Brief interlude before I answer comments on my last post.
Some of you use blogspot as their blog host. And some of you, though not all, have drawbridges in place.
Do you really think it necessary to infantalize your readership, or rather those inclined to comment, by asking them to “verify” that they are not a “robot”? Tick box. No, I am not a robot. But I may well employ one soon to tick the box verifying that I am not a robot. It gets worse.
“Please tick all pictures showing a shopfront/trees/mountains”. Come again?
What’s all the paranoia? Do you really think you are so precious that someone will take the time (after having penned a more or less considered reply to your musings) to then jump through the hoops like a dog with a biscuit waiting the other side?
U
Bitch on the Blog 
I like the “I’m not a robot” ones. I’ve heard having something like that helps protect your website from hackers, and this one is easy for the commenters. The ones I hate are the ones with letters and numbers that don’t always work when you translate it correctly. They tend to turn me off.
Comment by cheerfulmonk — July 18, 2016 @ 18:15 |
Gosh, Jean, yes. Had forgotten about those hieroglyphs. Here they tend to be used by government bodies and banks. Which is all fine and dandy. However if you can’t get your act together on attempt number three you are out of there. And I am not even blind (yet).
U
Comment by bitchontheblog — July 18, 2016 @ 20:54 |
You can skip the robot stuff. Try it. It usually works without do9ng all that shit.
Comment by Sabine — July 18, 2016 @ 20:42 |
I like a bit of optimism. Even if misplaced. Thanks, Sabine.
Come to think of what you said I am reminded of when phoning some organisation and a voice, devoid of any soul, will give you options. Press 1 if…, blah blah, press 2 … By option five I have usually forgotten what the others were. Or they make you say what department/person you want to speak to. No idea. I just want to speak to someone. So, eventually, like a small eternity later, they do give up on you; and what do you know … You are being put through to an “operator”. A human being. Hallelujah.
U
Comment by bitchontheblog — July 18, 2016 @ 20:51 |
No seriously. Most blogs I visit have this robot stuff but it can be completely ignored. Try it.
Comment by Sabine — July 18, 2016 @ 20:57 |
OK, so I had one of those check boxes. Checking it was to “Confirm you are NOT a spammer”. I don’t know if it was working or not as most, if not all, of the spam I’m getting has been filtered by other means. So…. I turned it off. If I start getting spam that I have to manually delete, it gets turned back on.
Comment by Mike — July 19, 2016 @ 13:29 |
I understand, Mike. I wrote my post in a moment of slight irritation, having had to go through the “routine” three times in a row. Obviously, as Jean also explained, if there is a rationale behind the madness, it’s fine with me.
Talking about spam. My previous (still used with my wordpress account) email address was hijacked by god knows who. Leaving aside my acute embarrassment when my father (and others) alerted me to spam they received in my name, the sublime touched on the ridiculous when I started receiving spam sent to me by me. Why people do this rubbish to others is beyond me.
As an aside, and still digesting and in awe that you work(ed) in nuclear: What’s your take on Oppenheimer?
U
Comment by bitchontheblog — July 19, 2016 @ 14:36 |
Oppenheimer is not someone that I’ve studied or given much thought about. The history of theoretical reactor physics wasn’t a required topic. My work in nuclear has been in the application of nuclear energy, first in nuclear propulsion and, after that, commercial nuclear power plant operations, and, eventually moving into training operators. I was licensed as a reactor operator and, later, as a senior reactor operator. I was an instructor in the navy and, after I got out, was able to get into training after about 3 years working as an operator.
So… I did a quick read on Oppenheimer. When he died, he was 62 — younger than I am now. I knew of him before your question, but hadn’t read much about him in a long time. In short, he was far, far smarter than anyone I have ever known — and that is saying a lot — his abilities summarized well in his reciept of the Enrico Fermi Award in 1963 “for contributions to theoretical physics as a teacher and originator of ideas, and for leadership of the Los Alamos Laboratory and the atomic energy program during critical years.” Even though he may have been a supporter of the American Communist Party, he was also an American patriot, was successfully recruited by the Soviets, though they tried.
Comment by Mike — July 19, 2016 @ 22:04 |
“was successfully” should be “wasn’t successfully” in that last sentence.
Comment by Mike — July 19, 2016 @ 22:06 |
Another glimpse, from another time, a Cold War time:
The BOMB. I’ve been closer to nuclear warheads than most who weren’t in the weapons programs — within feet, but I’ve never seen one. Never even seen a missile, though I was on a missile submarine. Used to go past the missile tubes on my way to and from the living spaces on the submarine and my work area. Like I said, I was in nuclear propulsion, not nuclear weapons.
The Cold War. I remember… “Man battle stations missile. Man battle stations missile.” Then sitting there, in the engine room at my station, for hours without hearing the words “Now spin up all missiles for weapons systems readiness test” like we always had before. Imagining the worst. Imagining what might be going on. Thinking that we had 16 missiles, each with multiple warheads (up to 14), ready to launch. Thinking about my family.
This was just one day in the mid 70s on patrol. Every other day was non-eventful and undramatic, just the way it was supposed to. Sometimes we had drills, but we always knew they were drills…. except for that one day when we heard, “Now spin up all missiles,” and not the rest.
Comment by Mike — July 23, 2016 @ 13:23 |
Thank you for taking the time to give me a glimpse into a world most of us are shut out of and therefore have little idea of what its day to day practicalities involve.
When I mentioned Oppenheimer I was thinking of “Oppenheimer’s Dilemma”, a moral dilemma which caught my imagination as early as age eighteen or so. And keeps fascinating me. The age old, how much responsibility a scientist has for the use any of his “discoveries” are put to by other agencies, does, of course, apply not only to Oppenheimer. Though, to this day, can’t help thinking he was the epitome of the scientist’s dilemma because of the enormity and far reaching consequences of what he made possible.
As an aside: Probably because the Cold War chilled me to the bone, particularly when I was still a child and was part of the adult world I didn’t understand, I find it very hard to say out aloud the word. ATOM BOMB.
And a further aside, and nothing to do with Oppenheimer: The atom bomb is not the devil’s work, it’s God’s. I don’t know where you stand in religion, I most certainly do not wish to offend. In fact I quite like God when I think of him as a “father”. Except, of course, he isn’t that “almighty” father, is he. Because if he were almighty we’d live in paradise. it was one of the first questions the Angel came home with after an RE lesson at school (and I bet most children do ask it): “Mama, if God is so almighty then WHY ….” Fill in the rest at your leisure. Well, that was the end of that. I did what my parents had done with me, namely, telling him that God and the Bible are best not taken literally … though do, like all religions, give insight into human workings … bla bla bla.
Yes, so starting with Oppenheimer and the atom bomb I end on the note of a non existing God. But then so was Eric Clapton … god. Shows you: All it takes is a guitar and knowing how to play it, and your audience.
I am fond of Oppenheimer. And hope that whatever he himself felt about his dilemma will let him rest in peace.
U
Comment by bitchontheblog — July 23, 2016 @ 06:41 |