The Fambily – Part 1, an Awakening

In my early thirties one of the things I used to do was to take a hit or two after work, kick back, and remember my past.  I would remember events I’d long since forgotten, which would lead me to other long forgotten memories, and so on.  I did this on an irregular but somewhat frequent basis, and after quite some time of doing this I noticed that these recollections always ended with my remembering how miserably unhappy I was in the way back when, particularly during the school year.  In my childhood I was unhappy most of the time.  Then it struck me, like a minor epiphany: Isn’t that pretty much the definition of an unhappy childhood?

I had never thought of myself as having had an unhappy childhood.  I always thought the kids who did were so much worse off than was I; after all, my parents didn’t abuse me, or beat me.  They always provided for me.  I had a roof over my head, shoes on my feet, clothes on my back, and food on my table.   I got presents for my birthday, for Christmas, and even for Easter when I was just a little kid.  They would hug me and tell me they loved me. My sister and I didn’t much get along but it wasn’t out-of-hand.  I had a few friends.  I grew up in a relatively safe middle-income neighborhood.  For many years I was sent to a private school.  Was it really so bad?

Surely I didn’t have it as bad as other kids who had an unhappy childhood, but there was no denying it: I was so unhappy, so much of the time.  I began to think back to what it was that was making me unhappy, which was a lot about school, but also – what?  A feeling of isolation, of being in a household with other people but alone with my problems, of being in school and being in a house but not belonging in either.  I remember on a few occasions when was, oh, maybe ten years old, walking back to our house, and as I came within sight of the front door I thought, “I’m Bella.”  Bella was our cat.  Bella also had a roof over her head, food and water in her bowls, but nobody asked her about her day or took any interest in her life.  She just lived there.  Like me.  Many years later I was hanging out with friends and I was about to tell them I had to go home, but I couldn’t.  I didn’t want to lie to my friends, but I just couldn’t bring myself to call that place “home.”  I puzzled over this, over how to phrase it, and finally settled on, “I have to go back to the house.”  It was, after all, not my home, but just the place where I lived.

Over time I began to piece together more of that puzzle.  I work for a family-owned company, and in the many years I’ve worked there it was common to have children in my office.  Watching and listening to the interactions of parents and their school-age children was – surprising.  Just hearing them talk to each other, how the adults would ask questions and get into conversations with the kids was something new to me.  Asking about their classes, their homework, their tests, even “Who did you sit next to at lunch?” or “Who’s your best friend?” – the way they talked to children made me realize that this must be how parents normally speak to kids.  My parents were uninterested and uninvolved.  They might ask me how I was, or my day was, but paid little attention to the answer, and only on rare occasions was there a followup question.  My family didn’t discuss the school day, the school work, friends at school, friends at home, our games, activities or issues.  Whatever personal problems I had were mine to deal with on my own, with rare exception.

Then I remembered something my therapist said when I was a teenager.  I know, there’s that thing in my life too, so let me touch on that first – long story short: I was starting to get legit paranoid, but I knew it was all-in-my-head paranoia.  The fear was there but I knew it was irrational, and so I told my parents I needed to see a psychologist.  I didn’t tell them why but my father did ask the doc.  My father said the doc only told him, “Your son is very brave.”  I’m not sure that’s true; I was more worried about my mental state than I was bravely seeking help for paranoia.

Talking to the psychologist helped me – or I just got over it, one of the two – and he started seeing the rest of my family, individually.  Anyway, at one point in one of our sessions, he said to me, “You know, you and your sister deal with the inattention of your parents in completely different ways.  She’s the squeaky wheel who gets the grease.  You withdraw.”  I was stunned, and said nothing.  What nonsense was this, about the “inattention of my parents”?  I didn’t think it was true – but I never forgot it.  Looking back on it, and in comparison to what I came to know as normal and healthy parent-child interactions, I began to see the legitimacy of his point.

Well.  That only took me twenty years.

