… I might notice this neighbor „squirrel“ modelling: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hzAUQI-Fe0
for an entertainment cookie? This is given from me as example and for orientation.
But, hey I have not said it were not an ordinary totalitarian parole of culture industry neither, such as glorifying its sporty survival conditions, to say, its crimes as healthy. Do not know how much of that poison gonna be mortal, to perceive the idea through the mirror of culture industry like this, rare sensation, not? (; I prefer that wares from culture industry can be used for project labeling. Yes. You do not believe me? This is debian style with toy story, right? Labeling: a schematic part of communication effort. Yes, we will use the imagery of that stuff, schematics, for our code, free code. We could for example label the list of future releases by figures in nut job. This could be hated, because of being:robust! I have to study the topic any nearer. What is culture industry wanting currently? What is culture industry consisting of, in our case? Triggered here from this presumed mislead: I am still speaking about this piece of culture industry ware, right?
…gonna swap to new post, I know, so bye for now ..
Hey, what is this but the naming scheme proposal:
I would further swindle, that the squirrel in the middle, the blue one right hand to the orange one, is the central, the current figure: This version can be called Sir. Then we could think of a stable and testing releases row to be labelled. King got stable where fingers got testing. Andie is old stable. (Alternatively I find the rat called „buddy“ the most central figure, it is not in the row, the little girl neither. )
-Question: is how get track of gui cracking, hostile minded gui cracking, if this is a legitimate question to ask, among people: that you do not use the gui not what it is designed for, but you use it for certain reason in a way its design is supposed to be even hostile to and that is your opted way of using it: by „cracking the gui“, transforming the interface by heavy effort an by: user simulation to a cli.
This normally goes with a heavy, heavy, remaining impact of narcisst bombardment in the internet, they yell you like a kid, who is getting disallowed. Well the anonymity cape should be soon in role always. This is not disallowed.
-Question: how is there no life in xautomation as in ahk, where there is community? Thanks.
-Question:who is doinf gui cracking these days? Tester? Gamer? Developer?
# Is this tool reliable? Answer: There are reported to be gamers in permanent usage, no signal of other cases.
-Question: Is there a science for „gui cracking“ as there is one for lock picking? There should by some intelegence effort in user interface design? Must not be fierce fight among multiply agents: „you get an hour at the power source if you service my gui.“ scenario. Are not we in military area, yet?
-Question: So what in gui cracking is not understood or/and not understandable?
Imagining the use case: evil vendor, such as state of Germany, forces a considerable amount of people, using his gui’s as labour. So the idea goes, i mean too, clearly to automiate this senseless because forced work, right?
-Question: Which software would be preferred as ahk substitute in linux? Answer, still more popular: autokey (google’s code donation code, mostly abandoned, but mailing list signal), xautomation: python bindings techniques
-Question: Is there a summary list of all ahk use cases somewhere? Thanks for a pointer. Answer: ahk wiki.
– Question: Which might be the most audacious software for gui automation these days in ahk context you know of? For me as template. tia
-How do they call what I am seeking? I found this names „gui automation with or by mouse automation“ – or more specific“
-evil vendor -gui automation with or by mouse automation“eventually+“Image viewing“+“Web Scraping“ what are any could be audacious examples?
Understand me: If there where ahk-clone community in linux I would wine at theme, but as they none, whom should I next ask: ahk windows, for example why there is critical mass and/or incentive, on linux not, why not?
guicracking
the best bet is that the mass which is deed critical to this phenomenon, is after what? rapid shooting, ok. But in a general sense is is explicitly this: that user fools his work giver. I am however in search for such fooling functionality, e.g. in terms a a. i. library.
guicracking
I see the development of ahk functionality limited
and ask for ways to change that …
there are a lot more uses for AHK than just moving the mouse
So finding: there should be a listing of described uses, and then comes out that the gamers cheat the gui’s designers. If this is the first shot final finding, then one should opt directly to support a campaign for decently maintained linux-ahk. Imagine xautomation has no community, three threads about usage in distro forum threads: that is all.
There might be a history to conquest linux land from windows land. Hey, I know the coders community, btw: this is wonderful. Unsupportable that linux has not it, is not it crippled? Is not it crippled??? Ahk is fantastic in comparison to what linux does.
https://qa.debian.org/ these ppl: maintain xautomation. Why? If nobody forebode its potential for decades. They orphan? Yes. Puh. Good night.
more findings:
I got it: In linux there are more developer, so that says their are professionals, that throws out that they are not only bastards but definitely idiots. So they can not recognize, in windows on the other hand there is kind of the opposite pole, at least some people, who do not celebrate their limitations. Gamers have no problem in tying the fire button to a rapid fire routine, for example. They are elite.
That is what I learned from you.
Fazit: Gamers are survivors.
