so I worte this, straight into the s.o.c. file. no editing, no concern for grammer. or even grammar. just written as fast as possible before the idea leaves.
nobody should be reacting to tfgs bleats. yes, prespare. yes, be vigilaney. but shut up in responding to him. you are playing into his con. you are suckers for responding. like wrerstling with a pig, he enjoys it.
obvs this is not presentable. i could probs spend 5-10 mins to polish it into some thing i can repsond with when i see dougie or others?? stupidly respond to tfg mouth-anus spewage. so let’s ask Gemini for to pollish this turd:
meta: note the bug in the image above – there is a lote of text in the .jpg proert “comment” field; the url of the gemini chat, the text i asked to polis, and the reults. since this image is unsearchable (practically), byincluding the relevant text of the chat in that field might should make it searchable.
note also the bug where the .jpg “comment” property is inserted into the image caption; since there is a lot of text in there (500 chars?), there caption is extemely wide; if set to right or left justified, the image will be stretch to huge as the caption is formatted san wordwrap. one wonders what wwould happen if I dropped a 1GB textt file in the comments field? allegedly there can be u nlimited # of comments as 64kb blocks (but what is 64k+1 is dropped into that field, while the +1 be trimmed off, will the +1 goto and automagically generate over comment block, crash? is there exploits in this? and what is unicode chars inserted (if possible); and the other obvious thing: the text in the commets field is shown as ? chars. the real comments are correct and readable, and i f i download the file they are preserved (confimrd: downloading, nor edit on blog (did a crop), and downloading that editied file still had the comments intact. that is good!
why? who knows. just another exmpale of our poor file systems and our lack of metadata standard. is .jpg the only file design team that goets it?
meta: is there any sense in have tags “ratfucker”, “ratfuckers”, “ratfucking”, and “ratfukery”… algtoht that last one is just a type. so would it be better to use wildcard searching “*ratfu*” would match all these. or should i compinbe them into one tag “ratfuckery”. my initila idea was the tag would also suggest of define the scope of the idea the tag is trying to encapsulate. “ratfucker” is the person/org/entity doing the “ratfucking”, which is the actual act of “ratfuckery”. i think i shall combine them to one “ratfuckery” to rule them all.
