old said:
What has this thread got to do with the PC 4GB RAM limit ?
Believe it or not, there was/is a connection, albeit convoluted, and this
one is similar to other basic 'complainer/conspiracy' evolutions.
It works like this. There is some situation someone doesn't
like/understand, such as a 4 Gbyte limit on RAM. Someone offers a variation
of the typical complainer explanation, like either the entire planet (or
users, or 'the industry', it varies) is 'stupid' or there is some
'conspiracy' (commonly 'for profit', or 'for oil') or both (stupid *and*
evil). Then the thread evolves through discussing the unsubstantiated
claims, such as "there is a big wide world out there beyond the geeks, and
almost no part of it is interested in computers, in any form;" which was
used as a kind of explanation for why no one cares (I.E. not complaining
too) thereby allowing industry to do these 'stupid/evil' things 'for profit'.
That's a shortened version because it wandered through 'software bloat' and
other 'complaints' about 'stupid' computer aspects with the basic idea
being the common 'complaint logic' that they're 'stupid' here (software
bloat) and 'stupid' there (computers are effectively no faster after 50
years), 'stupid' everywhere so, naturally, they're 'stupid' at that too
(the 4 GByte RAM limit). Everything's all fouled up, it's all for profit
(what isn't?), industry is stupid (there are other ways to do it) and out
to get you anyway (evil), no one cares because they don't know any better
(I.E. stupid too or, at this stage, they don't exist) and that's why you
have a 4 GB RAM limit.
Now, don't try to follow that logic too closely because it's a common
aspect of 'complaint logic' that if one complaint is disputed then any
other complaint can be substituted, whether related or not (what Phil was
upset with), because the basic argument is 'everyone and everything is
SNAFU and/or evil' so any complaint is considered 'supporting evidence' of
any other.
And that's how the topic evolves into almost anything.