[Home] [Video&Photos] [Ludicrous] - About The Natrix ] [Software]

You propably shouldn't take anything on this page too seriously. It's Just Plain Ludicrous (Not least inspired by items as those collected in the Superstitions Index) VINEGAR IN THE EYE! If you can't resist a battle then go battle each of the waves of the atlantic ocean! Then you can come back when you've conquered them all. If you can't resist a challenge then go count each drop of water in the atlantic ocean! Then you can come back when you're done counting them all. If you can't resist a gamble then I also heard that you can win a million if you count each drop of water in the atlantic ocean! Would you think that the new psychologic profile that law-enforcement, according to rumors, in the somewhat tainted name these days of "crime prevention", is planning on launching; "the principle-man", would accept a cigarette if you offered him one? ..Or would he have a principle against smoking? - But granted of course, people insisting on principles (such as principles of constitution or principles of scientific legitimacy, etc.) might principially be considered trouble. My joking around with the concept of "The Natrix" resulted in so many entries that I decided to collect them all on a page by themselves. And if you're gonna make slogans about "capitalism" then how about doing yourself the favour of finding out what that word means, in stead of abusing marxist jargon as an excuse to deny decent people the right to an honest livelyhood, and ruining other people's lives for fun! Karl Marx did NOT advocate a slavery model where a guy should not be alowed to earn money from his own work: Quite the contrary it was precisely such conditions in his contemporary society that he was opposing! Of course it is possible to cause your neighbour's house to collapse if you blow away its foundation with dynamite and fill its walls with termites. That, however, does not prove it to be a badly built house. It only proves you to be a person eager to destroy your neighbour's house. - And of course it is also possible to ruin a conversation or a lecture or other communicative situation if you fill the room with something like nitrous oxide and continuously spurring in naughty undertones and sports cheers to distract the thus nitrous-oxide-doped participants. That, however, does not prove them to to chimpanzees incapable of taking anything seriously. It only proves you to be a person eager to spoil communication. Dette billede illustrerer hvordan man laver en eksplosiv trykkoger: Grundprincippet er at trykkogeren oparbejder et indre eksplosivt tryk ved evigt at gå mod en principielt uopnåelig gulerod. Det er vigtigt at trykkogeren ikke faktisk må få en bid af guleroden, eller af søde sager iøvrigt, fordi så daler trykket, og så er den jo ikke så tilbøjelig til eksplodere. Endvidere er det også udmærket hvis man kan hale resourcer, såsom arbejdskraft, ud af trykkogeren, forudsat at den ikke skal have noget for det (derfor bør det helst heller ikke tage sig ud som om dens ydelser anses for at være noget værd - ihverfald ikke mens den stadigvæk er i live). Det er ikke blot givtigt, men hjælper også med til at oparbejde et tryk. Trykket kan også holdes inde med en "fnat"-mærkat til at lukke munden på den. Endvidere kan trykkogeren også udstyres med en Pavlovsk "hjern-hest" med klokke (og DET var ihvertfald med vanilje), til at lave heste-bøffer og sparke butikken omkuld med sit kick. Og evt. at tapetsere omkring den med kaniner er heller ikke afvejen. Man kan evt. også sprøjte et pift hørm af "bedste-far" (eller "bedste-mor" hvis det er en hun-trykkoger) til at holde andre trykkogere imod den, så bestanden af trykkogere ikke finder på at rotte sig sammen og begynder at forlange rettigheder o.lign. ubehageligheder. Den slags virker guleroden også imod, ved at holde trykkogerens opmærksomhed rettet mod noget andet. På dette billede vises en detonator af tilbuds-honning som kan sige noget overraskende når man trykker på dens knap, og derved udløse en trykkoger-klapfælde. - Til forskel fra rigtig honning kan sådan en honning-detonator kendes på at tilbudsskiltet har to sider og at den side som siger "tilbud" ikke vender ud mod beskueren. Trykkoger-klapfælden virker på den måde at når trykkogeren bliver lokket til at trykke på tilbuds-honningen, siger tilbudshonningen sin overraskelse, som så forhåbentlig får trykkogeren til at eksplodere, så fælden klapper. Allerbedst ville det være hvis man kunne få trykkogeren til at ligne noget i retning af dette billede, hvis eller når den eksploderer, så der kan blive en medie-begivenhed ud af det som kan tjene som lysende eksempel på det helt rigtige i at den slags "typer" ikke bør have adgang til søde sager fordi dem vil vi ikke have flere af. Suppose mental symptoms occurred AFTER a person had been burnmarked with a diagnosis, then would one asume that the diagnosis had somehow "foreseen" the symptoms (even if they were completely different from those described by the diagnosis) - or might one quite the contrary suspect that the diagnosis had in fact caused the problem? In principle: If someone has deliberately seen to it that somone else can not beget offspring (regardless of by which means it would have been acomplished; eg. by making sure that he/she/they does not have access to sex, or by whatever other means), then - as that would be in effect robbing those children in-spe of their lives, and robbing the latter of the lives of his/her/their children - how can one not avoid the conclusion that in principle that is equivalent to the former having in effect murdered the latter person's children? (Ikke mindst-, omend heller ikke kun-, med henblik på "... du behøver ikke bekymre dig ..." osv.) Speaking of which... 