They are elite. This is incredible an insight. Gaming seems to be something the preserves the mental health, where attending little to much to psychomarket and psychotechnics based makes much to much harm, so they are live a certain live in the game and keep the self from getting insane. The symptom of health is then: ahk-trigger-gun-fire in virtual life. Something not forbidden.
Board indexAutoHotkeyScripts and FunctionsGaming- Board indexAutoHotkeyAnnouncements
Well, you, know I have to find my daily peanuts for the projects. That is the attention now drawn to: ahk. We followed the red thread and end up with professionals. Thing that does not makes us angry, but delighted:
The heros end up with examples, end that would then our best bet machines. From the best bet machines we derive a prototype; it is going to split out: etqencqw5r. We say ok. And by the time we get signal.
This is not what I need, why? It will not go over the mouse. Seemingly what I search found its death ordered by a bad, anyway not reflected taste of what is „good style“.
From this entrepreneur we got some zoological work/or experiments(we will see?) done: http://sgiz.mobi/s3/AutoHotKey-Survey (a poll below out cuts) and they a doing a webinar. Ok.
During the webinar, we will announce the winner of the $100 Amazon gift card.
Join us Thursday May 19th at 3 EST / 12 PST
Of what? „Webinar“? And an amahohn gift.
Audio playback / editing
DLL calls
File manipulation / Disk management
Gaming
xxGUIs ### What does that mean,1) GUI designing, 2)them automating them 3) some other specific stuff?
Hotkeys# well, personal interest
Hotstrings#well, personal interest
xImage viewing / editing # what is that ocr reading in images??
Manipulate other programs/objects w/COM (Component Object Model) #well, personal interest, something not linix?–>dead alley, hm?
Mouse manipulation 1) is that not gui automating? this commercial offer goes inconsistent, is there gui auto without mouse: yes.
Object oriented #main uses!=programming style?? This could mean: if I used it for object orientated programming. No I use python, and then for object oriented programming I use ahk? They cripple ahk with oo? With whatever possible. Is that the message? Ok. Finding.
Registry editing #
Regular expressions # Python?
Re-mapping of keys # This is some kind of animal from „Hotstring“, „Hotkeys“
Text Manipulation#ok
Video playback / editing
Web Scraping #ok, yes there is a new word for it. I do not believe this techniques robust against evil vendors, waste of time surely. Examples?
But I fear in the end this all_ will need to be backed by „gui automation with or by mouse automation“: that will be the name understood.
Webpage Manipulation# No thanks we hack no pentagon for now…
Windows Send & Post Messages # has this with „gui automation with or by mouse automation“ or more specific“evil vendor gui automation with or by mouse automation“ +“Image viewing“ +“Web Scraping“
Other – Write InPlease enter an ‚other‘ value for this selection.
What do they gain? Nothing? They learn just together?
here I ended up today. This is what I have brought to them professionals, but I am bringing to the forum, gratuite advice, which is to certain extend, duty of free licensed software. Says I. Keeping everything hidden as support style and mean of run short knowledge. Well seems that they have absolutely no shame in celebrating „a user’s training to their products“ event of it, some kind of Butterfahrt: shopping excursion (by boat) to buy cheap and duty free goods. It is known in Germany and it has something to do with hostages. Terrible, but unique.
Expecting the worst, hoping the best, ok? We will see, which results would still drain through in upcoming time. I am searching for the most audacious gui crackers of there game vendors. Who does such stuff, who publishes it? The most ambitious, should yes think of it, as a matter of fact. I think the heat zone of culture industrial influence is different. On the other hand there shoot be enough students of computer science among them, too. Hell, there must be signal. Why there is no signal. Lets wait, and if nothing: read the code of their projects, if they do robust simulation of human graphical interaction. Maybe I am on a blind alley, and should waste no time on windows Butterfahrt and draw directly to where they cover gui cracking decently: to universities software engineering zoos (there where facultatively questioning human reaction, e.g. for medical purpose etc.? Is there only one scientist group free software working on this in world, I had signal. Do not they all, google and co., have bots around, using artifically guis unknown to them in the outer world and there is no free software among them, not one? hm) and to testers of free software graphical interfaces (these last ones wont look wont watch out evil vendor feature, forget it). The last question could go to the forum, could not it?
with this text shall be done the project duty on communicating the developer to the financier. Hello. You may come as a casual by passer and I can take you by the hand to lead you hopefully on a pleasant walk through a garden for you. And I guide you in terms of advice, or how do one say consult, of a supposed finance project of yours, that were fictively to finance the project bebo compliantly in any regard. It’s gonna be kind of sanatorium flair due to the mind blowing effect of critical enligthenenment everywhere, but altogether hopefully fun. We find you will like it and as it is on the year market we call to you: come in here mister. You have heard of industrial psychotechnics services that kidnapped financiers, and mistreat him with experimentally unreached brainwash methods using kind of scientific ancient magic, such as mother sounds, everywhere by doing advertisement on such a nowadays psyeudomarket? Yes, you are right. Come in here dear Sir, we will relieve you. A relief for us to have you here, as a company at a garden walk, to be true, is not it?
