On My PCs, IceWM and ROX-Filer Inherit Some of OS/2’s Cosmetic Artifacts

Something I’ve never needed is a desktop environment. So long as I’ve a solid window manager with a configurable menu (in my instance, IceWM) and some good file managers (Midnight Commander, PCManFM, ROX-Filer, CLEX, Personal File Manager, etc.), I’ve entirely obviated bloated desktops like GNOME and KDE that would afford me no desirable features in exchange for the robust requirements that they hardly deserve.

In nostalgic retrospect, I regard OS/2 very much as the average septuagenarian veteran of the KGB does the Soviet Union: very fondly, but after 18+ instructive years with Debian and two glorious (if occasionally challenging) years of FreeBSD, I neither want nor need it. However, I do miss the old Presentation Manager’s fun, flexible desktop, which I always preferred to that of Windows 9x/XP/Vista (which I also liked, anyhow). Recently, I interjected a large tranche of icons from OS/2 2.0, 2.1 and Warp 3 to my collection of homemade icons. Their generation entailed the application of Pinta to meticulously crop and position each icon from lossless screenshots of the OS/2 desktop at 32×32 pixels, add transparency, and save each as a Windows icon (though maybe they should be PNGs). (Among the many editors of raster graphics I’ve used, Pinta’s by far the best suited to edit icons.) These enjoyed a modestly positive reception on Neocities, but they were created primarily for selfish purposes…and to conduce relaxation during a spell of cold and insomnia.

The aforementioned ROX-Filer is a good file manager, but a far better shell for starting programs and accessing their documentation — like Windows 3’s Program Manager if it weren’t clunky and heinous. To this end, I produced a comprehensive selection of symbolic links and scripts that launch the totality of my regularly used programs, which are organized by categories and suites in directories navigated by ROX-Filer. By assigning native icons and those of OS/2 2.x (for many programs that haven’t any), I’ve created an interface that’s as easy and fun for quotidian utility as PM was back in the ’90s (it’s actually much more so, but I refuse to accept that). Here’s the root window of launch:

If your first thought was, “Hey it’s the PM!” then I’m sorry to disappoint you! (I hope I didn’t scare you. ;D) OS/2’s icons for folders are employed extensively to image these directories. In launch, the folders for Multimedia, Scheduled Tasks and Dial-up Networking respectively represent the directories for: audio mixers and audio/video players & editors; clocks; chat clients, Mutt, and web browsers. LibreOffice is accorded its own famous icon, while a folder containing a suite of programs from FreeBSD base sports my modified OS/2 System icon.

Here, the audio mixers example much of what you’ll see in later and larger directories. AlsaMixer’s been set with ROX-Filer’s default icon for executable scripts (which I quite like), aumix has its own, and the fantastic Umix has been granted OS/2’s cute little volume control icon.

In audio-video players+editors, we’ve a spicier selection! Herrie and MOC are uniform foils for all these colorful icons.

Meanwhile, WinFF and its PDF manual keep company beneath…

These calculators look nice! The excellent, textual bc is represented by the icon of OS/2’s calculator. Like most of the x11-apps, X11’s calculator sports its iconic logotype. ConvertAll boasts a colorful icon; its ReadMe file, like most of the documentation formatted in HTML, is displayed via Dillo.

Terminal programs that terminate after printing to standard output are launched via scripts in xterm with its hold resource enabled. FreeBSD’s cal and ncal programs function well here, demonstrating how I can implement as many flags of a terminal emulator and the program it’s running as I need. To my delight, Day Planner’s been assigned OS/2’s icon of its Daily Planner, and XCalendar that of its Calendar. Perfect! Like many more instances that you’ll observe, calcurse’s documentation is reached directly though a symlink to its documentation’s folder, where HTML and plain textual files can be browsed freely and flexibly.

ircII can be launched to visit my two favorite servers (when DALnet isn’t barring me for god knows what). Also, LostIRC is just adorable. Subjacent WeeChat’s exhaustive, multilingual documentation is now just a click away…

I’ve a few timepieces here. That Alarm Clock with a distinctively GTK flavor, cairo-clock, and the X11 clocks all have their own icons, but dclock’s been treated to OS/2’s alarms icon, as it has an alarm function. The rest are all decorated with ROX’s defaults. As you may have noticed, most programs requiring X11 are linked, while those launched through a terminal emulator and/or with options enabled are started via scripts. In hindsight, I really should’ve bestowed scripts to launch everything, and won’t be adding new symlinks in the future…

Not too many surprises can be observed among the databases, datal visualizers, documental viewers and file managers, except that PCManFM was granted the icon of OS/2’s funky, clunky file manager.

Among those of Unix-likes, FreeBSD’s base system is the best and leanest known to me. These are all great programs, more comfortably available than ever. Furthermore, the *-freebsd-doc packages constitute the most comprehensive, superlative documentation for any software that I’ve ever read; its handbook alone has helped me to surmount more snags and other obstacles than I can recall. This superabundance of articles and books used to be indexed in my IceWM submenus (and is still so available on some of my machines in pdmenu and ELinks); now its entirety (HTML, PDF, text, images and all) is directly accessed in ROX via launch and IceWM.

