The ongoing neocolonisation of Evernote

Evernote for Mac, Evernote for iOS. The only two evernote clients which aren’t unusably terrible. Some Evernote apps are only available for iOS or for Mac OS. Everybody stuck with the bug-sick green elephant! The grass is really gre- er… purpler on the other side at OneNote. Ironically, these people who just upgraded to 2007 design in 2014 (they were stuck at 2001 design till then) were awarded a design award from, guess who… Apple.

Evernote is all praise for Apple, such as in this document, where it hails Apple (and to be politically correct, and Evernote, not including Evernote) as a game-changer for education, something which will never be true, despite the sheer number of fools buying Macbooks and iPads for gaming in school and listening to music from iTunes in a coffee shop, also known as “Education”. The document is named, unsurprisingly as apple_edu.pdf and not apple_and_evernote_edu.pdf.

Actually, what they write makes sense. Writing “Apple and Evernote” is like writing “Microsoft and OneNote” or “Microsoft and Windows”. The relation between Apple and Evernote is similar to what was the relation between Microsoft and Nokia until Microsoft bought its Lumia phones division. Evernote is in the early stages of a neocolonisation by Apple.

Microsoft’s business model is:

Support them, Compete with them, Beat them, Kill them, Establish a monopoly, Get kicked hard by the Maoist courts for no particular reason

Apple’s is:

Compete with them, Reduce your competition with them, Eliminate your competition with them, Pretend to love them, Sue them, Fine them, Get them hanged, Give out your evil laugh, Resurrect your competition now that there is no competition remaining, Establish a monopoly, Go unnoticed by the courts

Beware, Evernote. Seriously, it’s annoying how Evernote ignores bugs in their web, Windows, and Android clients. Anyway, Evernote has no feature that OneNote does not. So, OneNote >> Google Keep >> Evernote. Evernote could have been significantly better than Google Keep, if not for the glaring bugs.

OneNote, on the other hand, is a full-fledged Microsoft Office beast. They could have gained a much larger market share if not for the undeserved poor reputation that Microsoft has (thanks to people associating IE6 from 2001 with Microsoft now in 2014, for no obvious reason).

Advertisements

Capitalism is about equal opportunity; Communism is about equal outcome

TL;DR – If you’re too stupid or too lazy to achieve what I did with the same opportunities, it’s not my goddamn problem. And anybody who suggests otherwise is a commie.

Communists love to shroud their true ideology under the name “egalitarianism”. But egalitarianism what? Egalitarianism of opportunity? Egalitarianism of natural abilities and provisions? Or egalitarianism of outcome? The communist ideology is, in fact, all about equal outcome, no matter how you would prefer to deny it. Granted, many self-proclaimed capitalists claim to support capitalism, which is about egalitarianism of opportunity, whereas what they really support is the discrimination of minorities.

What do reservations and quotas achieve for “equality”, economy, or science? The objective of reservations is clear. This is what their proponents say, “It’s to ensure that minorities don’t get under-represented in society“. Under-represented. What does this mean. That the outcome is fairly equal. It does not tackle real problems of discrimination; all it does is ensure that everybody gets discriminated.

Your child died in a car accident? So sorry, now I’m going to have to kill all children in car accidents, so that your child didn’t have to die. Oh wait, it doesn’t work that way. That’s just too bad. Because… I’M STILL GOING TO KILL ALL CHILDREN IN CAR ACCIDENTS! What, someone died? NOW I’M GOING TO MAKE THE HUMAN RACE GO EXTINCT! WOO-HOO!

What’s my problem, you ask? My problem is that:

  • It’s not my problem if despite having the same opportunities as me, you’re too stupid and/or lazy to achieve what I did.
  • Imagine a world with equal outcome. Now everybody will suffer, and no exceptional talents will arise. Yay <hi-five!>.
  • Socialism results in the oppression of people because their ancestors oppressed other people, and this cycle continues on and on, with multiple more communist revolutions, with a lot of bloodshed, economic destruction, and communal animosity.
  • Remember the competitions when the announcer would announce “Today, all of you are winners“? That’s of the same value as saying, “Today, all of you are losers“. The value of “winning” just gets devalued.
  • A good analogy for socialism is in stupid reality TV shows, in which the invited guests request that nobody be disqualified. That justs result in more people being disqualified in the next session. Sacrifice the future, for the present.
  • Communism encourages laziness. There’s been much said on this anyway.