'Wonder what kind of conclusions the potentially self fulfilling tendency of descriptive models, such as labels, would necesitate regarding the practices of psychologic "profiling" and psychiatric "diagnoses"... But who cares... Other than those whome the labels have been applied to of course - but of course they're not to be taken seriously: 'says so on the label! (Though this, this and this, from my old page also may be of interest in this connection.) I have always been fascinated - not enthusiastic, but fascinated - by the practice of judging IN ADVANCE, and then followingly provoke and harass the 'convicted' in the hope that if one just keep it up long enough, and perhaps even suggest "good ideas" along the way, then SOONER OR LATER he/she might "break" and do SOMETHING that might "justify" the conviction, so that one can afterwards say "that's what I said". I'm beginning to find it suspiciously remarkable how every time I get anywhere near the question of wether romance and sex may perhaps be conceived of as something that some people holds some kind of monopoly... OH LOOK! A DISTRACTION AGAIN!!! As for television: The best thing I've got to say about it is that I've been watching television in a language I don't understand for months without letting myself be the least bit influenced by it - simply because I don't understand the faintest sound of what's going on. The stuff I equipped the TV with is amazingly effective: No matter who or what comes on screen, or how cool, authoritative, scary, threatening or whatever else they are trying to appear, it remains impossible to take them the least bit serious with that looser hat on their heads. (There was a news reader the other day I could've sworn her eye began to twitch every time she moved onto the center of the screen) Here is aneat new invention: The "between-line hunter-killer algorithm" operating below the threshold of consciousness to weed out and destroy anything which operates unintendedly 'between the lines' of linguistic expressions. × × Have you ever heard about that guy who used to meet people on the beach and follow them around. Then he struck his "travelling companion" down whenever he tried to walk by himself because he would rather carry his companion than let him walk by himself, so that the companion wouldn't leave so many footprints on the beach, and so at the end he could point to the places where there were only one set of prints and say: "those were the times when I carried you!" - Though at first he appear like a really nice guy: The kind of guy you wouldn't think twice about introducing anyone to meet. × × I am not interested in trading my Amiga for "ever" - and thus reject the offer! I am not interested in "the love of life", nor in "shadow of the son" either - and thus reject the offer either way! I am not interested in "the love of my life", nor in "wikipedia destroyer of creativity" either - and thus reject the offer either way! I am not interested in "no sex", nor in "nazis" either - and thus reject the offer either way! I am not interested in "this gun", nor in "hire" either - and thus reject the offer either way! I made this picture of a globe, entitled "the world"... Jeg fik et billede af et "din"-stik; betitlet "din", fra internettet, og har tilgengæld kreeret dette billede, betitlet "evigt". ...and got in return a picture of a magazine title; entitled "you", from the internet. May 28th 2010: I very much regret that I put a riddle-solution* on this location yesterday (in fact I very much regret that I even thought of a solusion, or in fact that I even bothered), and have thus removed it again, since, as was predictable, Fifi only seemed to be encouraged by it to present more of its ass-wipe-worthy "enigmas" that it seem to be manically hooked on, like some kind of drug addict. I also predict that Fifi will no doubt now call me a chicken, or threaten me with something, for refusing to present a solusion to that riddle, as it usually does when I refuse to waste time on its stupid riddles. (Or perhaps it will abstain just to contradict my prediction). *(Thus I had it confirmed again that Fifi; the rediculous little second rank paranormal blob of snot, on the face of which I wipe my arse, still hasn't stopped bothering me with pointless and annoying, so called "therapeutic", riddles, the only purpose of which is to distract attention and keep me active doing something.) I hope Fifi is as disappointed as I am, and I regret having spent as much as the least minimum of creativity, inventiveness, and effort on this. r≠right : r≠wrong : r≠middle : r≠left In thread with the same line of thinking as the desktop toothpicks application I also acquired this wooden comb as a way to clear my head - and to keep stuff out of my hair too. It's actually also very comfortable to use. I cut abit off the sides to make it more handy. I'm quite satisfied with the result. I should mention though, that although it did