Books are in, now to catch up.
Useless links of the day:
And I’m trying to wean myself off of meat. Steak isn’t that much of an option, and pig (bacon, ham, and sausage) is cuisine non grata here. The only meat that we do here is turkey (turkey bacon, turkey sausage, turkey sandwich meat) and chicken.
Now if there was only such a thing as turkey steak…
Also, ranch is the new ketchup. I like it on green beans (thanks, Mom!).
Peace.
Or…is bisexuality a biologically-inherent trait of European men?
I mean honestly, I can’t count how many times that I’ve seen this idea pushed by disgruntled African-Americans in regards to the sexuality of white men?
Oh, right: I can.
Honestly, are Afrocentricity and Gay rights (or even Feminism) that diametrically opposed to each other? Afrocentrics love to lambast other sexualities and interpretations of rights+and+wrongs besides their own, but balk in and react with utter hypocrisy and duplicity when criticized by their targets.
Really, its just a manifestation of the sort of jealousy-driven ideology that was present in the Hutu supremacy movement in Rwanda and Burundi.
I have an FA account, although I doubt that I’ll use it anytime soon.
Anyway, I wonder if the scrappy few computer companies which have decided to choose a particular Linux default distribution (like System76 picking Ubuntu) have ever thought about offering an iMac-like all-in-one PC?
I’m asking that because one of the main criticisms by both Linux and Windows users of the different iterations of the “Mac platform”, particularly the iMac, is that it isn’t expandable or extensible on the hardware level. It’s just whatever is offered to you in that all-in-one package by Apple.
However, while it is a weak point to many who are more accustomed to more-flexible home computing environments (the sysadmins, the gamers, etc.), it is also a very strong point or attraction for many others who want a “KISS” approach for their hardware: a monitor, a keyboard, and a mouse, with as few wires with which you would need to entangle yourself.
Of course, the Mac Mini-like small-form-factor computer could whet that whistle, and most of the aforementioned Linux-geared desktop vendors are already selling such systems.
However, the Mac mini is simply a computer that is meant to work with any type of peripheral hardware; the iMac, on the other hand, is a computer that emphasizes whatever is present on the screen (the GUI) above all else, even placing all the hard drives, USB ports, on/off switch, and other such components to the side and back of the monitor.
Really, that’s what the iMac is: a truly media-oriented home computer that isn’t really meant to be portable, or expandable, but simply a voyeur for whatever media is present on the screen.
So it would be particularly interesting to see if a made-for-Linux all-in-one PC can be developed by a desktop computer manufacturer.
What could come out of that, though? What if System76 were to start selling an iMac-like Ubuntu PC? How would it influence the GUI design? Which crowd or audience would be willing to buy such a computer?
One can only wonder about the possibilities…
I don’t think that software, free or proprietary, will do any good for the environment, the way that it looks now.
I mean, why should software, and the growing evolution of it, benefit the environment? It mostly benefits the various manufacturing industries in various forms (especially the companies which make the chipsets for today’s electronic devices), who use the smelly, environmentally-hazardous factories in China, India, and Central America to create these devices (ranging from cell phones to personal computers to servers) which need bigger, better, flashier operating systems every two or so years and are built accordingly to handle such power.
What components do these computers and electronic devices use? They use various materials mined from the most minerally-resourced, most minerally-diverse regions of the world (DR Congo, South Africa, the Andes, etc.). Such ventures have tied into the local conflicts in these areas, such as the Civil War in the eastern DRC (blood diamonds, blood gold, blood coltan?), as millions of dollars in weaponry are to be gained through these minerals by the warlords who thirst for greater political control of these regions.
I mean, sure, we’re on our way out of the industrial age, and the transition from industrialization and industrialism to software and services is similar to the conflicts which accompanied the move from agrarianism and agricultural dependence to industry and manufacturing. Unlike the violent conflicts on the battlefield that accompanied the agriculture-to-industry movement (American Civil War, for example), the battles of this transition are being fought out in the courtroom, with every sort of company suing each other for copyright, patent, or some other form of intellectual property violation just to make a quick few billion dollars/euros in damages just to hold the company’s head just above the waters at the expense of someone else.