Basically, socialism is about oppressing the ones with merit and supporting those with none. Even if they had the same opportunity.

Socialism is about equal outcome; Capitalism is about equal opportunity.

Socialism is about tasty painkillers; Capitalism is about medicines – bitter ones.

Socialism is about making voters’ life comfortable till the next election; Capitalism is about making people’s lives better in the long run.¬†

Socialism is about killing your child’s future to enjoy yourself; Capitalsim is about forgoing some luxury so your child can feed himself.

Socialism is about enjoying tobacco and killing yourself; Capitalism is about avoiding such to lead a healthier life.

Socialism is about discriminating against those who’s daddies discriminated against others; Capitalism is about equal opportunity.

And the Maoists take over the EU and the US

The world’s three largest economies, the European Union, the United States, and China, have now been officially taken over by the Maoists. “People thought that Deng Xiaoping killed us” comments¬† the anonymous head honcho of the Maoist State of Europe, America, China and Hong Kong (MSEACH), who considers himself to be the second coming of Mao Zedong, “But nobody wonders who killed Deng Xiaoping. And look, we’re back, in the most unexpected nations of all.“.

When asked if they would succeed this time, he promptly exclaimed, “We’ve succeeded each time. The previous coming of myself had solely one aim. It was to endanger the sparrow. And we succeeded. A more well-framed question would be if we would remain in power for a longer period of time. The answer is yes. This time, we will be controlling nearly 59% of the world’s economy, and have a special new strategy…“.

After being prompted to explain the “special new strategy”, the head honcho of MSEACH, to whom we will hereby refer to Zedong II, explained “Oh, specialisation of course! We will specialise in economic destruction in the EU and social clampdown in the US. Monopolies FTL!“. Zedong II, who apparently thinks that “FTL” stands for “For The Loss” instead of the actual “Faster Than Light”, added that China is their backup option, when asked about their plans for the 1.36-billion-strong nation.

Zedong II also shed some light on the actions they have already taken to restore the reign of Mao Zedong across the world.

  • Implementation of BrowserChoice against Microsoft in the EU
  • A ton of anti-trust lawsuits, mostly against Microsoft and Google.
  • Breakup of Google services in the EU
  • Infringement of the sovereignity of non-US countries
  • Destruction of user privacy in the US (which basically encompasses the entire world besides Russia thanks to the previous point)

Zedong II was quick to point out that this is only the trailer, and the eventual goal of the MSEACH is to utterly screw up the world and its economy save the world from crony capitalist forces.


No, seriously. WHAT DO THESE NEO-MAOISTS LEADING THE US AND THE EU THINK OF THEMSELVES? What a sad state that has become of the US. One party doesn’t understand science; the other does not understand the economy. And the EU, thanks to the French, whose left and right are all the left (there the left are the Marxists, and the right are the Maoists. guess who’s better).

What rights do the Maoists in the US have to order Microsoft to hand over emails stored in its Irish servers (1, 2, 3)? I’m not a privacy freak, but the thought of a government agency personally reading your emails should freak anybody out.

And then people are thinking of bringing back SOPA. Maoism is very much alive.

An Irreligion FAQ

Those who are irreligious (atheists and agnostics such as myself) get various stupid questions asked regularly. Before asking such questions, I request you all to refer to this FAQ, the irreligion FAQ. Atheists and agnosticists will be collectively referred to as “a*ists* in this FAQ.


How do you a*ists define God?

*gods.

We don’t. That’s your job, as a theist. We tell you our belief, or disbelief, based on however you define them. Usually, when identifying as a*ists, though, we mean “absence of belief/belief of absence in an omnipotent, omniscient, or omnipresent creator, destroyer, or preserver indescribable by our laws of physics“.

What, in your view, is religion? What does it mean to be religious?