Comments Off on The Fambily – Part 1, an Awakening Posted in Fambily

The Fambily – Prologue and Conclusion

I’m not close to my family.  My mother has never been close to me; my father was, when I was small, but that faded away as I grew from boy to adolescent; my relationship to my sister was more like that of adjoining cellmates who didn’t get along – until she went away to college and we became distant-but-friendly on the occasions of family get-togethers.  Over the years I got along best with our cats.

I went from being an unhappy child to a rebellious, unhappy teenager, and then a directionless, unmotivated, unhappy young adult.  After I moved out of the house and got on my own I tried to both fulfill my family obligations and to keep the family peace, but over the years I’ve grown increasingly distant, by my choice.  I’ve found that the more distant I am from them the happier a person I have become.  When I think of my nuclear family I don’t feel a sense of love or attachment.  When something good happens in my life I don’t think, “I can’t wait to tell Mom & Dad”, and when something bad happens, I don’t think, “How will I tell Mom & Dad?”  My sister and I don’t talk unless we’re at some family gathering.  They’re more like a some of adults I know, and I don’t particularly like them, so I would prefer to think about them less than I do, and when I do think of them it’s often with contempt or derision.

It’s not that they’re nasty or generally unpleasant people; sometimes it’s because I’ll remember something from my past, like how at some point – in my adolescence, teens? – my parents stopped taking me to the doctor or dentist for checkups.  I only realized that when I thought back to when I was switched from private to public school, how I was taken to their doctor for a physical, undoubtedly as a requirement of law, and thinking at the time that, wow, it’s been a long, long time since I’ve been to the doctor.  It didn’t occur to me at the time but on reflection as an adult I wonder at that, and how I never did go for medical checkups after that, ever, and how that doesn’t seem right.  As in, I was under their care but I didn’t have a doctor or dentist, and they never took me to one for checkups, and that seems like a pretty blatant negligence of their obligation as parents.  So when I remember or think about things like that, then yes: contempt, or derision.

Most of my antipathy towards them is directly attributable to our political differences.  I’m a patriotic fiscal conservative neocon, and they’re f’ing international socialists.  Not merely Liberals – actual international socialists.  Bernie Sanders cheering, capitalism-hating, world citizen pinkos, although to be fair, they would probably describe themselves as “Democratic Socialists” now that it’s what Bernie Sanders calls himself.  It’s a family disease; every one of my extended family is, at the very least, a Liberal.  I recently learned after her passing that my grandmother’s parents on my mother’s side were Russian Bolsheviks (and that was why her first Christmas present came from her husband); my father recently told me that at age fourteen he was deeply influenced by Marx’s Communist Manifesto.  I’ve long known that my father was a member of the SDS long before I knew what it was; a copy of his membership card was incorporated by an artist friend of his into an art piece commemorating IIRC my father’s birthday, and which was hung proudly in our bathroom for many years.  He told me with an odd mixture of pride and embarrassment that after they started throwing bombs he let his membership lapse (… and just think about that…).  My sister told me she was a communist when she was in college.  They all live in the United States and wouldn’t dream of moving to one of the socialist utopias.

Although their political beliefs are strong they didn’t talk about their beliefs or opinions at home when I was growing up.  I grew up as a Liberal but that only by default and through osmosis.  After my own political conversion around 2002 my parents mentioned in a phone conversation with me that my sister’s opinions were so vociferous that they had agreed to a political “no-fly” zone – a banning of political discussion or comments in their conversations.  I enthusiastically told them that was a great idea for us, too.  It’s the only thing that’s kept the peace in the family when it comes to our political differences, and it still takes my turning of a blind eye to their occasional politically-charged comments and observations.  Sometimes they just can’t help themselves, but I can keep from making a retort.

