One More Reason

Ask questions and give answers about computers, mobile devices, game boxes, PC security and all manner of geeky stuff.
Post Reply
User avatar
yogi
Posts: 8953
Joined: 14 Feb 2015, 21:49

One More Reason

Post by yogi »

It's been a while since I've ranted on about Linux. So you can skip reading this because you've read it before, or you can carry on and be entertained by my frustration. LOL

This is a story about Linux Mint, and it's actually applicable to a lot of other distributions of Linux. I never realized until today what was going on with the Firefox browser found in many Linux distros by default. While perusing my Twitter feed I noted a comment that Firefox v. 99 was available as of today. I was curious to know what version Linux was using and if they were anywhere near being current on my machine. So ... I fired up Linux Mint, did the software update routine, and then checked the Firefox version number. It was 98.x and not the latest 99.x version. Well I can give them some slack on that point because the newest version was just released a few hours ago and the Ubuntu repositories might not be current. So I switched sources and then got an error message while attempting the upgrade. It was a 404 message saying the Firefox pages were nonexistent.

Hmmm, very strange. They should at least have had the old version, doncha think?

Then I went into the settings of the browser and found the tab to request a check for updates. That was grayed out. Alongside that was a note saying the system administrator disabled updates; talk to them if I had a problem. What the ...? Who is this system administrator? Requesting the update via sudo in the terminal gave the same results. The system admin said I can't do it.

Bah humbug, I said. I am the administrator and went over to the FIrefox website and downloaded v 99.x which happened to be a .tar file. I read in the support forums afterwards that the repository curators are the ones who disable the updates for Firefox and that using the version downloaded directly from Mozilla would solve the update problem. Maybe that is true, but I only installed from a tar baby once or twice in some previous life. Nobody actually does that anymore, do they? Thus I went looking around for how to install a package from .tar format and found a reasonable explanation. It was for installing WINE, but would apply to any package, so the author claimed. Well, the long and the short of it is that it would not install because it could not find a configuration file in that tar baby. I gave it the ./configure command which promptly told me there is no such directory. GRRRR

So, to my utter shock and dismay, I have discovered that I cannot update my Linux based browser because the powers that be in Linux heaven said so. I have a feeling that they booger up Firefox and only allow updates via the Ubuntu repo, which sucks big time in my humble opinion. You, being a Debian fan, may not see this issue, but me trying to make peace with Ubuntu found one more reason to be glad I am using Windows as a default operating system. Windows is now running Firefox version 99. I don't care if Ubuntu ever catches up. I will be changing browsers to something I can update at will.

</end of rant>
User avatar
Kellemora
Posts: 6508
Joined: 16 Feb 2015, 17:54

Re: One More Reason

Post by Kellemora »

That's interesting, because I just downloaded the new Firefox yesterday, and it is version 99.0 on LInux Mint 19.3.
There is a note that said Updates disabled by your system administrator.
Even so, when I check version number it comes up as 99.0
I have not yet updated Firefox on this machine, so let me check what version it is.
This version number shows 91.7.0esr - I don't use Firefox so have not updated it in a long time.
It does show updates are available though. Just not in the main repository.
Now Opera just updated a few days ago too.

LInux Mint uses the Ubuntu repositories.
Debian uses their own repositories, which might be why there hasn't been an update in them.

I just thought of something. I think I installed Firefox from Mozilla, not from Debian Repositories, which is why it hasn't updated along with other Debian updates. Since I don't use it, it is just there in my upper panel, just in case, hi hi.
I will usually use Opera before Firefox anyhow.
User avatar
yogi
Posts: 8953
Joined: 14 Feb 2015, 21:49

Re: One More Reason

Post by yogi »

I'll take a guess and say Ubuntu modifies Firefox in order to integrate it with the desktop. For that reason it is not a standard version of Firefox although I've never seen any reference saying it is different than what you can download from Mozilla directly. When I do updates I do them all from whichever version of Linux I happen to be using at the time. The repositories are different for the various distributions and that would explain why the browsers even with identical names are different. Then, too, Linux Mint does not identify itself as Mint. I've talked about the havoc it cause in EFI booting because they identify as Ubuntu.

