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

If a driver did this, I guess the driver and his insurance would be
liable. But this was doing the driverless auto-summons thing, so I
assume Tesla is liable.

Automation can transfer liabilities.

After it hit the plane, you might expect it to stop.

--

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
Francis Bacon

John Larkin wrote:
===============
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
>
> If a driver did this, I guess the driver and his insurance would be
> liable. But this was doing the driverless auto-summons thing, so I
> assume Tesla is liable.
>

** No way !!

The dumb jerk with the smart phone ( plus app) in their hands is.
And if not, the owner of the car that let them do it.

> Automation can transfer liabilities.

** No very likely.

...... Phil

On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 18:19:29 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
<pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:

>John Larkin wrote:
>===============
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
>>
>> If a driver did this, I guess the driver and his insurance would be
>> liable. But this was doing the driverless auto-summons thing, so I
>> assume Tesla is liable.
>>
>
>** No way !!
>
>The dumb jerk with the smart phone ( plus app) in their hands is.
>And if not, the owner of the car that let them do it.
>
>> Automation can transfer liabilities.
>
>** No very likely.
>
>..... Phil
>
>
>

Tesla forgot to code the "don't hit a jet airplane" subroutine.

And the "stop after you hit something" one.

--

I yam what I yam - Popeye

On 4/22/2022 6:47 PM, John Larkin wrote:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
>
> If a driver did this, I guess the driver and his insurance would be
> liable. But this was doing the driverless auto-summons thing, so I
> assume Tesla is liable.

Does it say in the fine print "Only to be used in parking lots"?

That don't look like a parking lot to me.

> Automation can transfer liabilities.
>
> After it hit the plane, you might expect it to stop.
>

On 4/22/2022 10:46 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 18:19:29 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
> <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> John Larkin wrote:
>> ===============
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
>>>
>>> If a driver did this, I guess the driver and his insurance would be
>>> liable. But this was doing the driverless auto-summons thing, so I
>>> assume Tesla is liable.
>>>
>>
>> ** No way !!
>>
>> The dumb jerk with the smart phone ( plus app) in their hands is.
>> And if not, the owner of the car that let them do it.
>>
>>> Automation can transfer liabilities.
>>
>> ** No very likely.
>>
>> ..... Phil
>>
>>
>>
>
> Tesla forgot to code the "don't hit a jet airplane" subroutine.
>
> And the "stop after you hit something" one.
>
>

My guess is it thinks it's in a parking lot and is mostly "looking"
close to the ground, and is deeply confused by how relatively high a
small aircraft sits on those lil legs. "path looks clear to me"

On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 10:20:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

>On 4/22/2022 10:46 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 18:19:29 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
>> <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>> ===============
>>>>
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
>>>>
>>>> If a driver did this, I guess the driver and his insurance would be
>>>> liable. But this was doing the driverless auto-summons thing, so I
>>>> assume Tesla is liable.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ** No way !!
>>>
>>> The dumb jerk with the smart phone ( plus app) in their hands is.
>>> And if not, the owner of the car that let them do it.
>>>
>>>> Automation can transfer liabilities.
>>>
>>> ** No very likely.
>>>
>>> ..... Phil
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Tesla forgot to code the "don't hit a jet airplane" subroutine.
>>
>> And the "stop after you hit something" one.
>>
>>
>
>My guess is it thinks it's in a parking lot and is mostly "looking"
>close to the ground, and is deeply confused by how relatively high a
>small aircraft sits on those lil legs. "path looks clear to me"

Don't Teslas try to sneak under semis that are across the highway?

They need a Limbo option.