I originally created my Facebook account about ten years ago so that I would be able to keep up with what’s going on in my family since they rarely directly communicated to me about family news.  It was through their postings on FB that I began to see just how leftist they really were, and from what I’ve seen, like most Liberals, they are gullible and stupid.  They’re told what to think, and they do.  They’re told what to believe, and they do.  They’re told who to hate, and they do.  What they’re told to ignore, they do.  For the most part, whatever happens to be the leftist outrage or cause du jour it’s a pretty safe bet that they’re on board.  A hundred years of history telling them that they’re wrong has taught them nothing.  They do not wait on a news story to allow for facts to emerge before supporting the opinion they’ve been given.  They exist in the Liberal Bubble and rely on their Liberal/Leftist news and opinion sources to tell them what their political opposition has to say; they are embarrassingly ignorant and easily misled yet consider themselves to be well-informed critical thinkers.

As people, on social occasions, they’re generally OK to be around – but their politics disgust me.  Political passion runs deep in my family, and we are at polar opposites of the political spectrum (and let’s just go with that metaphor and not get caught up in trying to square the circle of describing myriad political phyla as a linear plane).  They call Republicans Nazis, racist, homophobic, rapacious, and an assorted variety of vulgar insults; while I’m not technically a Republican I do vote that way, so they’ve made it clear what they must think of me.  They parade their hatred on FB;  in turn, my contempt for their politics, and by extension, them, is deep, wide, and just below the surface.  I could easily see a political discussion blowing up into a family-destroying argument.  I’m ready, but not yet willing, to flip them the bird and turn my back.

I don’t want to blow up the family.  I don’t want to break their hearts by telling them how I really feel, and what I think of them, but that’s what would happen if they were ever to learn the truth.  As for what can be characterized as parental negligence I’m confident they don’t see it that way, they may not even remember it that way, and they weren’t that way out of conscious malice, but rather it was a form of casual neglect.  Regardless, I am not their teacher; it is not my responsibility to correct their faulty knowledge or foolish beliefs.  They can go on to the end of their days being wrong and that’s not my problem.

My mother and sister remain distant, but I’m well aware that my father would very much like for me to be more in touch – to call, to visit, to be a part of his life – and that’s a real shame.  For him.  My parents squandered their opportunities and obligation to build a relationship with me when I was in my formative years, when I was child and most needed it.  I’m an adult now and self-sufficient, and I neither need nor want anything from them nor do I need or want them in my life.

As my parents get older they will become less capable of taking care of themselves.  They are both retired and their house would serve them poorly as a place in which they will be able to grow old.  They live in a fairly large house with (effectively) four stories; my father has had a lifetime of back problems which have left his legs with uncertain footing on stairs.  They live in a very nice suburban neighborhood that has rolling hills which become treacherous in winter, and their house is not within walking distance of stores.  They are reasonably intelligent and reasonably well-off, yet I’ve neither seen nor heard any hint that they are going to address the impending hazards of their living situation.

My sister lives in Alaska with her family and will be unable to assist them.  Despite my living in another state over an hour away by car, I am their geographically closest relative by a large margin, and I just know that that at some point I will be called upon to help – and I don’t want any part of that.

I will not be their caretaker.  Not.  My.  Problem.  On the other hand, considering that my father could fall down the stairs and break his neck, and my mother’s horrible driving might get herself killed, this problem could solve itself.

I’ve written some blogposts about my childhood and family and will publish them in the coming weeks.  Although partly autobiographical in a general way they’re mostly about my relationship with family, so I’ll give them this category in my blog: “Fambily”.

Comments Off on The Fambily – Prologue and Conclusion Posted in Fambily

Big Data Pays a Visit

Today a coworker of mine came up to my desk and asked, “Do you want to see something weird?” “Sure!” I enthusiastically replied. Who doesn’t want to see something weird? So I went to her desk and there she showed me her FaceBook page, where there was an advertisement for a desktop wire file sorter – the model I had just bought for the office. She had never seen one like that before I’d put it on top of my cubicle wall a couple of days ago, but now here it was appearing in an ad on her FB feed.