Welcome to the arcade. You little assholes won’t find Call of Duty, The Last of Us, Overwatch or any other bloated, humdrum kiddie shit here, so shut your faces.

I haven’t much to relate regarding these, except that documentation for Alizarin Tetris and Avanor was never so easy to check, and that Kirk Baucom really should acknowledge TextMaze, because it’s a great little game.

I’ve enjoyed variations of the bsdgames suite for years; they’re all superb games, and a few of them are cataloged among my favorites. Here, scripting enables me to play these with all of the customized options I prefer, in a variety of terminal emulators suited for different requirements.

These require no explanation. Henzell is our 7th greatest living Australian.

This is another set for which scripting really shines, because lord knows just how much is specified on the command line for DOOM II. To create the PRBoom+ scripts, I just copied those of PRBoom into the PRBoom+ directory, opened them all at once and subjoined the command’s “-plus” in each. I created that icon for Chex Quest when I played it via Chocolate Doom in Windows XP years ago.

The Jargon File is a great read, especially if you’re browsing it during a rainy day. Its anthropology and lore of hackers is as funny as accurate (for its time), and relatable for analogous geeks.

You’ll notice that I’m determined to group suites (regardless of whether some or all of their contents are categorized elsewhere), because I prefer them to be uniformly available, and to give credit where it’s due.

These nekos and Trons are of a different matter. I love the former as it reminds me of the few good things introduced on Macintoshes (which were inevitably improved elsewhere), and the latter because these are great games that remind me of what a wonderful mistake Tron was: a Disney-grade budget was expended to produce a juvenile classic with minimal executive or productional oversight.

Note the contradistinctions…obviously, all those options couldn’t be specified with symlinks…

You’ve seen most of this GNUish stuff elsewhere, but suites are almost as useful as categories when my memory’s reflexively fickle…

You get the idea. New Breed’s Tux Paint and several GNU projects are also here.

LibreOffice‘s icons always look spiffy.

Some programs of my farrago are used far more frequently than others.

If I’ve initiated this project for anything at all, it was to launch instances of Mutt daily to access my accounts. One couldn’t hope to do this so readily with a menu.

I only employ two of his programs nowadays, but I do so constantly because they’re indispensable. For both his accomplishments and advocacy for sensible technology, Hon Jen Yee is a hero.

I’m not a programmer so I seldom use these, but…

I utilize tcsh and bash daily, but these are all great shells for different purposes. Note the copies of FreeBSD’s and GNU’s contributions.

When I assigned OS/2’s old windowed DOS icon to DOSBox, my heart leapt with joy. Why do I love this so much?
If you’re wondering why xvt and urxvt share rxvt‘s icon, the answer is simple: the icon’s bundled with xvt in FreeBSD’s package, and for whatever reason, FreeBSD’s xvt seems to actually be rxvt. Here’s a somewhat familiar excerpt from the credits of its man page:

       Rob Nation 
              very heavily modified Xvt and came up with xvt

In Linux distributions, that line always reads, “very heavily modified Xvt and came up with Rxvt.” Withal, Nation’s rclock is usually bundled with rxvt, but instead available in its own package on FreeBSD. Weird!

I’m the only person of whom I know who calls these what they are: textual collators. “Data comparison tool” isn’t too bad, but “word difference finder” inanely rolls off the tongue like a cinder block.

Without these magnificent instruments, how would I compile countless hyponyms for disreputable modes of sorcery, or explain why Kenneth Branagh and Sophia Takal deserve to be murdered, then framed for a suicidal pact? Textual editors are as much a sine qua non of my life as are rubes for politicos and pundits. Herein, scripts are vital to launch whichever terminal emulators best suit the editors in question, and to set their working directories accordingly. The icon of OS/2 2.0’s System Editor is here given to ASEDIT, which unmistakably resembles it; Cooledit and fte are bestowed with icons of the Enhanced Editor from 2.0 and 2.1. I don’t know if the logo used in The Hessling Editor’s exhaustive HTML reference was intended to double as an icon, but now it does.

Yes, I use the Dial-up folders’ icon for all directories of user agents/clients/etc.

My homemade documental pixmap was applied for Ted’s documentation, which is demonstratively, fittingly formatted as Rich Text.

Finally, most of the x11-apps are as uniformly presented as their flat UI, back when it was appealingly designed.

This entire project is still underway, and subject to extensive change. More icons (including OS/2’s numerous graphics representing documentation) and programs will be added, and I expect that many symlinks will be supplanted with scripts to ensure greater stability and more options. Next year, I’ll post about all of the updates I’ve implemented since first documenting this endeavor.

Some personal and political metrics

These are my IPIP Big-Five Factor Markers, as calculated by the Open-Source Psychometrics Project’s Big Five Personality Test, which I took in full sincerity:

Neither was I surprised. Here are my results from the crude, obsolescent, yet generally accurate Political Compass:

Economic Left/Right: -3.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.49

When last I took this, my social score was 0. That variance probably reflects my waxing antipathy for most politicized people. Don’t worry; I’m still the same carping misanthrope who abominates baizuo because he’s internalizing white supremacy!