You may first snap https://beboreportingmachine.wordpress.com/2016/05/01/bebo/ for first ontologic requirements. We cannot offer you in the moment other than this primer on a project story, due to effort. Then in the red thread in the following I roll out any question that is tackled in conjunction with the public launch through first bet enterprice kickstarter.com. That is we prove to be whitin the guidelines of kickstarter.com requirements, btw too. This can guide us, but hopefully should not hinder us. So I try to
give all parameters that are usually expected of a so formatted business partner a, b, c. This provided by an
ad hoc ontology (basing on critical enlightenment). A
arithmetic formula how the the end number of 1.000.000€ in around one year is explained and therefore justified.
That would be all then: we give you
ontology and
contract.
And we are done with you, financier. Thanks for finding interest. Drawn to kickstarter.com: And we hope by this on the first intend to get compliance approval by kickstarter.com administration, if not, we need to search for the next best „platform.com“ available.
wheres: a= deemed days of the year a person is working on a project= 100 days.
About generosity in deeming there should be hold something that is explained later ontologically. Nobody works more then 100 days a year, deemed conservatively for not to fall in the mistreatment/illoyalty bug. Well, later more on this.
b= 10 hours a day per person: you see the design of our generosity: everything is hold the necessarily simple. 10 hours is a round number and makes no noise in the formula.
c= he or she earn 100€ the hour, well around 94€, because 6€ walk as taxes to kickstarter then. (So this finance model is ontologically: human work-income-per-hour based. So typically work hours rewards are measures derived from small natural numbers, according to Canetti.)
d=minimum number workers for ideal working: we put 3, why? Because already Jesus found that at least 2 or 3 together worked – in well discriminating surroundings. So asking why not 2, and how one could prepare against this being a big swindle, one concludes with the image of ninive, where god first asked for 10 justs and then for 2 justs out of the society. For some some ontological tanteo one gets to 10 persons. This goes ok as it does no noise to the formula.
About that last point parameter d is not said everything: Then the annual money flow to the 10 workers shall be given them as well afterwards. That first. Next clause shall be: that the person or persons who worked on a project should divide up the money among them, even though they are not reached the full number of 10 workers. Even if there might be only two or one person. So in other words: If I am doing in the meanwhile something reasonable for the project alone, thing that is happening right now, so the retroactive inflow full goes to me: I get then the full amount one Million Euro retroactively and to my private property. I hold this clause system as waterproof, until further notice.
Ok, what are the testfunction for the money to be effectively invested, one asks. Here I give you the test suite off our project that is as well the aim list. And there is no the one determined goal, we fear that that might limit our effectiveness. Furthermore we build out minimum and maximal goals.
The minimal goal for the money, the 1.000.000€, that comes from founding goes like this:
This answers to the question: what we will hopefully do because of a minimal self agreed project goal. The existence of the Testfunction being in code, lets assume with github, gives some prove, that we are working on that. The ideal deal format for such a contract between the two parties, developer and financier, within their specific situation claims well, we would hold, using business practices that are out of the line. That claims the right of being/communicating different and the need of being/communicating different. We will see in the next chapter. „Cause you can make me fall, in your way that not for me. So keep your shit away let me live voice and free“ (unknown punk band) We wont accept any format requirement guidelines that are against our way of putting things voice and free. Why should we? Are we allowed to do so? No. Nobody should be mistaken in this regard. And at this point it seems obvious that our contract to the financier breaks platform xy’s compliance, hm? From the stand point of the contract this contract is a gift to the one and only beginner’s private person and private property to be heavily claimed by economic interests, such as to provoke a decent initial impulse to such another kidnapped pseudomarket. Such a situation shall be deemed present and always included as possible in the contract between the partners. Given in this case their specific risk situation one, and secondly given loyalty from their specific abogacy function against the user, him, who is presumed to be discriminated. To be included, means that this scenario „all money gifted to one person without any return (exchange)“ is well possible.
The contract between the developer and the financier should get a chance of remaining within limits of what is to be seen as pious and therefore necessarily available for an agreement.
Tests_get_1_to_100.000programmers_together_weighing_on_the_project #This test goes ok, wenn an impact of that extense is available and we are capable of holding that. That is we had a satisfying concept for this possibility.
Tests_self_finance_self_presentation_and_publishing_howto_and_hello_world_give_me_effectively_money_now_for_community_delivered # we manage that milestone and we leave a howto to the world and everybody, out of a strategic aim and and out of general help.
Here we take once more the walk through the world of bebo. For some task we illuminate its market aspects. For self interest, but anyway for financier or for contract controlling instance as kickstart.com. After the critical enlightenment ontology we go out with a completely changed analysis as well as far „market“ is concerned, hardly recuperated from the former madness. That much would be expected, and that much turned out to true once more. Kind of well blaming it-is-otherwise around situation comes out and claims acute guidance of disoriented persons along doings like this one. A little sanatorium for all by standers, such as financier or platform .inc.