I had done a search for it on (didn’t buy it there, though), but she and I are not FB friends, and so the connection between us isn’t obvious. Then she scrolled right on the ad, and up came a nightstand – the very one that had been sitting in my Amazon cart for a few weeks. I’d dropped it out of the cart a couple of weeks ago, but here’s the interesting thing: I searched for the file sorter using my business account, and the nightstand was in the cart of my personal account.

“Clearly there’s a connection between you and me,” I said.  I told her about Big Data, and how big companies like Amazon and FaceBook are collecting all kinds of information about us, who we know, what we like, and so forth.  I also told her how, a few days ago, I created an Instagram account so that I could see the wedding photos where another coworker was a bridesmaid, and again, that other coworker and I are not FB friends and have no other connection but work.  When I created that account Instagram suggested some people I might want to follow and amongst some random famous people was yet another coworker, one of our warehouse guys, with no other connection between us.

“So, the lesson here,” I said, “is to be careful where you buy your sex toys.”

Sore Losers

This isn’t about being bad losers. We are in revolt because our country is now in the hands of an intellectually disinterested, reckless, mendacious narcissist. If this doesn’t terrify you, you’re a fool.

I found this in my FB feed and it’s just so, so… so very. What’s the word I’m looking for?  Wait, it’ll come to me.

The Format: There’s nothing about this video which needed to be animated; nothing in particular is emphasized by the animation, and all of the text fits into the given format size. It’s essentially a meme-GIF gussied up for no apparent reason.

The Music: You’ll have to clickthrough the hyperlink to hear it; WordPress won’t let me attach an MP4 so I had to convert it to a GIF.  Spare yourself: it’s goofy and dumb.  It’s almost as if the music was chosen to contrast and undercut the message. I’m guessing “Yackety Sax” was too obvious.

The Message: Let’s fisk it.

1) “WE ARE NOT SORE LOSERS” (in all caps) “This isn’t about being bad losers.” Yeah, actually, it is in substantial measure about that, and they most certainly are bad, sore losers. When candidate Trump cast doubt on the integrity of the vote he was assailed by Leftist Democrats as not merely wrong, but he was accused of undercutting the very underpinnings of the democratic process. Within weeks it was the Leftist Democrats who were throwing shade at the integrity of the vote on flimsy pretenses without a hint of shame at their own hypocrisy.
The Russian “hacking” of the election? Nonsense. There’s no clear evidence that the Russians hacked into the DNC.  The hacking tool (see GRIZZLY STEPPE) used to break into the DNC is for sale on the black market.  What the Russians certainly did was to spread “fake news”, to dubious effect. The hacking, in this context, refers to the leaked emails of the DNC, and if Julian Assange is to be believed the trove WikiLeaks published came from a disgruntled Bernie Sanders supporter. Assange is not trustworthy but it’s a completely plausible story, considering that the emails revealed the DNC to be colluding with the Clinton campaign to lock Sanders out of the primary. Even if it were the Russians who hacked the DNC, what happened was a revealing of truth, not disinformation. So let’s be clear about this: What the Democrats are upset about is the revealing of truth – not truth related to our safety and national security, but political truth and the dirty politics of the DNC.
The Comey backstabbing? Nonsense. FBI Director James Comey revealed days before the vote that the investigation into the Clinton emails had been re-opened due to the discovery of a new trove of thousands of emails on disgraced Anthony Weiners laptop. Essentially, the position appears to be that the truth of the status of the investigation should have been kept secret, as it was during the months summer months when Clinton insisted that the investigation was nothing more than a “security review”. In fact, Comey betrayed the American people by failing to press charges against Clinton and her staff despite unambiguously clear multiple violations of Federal law. Once again: What Democrats are upset about is the revealing of truth.  As for the allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians, we have Dianne Feinstein (D), who’s on the Senate Intelligence Committee, and assures us that there’s no evidence of that.

