Some people (like Steve) with a normal IQ choose to be ignorant -
while iKooks are ignorant by virtue of their inherent low IQ

The iKooks might enjoy this in that it shows _why_ Steve is so dead wrong
on so many things that he should _not_ be dead wrong on - as he's not stupid.

The iKooks are stupid by virtue of their low birth.
Steve is stupid by virtue of his own design.

Details below... from this thread today...
*Remove Google Apps from Android?*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/7qLXTRuzHCU>

BTW, the capability of removing apps from Android that are the default
bloatware and carrier and OEM apps, is another thing iPhones can't do.

sms wrote:

> I don't see our favorite nym-shifting trolls posts so if it was
> previously mentioned I did not see it.

Jesus Christ. Of course you're ignorant of everything, Steve.
It's who you are.

You know why you or Vanguard have _never_ found a fact from me to be wrong?
Do you?

Do you have any idea why my facts are never wrong? (see footnote in sig).
*It's because I don't choose to filter out relevant facts, Steve*

You do.

It's irritating how often you give dead-wrong advice to innocents, Steve.
Only _because_ you purposefully _choose_ to remain ignorant of all facts.

You _choose_ to be stupid, Steve.
You do it on purpose.
For example, we already covered adb in this very group, Steve.
Yet you're _completely_ ignorant of all facts about it.
<https://i.postimg.cc/436FCYFX/adb31.jpg> Local adb runs on Android

I don't mind Steve filtering out all facts, which is the same sentiment I
told Vanguard, which is I don't care that both of you wish to be ignorant.

What I care about is, as a result of you both wishing to remain ignorant,
you both spew fantastically incorrect garbage - which is often dead wrong.

You're both imbeciles by choice - even as I respect your potential because
both of you "can" handle technical details.

You alone _choose_ to be ignorant.
Your choice of remaining ignorant is why you both end up being stupid.

And I don't care about you two fantastically ignorant imbeciles.

I don't care at all that both of you wish to be imbeciles on purpose.
What I care about is as a result, you both give dead wrong advice.

> But it is true that you can find a way to get LADB without paying for
> it. But it's not on F-Droid and I would be uneasy about downloading it
> from unknown sites. The developer said that this was one of his only
> paid apps.

Of course it's true. I've written about this and I've used it myself.
Which is my point that both of you, Vanguard & Steve, wish to be imbeciles.
<https://i.postimg.cc/7YLhtcZL/adb32.jpg> ladb eliminates the PC

I don't care that you're both imbeciles so please don't get me wrong.
I respect that both of you have the "potential" _not_ to be imbeciles.

Even more to the point, neither of the two of you owns a low IQ.
You're both not stupid by birth.

You're both stupid by design.
That's different.

You can fix that.
You don't have to be an imbecile.

You _choose_ to be an imbecile.

What I care about is both of you give very bad advice _because_ you both
choose to be imbeciles; you're not going to get away with that with me.

Here's just one link for you two imbeciles to bone up on ladb for example.
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/udGDxJVcvxo/m/V3Vs_sjXBQAJ>

And another:
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/5-nzRG-xM4E/m/FORkwNFDCAAJ>

See also:
<https://www.xda-developers.com/debloat-your-phone-run-adb-shell-commands-no-root-no-pc/>
<https://forum.xda-developers.com/t/say-hello-to-ladb-a-local-adb-shell-without-needing-root-or-a-computer.4204855/>

You should be able to recognize my posts on the XDA-Developers' site.
--
I'm sure I'm wrong sometimes but nobody has ever found my facts to be wrong
because I don't say them unless I have reason to believe they are correct.

badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote

>> There isn't anyone intelligent in racing circuits who doesn't know the
>> significance of the catenary in terms of teaching basic racing skills.
>
> I�m not a racer, but I would guess it has something to do with calculating
> how to enter and exit a curve. As a motorcycle rider there are some very
> fine points of curve management one must learn to handle their bike safely.

Hi badgolferman,

Exactly. This is why I've never considered you (or Ant or Steve, et al.) an
iKook but why _everyone_ knows that Alan Baker, for one, is an iKook.

You have the cognitive ability to comprehend that physical forces are the
same in all directions, particularly the forces that suspend a bridge are
the same forces that act upon a motorcycle navigating a curve at speed.

