fact that they published a snarky, vile piece of trash so they replaced it with...get this, people...a blogger's post on how Michael Jackson was poised to make a surpisingly successful comeback. Damn Yahoo to hell anyway, and long live bloggers who pay proper respect to the dead: Yahoo ruined my day and my night as much as the news itself did (I wasn't going to link to it on my first swipe at this post, but on second thought, if you want to know why I got so upset you have got to read this trash).

Update 2: Yahoo seems to have become so sensitive to how the original article was a hodge-podge of disinformation and trash that the URL now redirects to news on the police investigation into Michael's death. I've disabled the link from working - I suppose you can still catch the original article, chimera that it is now, in a search engine cache and/or on archive.org.

Nothing like coming to realize - is there, Yahoo!/AP/MSM - that devotion to Michael Jackson was so surprisingly - perhaps unexpectedly - fierce all over the world that anyone who muckrakes is showing how out-of-touch they are with the rest of us...we know already, for God's sake. Why go over the more sordid details of the man's life again when he is, after all, quite dead (and now an overdose of Demerol administered by his private doctor is being looked at as the true cause of his cardiac arrest - which would explain why I ran around saying "He can't die!" after I learned the news - basically, I had this strong inward feeling that he simply couldn't die. It wasn't natural. It wasn't his time. He wasn't ready to. I believe that with everything I have in me. Sometimes another person's vitality, even if you don't know them personally, is something you can simply feel).

Cry for me, Argentina - I can't get online. I forgot to mention it (and I don't have time to edit the post now) but I can't pick up a wireless signal from anyone in the neighborhood (I tried today on my friend's laptop, the one I'm typing this on) so I'm stuck either buying a new modem ($80), buying a new router (my place is supposed to come with Internet so I'm working my landlord for the router) or else get under the house and drill out holes for extended Ethernet cable to run to or from (not sure yet which) my neighbor's place (we're technically on the same property and share the same address so that shouldn't be a problem}.

The one thing I lack is enough time to get this issue resolved and I miss the Internet already (barely into my third today without it - is this what crack withdrawal feels like?). Plus I made new friends in town who I'd just started hanging out with online; half of them think I'm blowing them off on purpose and won't speak to me now. It's frustrating after taking my ability to get online pretty much for granted for the last five years.

I was so sick of my reddish-brown, shoulder-length locks (I'm also growing out bangs - they almost touch my chin) that I changed my red-haired icon to a nice dull key weeks ago to give myself a break from seeing red hair every time I went online (this blog is set as one of my home pages in Firefox's Speed Dial, so there's no escaping it).

The red-haired icon sports a shade about 4 shades lighter than my own and seeing that jolt of red every time I got online was starting to get on my nerves. If you have naturally red hair or wear your hair red a lot you know you get tired of it like you get tired of no other color. There's something about it that's eye-catching and flamboyant, like it's daring you to do something - like kick its ass.

When I get tired of red hair - it happens at least once a year - I usually dye it dark brown but that hasn't been working out, either, since it still turns red (usually as soon as the dye hits my hair). So for the last six months I've been walking around with dark brown reddish hair and wanting to break every mirror I see because the reddish kept daring to me to kick it's ass and I couldn't.

I figured a scientific problem (overly red pigmentation) deserves an equally scientific solution, so I went shopping. That's about as scientific as I get. I chose Publix because they sell food, which I also needed, and most of their hair dye was on sale. (Publix is made of pure WIN: The entire country needs to be jealous of where I shop. If I won Lotto I would actually buy the place).

What I've really wanted to do is dye my hair blonde, but I've had at least three people who are not my mother (she thinks I should do it) talk me out of it: "You have to cover your roots every three weeks - it's too much trouble" from my formerly blonde boss and, "Your complexion won't work with blonde" from others, so that left me the following choices:

1. Not red ever again I'm so sick of it
2. Not dark brown since it turns red
3. Not blonde, since mom was outnumbered when I asked for opinions, and the last time I was a blonde (about 10 years ago), it really was a pain in the ass to keep up with
4. I dislike black hair on me (yeah, I've tried that too, so...no)

So what color did I go with?

That's right: purple. What choice did I have?

Seriously, I dyed it like a light tawny brown. It hasn't looked this good since I was a kid - after my red curls went away and before the Gods of Red Hair returned (I was about 9) to torment my stick-straight hair right through my adulthood.

The only reason this experiment turned out better than I hoped was I got some version of Feria that adds highlights so the color is really prismatic. Now it looks like the color it was when I was in between sieges of red hair as a child; pretty much the same as the icon I'm using now (which happens to look like me - except I'm older and can't make my hair that curly without a spiral perm).

So...this was quite a navel-gazing post, wasn't it? My apologies if it made your eyes glaze over, but I hear I don't talk about myself enough. I'm just trying to make up for that. I won't be trying much harder than this, though...I promise.