But, in the midst of trying to further the advance of software development (for- or non-profit), are we thinking about the environment?
Are we thinking about the ecological consequences of software being dependent upon industry and manufactured components, the makers of which depend upon mining and the building of factories in order to function?
At which point does software help preserve the ecological balance of this planet? Or is it simply a client of those who wish to expand the breadth of human civilization at the natural sciences’ expense?
Why is it that the video gaming lobby (yes, I believe there is such a thing) always address those who object to video games and the video game industry as “idiots” and “morons”?
I mean, sure, you can say that people like Jack Thompson are pretty over the top and are reasonably derided in public, but then the stereotype that all critics of the game industry are usually of his ilk is thrown about by the pro-gamer press as a rule of action, which, to me, seems unfair.
Personally, I don’t care that much for games. I don’t play them at home, and I see the folks at school playing them in the same area of the student center everyday.
Why? Well:
Furthermore, the gaming industry. It’s one of the most wasteful products of late-20th-century Western industralization, with billions of dollars being poured into the latest technologies for the biggest hulk consoles that can fit into a living room, and billions more being poured into the creation of DRM-laced, tightly-downtied software and firmware utilities whose compositions are kept secret from the public for fear of their 1 or 2 other competitors “beating” them in “market share” or some other consultantese.
And these corporations are the darlings of geeks because…..why? What type of good or service are these mouthbreathing wastes of space providing to Western civilization?
This also goes into the PC gaming subindustry (Blizzard, for example). For what good is World of Warcraft except personal, electronically-simulated bragging rights that translate into billions of dollars in profit for one particular corporation?
Where is the imparting, sharing, and application of real-world challenges and ideas?
I don’t find it in the gaming industry as it is, or as it has been.
If you’ve seen the completely overhauled Apple.com recently (that is, within the last three weeks), you would’ve seen that the Dock for October’s Mac OS X v10.5 has been “fleshed out”, gaining a 3D, reflective look that immediately divided the opinions of Apple fans.
Me, I like the new dock, but I don’t really like the new top menubar (others don’t, either).
The reason why I’m interested in this new dock is because, all of a sudden, something as common as program launcher icons (which are passe to most Windows and GNOME/KDE users) are given the appearance of tiny applications with a life of their own.
Furthermore, the “3d”, inward-reaching appearance of the new dock, IMO, may be a preliminary shot for breaking the paradigm of the flat, WIMP user interface that we’ve all been used to seeing since the advent of the commercial desktop GUI in the 1984 Macintosh.
Does this mean that the future of the user interface is reaching *into* the desktop?
Already, this appearance has been added to two of Linux’s current killer apps, the bouncy Kiba-Dock (yes, its Naruto-related) and shiny AWN (with decent-looking screenies, sans the reflection).
So this should be interesting.
Well, might as well be. No rain for weeks now.
They’re rationing water down here. Funny, since I was only mentioning a torrential downpour last month.
In the meantime, I’ve decided to start working on the Blackboard tutorials again; the PHP labs, however, are another story.
I’m starting to get bored with Digg and Wikipedia, btw. Nothing new gets posted to Digg anymore, and the Wikipedia editing is…well, maybe I should take a break from it.
YouTube’s interface is starting to annoy as well. I mean, sure, it’s useful for its content and social networking, but working with it feels less like enjoyment and more like a hurdle or threshold to find something that you want.
Don’t worry, <lj user=”lordsathien”>, I’ll catch up with you and Prentiss on the game. Just can’t do it right now.
I’m either not getting enough sleep, are exceedingly worried about every little thing, or I’m just very, physically lazy right now.
Take your pick.
Sorry for the long period off; I’ve spent most of my time on Digg and Wikipedia (obviously), with the want to update this ol’ journal not occurring to me until just now.
As you may’ve heard, Boris from Russia just died yesterday.