As an aside (owning a K1200 myself as I believe you have a Gold Wing), it
mostly applies in racing circuits (as the real world has opposing traffic).

It's likely that Alan Baker, even after furiously searching for the
definition, found mostly equidistant suspension bridging references, and
yet, since he lacks any education in Calculus or Physics, he can't relate
the vertical directional forces with the same horizontally directed forces.

Worse, while he claims to own a BMW, he's ignorant of the most basic of the
terms used for bimmers and beemers alike, which means his mind is on off.

Likewise, he claims to "teach racing" and yet he's likely never heard of a
catenary, which, let's be clear, would be discussed in any racing circuit
(other than straight-line drag racing perhaps, as no curves are involved).

*How do you deal with people that far to the left of the 1st D-K quartile?*

The point of bringing up the catenary or the metric tensor or Christoffel
symbols or even Dunning Kruger effects isn't so much what they are - but
that the iKooks are ignorant of them and yet they form strong opinions.

Jolly Roger thinks he's an iKook because "we disagree" but that's yet
another trait of the iKook to completely misunderstand the obvious.

He's an iKook not because we disagree - but because he strongly believes in
things which he's completely ignorant of - for example, Jolly Roger
repeatedly claims Apple fully patches older releases - when Apple doesn't.

Sure. We disagree. But my disagreement is based on Apple's own words.
His belief system is based on absolutely no facts whatsoever that matter.

Apple says they do not fully patch older releases.
Jolly Roger says they do.
In fact, he's sure of it.

Simply because Apple fixed a bug or two in an older release.
That's full "proof" to Jolly Roger that Apple fully patches older releases!

No fact can or will sway Jolly Roger from his purely imaginary beliefs.

*How do you deal with people that far to the left of the 1st D-K quartile?*

Not only do the iKooks lack that cognitive ability, badgolferman, but they
form strong opinions that all science is "dubious" simply because they
a. are ignorant of it...
b. because they're uneducated...
c. as a result of their low IQ

It's why the iKooks can't put together that Apple's variant excuses for
removing basic functionality is because Apple wants to them to buy it back.

Instead of putting things together, as you just did (and as most normal
adults would do), they accept Apple's individual explanations (e.g., "it's
courageous") because it's much simpler for them to accept a direct excuse.

The whole point of this thread is to point out what iKooks really are.

My main point about the iKooks is simply that they form strong opinions
about things that they spend absolutely no energy actually understanding.

Alan Browne, for example, repeatedly claims there is no walled garden
simply because he's completely ignorant that he's logging into it.

*How do you deal with people that far to the left of the 1st D-K quartile?*

This is a classic Dunning-Kruger first quartile trait, where they are so
confident of their assessments that they don't realize how wrong they are.

It's what I'm trying to patiently explain to Hemidactylus, who deprecated
the Dunning-Kruger graphs, where I fit into those same graphs as do you.

The difference is that I _understand_ what Dunning-Kruger papers explained.

It's the same with the catenary where, by now, Alan Baker has probably
furiously googled enough to find that it's a well-taught well-discussed
term in racing (particularly in motorcycle racing, as you've surmised).

Yet, he's likely never heard of it nor, more importantly, since ignorance
can be cured, he doesn't understand that it's an extremely important fact.

Just as nospam can't stand that he was ignorant that iOS doesn't have any
app store apps that graphically show wi-fi signal strength over time,
they'll make a childish kindergarten excuse for why they lack knowledge.

In nospam's case, that childish excuse is he'll repeatedly claim that apps
exist - and yet - when asked to "name just one" - he's never once named it.

*How do you deal with people that far to the left of the 1st D-K quartile?*

It's the same with Hemidactylus claiming the D-K is a weapon when everyone
fits into the D-K graphs - yes - everyone - including you and including me.

*How do you deal with people that far to the left of the 1st D-K quartile?*

The iKooks don't even realize _why_ they're iKooks, badgolferman.

But they prove it whenever the only way they can deal with facts that
they're ignorant of, like Alan Browne did, is to call people an 'it'.

Do you know why Alan Browne calls people dealing with facts an 'it'?
I do.

HINT: If he negates the person, he feels he's negated all the facts too.
--
How do you deal with people that far to the left of the 1st D-K quartile?