Egregious ideas: Spock’s Funeral (redux)

I almost can’t believe that I haven’t yet seen footage of a fat Trekkie reciting Kirk’s eulogy for Spock (from Wrath of Khan‘s conclusion) at the funeral of a friend, parent or other relative, perhaps as a segment in a cringe compilation.

That I haven’t located it means nothing.

You might be a contemporary, Anglophone conservative if…

  • …you’re still a member of the Republican party.
  • …you’re more concerned with decorum than policy.
  • …you can read National Review without laughing or groaning.
  • …you’re actually subscribed to National Review.
  • …you attended CPAC and weren’t ejected for politically incorrect heresy.
  • …you honestly believe that baizuo and other progressives are just confused people who might someday be suaded with that hitherto unheralded, apropos dialectic or rhetoric.
  • …you donate to the NRA in exchange for tacky swag cheaply manufactured in China and zero resistance to the curtailment of one’s right to bear arms.
  • …you sent your daughter to college.
  • …you’ve actually voiced a platitude that contained the phrase, “we all bleed red” or “diversity is our strength.”
  • …you’re still calling leftists (including progressives) “liberals” decades after all genuine left-wing liberals were hounded to political fringes.
  • …you’ve convinced yourself that fandom for coddled, moronic, violent felons outfitted with plastic armor and televised when they throw a ball across a field is vital to the preservation of cultural masculinity.
  • …you honestly believe that any of the wars in which the United States participated in the past 120 years weren’t disastrous wastes of life and materiel, the immediate corollaries and repercussions of which alike redounded to that nation’s disrepute and downfall.
  • …you privately complain about welfare, yet never contemplate the pecuniary black holes of every American war and occupation.
  • …you were convinced that Muslims half a world away hated Americans “for our freedoms,” but have never dared to utter dissent against cartoonishly censorial, defamatory organizations such the ADL.
  • …you treasure and seek to preserve the values and existence of a tiny, belligerent, parasitic ethnostate in west Asia that brutally enforces apartheid, and whose diasporic proxies actively, overtly lobby to outlaw and eventually extinguish your own.
  • …you know that a single Republican candidate anywhere will capture the majority of a black vote any day now.
  • …you actually believe that “hate speech” exists.
  • …you’ve never considered that expenditure and taxation should be slashed pro rata.
  • …you imagine that police would necessarily protect you if they could.
  • …you’re still wondering why Cubans, Mexicans and Puerto Ricans haven’t equivalent electoral preferences, because Latinos and their cultures must be fungible.
  • …you refer to the Democratic Party as a contemporary “plantation” for black voters for its exchange of welfare benefits for votes, yet never once consider how the tax donkeys who reliably vote for Republicans in exchange for nothing far more aptly fit this analogy.
  • …you laugh at Marxists for refusing in perpetuity to acknowledge the ideological constant of every calamitous Communist state, while never noticing the obvious comparison between Marxism’s and conservatism’s centenary traditions of failure.
  • …you’re certain that anyone opposed to free markets and open borders is a “Communist” or a “Fascist.”
  • …you imagine that Russia’s present government seeks reprisals for the collapse of the Soviet Union.
  • …you’re concerned that Russia’s influencing American elections, without a single thought regarding AIPAC, the Open Society Foundations, etc.
  • …you’re still upset that your Twitter account was deleted, and don’t know what to do.
  • …you celebrate the life and exploits of an obese, plagiaristic, whoremongering black dissident who promoted reparations for slavery as much as any other Communist.
  • …you’re terrified that somebody, somewhere believes or has alleged that you’re racist.
  • …you’ve gradually adopted nearly every radical, egalitarian, leftist premise expounded over the past century.
  • …your every other action is an expression of cupidity or hypocrisy.

Feel free to submit a few hallmarks of this stereotype…!

How (and How Not) to Curb Abusive Javabloat

One of many reasons why abuse of JavaScript has become as planted as pernicious is an oddly common inability to properly appraise and endorse solutions to this godforsaken trend. In an article he contributed to Brainleaf, Ben Shepardson reveals that his heart is nearly in the right place, but he’s stymied by his lockstep conformity to the hateful conventions established and perpetrated by horrible industries.

“In a world where UX is king, it’s curious to note that slow-loading websites are still a growing problem. Sadly, our benchmarks for what’s acceptable increase every year as we inch ever upwards towards larger and heavier sites.”

This is incontestable, and though the “our” and “we” never apply to me, websites of governments, small businesses and individuals are often as bloated and ugly as those of corporations.

“Yesterday’s bloated monster of a slow-loading behemoth at 1 megabyte becomes today’s sleek and light example of what to aim for. Back in the day, 100 KB was considered too big.

When I accessed sites at 56K in the mid-’90s, I didn’t adjudge 100K as excessive. Does “back in the day” denote the mid- to late-’80s, when images and audio uploaded to FTP servers and BBSs occasionally exceeded this length?

Today’s Tweets are heavier than yesteryear’s web pages.”