--

I yam what I yam - Popeye

On 4/23/2022 10:23 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 10:20:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
>
>> On 4/22/2022 10:46 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>> On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 18:19:29 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
>>> <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>>> ===============
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
>>>>>
>>>>> If a driver did this, I guess the driver and his insurance would be
>>>>> liable. But this was doing the driverless auto-summons thing, so I
>>>>> assume Tesla is liable.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ** No way !!
>>>>
>>>> The dumb jerk with the smart phone ( plus app) in their hands is.
>>>> And if not, the owner of the car that let them do it.
>>>>
>>>>> Automation can transfer liabilities.
>>>>
>>>> ** No very likely.
>>>>
>>>> ..... Phil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Tesla forgot to code the "don't hit a jet airplane" subroutine.
>>>
>>> And the "stop after you hit something" one.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> My guess is it thinks it's in a parking lot and is mostly "looking"
>> close to the ground, and is deeply confused by how relatively high a
>> small aircraft sits on those lil legs. "path looks clear to me"
>
> Don't Teslas try to sneak under semis that are across the highway?
>
> They need a Limbo option.
>
>
>

It's remarkable it works as well as it does much of the time. That guy
who was in the unfortunate crash with the semi that I recall got very
used to the autopilot being very good much of the time and came to trust
it like a friend. It wasn't his friend.

OTOH I saw a trash barrel roll out in front of a Model X a few cars
ahead of me on the highway the other day and it nimbly dodged around it,
faster than a human (or a human in the 5th decade of life like me at
least my video game playing days are mostly over, too) could manage.

My Volt is pretty bare-bones with respect to driver-assistance options
aside from a backup camera it's mirrors and my eyes.

On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 10:58:44 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

>On 4/23/2022 10:23 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 10:20:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/22/2022 10:46 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 18:19:29 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
>>>> <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>>>> ===============
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If a driver did this, I guess the driver and his insurance would be
>>>>>> liable. But this was doing the driverless auto-summons thing, so I
>>>>>> assume Tesla is liable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ** No way !!
>>>>>
>>>>> The dumb jerk with the smart phone ( plus app) in their hands is.
>>>>> And if not, the owner of the car that let them do it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Automation can transfer liabilities.
>>>>>
>>>>> ** No very likely.
>>>>>
>>>>> ..... Phil
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tesla forgot to code the "don't hit a jet airplane" subroutine.
>>>>
>>>> And the "stop after you hit something" one.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> My guess is it thinks it's in a parking lot and is mostly "looking"
>>> close to the ground, and is deeply confused by how relatively high a
>>> small aircraft sits on those lil legs. "path looks clear to me"
>>
>> Don't Teslas try to sneak under semis that are across the highway?
>>
>> They need a Limbo option.
>>
>>
>>
>
>It's remarkable it works as well as it does much of the time. That guy
>who was in the unfortunate crash with the semi that I recall got very
>used to the autopilot being very good much of the time and came to trust
>it like a friend. It wasn't his friend.
>
>OTOH I saw a trash barrel roll out in front of a Model X a few cars
>ahead of me on the highway the other day and it nimbly dodged around it,
>faster than a human (or a human in the 5th decade of life like me at
>least my video game playing days are mostly over, too) could manage.
>
>My Volt is pretty bare-bones with respect to driver-assistance options
>aside from a backup camera it's mirrors and my eyes.

We were driving uphill on Swiss Street and a blue wheelie recycling
bin was screaming down the middle headed right for us. At the last
second, it swerved and hit a parked car.

The slope there is about 20% so it was moving.

Driver assist makes more sense than autopilot to me, especially in
cities.

On the highway, I'd like a display of everything around me, with
projected collision hazards highlighted. My Audi has rear blind spots
and no cameras.

--

I yam what I yam - Popeye

John Larkin wrote:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
>
> If a driver did this, I guess the driver and his insurance would be
> liable. But this was doing the driverless auto-summons thing, so I
> assume Tesla is liable.
>
> Automation can transfer liabilities.
>
> After it hit the plane, you might expect it to stop.

When people said "AI" they used to mean HAL, but now a thing with less
intelligence than an insect is called AI.

--
Defund the Thought Police

John Larkin wrote:
===================
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
> After it hit the plane, you might expect it to stop.

** FFS it fucking did.

Wot a damn stupid troll.
Oh, it's a JL post so there is no other kind.