There are some good points about Linux Mint, but at the moment I can't think of even one. I switched to Mint because I got fed up with Ubuntu's desktop philosophy, but that was just jumping out of the pot into the fire, apparently. This all goes back to what I think is a major fallacy regarding the open source code behind Linux operating systems. It certainly is very flexible and easy to modify anything open source, but I have come across numerous occasions where that flexibility only served to deteriorate the system. I think you have the right idea about Linux. Pick a version, Debian in your case, and never, as in NEVER, change to anything else. I'm fairly confident that there are no two Linux based operating systems that work the same way. That would be fine if any one of them did everything needed to be done correctly and with fluidity. Unfortunately, that does not happen in an open source world where everyone is different simply because they can be.

Overall my experiences with Linux have been educational. It's too bad that I was forced to learn things nobody cares about in general, but that's how it goes with a second rate operating system. I suppose. :rolleyes:
User avatar
Kellemora
Posts: 6508
Joined: 16 Feb 2015, 17:54

Re: One More Reason

Post by Kellemora »

Why do I keep a Linux Mint system up and running all day everyday when I don't use it?
It lets me know when updates are available, much better than the system used by Debian.
So when Linux Mint gets an update, which is quite often since I'm using 19.3 with updates as soon as they come out.
I then know to check my Debian computers to see if they have updates available.
I do play FreeCell on it while my Debian computer is running an automated chore each day.

For me Debian is the perfect system. I have it set up exactly like I want it, and have all the programs I need to use each day.
And since I only have 89 bucks a month to cover everything I need each month, I don't have any extra to give to Mickey$oft.
In fact, when I checked to see what it would cost to go back to Windows, not counting the cost of the OS itself, it would take around six grand to have all the programs I use on Linux for free.

You do things with your computers that normal people just don't do, especially Windows users.
They only know one thing, how to turn on the machine and use what comes with it.
They don't know or realize what they are missing by sticking their head in only one box, hi hi.
User avatar
yogi
Posts: 8953
Joined: 14 Feb 2015, 21:49

Re: One More Reason

Post by yogi »

You got me pegged. I don't do simple. Well, I do when I'm trying to do something productive, but my computers are not being used for productivity. That was not the case when I worked at Motorola. For the longest time there were no computers in the manufacturing environment. I was part of the team that introduced them, and the first ones were not really computers. They were controllers made by HP. Anyway, for most of my career I had to deal with multiple operating systems. They generally were on different networks, or branches of a domain. I loved the fact that I maintained Unix servers that catered to dumb terminals and smart Windows/Apple Macs. At some point I had to service them all, including different versions of Unix. Linux was not a trusted system and could not be used for anything official. A few nerdy engineers had it on their computers, but none of the development was done on Linux. That was then and I have no idea what they are doing these days.

I've mentioned a few times in other threads that the guts of a computer is not OS sensitive. Most hardware can run any operating system given that it was compiled for such. I don't know exactly when I discovered that operating systems can be mixed up to a point. Any x86 machine can run just about anything you can get your hands on as consumer. The booting of those machines was the giveaway that you need not confine your interests to a single operating system. So when I discovered Linux can be booted on the exact same hardware that Windows uses, a whole new universe of computing was revealed to me. It got even more interesting when media to run the OS could be mixed as well. Running an OS off a CD was pure magic when I first did it. Thus I experimented a lot.

I love Windows but don't mistake that for me being dedicated to it forever. My main interest in Linux at it's beginning stages was to see if I can do away with Windows and replace it with some version of Linux. The value of being able to put both on the same hardware, or, better yet, put then on bootable USB memory sticks soon became alluring to my curious mind. So far I've not found a Linux OS that would suitably replace Windows. None of them are perfect, but as I like to say Windows just works. For me anyway. And for what it's worth, I run very few programs that require paid licenses. The vast majority of software on all my machines is free.
User avatar
Kellemora
Posts: 6508
Joined: 16 Feb 2015, 17:54