Microblogging is an inherently inferior concept worsened by the coded obesity characterizing nearly every site that provides such a service. At a fraction of their size, most message boards provide their users with far more flexibility and freedom than Twitter, Gab, Tencent Weibo, Plurk, Parler, Facebook, etc. Mastodon is a notable exception to this trend, but it was founded and it’s almost entirely administered by psychotically hypersensitive baizuo who practice ideological censorship as a lifestyle (and probably hate women).

“Of course, we have Moore’s Law to thank for ever-increasing web capabilities. Modern hardware and internet infrastructure can handle an entire galaxy’s worth of extra data transfer. But, like ever-expanding suburbs and the highways that connect them, extra capacity soon gets filled up as we expand in every direction.”

Avarice, stupidity and mundane incompetence is as responsible for this trend as expanded and advancing usage…

“Needless to say, any developer caught ignoring the principles of UX and unleashing megaton websites on the browsing public should take a serious look inwards. It’s simply bad form.”

Obviously, this is because no such principles or protocol thereof have ever been widely or formally acknowledged, much less observed by the vast majority of web designers.

“There are now layman’s tools for helping solve bloat on your own website, even when your web developer has sold you a heavy behemoth. Anyone can lighten up their own load by using code minifiers and image-handling techniques.”

Alternatively, they can actually solve rather than merely mitigate problems by demanding more HTML, CSS, PHP, et cetera, and less JavaScript.

“But this isn’t about tidying up your white space or decreasing pixels in your image carousel. This is about unwanted (read: unnecessary) javascript functionalities that are crashing websites, left and right.”

More trouble’s suffered from crashed and frozen browsers than sites.

“JavaScript is not to blame: unnecessary and therefore unwanted functionalities are the real culprit here.”

Those functionalities are but symptoms of this matter’s actual problem: excessive use of JavaScript to perform functions that are more efficiently executed via HTML, CSS, and other languages.

“No matter who you are – user or developer – you probably love JavaScript. It makes the Web what we need it to be today: fulfilling and dynamic, personalized and fun.”

No, it doesn’t. It can conduce to such qualities in moderate application, but notwithstanding its ubiquity, it’s obviously as demonstrably unnecessary for frolic as for utility.

“Nobody wants to go back to the days when all we had to work with was HTML.”

When was that?! It certainly wasn’t when Internet became popular. PHP and JavaScript were introduced contemporaneously in 1995; the W3C published CSS 1 a year later.

“Without dynamicity, that world would appear sad and flat to today’s users.”

One can intuit so much about a person by cursory observation of their diction and lexicon, and especially neologisms so encompassed in the latter. Dynamism can be a circumstantial virtue; “dynamicity” smacks of moronic corporate attempts to further befoul our living language.

“And marketers? They’d be completely lost without being able to serve up those highly-targeted ads we’ve all come to expect when we browse the web.”

Imagine that you’re in attendance at some soiree or other, and some drone burdened with a retreating hairline, micropenis and IQ of 95 opines from across the dinner table, “To be fair, industries really need to consider the needs of marketing departments when we design and test products and services, because that benefits consumers.” You’d be morally, if not legally justified to rise from your seat in a fit of pique, circumambulate that table and break his stupid face.

Hey, asshole: nearly everyone possessing an IQ above room temperature dreads rather than expects embedded advertisements, highly-targeted and otherwise. You can’t credibly shill JavaScript by promoting solutions when you support the problems that it enables.

“We couldn’t even eradicate JavaScript from the Web if we wanted to.”

We probably could, though that’s hardly desirable. After all, some other language will eventually supersede it.

“It is now a fundamental building block of the web. Almost every browser supports it, and almost every website uses it. Increasingly, mobile and app development are forever entwined with JavaScript as well.”

It’s no such thing, and the notion that JavaScript is fundamental, much less indispensable for its omnipresence is at best specious.

“Plus, we have derivatives like the jQuery library and Node.js (which takes JavaScript to the server side). Both are further evidence that JavaScript is here to stay.”

This is naive; present popularity is no reliable indicator of future preponderance. Incidentally, I freely concede that the development and adoption of jQuery is largely a tremendous boon.

These consecutive, contradictory statements are essentially a caveat for proofreading:

“JavaScript is, however, responsible for some of the weight gain of today’s websites.

“It’s not JavaScript itself to blame for the extra weight, but rather the way it’s being used.”

That latter declaration is true, but…

“In short, many of the functionalities of JavaScript can be handled in different ways, thereby lightening the load across the board for all kinds of websites.”

If “handled in different ways” connoted a decrement of implemented JavaScript, I might agree.

“So, what’s a developer to do? Here are some ideas of how JavaScript can be used in better ways to trim the fat so to speak. These don’t cover all of the creative ways you might tackle this issue, but they will point you in the right direction.”

Wrong! Our trouble isn’t merely that JavaScript’s abused, but that it’s overapplied.

“1. Wean ourselves from jQuery addiction

“jQuery is a wonderful, time-saving convenience, but it’s overused. Using it for simple tasks is often not necessary with today’s browsers. These kinds of tasks have surprisingly robust native implementations that perform jQuery-style functionalities all by themselves. Stick to native JavaScript whenever possible.”