But, well, lets go!
being forgotteness
Finding: developers make usage impossible because he sets user unseenly to a discriminated position. So there is where the story without our any intervention normally would end up. This is fundamental enough as a finding to our projects interest. From there one derives directly:
Humans in contact with outcome of the project are:
Big money -community development driven style, better
Developers as a) hired ones and b) community driven. So it is to state, that the format from type b) is more pleasant for our development style. Cause they know how to cover the user’s case more precisely, from intimate experience, and bring solutions for. It is not likely that a tool chain gap will be unfelt here, meanwhile conventional programming would like be unnoticing user’s death.
The community user imho very often has the hurdle of having no idea of his potential for us, e.g. contributing to the project as far as integration in test driven development is concerned. The potential: easy integrate by the way of ordinary work as tester and cooworker of developement. This is to say as well, to the question: if „action support or better money support?“
Where as the question mark above type a) is that of questioning evil absurdity: will one control them to commit instant murder to the project? And that drives us to the next level finding: They will all have to have kind of provenly read Dialektik der Aufklärung, as a effort of 200h*100€*10people of lets say 200.000€ in the account, no?
There are targeted to be user. We believe that there are steadyly 10.000 users it the usage without money in Germany. That is they are currently in big trouble of zero income. These humans are consumers or slaves. The latter depends on how the design principles of the software goes. Does it contain ongoing cli tool chain breaking, it is deemed slave ware, usable for slavery means to initiate and perpetuate slavery careers. This case goes clearly to the category, as it is limiting the users sublime wish to cover usage by cli means, without need but with willing ignorance and deemed brute illoyality. Grounded in the brainwash having themselves thrown away to the enemies of there users at whom they are doing openly sabotage as contribute of being piously part of something, that is classified by critical enlighenment as evil. You find a feature list in the garden ground on which is written: Economic Marketing finding: Appointments of „monstrous coworker“ 1-743+x casually sorted out of availability set. From the point of view of a financier, of a pious financier, which we are, Sir, you are, what would you find? The risk for your money is that one of actors in this theater make use of her inherent remorse against their hostagekeepers, such as killing a tree by driving a car all the way against it. At least back to red thread of guidance which might be finding a finance style, yes or no. One can further more, dear guest of this garden, find that your risk in financing correlates with your found gain of it, the extend of found financier’s gain of the project. Your immediate return of invest.
monstrous cupboard that thrashed out gold coins with any tendency of stopping
Huch: what is this: a kind of monstrous cupboard that thrashed out gold coins with any tendency of stopping, you could over see in this garden, but I as I guide you here, advice you were it is, just observe there! You might feel it sources out of you money pocket, right, hae, hae. Is that the sign, ontology is emitting as contract proposal between us? Were not that a tough swindle of ours, father?
So seen it all together on a walk through the world, with the person financier: We wont bother begging or bother invoking and manipulating feeling like hope on the target person. We are not a cheap feeling automate. We have no useful way for this incrimination of this thanks for keeping piously loyal to the user. Every effort is now known to you, what does it need to finance any doing? Are there substantial questions left, such as: for where to put your tribute to any retroactive work? We see none.
Well, anyway, what would then be a best bet candidate appeal? Some, any slogan material send to propaganda chanel b,c more than nothing?
Here comes the effort of ours:
„Give us the contribution, that it can go further!“
„Shoot that rodent!“ (Idiot boss from pea nuts)
Well that is all? Mind reading Appendix B? Hopefully it is enough wander for today. Another tea, mister? Good night.
Appendix
A) What kind of neighbor projects are existing:
1) https://sanktionsfrei.de/ # crowd founding project of some 150.000 € for use cases fighting for users chance on processes of set-to-no-income-state. „100% sanction“
2) one could have a control feel, listening, how the the „vermin fight“ discoverer and the most acknowledged representant of critical enlightenment, discoverer of the „culture industry“ discuss with each other: (even if it is in german language)
B) Further contributions to the deal:
Disrupting our wander in wander land not so soon we might find some more interesting details on the story.