2) “We are in revolt because …” Whoa, let’s stop right there. They certainly are revolting but not in the sense that they are “in revolt” by any stretch of the imagination. Leftists have a long-standing love affair with “revolution” and they love to associate themselves with it. It’s self-aggrandizing, counter-establishment, and in their minds, flattering. When Leftists declare they are “in revolt” they are echoing the battle-cry of Leftists from decades past, but they are not, in fact, “in revolt”. They are just complaining like the sore losers that they are.

3) “… our country is now in the hands of an intellectually disinterested, reckless, mendacious narcissist.” Well, to be fair, that’s true enough. The problem Leftists have is that it’s the other guy who won. Their candidate fits that description too, and is, by far, the most corrupt politician I have seen in my lifetime, and I remember ABSCAM when congressmen were literally taking a bribe in the form of a suitcase full of cash. There’s also the matter of her sense of entitlement to the presidency, her disparagements of the other side, her willful disregard for the our national security secrets, her massive influence-peddling, and so on. Clinton was a deeply, deeply flawed candidate/criminal, so much so that despite at least a two-to-one spending advantage her team couldn’t beat Donald Trump, the biggest clown running for the presidency I have seen in my lifetime, and I remember – wait, no, I don’t want to start clown-ranking past presidential candidates.  That’s beyond the scope of a blogpost. So: He’s the biggest clown. Trust me. The biggest. Yuuuuge clown.

4) “If this doesn’t terrify you, you’re a fool.” Idiot Leftists are equal measures stupidity, ignorance, and smug arrogance, supported by a foundation of fear and violent anger, all of which they project onto their political opposition. Socialists are shameless in their support of an ideology which has killed tens of millions, and the terrifying disasters which are the direct result of their ideology put into practice teach them no lessons in failure, but really, if you aren’t terrified of Trump, you’re a fool. None of the dumbasses who liked or shared this have actually acted in any meaningful way to protect themselves or their loved ones from this terror, but supposedly: terror.

5) “WE ARE RESISTING TYRANNY” (again, all caps). No they are not. I’ve heard this word, “resist”, thrown around a lot by these Leftists, but no, they’re not resisting. What does it mean to resist, to be in this resistance? Are they smuggling refugees out of the country to freedom and safety? Are they smuggling news, supplies, weapons, anything to the victims trapped inside, or the their fellow revolutionary resisters? Are they carrying out missions of sabotage or assassination? No, none of it. So what are they doing? complaining is what; complaining like the sore losers that they are.  And in what way does the Trump Administration manifest “tyranny”?  We know what tyranny looks like.  We have real-life current-day examples of tyranny:  China, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela; and the farther left a government goes the more tyrannical it becomes.   Socialism is the road to tyranny (or serfdom, for you Hayekian purists) and these pathetic Leftists are so clueless as to call themselves Antifa.

Ah! there’s the word I’ve been looking for:



Addendum: While writing this post I googled “Define sore loser”, and here’s what Google came up with:

In what cannot in any possible way be interpreted as a partisan political message, when I Googled “Define sore loser” and I got a picture of James Comey.

Burning Questions About Hydrogen Wire

Scientists at Harvard have recently announced the long-sought creation of the metallic form of Hydrogen.  The last I recall reading about progress towards this goal, perhaps a decade ago, researchers were using diamond anvils.  Take two perfect diamonds, set them opposite each other, place the sample substance in between, and then squeeeeeeeze.  As it turns out they’re still using that same kind of apparatus with some refinements to make the compression surfaces more atomically perfect.

In the circles of material science this milestone really is a big deal.  The theoretical properties of metallic hydrogen are intriguing: room-temperature superconductor, super-high energy rocket fuel.  The article goes into some pie-in-the-sky speculative detail about what wonderful things could be done with this new substance, as most science articles are wont to do.