This won’t happen for awhile, for jQuery’s appeal inheres in not merely its convenience and usefulness, but also its novelty. Developers disposed to use jQuery won’t dispense with it until something just as commodious succeeds it.

“2. Limit surveillance scripts

“Third-party tracking code is responsible for much of the weight gain of the internet. We all know it to be true, yet web developers are still held hostage to clients who insist on loading up their seemingly wonderfully optimized and fast-loading newly designed site with cookies, tracking code. Online marketing companies don’t always realize the weight that elaborate advertising code can cause. If you’re not using it, let it go.”

If “limit” read as “eliminate,” I might agree.

“The moral of the story is that JavaScript is great when used properly. What’s more, it’s here to stay, so we may as well learn to get along with it.”

“BLAH BLAH JavaScript is our lord and savior now and forever; accept its love and providence, heathen BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH.” Whatever!

Here are four tips by which everyone can actually lighten their load:

  1. Don’t use JavaScript as a succedaneum for any of HTML’s elements or attributes thereof, or any function that may be executed more efficiently with CSS or PHP. Nota bene: HTML and CSS are intended and optimized for their respective purposes. If you’re writing JavaScript to replace HTML’s a, img, video or any other block- or text-level elements, you especially deserve the pillory, shitbag.
  2. Never write scripts that enable a server to surveil, track or cryptojack public visitors. If this seems revolutionary, good. Usury and marital infidelity aren’t moral for their legality either.
  3. Stop animating with JavaScript; use embedded videos, GIFs, APNGs, or even MNGs instead.
  4. Don’t be a dunce who renders the title in a user agent’s window caption as a marquee with JavaScript, or anything else.

Per se, JavaScript is a great tool, and in certain ways comparable to firearms, abortion and automobiles: respectively unsurpassed means of self-defense, eugenics and personal transport which have been misused horribly by senseless and sordid people, and consequently prohibited or restricted by governments who’d better serve their societies by stamping out the people who abuse these technologies, and curbing the causes of their pathologies. JavaScript is no different: web bloat won’t cease to exist until societies coerce those who perpetuate it to surcease. Bullycide a web developer today.

Egregious ideas: ShaveCarruth

For all I know, Shane Carruth’s and Amy Seimetz’s recriminations are just tendentiously selective portions of the same story. Peradventure The Auteur really did flip his wig and throttle his quondam leading lady after discovering that she was cheating on him, and maybe all of his evidently insane emails and DMs to her are no worse than whatever she may have transmitted to him, other than that famous, unspecified STD.
My own conjecture is that Seimetz, eventually weary of her annual drudgery that entailed performances in two to ten features and series of limited distribution for emolument that barely paid her rent, advanced her career by bedding influential men during her engagement to Carruth. Either before or after she infected him with an venereal disease that she contracted in the course of her infidelity, maybe he berated her, slapped her around, even strangled her as she’s alleged. His deranged correspondence doesn’t indicate whether his abuse was provoked on multiple occasions by possible repeated assignations, or if it was ever even physical. However, this may be entirely wrong; however unlikely, one or both of them are in this scenario villains or liars.

Naturally, those few notables based in Hollywood (amusingly termed “the film community” by the commentariat) who’ve bespoken her allegations are predictably, prejudicially united in support of Seimetz, now a famous actress and directress after transitioning successfully from a prolific career in independent pictures to mainstream visibility during the past eight years. Carruth’s retired, a genuine independent and male, so he won’t be afforded any benefit of anyone’s doubt. Ever conformable, numerous baizuo who profess themselves “former fans” have also turned on him like Greek waiters without considering his (erratically related) account. This bias is readily evident in the forced outrage tweeted in response to his facetious, peripheral, photographic divulgence of her restraining order:

That no such furor was inflamed by his claim that she’s paid an agent to messily disseminate these in his neighborhood once again demonstrates the simple hypocrisy that defines the progressive ethos. They must #believeher; no other options exist.
Withal, a sensible man would’ve controverted Seimetz’s accusations by publishing a detailed disaffirmation, or photos that he claims image wounds she inflicted on him, rather than arguing with pissant nonentities on Twitter. The Auteur is not that man.

Anyone who’s seen Primer or Upstream Color knows that Carruth’s a multidisciplinary genius, and whoever’s read more than a few posts of his Twitter account is familiar with his mordancy, faunal preoccupations and profoundly autistic incapacity for perspicuity. Shane’s communicative opacity is often almost cryptic.

My abhorrence for Twitter is so ardent that I won’t even deign to register a trolling account there, but if I did, its username would be ShaveCarruth. Why should we shave him? Because (as declared in the account’s profile), he’s barbate ‘n’ crazed!!

Obviously, there’s only one rational application for such an account: to make the online life of Amy Seimetz’s personal assistant a living hell by tweeting and retweeting Carruth’s countercharges, parodies of his psychotic, veiled death threats, and video clips of numerous scenes in which Seimetz’s characters have been tortured and murdered to her account, which said subaltern is authorized to operate.

Just imagine…

@amy_seimetz No way you’re living without me. Remember what you said. Maybe vice versa. At least our lives aren’t dull.