The financier might ask: Just for sake of completeness, which were the alternative scenario to just give you a million money retroactively? Well, the answer comes: The always included risk case, that one can not find workers that do understand the ontological basics in less then 200h is high. So if you complete cleanly to 1000h your money could find that clearly compliant sink, too. This is quite like in a culture industry land, where disagreement rates against similar facts, e.g. that the user needs in all computer action cli support, are microscopical, of low, low percentage. How much money does it need to have them first not making non sense in open disagreement zone? Who predict that ontologically? Me not. So you got some unconditional, situational character, a lottery character at this project. Ontologically however you are driven pretty sure in unavoidable conflict zone to culture industry, cause we want to justly arm anyone set out to any thinkable holocaust machine like batman and the culture industry want on the same persons something inherent contrary. According to Adorno: The maxim of the culture industry is included in the joke: „Nobody shall hunger and freeze, who does it anyway, goes to KZ, which is concentration camp.“ The culture industry is living from emotion created, threat and angst, terror and therefore fights for it. And we want make this emotion creation history. They want to put it on – with full effort, we put it off with – with full effort. In this scenario of plain fight against culture industry the any-success-probability to have someone, in this case our hired worker, thinking something concurrent, centrally concurrent and opposed, to offered order of the governing opinion machine, sinks presumedly. Admittedly can sink drastically, right? Well one word to the KZ wording: You see even on the most conservative, to say ontologically found some 50 years ago, you get dramatic increase in security effort, this depends well on the casuality to where the winds of public opinion at the end historical land, but it is most like priced with high risk insight. You need more a nurse, a developer and live long set and left out fireman, set out to a not necessary agreeing public, instead of just to buy, easily, 10 „developer and nurse“-person for 2.000.000 money units next year, he? So the resume of that, too, is, that a casual by passer through this garden, would receive much less from his money invested than he expected, right? It is quite hot in this zone, even for firemans, so it certainly depends on local weather report to start action in a year or not? If what easily can happen a news paper out of business mobilizes a million person against a hire worker, independently maybe increasing with his intelegence he may deem 2.000.000 a person peanuts. In the ontology of the fireman these winds consist of interests of military propaganda maneuvers of any players in public. When they are thrashing them self, is bad weather for us to go out, when they are all tired meanwhile once, then it gets time to do something outside. Collect some peanuts as a squirrel. So to say. I would call and offer the peanuts-squirrel-developer-financier-interface-formatted-bad-weather option as one best bet candidates indeed, did I say that? I could thing of a truly offered worst case interface with kind of ontologic approval stamp on it. OK?
Excursus of vermin fighters
So, in this part of the garden a this time of the year you vermin fighters. Here is one: „hey, vermin fighter, say hello to the Sir!“ Imagine the costs: Furthermore the professional firemen hit with the acknowledgement that the their situative contract case is that of being targeted by the primitive psychological group of vermin fighters. It is a kind of human species syndrome: this obviously disturbed patients, who got a hallucinogen relationship with their inner imagination to what is: „parasite“. Thing, zoologically based and typically to nature of our human species, that happens to just us. So we add another even more constant-risk-bonus to our risk price. For obvious reason it is of considerable weight, for a fireman to contract, – if this means, that his personal ad hoc security is lowered, by everywhere not improbably upcoming hate hooligan groups searching personally exactly him. Hoo? frightened? In this sanatorium will happen nothing. Imagine that we got types of vermin fighters voting for a pseudo market around with everybody’s easiness! Virmin fighters, so you got two, maybe three kind, level of it. Virmin figthers of first level and second level at least. Kind of dynamite laying around everywhere in world where, true. These hordes will „biologically“ identify you as one or there lunches, right? We got for sure to implement an effective financier_protection_option_virmit_fighter option – and anonymity comes to mind. For a in-plain-market-battle-enduring-financing, you might opt to switch on an entire financing industry for. In the situation of concurrent world wide finance system this could be not even bad chances. Imagine to established system: the one pointing of virmin fighters in disguise of being hooligans to be ousted will get the vote. „Hooligans oasted“ will be cheapest price message among the primitives as an ever green, end, long term tendency. Am I publicly related right? So what? You can get to be profiteur on the way there, or you family or generations of it to that clearly human rights compliant agreement. Hey, noticed? Have not we seen an ever green, is it a plant?
It is that with the finding of virmin fighters we get a completely unexpectected, as if the wind of an ocean pushes our ship from coast to the other. Virmin fighters would truly press you effort to peanuts and even more create you probably more effort: Cause you need to protect yourself from now on against virmin fighters. Weird you finance project, is not it? It is weird because the effort in one word, too, paints your whole personal gain, kind of freedom gain, of it. Right?
So that is what we find on the way: peanuts.
Funny. Peanuts. Where do they come from? Maybe a bird dropped them. The peanuts that the winds of public have drawn from the formally argued packages of a million money units.
In this case the simple advise comes to mind, out of generosity just to pay two million for the first, an initial annual cycle as tribute, does not it?
Ok? So lets take this way, here. What we find on our way, are two more objects. The first is a „pulping machine“ and the second: a swamp on which is swimming a puddle.