He was a drinker, a rabble-rouser, a fidgety old git…,
he led Russia in the aftermath of the Great Soviet experiment, swinging the door of the country to Western economic liberalism like nobody’s business,
he led it through the oft-violent, oft-needy turbulence of 90’s-era recessions;
and his efforts to establish Russia apart from its predecessor state only paid off after he left office in 2000.
This article from BBC News talked about how Russia’s presently-strong, Putin-era economy only reached that state because of Yeltsin’s economic policies (only tempered after Putin’s government drew back the power that Yeltsin’s had given to the oligarchs and energy barons).
It also talks about how the gap between the rich and poor has only gotten wider since the introduction of free-market reforms in the late 80’s and early 90’s.
I can agree, in particular, on how the reforms caught everyone off guard, and how only a few have been able to make it up to the top of Russia’s economy.
But why were they able to get up so high from, often, literally nothing in their own possession, while others drowned in the depths of poverty?
I think its because of the lack of advance education on free-markets and profits that should’ve been provided to the masses before Russia came out of the Communist closet, so to speak.
All that was being told to the Russian people was that “We’re going for a free market. Everybody will be rich, Russia will be rich and powerful and free, etc.”
They weren’t told about the real ins and outs of “marketing, advertising and exchange rates; or barter, leasing and – not least – profits.”
They weren’t educated.
They were simply dragged into this system without prior, real-world knowledge of what they were getting into.
Same thing happened in Latin America (pre-Chavez). The poor were kept ignorant of the immediate hurt and the long, hard haul to economic stability. The social safety nets were cut from under them by the political, Harvard-educated elite, and fell flat on their backs.
Free markets aren’t bad. Economic freedom should be guaranteed, IMO. But come on…why are they poor when the economy is going well?
Why does the gap between the rich and poor continue to widen in free-market societies?
And why do these countries often elect such stridently-xenophobic politicians as Hugo Chavez to office when they get sick of neoliberal policies which are ideally meant to work great wonders for their societies?
It’s like Venezuela is sick, and bodily rejects the necessary food that should keep them from starving in their own illness.
And why do nationalist Americans get so surprised at this?
I don’t get it…
Anyway, here’s to Boris:
It’s like I can barely move through the thick of the soupy humidity in the house. Even raising every window in the frickin’ house does nothing.
What’s worse: since Mom is out of commission due to her spinal injury (she tried to pick up a table at work…..BY HERSELF), she won’t let me turn on the A/C.
Shit…..it’s driving me nuts.
Oh, and I’ll be flying to Detroit on Thursday. In the meantime, I’m simmering and sauteeing just fine down here, thanks.
Cue Limp Bizkit – “Rollin (Air Assault)”
Well, we weren’t expecting the Spanish Inquisition, either, but this is something that you don’t hear about often:
rebel groups with planes.
Yes. Not only do the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka/Tamil Eelam have ground forces and a home-grown navy, but now they even have their own air force, which commenced its first operation in the wee hours of earlier today on Sri Lanka’s largest airport.
Of course, the government’s own fighter jets were in hangars, so they weren’t damaged by the planes above.
However, this is an unprecedented show of force by the Tamil Tigers, who’ve been fighting bitterly against the Sinhala-dominated government since the 1970’s for the secession of the predominately-Tamil-speaking section of the island (mostly a sliver of coast on the northeastern side).
This has also spread to continental India several times, most infamously with the assassination of Indian PM Rajiv Gandhi by Tamil Tiger operatives (his mother, ex-PM Indira Gandhi, was also assassinated by her Sikh bodyguards; the Sikhs have also aspired for the secession of their homeland from India for several decades).
As the Tigers are classified as terrorists by a number of governments (including the US) because of their tendency to use suicide attacks against government officials, it would be safe to wonder about that air power that they now have:
what if other rebel and terrorist groups decided to create their own particular air assault forces?
What new airborne horror has been opened on the world, whoopass-style?
Let’s just hope that airborne violence doesn’t become a popular medium for one’s expression of disaffection with the status quo.