@amy_seimetz One of us has photos. The other doesn’t. Think about that.

@amy_seimetz Watched this tonight. Saw it years ago. Remember? It makes way more sense to me now. That third act is hilarious, and has a few great ideas. @Simon_Barrett @ajbowen @joeswanberg

@amy_seimetz I emptied half a bottle of Stoli tonight. Jealous? Maybe you can lie as well in AA as you do to everyone else.

@amy_seimetz You should sprint more often. You know, when you’re not falling down drunk and blaming the bruises on me. Maybe life should imitate art. @Simon_Barrett @joeswanberg @Ti_West @ajbowen

Replying to @amy_seimetz and @foxesinfiction

You’re finished. You just don’t know it yet because you’re in league with the devils of Loudun, you cunt whore.

@amy_seimetz Don’t think I don’t know where you live now. @applebees down the block from you is serving Irresist-A-Bowls. Pretty long drive, so I needed one.

@amy_seimetz No way you’re invited to the reunion screening after that last court call. You’re fucking crazy. @drafthouse

Replying to @amy_seimetz

Cops can’t respond to every single fake call, especially now that their operators know the sound of your voice. I’m in your driveway. Cut the shit and come out.

Replying to @ALM_means_BLM and @foxesinfiction

Can not believe. Just shot myself in the leg, right here in my car. In Amy’s driveway. Relax. Just a BB. Can’t find it yet.

Replying to @ALM_means_BLM @foxesinfiction and 2 others

It’s probably in my sock. Doesn’t matter. I can wait out here all night.

Replying to @darqfybre

At least I’m doing something with my life, brah. Never mind. Want to get a bite tomorrow? I’m buying. Or you are. Whatever.

Wow. Kind of can’t believe that the cops came.

Replying to @When_in_Rome

She looked and sounded like a psycho, right there in front of the house. Blotto and screaming. Now the cops have a glimpse of what I lived with.

Replying to @orlandocinephile @DanBilzerian and 3 others

No charges filed. Weird, though. You’ll have to drive further than me to show me “what you can do,” Orlando.

Replying to @orlandocinephile @darqfybre and 24 others

Never happened. None of it did in the first place. Whatever. Maybe you can sit in on the next court call.

@amy_seimetz Of course you haven’t blocked me. You can’t.

Replying to @ZingularDay and 13 others

Maybe when she stops littering dockets with bullshit ROs.

You get the idea. Of course, the secondary function is to encourage Carruth to Shave:

@harrys Actually looking forward to shaving every few days. Not bad.

Replying to @masterofdisgust @ZingularDay and 6 others

I love to shave. Every day. Almost as good as new pets that just wander in.

If this were successful, Shane would shear those whiskers regularly, and we’d all enjoy that sweet, fresh-faced boy we knew and loved!

Shane Carruth (Photo by Robin Holland/Corbis via Getty Images)

Also, I might somehow convince him to surcease this footling dissipation of his time on adolescent tiffs with losers via social media (like every fifth anglophone under 50), and finally shoot A Topiary. Grow up and follow your calling, Shane.

Contemporary Lexicography Sinks to No Nadir

Yesterday, I purged numerous second-wave feminist neologisms suffixed with -woman and -person from my unparalleled personal dictionary. Furthermore, the preposterous postpositive -adjacent was newly tabulated in my Douche-English Dictionary. Some cursory research regarding this adjective’s newly daft definition led me to a strikingly (if typically) asinine article published by the New York Times, and penned by yet another of its innumerable unsightly, bewhiskered, gormless pressmen:

Why Is Everything ‘Adjacent’ Now?

What, exactly, are all these things next to?

By Jonah Engel Bromwich

Isn’t this already just adorable? If Maddox were more healthy and hirsute, and a vampire of Nosferatu’s mold, he’d perfectly resemble this clown.

As we find ourselves stuck hopelessly online, our lexicon grasps back toward the physical world. An example: The word “adjacent” has recently packed its suitcase and taken the short trip from the literal to the figurative.

Translation: numerous Anglophones under fifty are so lexically nescient (in this instance, of prefixes quasi- and semi-) that they’ve ineptly misused a word en masse.

It used to be that “adjacent” meant “next to,” as in buildings, or city blocks. These days, it is more likely to signify a more conceptual and vague relation, which the speaker or writer would rather not describe in depth.

Accurately, the extension of this word’s definition from a spatial to relational meaning only denotes its speaker’s susceptibility to trends and inability to adequately articulate.

The following nauseating, inane instances only demonstrate the subliteracy and ideological monotony of mainstream journalism:

On Christmas Day, the CNN commentator Chris Cillizza called Michelle Obama “probably the most popular politics-adjacent figure in the country.”

“Quasi-political” would be too revealing, too sincere in its rightful relegation of the former first lady and her many moronic, uninformed tirades, wouldn’t it? Just as oblivious, neoconservative boomers are the only people who can stomach the Bushes, Obama and his brood are admired exclusively by leftist cretins. I can concede that fewer people likely loathe Michelle Obama than George W. Bush, only because she’s not a criminal bellicist. Anyhow, this merely exposes how cheaply euphemistic this bilge can be.