The pulping machine:
You put million money units in and in the cycle of one year it swallows a milestone. There is a row of milestones nearby that it is going to swallow and one row that it has swallowed. What is truly observed, is, that on the next upcoming to be swallowed milestone is written on: „decent, free software, market feasibility report for our core and prototype needs“.
a swamp on which is swimming a puddle
Then we turn to the swamp, no, we wont go to the swamp and ask him: hey swamp, how are you? like Alice in wonderland. No, we are more scientific, ontological, we deem that without more in this world, if the swamp wont get any new liquid soon, first the puddle will disappear in the process of drying. Then according to the dryness length and the suck capabilities of the swamp, it needs amounts of time and liquid to make the puddle reappear, right? We do therefore not forget to note, when the puddle last time has been seen, do we? date
Mo 2. Mai 16:20:07 CEST 2016
So lets say two sentences on financing without generating „puddle“ and on the other hand with generating puddle.
So what is then the minimal promise, to say the true congruence with you plan, if the financier creates puddle? Answer: 10 workers will be hired for one millions next year in aimed to at least milestone1.
and without puddle?
If you want to free your self from the scenario that 10 bofh’s swallow your millions year by year, with secure mercilessness, reading philosophy books eventually not for them, there is the retroactive finance option anyway, is not it? You get no order over the actions, but you get some properties, such have a „having sense“ output parameter to your finance project. The receivers more probably would be those, who did something for it. You can have the decision based on reconstructions such as present or even presented results. And, hoppla, what is that, I may advice as ontologic guide in this garden: The actors are not the same as in puddle scenario. So you can not compare the scenarios that easy. Btw. This could than be indeed something someone would like.
Very lazy, about finding out if there is an option for this launch without crippling it, I am right, no?
It seem useless. Maybe useful just to practice negotiations with those. Hm, maybe better launch a
–metaquestion to some by passing crowdfunding knower:
„How to get the most
-easily offered finance deal (e.g. „peanuts for done milestones“)
-labeled anyway as „outlaw „in terms of critical enlightenmen’s culture industry.
exposed
-for other peoples search
-in public –
-qualified and there for recognized as so called crowdfunding and
-ideally most anonymous for the launchers person?“
-more questions:
Problem 1: anonymity for all as project requirement
Is it possible to maintain the names secrete, especially the name of creator and financiers to the public?
Problem 2: fit Software developement in „all-or-nothing“ design:
problem: Are inherently __multiple goals in software engineering possible with platforms such as „kickstarter.com“: ongoing maintainance, prototype, testing releases, stabe release, ongoing feature goals
a,b,c. In this line go early project stages, too, as : feasibility report. So I will not believe, that kickstarter wishes software crippled to one goal things, but I ask: how the deal creator/backers in kickstarter’s one-goal-mode is to be setup for softwares bests. I could think of offering them a feasibility report, as well I might offer other stages of the software live line, such as „first prototype to be tested“.
Intended investigation procedure: Such as it works with offers like this. Asked among any by standing usurpants. „Where there could have a hole provided for crap as ours?“ They say some outcome , and bingo thereby. That means anyway: „bingo boys!“. That is the plan.
That is for example what kickerstarter.com wanted from me:
Deine Telefonnummer muss verifiziert werden.
Deine E-Mail muss verifiziert werden.
Prozess zur Überprüfung der Identität muss abgeschlossen werden.
Payment source ist erforderlich.
Deine Identität und Bankverbindung muss eingerichtet werden.
Deine Identität und Bankverbindung muss verifiziert werden.
This is what kickstarter machine wanted to me, „text writer in the internet“, I was up to now not aware that the anonymity feature was out of box „default on“.
Clearly, shall be checked, if someone nobody hello world tester, can put a most anonymous launch of one of this, strictly maintained at the testfunction’s aim. Kind of Howto. This a thank you and incentive for helper with that question, always as pious as possible (; (apap)
Who is without name to whom in this privacy scenario? In this chapter I will blog on the progress of platform negociations and platform search.
this gonna be the story for my new software project. Programming something is senseless. I started a project named „bebo“ around 10 years ago with perl and bash. But I did not come to a clear solution, as someone objected this were kind of spam. Spam? There is spam wars out there. What happens?
Maybe, explanation gets clearer, if I from here on I simply start to enumerate the feature and design goals of the functionality requested.
Given the scenario of a typical transfer money receiver who needs to prove 10 job applications each month as a condition to receive existence minimum transfer money. Well, everybody knows, that this is clearly a human right violence, a blamage for everybody who is supposed to stand up for its absence. So even if the practice of forced job application is governing for decades, the claim to deal with any kind of silly (GUI) graphical user interface automation solution in the live of a human did not arise due to the lack of fierce critique. I am going to stop pretty soon now bubbling around existence minimum goddesses, but continue about speaking what is practically needed, because the user is left alone, in the hell fascists, willing human rights violators and fascist system is keen to prepare.
We are dealing with a problem, that is indeed mistreatment or a certainly applied dose of torture, whereas the torture’s function is for big expansion terrorizing and satisfying the population. So the first optional feature that should be named is: „Ich will mich verstecken, will nicht wir euch verrecken“. Hide me efficiently. The user wants quickly ten, twenty, hundred of the ugly actions and a reported list of ugly such actions, a humanity scorning ware, to save his ass, that is to save his life. That is: to relieve the effects of the torture – without having noticed that nobody else. „Give me a list of 100 really sent, fake, job applications that could stand in any case a the tests of being qualified as orderly. Cases, that German judges in German courts, in a wise of social court industry, put through regularly.“ So in terms of software design one could state that the scalability of bebo should include these fake use cases.
