[OT] Seek 'usage timer' utility to stop Net addiction!

[Franklin]

This is off-topic.

------

There are plenty of timer utilities.

But I am looking for a timer which counts only while the PC's
keyboard is in use.

Then the timer might sound an alarm when it reaches a preset duration
of keyboard usage - such as 60 minutes.

Can anyone help me locate such a utility?

 

[Noozer]

This is off-topic.

Which is french for "the OP is an idiot"

 

[recursor]

This is off-topic.

------

There are plenty of timer utilities.

But I am looking for a timer which counts only while the PC's
keyboard is in use.

Then the timer might sound an alarm when it reaches a preset duration
of keyboard usage - such as 60 minutes.

Can anyone help me locate such a utility?

Why X-No-Archive ? troll.?

 

[no66y©]

"Franklin" wrote in message

Can anyone help me locate such a utility?

self discipline?


--
No66y©
Those who find they're touched by madness
Sit down next to me

Reply to address is a spam trap.
Use no66y [at] breathe [dot] com

 

[Franklin]

On Tue 01 Mar 2005 20:42:54, Noozer wrote:

Which is french for "the OP is an idiot"

I think it is something like ... Some people are too dense to
understand what OT means in the subject line that the poster has
kindly repeated it in the first line for these people and even then
some people like Noozer will still be too slow off the mark to
realise that he does not have to read it and certainly he is not
obliged to reply to it!

 

[Franklin]

On Tue 01 Mar 2005 20:51:43, recursor wrote:

Why X-No-Archive ? troll.?

All my posts are XNA. It is effectively a perfectly legitimate
request for search engines not to log me for longer than 7 days.

Why waste your time asking?

 

[recursor]

On Tue 01 Mar 2005 20:51:43, recursor wrote:


All my posts are XNA. It is effectively a perfectly legitimate
request for search engines not to log me for longer than 7 days.

Why waste your time asking?

Time isn't in short supply round here, my point was that you *seem* from the the
XNA and the post above to be more savvy than your silly original post suggests,
so I thought maybe you were a smurf. If it was a real question I suggest you use
your watch and your brain to achieve the end you wanted.

 

[Noozer]

On Tue 01 Mar 2005 20:42:54, Noozer wrote:



I think it is something like ... Some people are too dense to
understand what OT means in the subject line that the poster has
kindly repeated it in the first line for these people and even then
some people like Noozer will still be too slow off the mark to
realise that he does not have to read it and certainly he is not
obliged to reply to it!

So it's OK to smoke in a non-smoking area as long as you announce that
you're going to smoke?

It's OK for a man to go into the ladies room to take a leak as long as he
announces his intentions?

It's OK to drive through a red light just because you're laying on the horn?

OT = inconsiderate dumbass.

 

[Lin Chung]

There are plenty of timer utilities.
But I am looking for a timer which counts only while the PC's
keyboard is in use. Then the timer might sound an alarm when
it reaches a preset duration of keyboard usage - such as 60 minutes.

This one-hour timer may equally be suitable as a reminder that one should
leave the computer for a while, stretch one's legs and, perhaps, make a cup
of tea to avoid getting deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism and, in the
rare occasions, cardiac arrest.

If there is no ready application software specifically for this timer
function, you may consider writing your own, using a macro language
programme. There are some free ones on the web. The algorithm is pretty
straight forward (basically a timer to be started by a key stroke and
finished with a machine turnoff), apart from the decision making part of the
timer's deciding on the lapsed time (since the last key stroke) to be part
of a continuous keyboard use or of unused, idle time. But when you really
think about it, the solution is obvious.

If you do decide to 'roll your own', please publish it here for the benefit
of the community! <g>

 

[CBFalconer]

All my posts are XNA. It is effectively a perfectly legitimate
request for search engines not to log me for longer than 7 days.

Why waste your time asking?

<rant>
It is also a signal, if I notice it, not to bother giving you any
help. If you are so inconsiderate as to hide your articles from
anyone wanting similar help in the future, and thus generally
anti-social, I (and many others) have no interest in helping you.

Which reminds me - I must request that Mozilla and Thunderbird be
organized to expose such a hidden X-Noarchive flag. It just takes
a little indicator.

F'ups set, in a vain hope of quashing the lack of them in the
original post. Another sign of anti-social behaviour by the OP.
</rant>

 

[Franklin]

On Tue 01 Mar 2005 22:12:00, Noozer wrote:

So it's OK to smoke in a non-smoking area as long as you
announce that you're going to smoke?

It's OK for a man to go into the ladies room to take a leak as
long as he announces his intentions?

It's OK to drive through a red light just because you're laying
on the horn?

OT = inconsiderate dumbass.

OT is a well understood and perfectly acceptable convention.

Some outraged people may feel that the Usenet was designed for them
and theor rules but the rest of us just behave normally.

If you don't want to read off-topic posts then ignore those that are
mark "OT". There. It's not difficult is it?