A few months before that, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar said that Megyn Kelly’s remarks on the use of blackface in Halloween costumes were “not quite racist, but racist-adjacent” and also hate crime-adjacent.

I can’t relate to anyone who’d squander a minute of his retirement sequent to a great career whining about some fatuous, faithless, televised twat, but Abdul-Jabbar would’ve sounded less dumb (though no more cogent to anyone with a functioning brain) if he’d denounced her comments as “semi-racist” or “implicitly racist.”

Some months later, Max Newfield, a writer for Heartland Weekend, a Missouri publication, took readers on a tour of “wellness-adjacent” beers available for purchase from Southern breweries. (Because beer isn’t actually good for you, no matter its adjacencies!)

Who the shit can even fathom that gibberish?

“We almost might need to write a new subsense for this,” said Peter Sokolowski, the editor at large of Merriam-Webster, of the flock of “-adjacents.”

Anyone who essays to reconcile erudite and exoteric objectives or prioritize popularity in the field of lexicography is either a pseudo-intellectual or a brazen fraud. In the two articles featured in this post, Sokolowski exhaustively confirms that he’s both.

(Subsense is dictionary-world jargon for a secondary meaning of a word.)

Those of us who actually read know that subsense is a hyponymous or otherwise subordinate division of a more general definition. We also don’t type sophomoric terms like, “dictionary-world jargon.”

The usage, he said, was “so new it’s not in the damn dictionary.”

It shouldn’t be listed in any dictionary. Of all the horrid English dictionaries in print, Merriam-Webster is the most notorious for their inclusion of any popular slang to shift a few units or attract people to their ugly, bloated website. New American Heritage is more politically correct, and poorly written besides, but Merriam-Webster has become in the past forty years the trendiest reference book available. It’s a dictionary for dopey teenagers and bottom-feeders of contemporary pop culture.

“Adjacent,” in this usage, is a postpositive adjective. That just means that it comes after the noun it modifies. This is unusual in English, but standard in French and Latin syntax.

Contributors employed by the NYT are now obliged to clumsily define postposition for the uneducated simpletons that constitute their dwindling readership. Does anyone remember when this outlet’s output was characterized by a modicum of learned assumption? I don’t, but I was born in the late ’70s.

Because the conventions of those languages can often read as fancy in English, calling something “cannabis-adjacent” or “cosmetics-adjacent” grants a nifty sheen.

Ergo, millennials striving for a veneer of sophistication once again betray their stupefying idiocy and ignorance. I’m shocked.

“Like the technical vocabulary of law and medicine, the Latin nature of this word brings the discourse up a notch,” Mr. Sokolowski said. “It makes it seem more formal and technical.”

Patently vacuous pretensions don’t elevate language or discourse, but upon observing a commercial opportunity to exploit, Sokolowski needs to palaver and pander to rubes in one of the most amenably gullible demographics.

Such shifts in meaning irk purists like Lionel Shriver, a writer who recently decried in Harper’s what she called “semantic drift.” In an interview, Ms. Shriver described her reaction to the use of “-adjacent” and “space,” another term she said was increasingly being used in a figurative sense.

How is Shriver a “purist” for opposing semantic drift of such a witless stamp? What purity is she attempting to preserve in our language’s rich and irreparable farrago?

“The weird thing is that it’s imposing geography on what could not be more abstract,” she said. “It’s almost like a need for geography in the digital world, where everything’s floating around. We’re living increasingly in a world beyond space, beyond physicality.”

This is a valid analysis, but Shriver’s perhaps abstracting too much of what may be imputed to simple stupidity, pliancy and inscience.

(Incidentally, Shriver’s novel We Need To Talk About Kevin and Lynne Ramsay’s eponymous filmic adaptation thereof are fine fiction on the disastrous repercussions of parental dereliction.)

Ben Zimmer, a lexicographer, said that he began to notice the usage more and more about five years ago. He thought it may have originated with “real-estate talk, where, say, ‘Beverly Hills-adjacent’ indicates that a property isn’t actually in Beverly Hills, but close enough.”

At least this is casually condonable, neither too silly nor inapplicable, but…

Others see the word as useful in Silicon Valley, where start-up founders can’t quite be sure what it is their companies are making, even as they’re selling it to investors. It’s best to keep options open in case the need to pivot suddenly arises. The chat application Slack, for instance, was once TinySpeck, a gaming start-up with a particularly sophisticated chat feature; it was chat-adjacent. It left the gaming space, entered the chat space and became a billion-dollar company.

Ah, more “spaces.” These are the successors of people who daily uttered neologistic, corporate portmanteaux without a trace of irony for decades.

Erik Torenberg, a founder of the early stage venture capital fund Village Global, said that he sees technology entrepreneurs use the word as if they are preparing for a similar pivot (to use their favored jargon for “change in strategy”).

Big tech is the new Hollywood: a sector as flush with lucre and avaritia as it’s bankrupt of intellect.

“When people are trying to pursue one path, that path doesn’t necessarily work so they go into an adjacent space, a space next to that path,” he said.