-Other use case imagined: And then there a use cases where the protection is lowered, because he wants to fight politically against the employers, the officials or the public. Even the user might opt send part of his messages anonymously as a contribution for change and legitimate revenge. We could ontologically perceive that use case open attacks in an end of a scale.
-And then there are usage case on another extreme in the wondrous universe of human free behavior, which is by all legitimate feelings of revenge and all legitimate feeling of hate, angst, shame, the hole cocktail injected, should not be overseen: A straight forward use case application for a really wished economic cooperation between to contractors, which could be something valuable in the life of user and which in any case should be protected from being smutted by evil, official format requirements. The user may want to keep these applications out of the reach of the regime deliberately.
So in one word, the user in torture „work“ delivery phase, aiming for proves of 10 required applications performs in reality 30 application. One for save one’s own ass, one to protest decently and one living one’s own live.
fun-fuck-fake
In one single word: fun-fuck-fake-application. This is what bebo, the Bewerbungsbomber, the job application bomber is doing for you all in one. Ontologically one adds the the application, as animal of of the zoo of communication tools or phenomena – luckily – is a vehicle, with which you can address nearly any idea. The ontology of the subject of „forced application“ reveals a more mighty and comfortable PR-power position, compared to classic forced work, btw. It is meant the invitation for contracting, so it bears the seed, the concept of the hole upcoming contract. The fascists that are about to destroy the freedom for anybody attack the freedom, e.g. the freedom of contract or the freedom forcing anybody to their absurdity by threatening that to all. That is the bad news. That is the bad news. The good news is: in comparison to other approvedly degrading works such shuffling a staple of sand to another and back and forth, (Dostojewsky calls that the worst of tortures) our degrading work, forced applications, is on at least a mighty, maybe the mightiest tool in the world of communication – in „our“ hands.
Seen it from standpoint of critical enlightenment it stakes out, that defiance is pointed to self crippling here, just like we had a expected that from fascist’s nature. Imagine somebody forced you by death threat to be part of a your favorites team football match!
Have fun having fun then! Have fun having fuck! Have fun having fake then! These turn out the imperatives, the best wish, that machine intended should help.
This were my first thoughts about it in hope, that that would labelled as „something reasonable and some tribute work as writing of it.
But now it comes out that (secondary guesses) :
about: incredible in first) selfdefenseless , left secondly alone : in that very situation
Wow this tool is a batmen defense tool. It runs arbitrarily in a mode called „partisan“. Guessing on the aptitude of such measure, has never be done, porque this part of the Project Roadmap, requires special care from the beginning on: the ontological situation: the real user situation is that he lives a life that is drastic. Here is the real doings happening as matter of fact, for us to support and to enable our user.
Well I try to sketch this world, an btw explain the plan. Ok? Here it comes:
He is supposed to be hurt e.g. as consequence of public communication. He is that hurt the he presumedly can not hold a pencil without tattering. He is a patient better in the bed these days of his doings. But from our finding he shall not work. We shall work for him now. Totally.
And therefore I would deem, that at least one thing matters: Simply because whole and heavy bunches of emotion are triggering at this event, to observe is: he lives a fucking hell with it, ok? During the usage.
Implementation prototype machine
So I would most naively choose the design principle, adhoc prototype machine requested, – for nobody forbidden to do the whole work – design project. If you ask me:
4,5 or even more software agents that do together duty, that is assisting the user doing category 1 duties. On one stage of a scale. On a different stage of a scale is the option: „Do everything for me!“ And the answer is: All the Holocaust that you might feel with it, we handle that for you. Our aim is to achieve anything the user needs to betray any supervising instance that he is doing something that he is doing not all. Supposedly. We are are all agreeing that this supervising is of a criminal energy and it is to encounter with high reliability. We want to have clean coverage of them as a design goal, that they are defeated in hundred percent of the cases. And that in front of the eyes of the judge the user has done all the shit orderly, whereas this one in a reality just lived the aspect of his vida, and we, exactly, we have done the shit work for him. We can as a project not different to vote on public relation with our users, that btw. We procure for the user every piece of behavior which could be expected. Clearly, we are the first, if we got the signal Test_quality_of_level_high_enough_material_for_official_transfer_requirement_delivery_all_in_onefail. I would set this function as to be implemented. I would deem a positive in that test that the user gets a list that maybe not 100% nonsense free. So having we 5 software agents the work delivered in that format for the user, we browsed web-interfaces that got to the eyes of the user, we identify that as slave ware, that is everything that normally comes in the users way supposed to help him solving the problem. In such a situation the user is super hurt. Cause nobody is interested to even perceive his pain, everybody fails to stand up amending. Pain-and-nobody-on-whole-planet-friendly-thank-you!-Feeling“. But we as his agents are not hurt, and this is the our time of our staging, ok? We are a kind of super soccer players beating his contrahents merciless.