...... Phil

On 23/04/2022 15:20, bitrex wrote:
> On 4/22/2022 10:46 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 18:19:29 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
>> <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>> ===============
>>>>
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
>>>>
>>>> If a driver did this, I guess the driver and his insurance would be
>>>> liable. But this was doing the driverless auto-summons thing, so I
>>>> assume Tesla is liable.
>>>>
>>>
>>> **  No way !!
>>>
>>> The dumb jerk with the smart phone ( plus app) in their hands is.
>>> And if not,  the owner of the car that let them do it.
>>>
>>>> Automation can transfer liabilities.
>>>
>>> **  No very likely.
>>>
>>> .....  Phil
>>
>> Tesla forgot to code the "don't hit a jet airplane" subroutine.
>>
>> And the "stop after you hit something" one.
>
> My guess is it thinks it's in a parking lot and is mostly "looking"
> close to the ground, and is deeply confused by how relatively high a
> small aircraft sits on those lil legs. "path looks clear to me"

Not only that but the tail is at such an angle ~45 degrees that the main
reflection back to the sensors will mislead both lidar and radar into
thinking that the obstruction is further away than it really is.

The image processing sanity check clearly didn't work. Ooops!

We know that Telsas have a thing about featureless white trucks too.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Sunday, April 24, 2022 at 6:09:06 AM UTC-7, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 23/04/2022 15:20, bitrex wrote:
> > On 4/22/2022 10:46 PM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >> On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 18:19:29 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
> >> <palli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> John Larkin wrote:
> >>> ===============
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
> >>>>
> >>>> If a driver did this, I guess the driver and his insurance would be
> >>>> liable. But this was doing the driverless auto-summons thing, so I
> >>>> assume Tesla is liable.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> ** No way !!
> >>>
> >>> The dumb jerk with the smart phone ( plus app) in their hands is.
> >>> And if not, the owner of the car that let them do it.
> >>>
> >>>> Automation can transfer liabilities.
> >>>
> >>> ** No very likely.
> >>>
> >>> ..... Phil
> >>
> >> Tesla forgot to code the "don't hit a jet airplane" subroutine.
> >>
> >> And the "stop after you hit something" one.
> >
> > My guess is it thinks it's in a parking lot and is mostly "looking"
> > close to the ground, and is deeply confused by how relatively high a
> > small aircraft sits on those lil legs. "path looks clear to me"
> Not only that but the tail is at such an angle ~45 degrees that the main
> reflection back to the sensors will mislead both lidar and radar into
> thinking that the obstruction is further away than it really is.
>
> The image processing sanity check clearly didn't work. Ooops!
>
> We know that Telsas have a thing about featureless white trucks too.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Martin Brown

Tesla suffers from a total reliance on vision processing instead of combining it with LIDAR.
https://venturebeat.com/2021/07/03/tesla-ai-chief-explains-why-self-driving-cars-dont-need-lidar/
The problem is nobody, apparently, collected data on what aircraft look like.

On Sun, 24 Apr 2022 06:02:31 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
<pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:

> John Larkin wrote:
>===================
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
>
>> After it hit the plane, you might expect it to stop.
>
>** FFS it fucking did.
>
>Wot a damn stupid troll.
>Oh, it's a JL post so there is no other kind.
>
>
>
>..... Phil
>

I sentence you to being Phil Allison for the rest of your life.

--

I yam what I yam - Popeye

On Sunday, April 24, 2022 at 2:52:18 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
> On Sunday, April 24, 2022 at 6:09:06 AM UTC-7, Martin Brown wrote:
> > On 23/04/2022 15:20, bitrex wrote:
> > > On 4/22/2022 10:46 PM, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> > >> On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 18:19:29 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
> > >> <palli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> John Larkin wrote:
> > >>> ===============
> > >>>>
> > >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
> > >>>>
> > >>>> If a driver did this, I guess the driver and his insurance would be
> > >>>> liable. But this was doing the driverless auto-summons thing, so I
> > >>>> assume Tesla is liable.
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> ** No way !!
> > >>>
> > >>> The dumb jerk with the smart phone ( plus app) in their hands is.
> > >>> And if not, the owner of the car that let them do it.
> > >>>
> > >>>> Automation can transfer liabilities.
> > >>>
> > >>> ** No very likely.
> > >>>
> > >>> ..... Phil
> > >>
> > >> Tesla forgot to code the "don't hit a jet airplane" subroutine.
> > >>
> > >> And the "stop after you hit something" one.
> > >
> > > My guess is it thinks it's in a parking lot and is mostly "looking"
> > > close to the ground, and is deeply confused by how relatively high a
> > > small aircraft sits on those lil legs. "path looks clear to me"
> > Not only that but the tail is at such an angle ~45 degrees that the main
> > reflection back to the sensors will mislead both lidar and radar into
> > thinking that the obstruction is further away than it really is.
> >
> > The image processing sanity check clearly didn't work. Ooops!
> >
> > We know that Telsas have a thing about featureless white trucks too.
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Martin Brown
> Tesla suffers from a total reliance on vision processing instead of combining it with LIDAR.
> https://venturebeat.com/2021/07/03/tesla-ai-chief-explains-why-self-driving-cars-dont-need-lidar/
> The problem is nobody, apparently, collected data on what aircraft look like.