Christ, but the millennial’s impoverished parlance is revolting! Every phenomenon is “a thing,” every locus (be it physical or figurative) “a space.” This is a corollary of three consecutive generations composed primarily of “book virgins.”

(Mr. Torenberg said that, when it came to the frequency of the phrase’s usage, it was a seven or an eight on a scale of 10. A 10 out of 10, he said, was the term “doubleclick,” which investors use as handy shorthand for “let’s go deeper or zoom in on this topic!”)

If anyone actually verbalizes that in my presence, I’ll need to decamp.

Ms. Shriver said that “-adjacent” was probably useful in a climate where businesses were “started up in the spirit of going fishing.”

If anything, its utterance is a valuable sign by which an interlocutor’s intelligence and superficiality may be assessed.

“It’s something between angling and gambling,” she said. “Rather than setting out with a specific intention to produce a product and sell that product, it’s capitalizing on vagueness.”

I concur: sleazy marketing can’t be compassed without at least a heaping dose of ambiguity.

This post probably wouldn’t be indited if I hadn’t — by complete coincidence — chanced upon another that’s far more aggravating earlier today:

Missouri woman says she contacted Merriam-Webster to change dictionary definition of racism

By Louis Casiano | Fox News

An email from a Missouri woman has prompted Merriam-Webster to update its definition of “racism” to include the systemic aspects that have contributed to discrimination, according to a report.

Who needs standards when crumbling institutions have brainless laymen to counsel them by petition?

Kennedy Mitchum, 22, of Florissant, told KMOV-TV that she was inspired to email the dictionary publisher after getting into arguments with others about the definition.

Naturally, because she’s as overtly incorrect as brainwashed.

Merriam-Webster defines racism as “a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.”

If one were to replace, “produce an inherent superiority” with “define the comparative nature,” that definition would be correct. Not only are races (and ethnic groups thereof) distinguished by thousands of physiological differences, but all of them are in some way inferior and superior to others by virtue of their respective deficiencies and aptitudes. No other datum is so heterodox to our rotten, ruling elites, and few are so evident — hence their attempts to muddle by redefinition racism with racial supremacy, which is as banefully immoral as racism is honest.

Mitchum, a recent graduate of Drake University, felt the definition was too simple and too surface-level, according to the news station.

When aren’t collegians ruled by their irrational emotions, especially when they can’t prevail in debate?

“So, a couple [sic] weeks ago, I said this is the last argument I’m going to have about this,” she said. “I know what racism is, I’ve experienced it time and time and time again in a lot of different ways, so enough is enough. So, I emailed them about how I felt about it. Saying this needs to change.”

In clown town, acceptation must suit the disingenuous needs of some imbecile who stultifies herself in her little squabbles. Okay, hon.

“I basically told them they need to include that there is systematic oppression on people. It’s not just ‘I don’t like someone,’ it’s a system of oppression for a certain group of people,” she added.

Yeah: systematic oppression in academia and the dating market is suffered by overachieving east Asian males. That’s it. This woman will never know what oppression is unless I ascend to predominance as a powerful warlord governing the monocracy of Buchanistan. Under the heel of my dictatorship, she’d probably come to love my tyranny, if only because she’d be subjected to actual human nature.

The change comes as the United States is grappling with nationwide protests over racial discrimination following the death of George Floyd.

Whereas the original definition of racism is a person’s individual belief in the superiority of one race over another,

As explicated above, that’s a lie.

the second definition will be expanded to include the types of bias that have contributed to racial discrimination, said Peter Sokolowski, the editor-at-large at Merriam-Webster, in a statement to Fox News.

Imagine my surprise, to find this diddling peddler of substandard scrivening the following afternoon, preaching to the progressive cult’s choir.

(Of course, he’s one of these. Genuine progressives who are either attractive or intelligent are as rare as four-leaf novels.)

“Our second definition is divided to express, first, explicit institutional bias against people because of their race, and, second, a broader implicit bias that can also result in an asymmetrical power structure,” he said.

Even if he was referring to the actual systemic bias in government, academia and legacy media that promotes corporate feminists and a few largely dupable ethnic minorities, and sustains our plutarchy at the expense of everyone else, rather than Bonald Blumph’s imaginary AmeriKKKan white supremacist patriarchy, the equational leftist argument that power+privilege=racism is still wishful fantasy.

“This second definition covers the sense that Ms. Mitchum was seeking, and we will make that even more clear in our next release,” he added. “This is the kind of continuous revision that is part of the work of keeping the dictionary up to date, based on rigorous criteria and research we employ in order to describe the language as it is actually used.”

Your sales have been in the toilet for years, so you may as well keep flushing.

Look, I’m fully aware that this is probably just a publicity stunt. Who knows whether this purported email ever existed, or whether this querulent is a paid shill? However, this article does prompt certain questions. Does “rigorous research” involve the receipt of dumb emails from jaundiced, mentally challenged women as valid recommendations? Which “rigorous criteria” prescribe political trends as viable influences on a resource that’s supposed to be definitive and impartial?

Stick to Random House’s publications, which are largely dispassionate and far superior, faults notwithstanding.