Thursday, June 5, 2014
I have Jay's old email id on AOL. I haven't used it in something like eight years, because we went through a period where on every AOL update I lost all my saved mail. I don't even remember the password. Back when I set up my Gmail account, I set AOL to forward all email to Gmail. Over the years I've been getting fewer and fewer bits of email forwarded from AOL, mostly ads from cruise lines. AOL, for all its faults, does a fairly good job of filtering out spam.
Suddenly I'm getting loads of crap forwarded from AOL, all unsolicited spam ads. It all seems to be coming through some kind of bulk mailer called "iBuilder".
Where the heck did they get that email address? How do I stop it?
(I may have shot myself in the foot. It's possible that something somewhere, like a local store I was shopping in, insisted that I give them an email address, and I shrugged and gave them the AOL id without even thinking about it.)
----------------------------------------
Bonus rant:
Alexander Fleming DID NOT "discover" penicillin. He merely named it and gave it a medical stamp of approval, and made it possible to make money on it. People had been strapping moldy bread to injuries for centuries before he came along.
.
Showing posts with label AOL. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AOL. Show all posts
Thursday, June 05, 2014
Friday, August 07, 2009
2536 Nuthin'
Friday, August 7, 2009
Nothing day. The outside temperature was 75 F, but for some reason it felt terribly hot to me, so I didn't do any walking. It was 75 in the house, too, but it felt cool in here. Must have been the sun. And humidity.
Mostly I spent the day moving old emails from the AOL archives to my new Gmail id. Mostly from The Man. Naturally, I had to read them all as I transferred them - all 4000 or so from over the past 2.3 years. I've been reading them over the past several days. We've used email like other people use instant message, I guess.
I do love his mind, it's been fascinating reading, but he's also the most frustrating person I've ever known, so it's also been a rollercoaster read.
.
There can’t be sin without knowledge.
--------------------------
--------------------------
Nothing day. The outside temperature was 75 F, but for some reason it felt terribly hot to me, so I didn't do any walking. It was 75 in the house, too, but it felt cool in here. Must have been the sun. And humidity.
Mostly I spent the day moving old emails from the AOL archives to my new Gmail id. Mostly from The Man. Naturally, I had to read them all as I transferred them - all 4000 or so from over the past 2.3 years. I've been reading them over the past several days. We've used email like other people use instant message, I guess.
I do love his mind, it's been fascinating reading, but he's also the most frustrating person I've ever known, so it's also been a rollercoaster read.
.
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
2531 Three days?
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
I haven't updated in a while. I've been busy moving archived emails from AOL to Gmail, and in the process, I'm rereading them. Fascinating. And we've had a few days without rain, so I've been walking. I'm still eating under 1,000 balanced calories per day in five or six "meals", but I'm still stuck at 10 pounds lost and 15 or 20 to go, so every day it's not raining, I walk.
I'm going to a Meetup movie and dinner tonight in Albany. We're to meet in the theater lobby at 6:00, and I don't know exactly where it is, or what rush hour traffic might be like. The GPS says the drive should take an hour, so I figure just to be safe, I've got to leave here a little after 4.
It's not raining, so I want to get a walk in before washing my hair and dressing.
Bye.
------------------------------------
A few minutes later: Wow! Google maps is helpful! The GPS would get me there, but I still wondered where I was going, so I looked it up.
Then I looked at the street view, and my heart fell. The theater fronts on a street full of businesses, with a store abutting on each side. Albany is famous for parking difficulty. I didn't see any sign of a parking lot or lot entrance next to the theater.
So I looked at the satellite view. Bingo! There's a large parking lot immediately behind the theater reached by turning in at the next side street.
GPS wouldn't have told me that.
.
T.S. Eliot: "Some editors are failed writers,
but so are most writers".
-----------------------------------------
but so are most writers".
-----------------------------------------
I haven't updated in a while. I've been busy moving archived emails from AOL to Gmail, and in the process, I'm rereading them. Fascinating. And we've had a few days without rain, so I've been walking. I'm still eating under 1,000 balanced calories per day in five or six "meals", but I'm still stuck at 10 pounds lost and 15 or 20 to go, so every day it's not raining, I walk.