Re: One More Reason

Post by Kellemora »

When I had the pizza shop, they didn't have computers, but super cash registers that used the telephone lines to send data to and from the home office.
Naturally we had paper order pads, which went on the spin wheel so the folks in back could whip out the pizzas.
But when we added the restaurant, I bought a Display Board for them to see what orders were from the restaurant side.
It was nothing at all like an old black and white computer monitor. It was more like a signboard with lights behind black slots with clear lettering areas so the light shined through the black films. It did have small squares after each one with lights that lit up for the extra toppings over and above the standard toppings.
But it was short lived. Either lights burned out, or it couldn't handle the different requests. So in the end, it was only used to show the drivers for each area if they had deliveries and how many.

I'm sure you have learned a lot over the years with what all you could do with a computer.
You could think outside the box with computers and programs, much they same way I did with physical tangible processes.
I'm still using the smoke discharge to outside device I built from an array of items to get the smoke outside.
I know I've mentioned how it was made in the past.

See, that is one area where we differ greatly. I see LInux as the rock solid system, and Windows as being a problematic nuisance to use. For me, nothing ever did what it was supposed to on Windows. While on Linux, everything I do works flawlessly, well 99% of the time.
Even back in the Windows days, I was using OpenOffice Writer because msWord messed up all too often, and even gave the printers I sent work to problems as well. They never had a single problem with my OpenOffice Writer files, nor the later LibreOffice Writer files.
User avatar
yogi
Posts: 8953
Joined: 14 Feb 2015, 21:49

Re: One More Reason

Post by yogi »

When I hired into Motorola I was a line inspector. Some of the radios I looked at all day long had tubes in them. Eventually solid state electronics came into being and I graduated to be an analyzer/troubleshooter. I still inspected the boards built by the production line, but then I was doing it with the aid of a bench full of electronic equipment. Much of that test equipment was built in house, but a lot of other things were attached to it, such as oscillators, power supplies, and spectrum analyzers. All that equipment was connected to the test jig manually and all the knobs and dial readings were done manually. At one point HP came up with the brilliant idea of selling a test equipment suite of instruments that would do the testing automatically. The automation was accomplished by what looked like an old Burroughs Calculator that could be programmed. I learned about the fundamentals of programming on that kind of machine. It was crude but it was how I learned to get a machine to do things and make limited scope decisions based on test results. From the factory I went to what was called a test lab where all those gizmos were repaired and calibrated. The test lab also was responsible for making those in house testing stations per specification from design engineers. You might be surprised at how much you could learn (sometimes unwillingly) when you have to deal with a guy who invented a product and thinks he knows how it should be tested in a production environment. LOL Well, all I am saying here is that automation was a significant part of my career and that is how my interests in programming and computer integrated manufacturing came into being.

It's not too difficult to understand why you love Linux and I don't. I get along with Windows because it does what I want it to do the way I want it to do it. Linux does not. The problem is not with Linux nor with Windows. They both have merit and a well defined place in the business world. The experiences you and I talk about here are derived from our personal needs. Windows is not the tool for you to use to meet your needs. I can say the same about Linux. A vast majority of the shortcomings I see in Linux are things you never have a need to use or look into. My expectations from Linux are in areas that only a geek would care about. When I complain Linux is undermining the boot process when installed side by side with Windows, that phenomena is a well known issue (shortcoming). But, you don't use Windows so that you would never see the problem. It's as simple as that. :grin:
User avatar
Kellemora
Posts: 6508
Joined: 16 Feb 2015, 17:54

Re: One More Reason

Post by Kellemora »

You would not believe some of the crude and poorly designed test equipment made buy Bally and sent to us for testing machines to see what the problem may be with them. The ones from Williams, before they merged with Bally were super nice looking, easy to use, and worked like a top.
The Williams machines came with plugs and sockets that fit the test areas of the boards we were working on.
Bally on the other hand, only came with leads and alligator clips, or push-pin type ends on the leads. You had to pay very close attention to the markings on the lead wires to know which ones were which also.
After the merger, the Bally testing machines were upgraded slightly to use plugs and sockets also, but were only good to use on the newer machines that had them built in, else we were back to using the leads to do the testing.
In later years, the testing equipment was built right into the machines, so all you had to do was plug in the service box with a display, or a box with lights in it. The latter box with the lights only checked a few things, and was basically useless.

