On Sat, 07 Dec 2019 12:23:39 -0800, The Horny Goat
wrote:

On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 12:12:58 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

On 12/4/2019 7:00 AM, Shadow wrote:

**Are people able to "think" after 2 bottles of whiskey?
Apparently not coherently ...

Thinking coherently isn't the problem. Most people are not able to
*live* after two bottles of whiskey. That's way over a fatal dose for
almost everyone.

I had the ill fortune of dealing with my son the weekend he
overindulged the weekend before start of grade 12. As in high .30s
blood alcohol content with a police escort to hospital and emergency
treatment.

After he fell asleep that night I worked on what I knew would be one
of the most important speeches of my life and the next morning told
him that I knew he had wonderful dreams (which he is now well on the
way to achieving 10 years later) which I thought were great and fully
supported - but that the doctors told me that anything over .30
carries a risk of permanent brain damage and that nothing would hurt
me more than him being unable to realize his ambitions because of this
kind of damage.

That's what good parenting is all about. You took him to a
medical facility and went on to care for him in later years.
Just about everyone I know has been in that situation because
of a family member, and it doesn't always end well. Few die from acute
intoxication, but many become alcoholics.

On the subject of alcohol-abuse, I know a person who was told
to stop drinking by numerous doctors, so he resorted to this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_enema

He can still cross-post numerous OT/stalking/spam messages
(without the OT up) but the brain damage is quite apparent. And he has
trouble sitting down.

Going back to MS-DOS days Microsoft operating systems have gone back
and forth between fairly decent and outright clunkers.

Consider:
MSDOS 2.0 meh, 3.0 ok, 4.0 OMG - one of the worst ever, 5.0
reasonable, 5.1 meh, 5.2 / 5.22 decent, 6.0 meh, 6.2 best of the
MS-DOS line

Windows 1.0, 2.0 - OMG, 3.0 decent, 3.1meh, 3.11 (first to have any
kind of networking meh on the networking components, decent
otherwise), 4.0 OMG - nearly as bad as DOS 4.0, 95 - probably the best
early one they did, 98 - mostly bug fixes - meh, 7 - good for its
time, 8 OMG, 10 better than it's predecessors which could be good or
bad depending on your opinion.

You forgot to mention Win 98 SE, XP/2000 and ME in your
decent/"meh"/OMG classification.

[]'s


--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012