Religion is the complete belief in a philosophy of the past, including science and ethics, perhaps restricted geographically, that is overruled by a more modern philosophy. To be religious is to believe in a religion, in part or in full, irrationally and solely because it is from the past. To be pseudo-religious is to be religious without full knowledge of their own belief.

What do agnosticism, atheism even mean?

Let’s put this on a scale.

scale from theism to agnosticism to atheism
It’s a 1-dimensional scale – please stop putting “gnostic-agnostic” on a separate orthogonal axis.

The three positions to the left imply absence of belief in gods. The three positions to the right imply absence of disbelief in gods. Below, “” means “and everything to the left of it“. E.g. “Agnostic theists –” means “Agnostic theists, Agnostics, Agnostic atheists, and Gnostic atheists“. Similarly, “+” means “and everything to the right of it“.

Agnostics – : Absence of belief in the presence of gods

Agnostic atheists – : Disbelief in the presence of gods

Gnostic atheists – : Belief in absence of gods

Agnostics + : Absence of belief in the absence of gods

Agnostic theists + : Disbelief in the absence of gods

Gnostic theists + : Belief in the absence of gods

I hope you are thoroughly confused by now. No? Most atheists tend to be agnostic atheists, while most theists tend to be gnostic theists. Of course, there are regional variations. The theists of my own community tend to be agnostic theists. It’s also worth noting that one may be, say, an agnostic atheist in one god or definition of god, and, say, a gnostic theist in another god or definition of god. Most theists in their favourite god tend to be gnostic atheists in all other gods or definitions of god. So atheists are only slightly more atheistic than theists ; ). That is, given the 2500 different religions, their hundreds of thousands of cults, the more than 330,002,501 different gods they worship, and other gods from lesser known religions of a single person or a small group of people, or a tribe.

Do you a*ists worship demons or the devil?

We tend to not worship anything that doesn’t exist, idiot.

A*ists don’t believe in any gods and godsends. And that includes devils and their demons, devilsends, because devils are also. Period.

And seriously, if devils are symbols of evil and gods are symbols of good,… looking at what these gods do, I guess your bad is my good, and I would probably like these devils. What I don’t understand is how the good angels can bear with an arrogant, self-obsessed, idiotic, evil god, while a rational and sensibly liberal devil can bear with those evil, hateful, and destructive demons. That’s for Christianity, anyway. In Hinduism, the angels seem to be the only bad people, with a good (though quite angry, and biased against demons) god, unfortunately oppressed demons, and a kind devils.

Who are your prophets?

Haven’t you heard? For Hitchen’s sake. Oh my Carvaka! Holy Dawkins! The first of them is our single prophet, and the second two are the gods of the two cults of atheism.

What are your thoughts on Jesus Christ?

A nice social activist of Jewish ethnicity, who went a little crazy, and got overhyped. Strangely, he was brutally killed by members of the same religious community who today worship him. Huh.

Seriously, all a*ists, or even all agnostics, all agnostic atheists, or all atheists, don’t share an opinion on this random person.

Do you believe in evolution/the big bang?

Wrong word – you’re not supposed to believe in it. You’re supposed to learn the pre-requisites, understand the theory/model, and rationally assess it.

So do I think it’s true? Yes, I do. But that doesn’t mean all a*ists think it’s true. Unlike what you may believe, the entire lives of atheists does not revolve around going against theists. Pretty much the other way around, really. Being against evolution or the big bang is endorsed by Christianity, but so is refusing to kill someone. Huh, there are even so many contradictions in that big fat fictional novel, how do I go against it? I mean “Thou shall not kill” but “Jesus killed lambs and fishes, along with lots of other stuff.” and “God flooded the world and killed almost everyone including humans and animals“. Can someone tell me if I should kill you or not?

What kind of immoral folks are you?!

Type tFsM10-omega build 9906 (off-topic: decode this code and tell us in the comments!). Seriously, morals predate religion, and religion is based on morals and science setback certain time and place, i.e. outdated. Ethics evolve, like science. Religion is the refusal to evolve. So I won’t be surprised if the average atheist is twice as moral as the average theist.