I have a couple of Windows computers, they need cleaned again because they shut down due to overheating, so are not in use right now. Same thing happens if they have Linux installed on them, because the CPU cooling fins get clogged up real fast.

Like anything else, it really has more to do with what you get used to. So using anything else is always awkward.
User avatar
yogi
Posts: 8953
Joined: 14 Feb 2015, 21:49

Re: One More Reason

Post by yogi »

One of the groups I worked with at Motorola made test equipment for field service shops. It was essentially the same type of things we used on the production lines, but made to be portable and were a lot cheaper. There was a suitcase about the size of two shoe boxes that had a telephone dial, a multi-meter, and a whole bunch of lever switches and light bulbs above and below them. Back then cell phones didn't exist. DTMF didn't exist in the beginning either so that there were no dial tones. These were fun boxes to work on in that they were very complex on the inside and simple to use on the outside. We also made frequency counters for field testing, and the ones I worked with had Nixie Tubes for the display. These things were about the size of a small suitcase and weighed a ton. But, they did have some solid state circuitry inside so that we could sell them as state of the art. All of it was plug in and easy for the field techs to use. I was out of the test equipment departments by the time cell phones came into being. The initial philosophy with cell phones was not to repair them. If they failed toss them and replace with a new phone. Then, too, those were the days when cell phones were actually phones and not much more.
User avatar
Kellemora
Posts: 6508
Joined: 16 Feb 2015, 17:54

Re: One More Reason

Post by Kellemora »

I had an old calculator I loved that used Nixie Tubes. It was still working during my first two or three years down here.
Right now, I'm still using a Texas Instrument TI-1795+, which doesn't work when the humidity goes up.
I have several others but like this one the best, because it does plus and minus percentages properly.
Most of the new ones don't work like the old tried and true calculators.
I've also programmable calculators and other fancy ones over the years, all died a painful death, hi hi.

Most of our field test equipment from Bally was in aluminum or steel project boxes, not fancy looking at all.
While the ones from Williams were all in either formed steel cases with a vinyl cover over the metal, or in plastic boxes designed around the usage. I kept a capacitance meter for years that was plastic with a yellow rubber cover over it. I think it was made by Fluke, but had the Williams logo on it.

One of the tools I miss, and have not been able to find for sale anywhere, was a graduated level for measuring grade and tilt.
I've seen several that do that job, but nothing like the little one we used on pinball machines.
Almost all of our tractors, even years ago in the 1950's and '60s had tilt indicators on them.
Some of them were nothing more than a flat steel triangle with a pointed end weight on a wire with hooks at each end.
These usually broke fairly quick from the tractor shaking and wearing through the hooked wire.
But the newer tractors had the same thing only encased in glass and filled with clear oil of some kind.
I've never seen one of those ever stop working and they were accurate all the time.
The last new tractor we bought had an electronic sensor that beeped loudly if you were close to the tip-over point, and it was very lenient too, because you could tilt another 5 to 10 degrees before you were in danger of rolling over.

Sorry, forgot to mention in the other response. I hope your doctors appointment went OK.
User avatar
yogi
Posts: 8953
Joined: 14 Feb 2015, 21:49

Re: One More Reason

Post by yogi »

My clever phone, and probably all smartphones, have a level sensing device built in. The one I've seen was flat about the size of a dime. A half moon shape metal cog was sandwiched inside and floating in some sort of liquid. The half moon would of course always be parallel to the earth's surface so that it could be determined if the phone tilted or not. The display went from portrait to landscape depending on what it senses. My current clever phone has the same thing but it is indeed more clever than the one's I've seen in the past. I have a app that shows me where any given satellite is. I use it to track the ISS because sometimes it is visible with the naked eye. A sky map is projected onto the screen and a dot shows where the satellite of interest is located. The phone can then be elevated and turned to point directly at the satellite. I'm not sure exactly how they do that but I'm guessing the sensor is more of a globe than that flat coin like device I once saw.