I'm going to a Meetup movie and dinner tonight in Albany. We're to meet in the theater lobby at 6:00, and I don't know exactly where it is, or what rush hour traffic might be like. The GPS says the drive should take an hour, so I figure just to be safe, I've got to leave here a little after 4.
It's not raining, so I want to get a walk in before washing my hair and dressing.
Bye.
------------------------------------
A few minutes later: Wow! Google maps is helpful! The GPS would get me there, but I still wondered where I was going, so I looked it up.
Then I looked at the street view, and my heart fell. The theater fronts on a street full of businesses, with a store abutting on each side. Albany is famous for parking difficulty. I didn't see any sign of a parking lot or lot entrance next to the theater.
So I looked at the satellite view. Bingo! There's a large parking lot immediately behind the theater reached by turning in at the next side street.
GPS wouldn't have told me that.
.
Friday, January 02, 2009
2193 Another "News Story" from those blithering idiots at AOL
Friday, January 2, 2009
I use AOL for my main email id. That's all I use it for. It's the one thing they get right, and it's free. When you bring up AOL you get a welcome screen that has "news stories". I should know better by now, but sometimes I get suckered into clicking on one.
One that suckered me yesterday was about a study showing that heavier women report more and better sex than thin women. Well, I'm a heavier woman trying to get thinner, and I certainly want to continue enjoying sex, and I wondered if I might end up missing out on something, maybe it has something to do with estrogen being stored in fat, and if there's anything I need now it's to preserve the little estrogen I've got left ... so I clicked on it.
There were so many things wrong with that "study" that I was literally yelling at the screen.
I should define where I'm coming from before I go commenting on "heavier women". I am 4' 10" tall, and I weigh 140 pounds. My measurements are 42, 33, 39. My legs are short and thick, and my thighs jiggle side-to-side when I walk. I am by no means thin. My goal is 125 pounds, that's where I'd like to be, and even there I'd still be pretty, uh, lush, because I'm so short. Actually, the only thing that distresses me about my body right now is that I have a thick pad on my belly (it's a loose pad on TOP of very good abs, by the way, so don't make crunch noises at me). If I could get rid of just that pad I'd be satisfied with all the rest as it is, jiggle and all. Anyway, the point is, I am considered "heavier", no matter how any study defines it.
And that was the first thing that bugged me about the story - they defined "heavier" as being a size 12 (American) and up.
First off, you can't define anything by dress size! If I pay less than $30 for a dress or blouse, I wear a 10 or 12, or a medium, maybe even a large if it's tight across the bust. If I pay more than $100 for the same thing, I wear a 6 or 8, or a small. I'm not exaggerating. I buy about half my clothes at Wal-Mart, and half at boutiques, so I have a lot of experience with the difference in size measurements. I wear a Coldwater Creek small, 6/8. Coldwater Creek caters to older women with large budgets, and wants to make them feel good about their sizes, so they put small numbers on big items. If I tried on a $2,000 sundress on Rodeo Drive, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find I wear a 4. Less expensive clothing skimps on fabric. More expensive clothing plays to egos. Simple fact.
So is that a cheap 12 or an expensive 12? And how do they get "heavier" when 12 (however defined) is supposedly the average woman's size? Heavier than what?
So ok, got past that. Next, the "study" is based on women "self reporting". Bad methodology. Self reports means self selected, often come from people who want to brag and/or have an agenda, and often have nothing to do with facts.
Last, the "researcher's" "conclusions" are that men (they're saying in general, note, not specific) prefer heavier women, find heavier women sexier.
This is not a valid conclusion.
[It may or may not be true. I'm certainly not saying that large women aren't sexy, ALL intelligent strong loving confident women are sexy!, but the conclusion simply isn't supported by the "study", and that's what I'm objecting to. I'm heavy, and I'm sexy. So there.]
It's possible that men find heavier women simply more approachable, and more available. Wolves and players all know that it's easier to get into a woman's pants if she has low self esteem, and all men dislike rejection, so if a guy is looking for a one-night stand, who's he more likely to approach? Most likely one that he thinks DOESN'T get approached a lot.
Getting approached and invited has a lot to do with how much you get.