Let me just point out a couple of things:

  1. There is no theoretical means of mass production.  When these people talk about this room temperature superconductor revolutionizing energy storage and transmission, bear in mind that we have no idea how to scale up production to a level which would be useful or economical for anything other than special-purpose 1-off big-money project.  Think: military, or space exploration, or special-built supercomputer.
  2. Unlike most fuels we use metal hydrogen must have all its energy put into it.  Gasoline, in contrast, has a rather high specific impulse, but what makes it so darn attractive is that the energy is already present in the hydrocarbons we pump out of the ground.  With a few chemical tweaks we can modify it into a very useful fuel, but it is an energy source, whereas metallic hydrogen would be useful as an energy medium, i.e., a form of energy storage.  That is to say, the energy from metallic hydrogen will have to come from some other source and then be stored in the form of metallic hydrogen, but that energy has to come from somewhere else.  Therefore, it’s useful for rockets where volume and mass are at a premium, but very little else as compared to, for example, hydrocarbons.
  3. When considering the superconducting applications of metallic hydrogen, don’t forget the other potential use: high specific-energy rocket fuel.  Now consider the implication: superconducting metallic hydrogen wire would be made of rocket fuel.  We’re used to thinking of wiring as a fire hazard, but mostly because it can overheat and melt, and spark, and thereby set other things on fire, but hydrogen metal wire will itself burn enthusiastically.  Maybe not the kind of stuff you’d want anywhere near your person or things you care about.

So: Metallic Hydrogen.  Superfantasic as the fuel of the world’s tiniest spacecraft, but otherwise, well…  Not so great.

Fauxahontas vs. Big Pharma

Found on my FB feed this morning, posted by one of my many Liberal relatives, who apparently did not actually read what she was endorsing.  Fun fact: She’s a schoolteacher.  Here is the important message from Fauxcahontas, and without further comment, I quote (emphasis added):

“For years, Congress has been working on legislation to advance medical innovation in the United States. But in the closing days of this Congress, Big Pharma has hijacked this 21st Century Cures Act – and every good, common-sense, bipartisan proposal will die unless Democrats make it easier for drug companies to commit fraud, give out kickbacks, and put patient’s lives at risk. I know the difference between compromise and extortion – and I cannot vote for this bill as it currently stands.”


DNC Eggs On Leftist Violence

After their 2016 election loss Democrat supporters took to the streets and marched – and rioted. That riot part was downplayed by the MSM as “protests” – here’s a clue for them: when protesters break store windows, smash cars, set fires, and beat people up, it is called a riot and they are called rioters.

The Democratic National Committee has seen this too and they’re doing their part – to keep it going. Here’s my inbox from the last couple of days:gmail-inbox-2016-11-18

Yes, the DNC would like you to start fighting back. “Fight” is the operative word here. See also this email about a sticker they’d like you to put on your car; and what’s the operative word here?dnc-email-fight-back-2016-11-17

Yes, FIGHT. With Liberal defiance, fear, and violence run amok the DNC would like all of their supporters to do what? FIGHT.

Money Can’t Buy Them Love

Bradley Smith has a piece in the Washington Examiner (“Kill the ‘money buys elections’ cliche” – 2016-11-14) in which he points out that in the 2016 election cycle Clinton outspent Trump two-to-one, and of  “independent” groups the Clinton side outspent the Trump side by three-to-one. These are not marginal differences, they are huge and unprecedented; you can’t look at that difference and say that it’s within any kind of margin of ineptitude.  That is to say, it’s not like you can argue that the “true” amounts spent were close because a significant portion of the Clinton cash was spent on stupid things (ex., “That $20M for skywriting over North Dakota? It seemed like a good idea at the time!”).

In his piece Smith makes the case that the “money buys elections” cliche is dead. I’d argue that it isn’t, mostly because, despite the clear-cut example presented by this election, partisans will use whatever argument might work regardless.  Also, money can still buy elections under different circumstances – a candidate who has virtually no budget will probably lose vs. an opponent who has even a modest bankroll, or when all the candidates are not already well-known to the voters. Money still counts.