And saying that there will be just, there is out of experience a communication problem. That if, somebody, anyday might be interested in such a story unroll to the kernel of it. The first, the
format of result:
lets say 20 lines of which some names ordered on it between numbers. In this list are may 20 Names, an nearby other words and numbers. Lets say that the on the paper are ten lines that are senseless as default and set 10 are reliable. The 10 nonsense lines stem from the origin of some fun joking or arbitrarily test experimental real world runs. Lets consider some new implementation launched, but the generosity policy of this tool is set also to admit nonsense around the a persons name. So this means that have been contacted persons with obvious idiot stuff, such as I do the application for „is“. Where is a word that our functions might have localized „name of job“ not hundred percent secure. So the judge get some positives and some negatives. Whereas the resultant judgement is deemed in to hundred per cent in favor of our user. And with that we betray him in a most obvious way, and b) the most_unobvious_way as a feature to be requested. Finding.
Well, we got in first hurdle confronted with the worldwide „gui controlling taboo“. Which wonder is there enough catastrophe thinkable, as if all the surrounding is designed to damage him. The „gui controlling taboo“. The direct effect at this phenomenon is immediate helplessness for the user because of the user’s matter of fact tool chain rupture. And that this phenomenon tells something about the prescribed development of skills about the software society with the user. A world wide community of free software offerer, anyway included, yes a world like this. Ours namely. This sketches the possibilities to suck know how by the ordinary sources. Even if they would like to help you, they do not understand, what you want, cause that is the taboo for them. One beats them with critical enligthment, no? Easily, yes! But matter of fact is that the the adversary is governing. So first measure is put it on the PR-List that this Phenomenon is too big for one software offerer as us.
Our Pr-Message:
No software can persevere as a gui only variant, any software needs a full cli scriptability. This because the software should be called slave ware, and the users seen as slaves should be freed better before all other measures.
This is as request the first feature. But! But over more we enable our user to break out in the scale the we break in for him, do not we? So we know, how disastrous is the situation, of what is named mouse and windows controlling. So the mouse should the pressed automatically by a script. So a free software tool quality dramatically sinks to the bottom of being something harmful to the humans, of being able to be used as tools of real existing slavery. Slave ware. Hopefully as return of invest we get a whole forest or whole zoo of functions spread for our agents to use. And proceed strategically.
The human interface designer of our users are in task of hostile intelegence to fool. Mainly they can change the slave wares interface each period to make more difficult our duty, well to unsecure the user. So our usage requires growingly sophisticated methods. Right what happens: The agents in procure of the use go to a web database for labor market, official or non official. And the agents treat not to enter over the user interface, they do that. They senselessly gather some data from there and send emails to email addresses to where someone applies for „is“. Which is the third person of the verb „be“.
about: Spam scenario, the dangers of the so called ongoing -legitimate- war against spam and of getting between
One need to defend with chances against the governing anti spammer war lobby. We defend with that, that our doings could be called art or human rights abogacy, but not by neither by intention nor extension spam and therefore no aggression is justified. Anyway, rational persons might care, the the totalitarian spam filters do not care… Guess the situation is kind of: that there it is let space possible for kids to play with, but not without hurdles neither.
The adversary could even come up with legal prescription to not script evade their slave ware. We disagree with the idea of being effective such rights strongly.
loyalty
We are devoted to the user and willing to keep him pious and in just surrounding. There is definitely a discrimination problem, that nobody does intervene against -besides us. So in self we software agents input at our adversaries as a first attempt: „the moral situation is clear. we are morally good, you are morally bad, do not you agree?“ Our preset „actitude“ feature is goes: goes at least: we are discriminating against this discrimination. We have the most reason to behave smoothly with him, user, and hope that he would trust us. So then lets follow just the tool chain, in the work flow so called, in order to collect the situation, tool coverage of our suite.
about: tool chain, webinterfaces:
1 brouse data base of employer adresses,
2 report engine, latexpdf
3 browse automatically Web interface for the mailer (google)
Dataflow: There is big, noisy, text dataflow from address data bases to the core.
Intelegence needed/to be researched on in ongoing effort:
filtering the text
finding out the way decent through web interface, in two cases, whereas the first case is to be classified as extremely hostile.
Hi, still here? Ahh, you caught me already working at it, is not it all a kidding? Fantastic world of software development, these days, is not it? Heavy use of critical Enlightenment needed too, these days, is not it? Such as Dialektik der Aufklärung. So this was my first day on „bebo“. It was like giving for gift many insights for me. So if I understand and you understand, why a I pursue this aim, this piece text called story, got some sense.
beboreportingmachine 