If you watch Maury or Jerry, you see 300 pound toothless illiterate women who are sleeping with five men at the same time. Some men will take anything they can get. Some women are easy to get. At least Jerry Springer doesn't attempt to conclude that 300 pound toothless illiterate women are sexier and more in demand than other women.
Give me a break, AOL.
--------------------------
Yes, there are lots of men who do prefer full-bodied women. I'm dating one right now. By his standards, I'm skinny. He likes 'em BIG. I think that's why I'm having so much trouble losing that last 15 pounds. I don't feel a strong internal or external urge.
.
I use AOL for my main email id. That's all I use it for. It's the one thing they get right, and it's free. When you bring up AOL you get a welcome screen that has "news stories". I should know better by now, but sometimes I get suckered into clicking on one.
One that suckered me yesterday was about a study showing that heavier women report more and better sex than thin women. Well, I'm a heavier woman trying to get thinner, and I certainly want to continue enjoying sex, and I wondered if I might end up missing out on something, maybe it has something to do with estrogen being stored in fat, and if there's anything I need now it's to preserve the little estrogen I've got left ... so I clicked on it.
There were so many things wrong with that "study" that I was literally yelling at the screen.
I should define where I'm coming from before I go commenting on "heavier women". I am 4' 10" tall, and I weigh 140 pounds. My measurements are 42, 33, 39. My legs are short and thick, and my thighs jiggle side-to-side when I walk. I am by no means thin. My goal is 125 pounds, that's where I'd like to be, and even there I'd still be pretty, uh, lush, because I'm so short. Actually, the only thing that distresses me about my body right now is that I have a thick pad on my belly (it's a loose pad on TOP of very good abs, by the way, so don't make crunch noises at me). If I could get rid of just that pad I'd be satisfied with all the rest as it is, jiggle and all. Anyway, the point is, I am considered "heavier", no matter how any study defines it.
And that was the first thing that bugged me about the story - they defined "heavier" as being a size 12 (American) and up.
First off, you can't define anything by dress size! If I pay less than $30 for a dress or blouse, I wear a 10 or 12, or a medium, maybe even a large if it's tight across the bust. If I pay more than $100 for the same thing, I wear a 6 or 8, or a small. I'm not exaggerating. I buy about half my clothes at Wal-Mart, and half at boutiques, so I have a lot of experience with the difference in size measurements. I wear a Coldwater Creek small, 6/8. Coldwater Creek caters to older women with large budgets, and wants to make them feel good about their sizes, so they put small numbers on big items. If I tried on a $2,000 sundress on Rodeo Drive, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find I wear a 4. Less expensive clothing skimps on fabric. More expensive clothing plays to egos. Simple fact.
So is that a cheap 12 or an expensive 12? And how do they get "heavier" when 12 (however defined) is supposedly the average woman's size? Heavier than what?
So ok, got past that. Next, the "study" is based on women "self reporting". Bad methodology. Self reports means self selected, often come from people who want to brag and/or have an agenda, and often have nothing to do with facts.
Last, the "researcher's" "conclusions" are that men (they're saying in general, note, not specific) prefer heavier women, find heavier women sexier.
This is not a valid conclusion.
[It may or may not be true. I'm certainly not saying that large women aren't sexy, ALL intelligent strong loving confident women are sexy!, but the conclusion simply isn't supported by the "study", and that's what I'm objecting to. I'm heavy, and I'm sexy. So there.]
It's possible that men find heavier women simply more approachable, and more available. Wolves and players all know that it's easier to get into a woman's pants if she has low self esteem, and all men dislike rejection, so if a guy is looking for a one-night stand, who's he more likely to approach? Most likely one that he thinks DOESN'T get approached a lot.
Getting approached and invited has a lot to do with how much you get.
If you watch Maury or Jerry, you see 300 pound toothless illiterate women who are sleeping with five men at the same time. Some men will take anything they can get. Some women are easy to get. At least Jerry Springer doesn't attempt to conclude that 300 pound toothless illiterate women are sexier and more in demand than other women.
Give me a break, AOL.
--------------------------
Yes, there are lots of men who do prefer full-bodied women. I'm dating one right now. By his standards, I'm skinny. He likes 'em BIG. I think that's why I'm having so much trouble losing that last 15 pounds. I don't feel a strong internal or external urge.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)