One thing I found remarkable in this cycle was the absence of the usual Liberal hair-pulling over “Campaign Finance Reform”. Obama outspent both McCain and Romney but the margin was tight enough that Liberals could still pretend they were the underfunded underdogs and decry the way the Right was buying the election. With the disparity as great as it was in this cycle that would no longer pass the laugh test, and that’s why we didn’t hear anything about it.  Not in the WaPo, not in the NYTimes, not on CNN, not in the MSM; not on NPR; not on the Liberal blogs. Where were the Kos Kids or HuffPo? Thinkprogress? Anyone? Did the Liberal “watchdog” groups so much as snarl?

This is another example of the Liberal “Pretext of Principles“.  The disparity in money spent has never been greater, in terms of the ratio or in terms of absolute dollars spent, by the campaign or its supporters, and Liberals didn’t and don’t mind at all because it benefited their side. Their principle that money corrupts the democratic process may or may not be true, but whether it’s troubling to Liberals is entirely conditional on whether or not they are the beneficiaries of the disparity.  As a corollary, the same goes for big money donors; for Liberals, if Wall Street or Big Pharma or whatever deep-pockets pays their side, that may be notable but it’s not bad – and it’s not necessarily notable either.

Your First Clue Was His Initials

Bernie Sanders, having just ended his leftist bid for the Democrat presidential nomination, has bought his third house, a $600K summer dacha, in his home state of Vermont.  I think this is hilarious!  It makes me want to point and laugh big hearty guffaws in the faces of his supporters – not that I would unless provoked, but the notion is delightful.

The hypocrisy of this is incandescent but, sadly, this will change nothing.  The news of this extravagant and indulgent purchase will, by and large, not reach the ears of the leftist rubes who supported him and donated to his campaign.  Probably they’ll never learn of this, and that’s a pity, but even if they do find out most are  incapable of reassessing the man, his campaign, or their own beliefs.  After a quick grimace they’ll go right back to their delusional comfort zone, and their cognitive dissonance will shrug its shoulders and move on.


New Toy: HP Stream 11-r020nr Notebook

I just bought myself an HP Stream 11-r020nr Notebook.  It’s got an Intel Celeron CPU (1.66GHz, 2 cores), 2GB DDR3L SDRAM, 32GB flash drive, and an 11.6″ display with onboard video.  These specs were kinda underwhelming ten years ago, but today they’re downright pitiful – and it’s not even upgradable.

So why did I buy this tricycle of a computer?  Because it’s was cheap at only $180+tx and it comes with Windows 10, so altogether it should be adequate to the purpose, and that purpose is online banking.  That will be the singular purpose of this machine.

I’ve been doing my own online banking and portfolio management for many, many years now, generally using my home desktop machine.  I also use that machine for everything else as well – email, web browsing, etc. – and although I have it somewhat secured it’s not very secure, and as such it’s not a suitable platform with which to manage my life savings.  I knew what I wanted to do but I didn’t want to do it; then I reached my tipping point after reading about GozNym.

The solution is to have a separate computer with which I do the financial stuff, and only that stuff.  No web browsing, no email, no video or game playing, just using the browser to go to specific financial websites.  Nothing else.  Very little uptime and limited exposure.  On the flip side, it cost me some coin and using it is an awkward PITA.

I thought about using my 10-year-old Acer TravelMate TM4072WLCi – hey, it still runs! – but no.  I need a Windows OS to run Password Safe and so I’d have to replace WinXP.  Win7 is being phased out by MS and replaced by Win10, and buying Win10 standalone costs $100 or so – but I doubt it would recognize the hardware.  I have WinXP drivers, but would they work with Win10?  Doubtful.

All I’m really trying to do with this new notebook is to make myself a more elusive & harder target, and when you come right down to it those are bedrock principles of defense.