I had a friend who was a civil engineer many years ago. He was a bit eccentric but very interesting. One of the things he kept in his pocket was credit card type device that could measure the inclination of an object in the distance. He could also measure the grade of a hill, or street with it. Why he would carry such a thing with him all the time was beyond me. I never thought about tractors making use of tilt indicators, but it makes a lot of sense.

My recent doctor's visit was just a regular checkup to see if I'm still breathing and capable of surviving surgery - hernia repair. Apparently I'm pretty healthy but need to get an EKG tomorrow and some blood work. Then a Covid test in about a week. If all goes well I'll meet with the surgeon on the 25th.
User avatar
Kellemora
Posts: 6508
Joined: 16 Feb 2015, 17:54

Re: One More Reason

Post by Kellemora »

I don't know how they do it, but my wife's phone, if you lay it on a table or countertop and press one of the buttons (she knows which ones, hi hi) it will display a series of circles with a dot in the middle if the top is level, if not the dot is not in the center.
Once I knew it had this feature, I used it on a watering tray for the birds outside to finally get it perfectly level, so it would hold the most water. Then I decided to tilt it down about the thickness of dime, so when it did overflow, it did so to the downhill side. Oh you can stand the phone on the long edge without the side buttons, and it will show level using a straight line on top of a straight line, and if you tilt it, it shows the degrees of elevation. And for once I finally know my treadmill is set to 5 degrees inclination. I can make it steeper than that, but I knew it never went all the way down to flat. But that is because I have the head end of it up on two dense rugs to reduce vibration noise.

Many hunters carry these cards with them to know how many yards away a deer is from them. I assume it is based on the average height of a deer for the graduations marked on that side of the card. The other side shows how tall a tree or building is, or even a hill as far as that goes, but only if you know your distance from it.
My uncle Andy had a scope on one of his rifles that was totally awesome.
When I looked through it, I had no idea how to read it, hi hi. I just went by the center crosshairs, which he said were dead on for either 100 feet or 100 yards, I forget which now, there was also a green line that was supposed to be a level line, but I couldn't figure out how that worked. If I lined up the green line with the center crosshairs I usually shot into the ground. He did tell me it is supposed to be down on the bottom line, but I never saw a bottom line, hi hi.

Speaking of scopes. One of my little pellet rifles has a cheap scope on it.
I have to pellet rifles that you cock by the breakaway barrel method.
The 22, without the scope, I can hit the center of the target with ease.
The 177, is just as accurate, but when I try to get the scope set, about the time I think I have it dead on, it is off by a mile.
I took it with me to the gun store, so I could use his laser to get it set. His inside range is 75 feet, but I used the 50 foot target to get the scope set.
It's pretty simple how it works. The laser light is in like a 177 bullet, and it has sleeves for 22, 38, 45, etc.
You put it in the rifle, mount the barrel on the bench vice for guns, then adjust the vice up down left right until the laser light is dead center on the target.
Then you adjust the set screws on the scope until the crosshairs are aligned with the red dot. Which is then for 50 feet, but not quite for a pellet gun which has some drop at 50 feet, so you adjust the crosshair down slightly. Take out the laser and put a pellet in and give it a try.
Now although my 22 pellet is fairly accurate, meaning it doesn't have much drift.
I've come to learn that 177 pellet gun has a drift of about 2 inches in 50 feet. So even if the scope is set perfectly for 50 feet, and the rifle is mounted in a bench vice so there is no human error, at 50 feet it shoots in a 4 inch pattern, while the 22 shots in about a one inch pattern.

I hope all is well when your surgery date comes up, and everything goes smoothly.
And with no appreciable pain afterward during the healing up period.
User avatar
yogi
Posts: 8953
Joined: 14 Feb 2015, 21:49

Re: One More Reason

Post by yogi »

I had an Argus camera with a split image range finder. The view finder window had a clear top and and tinted blue bottom. The image you wanted to focus on was split at the junction of the two view panels. All I had to do was turn a knob to get the images to line up properly, then read the distance off the adjustment dial. Most of the time knowing the distance was useless, unless you were taking flash photos. Then the distance made a big difference and the aperture had to be set accordingly.