None of that matters. Any time the car is being moved, a person is supposed to supervise it. Summon is not intended to work without someone watching to stop it with the remote or phone app. Clearly this person is rather trusting and expected the car to drive itself autonomously... which they don't. No one at Tesla says they do operate autonomously. Just people who wish to complain that the car doesn't do what they say it doesn't do. Larkin is the number one complainer. I guess he isn't very good at listening to what he's told.

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Sunday, April 24, 2022 at 5:06:17 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Apr 2022 06:02:31 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
> <palli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > John Larkin wrote:
> >===================
> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
> >
> >> After it hit the plane, you might expect it to stop.
> >
> >** FFS it fucking did.
> >
> >Wot a damn stupid troll.
> >Oh, it's a JL post so there is no other kind.
> >
> >
> >
> >..... Phil
> >
> I sentence you to being Phil Allison for the rest of your life.

Larkin envies Phil Allison in that regard.

--

Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On 4/24/2022 5:15 PM, Ricky wrote:
> On Sunday, April 24, 2022 at 5:06:17 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> On Sun, 24 Apr 2022 06:02:31 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
>> <palli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>> ===================
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
>>>
>>>> After it hit the plane, you might expect it to stop.
>>>
>>> ** FFS it fucking did.
>>>
>>> Wot a damn stupid troll.
>>> Oh, it's a JL post so there is no other kind.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ..... Phil
>>>
>> I sentence you to being Phil Allison for the rest of your life.
>
> Larkin envies Phil Allison in that regard.
>

It will be fun to "ha ha!" the Tesla owners around here once Musk
unlocks Trump's account 2 minutes after acquiring Twitter. It would be
more satisfying to punch them, but...

On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
> On 4/24/2022 5:15 PM, Ricky wrote:
> > On Sunday, April 24, 2022 at 5:06:17 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >> On Sun, 24 Apr 2022 06:02:31 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
> >> <palli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> John Larkin wrote:
> >>> ===================
> >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
> >>>
> >>>> After it hit the plane, you might expect it to stop.
> >>>
> >>> ** FFS it fucking did.
> >>>
> >>> Wot a damn stupid troll.
> >>> Oh, it's a JL post so there is no other kind.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ..... Phil
> >>>
> >> I sentence you to being Phil Allison for the rest of your life.
> >
> > Larkin envies Phil Allison in that regard.
> >
> It will be fun to "ha ha!" the Tesla owners around here once Musk
> unlocks Trump's account 2 minutes after acquiring Twitter. It would be
> more satisfying to punch them, but...

On the meths today, I see.

Why would I give a shit about Trmp, Musk and Twitter?