at first appear to have some effect the effect seem more to be of the paranormal finding itself comfy in a role as spiked vampire than of actually exorcising it. - The admittedly significant drop in paranormal activity around me lately rather seem to be mainly attributable to the "ornamentation" with wich I equipped my television apparatus, and the naming I've applied. In case you find "the 100th monkey phenomenon", or something else of that kind, telepathically stealing your research, ideas, or other intellectual valuables, then focus your attention on methods of how to commid suicide, and may the 100th monkey and its beneficiaries choke on that! Bon apetit! I also executed Microsoft Agent due to reasons of espionage and subversive activities - and then because it wouldn't allow itself to be deleted: When I tried to delete agentsvr.exe and the dlls they were regenerated immediately (I couldn't even change the icon of agentsvr.exe without it getting immediately regenerated). Which, btw., is strange since msagent is not essential to Windows: It can make some animated characters and otherwise has to do with speech recognition and speech synthesis. None the less Microsoft apparently consider msagent to be so important that it should not be possible to uninstall it (as can be done with other, more essential windows components) or remove it. - So in stead I had to toss a poison gas grenade into the MSAgent folder and shoot the agent through the head just to make sure. Question: I think the "G3-bot" project sound interesting. Can I have a look at the source code, please? Answer: Nope. I was earning no profit from it so I deleted it. Question: Will you ever reconstruct / further advance G3-bot? Or any of your other work on artificial intelligence?.. Answer: Why? Are you gonna pay me* real money to work on it?! ...I didn't think so. (But in stead of G3-bot maybe you can find some comfort in these words that was always my consolation when I wasn't getting any of what I want. Or maybe you can try talking with some contemporary chatbot about it to see if that can cheer you up.) Today I had an idea to an amusing video - though of course I don't expect to earn anything on it - so if I DON'T create it then at least there won't be anybody else enjoying that idea either. :-D I also thought of something interesting - though of course I don't expect to earn anything on putting my thoughts in writing - so if I DON'T write it down then at least there won't be anybody else getting enriched by that thought either. :-D This is when I burned ALL my old artwork from back then when graphic design was still made with ink on paper. (I was getting no money and no pussy for my work anyways. But at least this way I'm sure noone else ever will either.) But even so: If it's a deal or if it's in return for something, or if it has any alterior motive, or if its motivation is influenced or enforced in any way, then it can hardly qualify as "love" anyways. So evidently there seem to be no point in bothering at all. - Because.. well.. just because. Rasmus Palbo Nielsen is NOT to be interpreted inversely, and does NOT see it as urgently necessary to cause oneself to permanently and immediately cease to exist... - But if anybody (or anything) absolutely INSIST then of course that's entirely up to that person (or entity). And however nice it would be if they would stop doing that, after all I, Rasmus Palbo Nielsen still want that anybody and anything dedicated to not providing Rasmus Palbo Nielsen with anything Rasmus Palbo Nielsen want, plus anybody and anything that define as "good" anything which is not good for Rasmus Palbo Nielsen, will still exist after 2008. No particular reason they should die or anything, as long as they would just stop spoiling things that would be quite sufficient. You may at first glance have decided I'm crazy. You're not jumping to conclusions. Anybody who decided I'm crazy did so at first glance! It is that person who originally wrote that "she will be in Hell if she expect to be payed" who is that "she" who will be in Hell if she expect to be payed! And it is the person or persons who uploaded sims characters resembling a photo of me, Rasmus Palbo Nielsen, and/or of Ketty Nielsen, who "lived"! Og det er den person som satte sig overfor undertegnede og ordret proklamerede at være redaktør for en vis tegneserie om en vis and, som selv er den pågældende and! *Any instance of the words "I", "Me", and any other 1st person pronoun on this entire website, as well as in any document which was actually written by Rasmus Palbo Nielsen, anywhere else on the web, refer (except in such cases in which it appear in a quotation from a different source) only to the concrete fysical person Rasmus Palbo Nielsen, and thus NOT to anybody nor to anything else. And likewise: Any instance of any other personal pronoun (ie. words like "you", "he", "she", etc.) on this entire website, as well as in any document which was actually written by Rasmus Palbo Nielsen, anywhere else on the web, refer (except in such cases in which it appear in a quotation from a different source) only to the concrete fysical person of whome it was intended, and thus NOT to anybody nor to anything else. More ludicrous not likely to come anytime soon (I haven't got anything for it, see) The EnviroLink Network (Donate button at bottom of page)