I don't know about split image scopes on rifles, but I can see how knowing the distance to your target could be important. Short range shooting probably doesn't matter but gravity does have it's effects on longer distances. I suppose that's what the gradient tick marks on the cross hairs are for. Then, too, you need to know a lot about the ammo you are using and how it is affected by such things as wind and gravity. If I recall correctly there are gun sights that emit a laser light beam that you would put on the distant target. You can shoot from the hip in those cases, and still be dead on. I'm not sure how deer hunting would work with a laser light. Those critters would surely be able to see it and run.
User avatar
Kellemora
Posts: 6508
Joined: 16 Feb 2015, 17:54

Re: One More Reason

Post by Kellemora »

As far as I know, it is illegal to use a laser scope for hunting any controlled species of animal designated for hunting.
That being said, green laser scopes are allowed for hunting overpopulated wild animals, such as wild hogs.
Down here, you see more of the green laser scopes in use than red laser scopes, on hunting rifles.
Snipers on the other hand you high-band red laser scopes or just pointers on their pistols.
And I've heard of infrared lasers for pistols and rifles also. Never saw any for sale in the gun stores though.

I don't think Squirrels can see a red laser pointer, because I brought mine from the house up to the office to scare them off the bird feeder, they ignored it, hi hi.
Before I burned out my big battery powered search lamp, now that would get them to run, hi hi.

I had a camera once that you focused by using the knob to bring the lines together, but that was eons ago.
I've had SLR ever since. In fact, I have my old Yashica TL Electro X up for sale. It uses a focal plane shutter.
The strobe flash battery died years ago, but it was working until then.
The only item I don't have with it anymore is the large reels that held 100 feet of film.
I sold that shortly after I quit doing freelance work, but decided to keep the camera.
User avatar
yogi
Posts: 8953
Joined: 14 Feb 2015, 21:49

Re: One More Reason

Post by yogi »

I won't bore you with my lack of knowledge about guns, but I can say a few words about hunting in general. I used to do a lot of fishing but never hunted a quadruped. Never owned a gun just for that reason. I have considered being armed for self defense purposes but there's something about sawed off shotguns that they deem illegal. To me that logic is the same as making laws about weapons for hunting. The end result is always the same. An animal gets killed. Restricting the kind of weapon or how that weapon is equipped doesn't change the end results. I know it's all about being humane and fair to the animals. But, if I was truly a believer in that philosophy I would not be hunting them in the first place.
User avatar
Kellemora
Posts: 6508
Joined: 16 Feb 2015, 17:54

Re: One More Reason

Post by Kellemora »

I'm not a big gun lover, but do have a few for my own protection.
Actually, the only 4-legged animal I've ever killed were rats in the feed barn, and a few squirrels who were doing damage.
Other than that, I feed the squirrels and birds.
I have shot a couple of geese when out with my boss, but he got them, I didn't want them.
My uncle was a deer hunter, both bow and arrow, and rifle. He never let one get away after being shot, and they ended up in his freezer.
Or as the joke goes, people shouldn't be killing animals, they should buy their meet at the store where they are made, hi hi.

Now if you start talking about black powder guns and rifles, I used to have a dozen or so. Most built from kits, and used at the rifle range. I built a flintlock but rarely used it, too much trouble to shoot. So nearly everything else was cap n ball.
One of the pistols I built from a kit turned dangerous. Too cheaply made I guess. It would blow the socket the cap sat on out of the back against the hammer and it would fly off and could have hit someone. I sawed that monster into three pieces.
User avatar
yogi
Posts: 8953
Joined: 14 Feb 2015, 21:49

Re: One More Reason

Post by yogi »

I never considered making a gun from scratch. It sounds like an interesting pursuit. It falls into the same category as cabinet making. I've always admired those people because they seemed to be perfectionists at creating fine pieces of furniture. I've often imagined myself with a shop full of woodworking tools and unlimited access to all the hardwoods the world has to offer. People would fight to buy my productions. LOL I can see the same kind of perfection and tooling going into gun making. I don't imagine it to be simple and that is one thing that would be attractive to me. Using the guns I made would be incidental to the hobby. Although, I would probably want to test out my work to see that it functioned as well as it was built.