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On 4/25/2022 11:13 AM, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 11:20:57 PM UTC+10, bitrex wrote:
>> On 4/24/2022 5:15 PM, Ricky wrote:
>>> On Sunday, April 24, 2022 at 5:06:17 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 24 Apr 2022 06:02:31 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
>>>> <palli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>>>> ===================
>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
>>>>>
>>>>>> After it hit the plane, you might expect it to stop.
>>>>>
>>>>> ** FFS it fucking did.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wot a damn stupid troll.
>>>>> Oh, it's a JL post so there is no other kind.
>>>>>
>>>> I sentence you to being Phil Allison for the rest of your life.
>>>
>>> Larkin envies Phil Allison in that regard.
>>>
>> It will be fun to "ha ha!" the Tesla owners around here once Musk
>> unlocks Trump's account 2 minutes after acquiring Twitter. It would be
>> more satisfying to punch them, but...
>
> John Larkin is a physical as well as an intellectual dwarf, so his punches would have the same kind of impact as his insults.
>
> Elon Musk may not be as clever as he thinks he is (though being the richest man in the world does suggest some ingenuity) but he's probably clever enough not to unlock Donald Trump's Twitter account even if he could. It's not as if Donald Trump has enough ready money to offer him an attractive bribe.
>

Just going on how much the "lamestream media" says it's very unlikely to
happen, and how much Donald Trump has said himself he's not interested,
I'm guessing the probability it will happen in short order to be almost
a certainty but we'll see...

On 4/25/2022 11:02 AM, Ricky wrote:
> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 9:20:57 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
>> On 4/24/2022 5:15 PM, Ricky wrote:
>>> On Sunday, April 24, 2022 at 5:06:17 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 24 Apr 2022 06:02:31 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
>>>> <palli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>>>> ===================
>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
>>>>>
>>>>>> After it hit the plane, you might expect it to stop.
>>>>>
>>>>> ** FFS it fucking did.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wot a damn stupid troll.
>>>>> Oh, it's a JL post so there is no other kind.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ..... Phil
>>>>>
>>>> I sentence you to being Phil Allison for the rest of your life.
>>>
>>> Larkin envies Phil Allison in that regard.
>>>
>> It will be fun to "ha ha!" the Tesla owners around here once Musk
>> unlocks Trump's account 2 minutes after acquiring Twitter. It would be
>> more satisfying to punch them, but...
>
> On the meths today, I see.
>
> Why would I give a shit about Trmp, Musk and Twitter?
>

Musk is still greatly admired by many ignorant liberals and Democrats
who don't know any better, I'd say they likely make up the bulk of his
fan base at this time.

And if there's a somewhat reliable method to maintaining long-term
popularity as a big celebrity in America one of the things that's
required to do is about every decade, do an inventory of who your
biggest fans and long-term supporters are. People who've stood with you
for years.

And take a big steaming shit on them, lol...

On 4/24/2022 2:22 AM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
> John Larkin wrote:
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrrDlsT_xU
>>
>> If a driver did this, I guess the driver and his insurance would be
>> liable. But this was doing the driverless auto-summons thing, so I
>> assume Tesla is liable.
>>
>> Automation can transfer liabilities.
>>
>> After it hit the plane, you might expect it to stop.
>
> When people said "AI" they used to mean HAL, but now a thing with less
> intelligence than an insect is called AI.

So if you put all 535 of the AIs elected to Congress together you'd have
almost one unit of what is now a thing called "AI"

bill....@ieee.org wrote:
================
>
>>> Phil Allison wrote:
> > >>> Wot a damn stupid troll.
> > >>> Oh, it's a JL post so there is no other kind.
> > >>>
> > >> I sentence you to being Phil Allison for the rest of your life.
> > >
> > > Larkin envies Phil Allison in that regard.
> > >
>
> John Larkin is a physical as well as an intellectual dwarf,
>

** So JL is a "short arse" is he ?

Explains a lot.....

" Short people got no reason to live.... "

..... Phil

On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 16:52:19 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison
<pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:

>bill....@ieee.org wrote:
>================
>>
>>>> Phil Allison wrote:
>> > >>> Wot a damn stupid troll.
>> > >>> Oh, it's a JL post so there is no other kind.
>> > >>>
>> > >> I sentence you to being Phil Allison for the rest of your life.
>> > >
>> > > Larkin envies Phil Allison in that regard.
>> > >
>>
>> John Larkin is a physical as well as an intellectual dwarf,
>>
>
>** So JL is a "short arse" is he ?
>
> Explains a lot.....
>
> " Short people got no reason to live.... "
>
>
>.... Phil

5' 7.5", not especially short.