 

[Franklin]

On Tue 01 Mar 2005 22:11:51, recursor wrote:

Time isn't in short supply round here, my point was that you
*seem* from the the XNA and the post above to be more savvy than
your silly original post suggests, so I thought maybe you were a
smurf. If it was a real question I suggest you use your watch
and your brain to achieve the end you wanted.

Tried that! Doesn't work!

 

[recursor]

On Tue 01 Mar 2005 22:11:51, recursor wrote:


Tried that! Doesn't work!

LOL

 

[kony]

On Tue 01 Mar 2005 22:12:00, Noozer wrote:



OT is a well understood and perfectly acceptable convention.

Actually, no. Where would it end?
You suppose usenet for designed only for you and your rules?
Clearly we could not have every topic that isn't on-topic,
posted in all groups, else what's the point of separate
groups? They'd all be overrun with OT posts and usenet is
then useless. That is, unless you feel that only you
personally and a select few "like you" should be posting OT
while all others shouldn't?!

Some outraged people may feel that the Usenet was designed for them
and theor rules but the rest of us just behave normally.

If you don't want to read off-topic posts then ignore those that are
mark "OT". There. It's not difficult is it?

If you dont' want to post ON-topic, go where your post IS
on-topic. It's not difficult is it?

 

[BBUNNY]

kony wrote:
| On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 18:06:46 GMT, Franklin
|
|| On Tue 01 Mar 2005 22:12:00, Noozer wrote:
|| <||
|||| I think it is something like ... Some people are too dense to
|||| understand what OT means in the subject line that the poster
|||| has kindly repeated it in the first line for these people and
|||| even then some people like Noozer will still be too slow off
|||| the mark to realise that he does not have to read it and
|||| certainly he is not obliged to reply to it!
|||
||| So it's OK to smoke in a non-smoking area as long as you
||| announce that you're going to smoke?
|||
||| It's OK for a man to go into the ladies room to take a leak as
||| long as he announces his intentions?
|||
||| It's OK to drive through a red light just because you're laying
||| on the horn?
|||
||| OT = inconsiderate dumbass.
|| OT is a well understood and perfectly acceptable convention.

|| Some outraged people may feel that the Usenet was designed for them
|| and theor rules but the rest of us just behave normally.
||
|| If you don't want to read off-topic posts then ignore those that are
|| mark "OT". There. It's not difficult is it?
|
| If you dont' want to post ON-topic, go where your post IS
| on-topic. It's not difficult is it?


| Actually, no. Where would it end?
| You suppose usenet for designed only for you and your rules?
| Clearly we could not have every topic that isn't on-topic,
| posted in all groups, else what's the point of separate
| groups? They'd all be overrun with OT posts and usenet is
| then useless. That is, unless you feel that only you
| personally and a select few "like you" should be posting OT
| while all others shouldn't?!

How the HEXX can any topic be of topic in a general NG????

 

[recursor]

kony wrote:
| On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 18:06:46 GMT, Franklin
|
|| On Tue 01 Mar 2005 22:12:00, Noozer wrote:
|| <||
|||| I think it is something like ... Some people are too dense to
|||| understand what OT means in the subject line that the poster
|||| has kindly repeated it in the first line for these people and
|||| even then some people like Noozer will still be too slow off
|||| the mark to realise that he does not have to read it and
|||| certainly he is not obliged to reply to it!
|||
||| So it's OK to smoke in a non-smoking area as long as you
||| announce that you're going to smoke?
|||
||| It's OK for a man to go into the ladies room to take a leak as
||| long as he announces his intentions?
|||
||| It's OK to drive through a red light just because you're laying
||| on the horn?
|||
||| OT = inconsiderate dumbass.
|| OT is a well understood and perfectly acceptable convention.

|| Some outraged people may feel that the Usenet was designed for them
|| and theor rules but the rest of us just behave normally.
||
|| If you don't want to read off-topic posts then ignore those that are
|| mark "OT". There. It's not difficult is it?
|
| If you dont' want to post ON-topic, go where your post IS
| on-topic. It's not difficult is it?


| Actually, no. Where would it end?
| You suppose usenet for designed only for you and your rules?
| Clearly we could not have every topic that isn't on-topic,
| posted in all groups, else what's the point of separate
| groups? They'd all be overrun with OT posts and usenet is
| then useless. That is, unless you feel that only you
| personally and a select few "like you" should be posting OT
| while all others shouldn't?!

How the HEXX can any topic be of topic in a general NG????

Beware the dreaded x-poast.

 

[Ikke]

So it's OK to smoke in a non-smoking area as long as you announce that
you're going to smoke?

It's OK for a man to go into the ladies room to take a leak as long as
he announces his intentions?

Again OT, but if the gent's is occupied, since when is it not OK to use the
ladies room to take a leek? Even without anouncing intentions?

Are you american perhaps?

Ikke