I've had wild goose for dinner once that I can recall. All I can remember about it is that it tasted foul, not like fowl. LOL
User avatar
Kellemora
Posts: 6508
Joined: 16 Feb 2015, 17:54

Re: One More Reason

Post by Kellemora »

The kits to make guns had all the parts pre-made, you just had to assemble them.
But you had the option of rough stocks you could shape and finish yourself, or already shaped but not finished.

I completely made a new stock for my old 410/22 over under I got from my grandfather.
I used Cherry wood, both for the stock and the lower barrel cover where you hold your left hand.
On the steel, I used Outers 44/40 gun bluing until it was midnight blue, then went over that with stove black for an even deeper polish. Some of the appointments that are normally left silver in color. I took to Thiess Plating Company and had them brass plated, polished, and then coated with trumpet lacquer.
What irked me more than anything is grandpa gave this gun to me about 8 years before he passed away.
But it was mentioned in his Will as being promised to one of my younger cousins.
We were surprised at this for a couple of reasons. Grandpa already gave him two shotguns, of which the cousin sold both of them, because he don't really like guns all that much. And because in the Will, I was promised his '56 Chevy, and he had given it to another younger cousin who promptly wrecked it.
Grandpa gave away many of his things in his final years and never updated his Will to reflect this.
All that work I did to that rifle, and my cousin let it sit in the doorway of one of the barns where he was now living until the bottom of the stock rotted, and the rest of it got so rusty it was no longer repairable.

I don't like to eat anything wild, no matter what you do with the meat, it always still tastes wild.
That being said, my Uncle Andy cold prepare Deer so it tasted like grainy beef, when made as a beef stew or like a pot roast.
It didn't taste so bad then. But you couldn't cook it like a steak or by itself without it tasting wild.

My grandparents on both sides ate things I could never eat. But then it was what they were raised on too.
Heck, I can't eat half of the things my wife likes either. But here too, it's what she was raised on.
User avatar
yogi
Posts: 8953
Joined: 14 Feb 2015, 21:49

Re: One More Reason

Post by yogi »

My mom would make chicken soup using a whole chicken. Sometimes she went to the chicken store, there were such things in my old neighborhood, and got a live chicken. They killed it and cleaned it but mom had to pluck the feathers. Part of the process involved burning the nibs still in the chicken skin and that smelled awful. She and my dad would fight over who would get the giblets, particularly the neck. The soup was wonderful tasting but since I knew how it was made I didn't eat much of it. Now and days I don't think chicken giblets are sold to the public. At least I've not seen them in the stores. I have seen hog jowls and just today I could have purchased crayfish tail meat. Folks around here think nothing of eating those things, but this city boy is astonished by it all. LOL

Grandpa left my father $40,000 in cash as stated in his will. The very sad fact of the matter is that my dad died before grandpa died, and grandpa did not update his will. Needless to say since mom was essentially not part of the family, but only an inlaw, they found a way to not pass the cash on to dad's survivor. I didn't hold a grudge too long over that trick, but I never did take a liking to that side of the family. There are all kinds of stories about families going to war with each other after an elder passes on and leaves an estate. It's truly amazing what happens to people when they are in line for an inheritance.
User avatar
Kellemora
Posts: 6508
Joined: 16 Feb 2015, 17:54

Re: One More Reason

Post by Kellemora »

I imagine most older folks all raised their own chickens, or I should say, I don't know anyone who didn't while I was growing up.

I worded my will very carefully, but never had it officiated yet. Perhaps that is something I should hop on getting done.

I think you either have to come from being super poor, or from being in the top of the upper class, to like to eat some of the the things they eat at both ends of the spectrum. Then there are us normal folks in the middle.
Post Reply