But Sloman has never met me. He applied for a job but we turned him
down. He hasn't been friendly since.

If you send me your resume, I can turn you down too.

--

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
Francis Bacon

John Larkin wrote:
==============
>
> >>>> Phil Allison wrote:
> >> > >>> Wot a damn stupid troll.
> >> > >>> Oh, it's a JL post so there is no other kind.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >> I sentence you to being Phil Allison for the rest of your life.
> >> > >
> >> > > Larkin envies Phil Allison in that regard.
> >> > >
> >>
> >> John Larkin is a physical as well as an intellectual dwarf,
> >>
> >
> >** So JL is a "short arse" is he ?
> >
> > Explains a lot.....
> >
> > " Short people got no reason to live.... "
> >
>
> 5' 7.5", not especially short.
>
> But Sloman has never met me. He applied for a job but we turned him
> down. He hasn't been friendly since.
>
> If you send me your resume, I can turn you down too.
>

** Spent two years working for an electronics business run by Scientologists.

The job interview lasted barely 2 minutes.
That the boss and other staff were all disciples of L. Ron Hubbard was not revealed to me.

I left with no warning to start working for myself, never looked back.
Reckon I can handle any damn thing after that.

...... Phil

On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 8:30:16 PM UTC-4, palli...@gmail.com wrote:
> John Larkin wrote:
> ==============
> >
> > >>>> Phil Allison wrote:
> > >> > >>> Wot a damn stupid troll.
> > >> > >>> Oh, it's a JL post so there is no other kind.
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >> I sentence you to being Phil Allison for the rest of your life.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Larkin envies Phil Allison in that regard.
> > >> > >
> > >>
> > >> John Larkin is a physical as well as an intellectual dwarf,
> > >>
> > >
> > >** So JL is a "short arse" is he ?
> > >
> > > Explains a lot.....
> > >
> > > " Short people got no reason to live.... "
> > >
> >
> > 5' 7.5", not especially short.
> >
> > But Sloman has never met me. He applied for a job but we turned him
> > down. He hasn't been friendly since.
> >
> > If you send me your resume, I can turn you down too.
> >
> ** Spent two years working for an electronics business run by Scientologists.
>
> The job interview lasted barely 2 minutes.
> That the boss and other staff were all disciples of L. Ron Hubbard was not revealed to me.
>
> I left with no warning to start working for myself, never looked back.
> Reckon I can handle any damn thing after that.

LOL. That's pretty funny actually. What sort of stuff were they building? How did the Scientology aspect impact the work? Did they not believe in specifications, budgets, schedules?

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On 4/25/2022 8:49 PM, Ricky wrote:
> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 8:30:16 PM UTC-4, palli...@gmail.com wrote:
>> John Larkin wrote:
>> ==============
>>>
>>>>>>> Phil Allison wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Wot a damn stupid troll.
>>>>>>>>> Oh, it's a JL post so there is no other kind.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I sentence you to being Phil Allison for the rest of your life.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Larkin envies Phil Allison in that regard.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> John Larkin is a physical as well as an intellectual dwarf,
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ** So JL is a "short arse" is he ?
>>>>
>>>> Explains a lot.....
>>>>
>>>> " Short people got no reason to live.... "
>>>>
>>>
>>> 5' 7.5", not especially short.
>>>
>>> But Sloman has never met me. He applied for a job but we turned him
>>> down. He hasn't been friendly since.
>>>
>>> If you send me your resume, I can turn you down too.
>>>
>> ** Spent two years working for an electronics business run by Scientologists.
>>
>> The job interview lasted barely 2 minutes.
>> That the boss and other staff were all disciples of L. Ron Hubbard was not revealed to me.
>>
>> I left with no warning to start working for myself, never looked back.
>> Reckon I can handle any damn thing after that.
>
> LOL. That's pretty funny actually. What sort of stuff were they building? How did the Scientology aspect impact the work? Did they not believe in specifications, budgets, schedules?
>

Solar-powered flashlight. Wooden fireplace. Helicopter with an ejection
seat. Screen door in a submarine, to keep the fish out.