Gentoo Linux Forums
Hi,
I am the author of a Gentoo Linux Forums post that may see has seen over 30,000 views within the next couple of months: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-813539.html
I was in the right place at the right time. I claim no particular knowledge or expertise compared to the (probably) thousands of developers out there hacking away at both the Linux kernel and Gentoo Linux software in general. But it does feel pretty awesome to know that I have at least done this much.
I once was perusing the web site of someone whose site was obviously interesting enough for me to want to look at. I randomly found a link to my forum post =). Small world, eh?
Mac OS X: Moral Equivalent
Lately I have been trying to hack up some startup scripts for Mac OS X (Synergy client startup script for those interested–I still haven’t figured it out, much to my own chagrin). I shortly found that one way of coding startup scripts for Mac OS X had been deprecated in favor of another, but that is beside the point. Perusing the necessary man pages, (specifically for launchd) I have found a term “moral equivalence”: https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Darwin/Reference/ManPages/man5/launchd.plist.5.html
What in the world does this mean? A Google search yields results outside the spectrum of Unix/Linux startup scripts. It doesn’t seem too many are coding Mac OS X startup scripts these days.
Intellectual Property
Intellectual property has become a focal point of digital culture and the Information Age. Perhaps it has always held a pseudo-tangible place in peoples’ minds, but modern computing makes its existence even more obviously ambiguous. The definition of intellectual property I like to use is that of Thomas Jefferson’s:
If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density at any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property.
Napster got sued when I was in high school. By this time, broadband internet and downloading mp3′s had almost been synonymous. The secret was out that the Internet could be used quite easily for piracy. Not that this was any secret to veteran computer users. The media industry quickly responded litigiously to save face, but in the end the grasp of technology had prevailed. For all the piracy that could be stopped, the floodgates were opened. People figured out that perhaps they have a right to share some information.
Myself and others like to draw comparisons between the Internet and the printing press; the former is essentially a digitized form of the latter. Similar to those who study literature, computer scientists are claiming that the Internet will democratize information and increase its dissemination. Not too surprisingly, U.S. legislation has responded accordingly with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and the Stop Online Piracy Act.
As a programmer, I’m well aware that producing software is hard work, and in some ways piracy is pilfering this labor. I can’t stop asking myself, however, at what point are pride and emotions to be set aside for the benefit of mankind. Software exists in the minds of men, and it can be defined as an idea in the same way Thomas Jefferson interpreted it. Software is leading society into the future, running everything from pacemakers to nuclear reactors. It is hard to imagine a copyright on the whole of software because that would be similar to copyrighting the wheel or fire.
I can’t help but imagine what the world will be like in the future, during and after my lifetime. I certainly hope that among the ranks of aspiring IT professionals and lawyers, there are people who possess enough benevolence and humility to see things the way Thomas Jefferson saw them.
Gentoo Linux
I have been using Gentoo Linux off and on for the past 6 years. I joined the Gentoo forums in 2006. My first encounter with it was met with bewilderment. I was amazed at the options available to me. Things seemed different than they did on Knoppix and Fedora where I had my first Linux encounters.
I have to be honest here and say that I got off to a rough start with Gentoo. The amount of responsibility placed into the hands of the individual user is daunting. Linux alone is labyrinth-like (Not to say that Windows or Mac OS can’t be like that too at times), but Gentoo had almost double the options/configuration from what Knoppix and Fedora exposed me to. My intuition was that there was good reason for this, and I was right.
I learned that portage, Gentoo’s package management system, was based off of BSD’s ports. I learned about runlevels, I learned vim (nano sucks, but text editor knowledge is invaluable in a Gentoo environment, why not learn a superior editor?), I even learned how to configure and compile the kernel myself.
Throughout my journey, whether passively browsing or actively participating on the forums, I have met people whose knowledge of Linux (and perhaps to a certain extent Computer Science) never ceases to amaze me. For example, one user I’ve met makes his own “kernel seeds”, which are minimal, bare-bones .config files for the kernel (Link: http://www.kernel-seeds.org).
The creature of habit in me died a slow and painful death, that creature that was woefully tied to Windows and all its nuances, its ease of use, its abstraction-beyond-cruft, presented on a silver platter. Getting used to Gentoo is, admittedly for me, at times painful. This is a good kind of pain, though. This is the kind of pain that comes from breaking the shackles of bondage, knowing you are free to use your hardware and install your software as you see fit. It is a freedom that, once acquired, no one can take from you.
Kierkegaard once said “anxiety is the dizziness of freedom”. I have experienced this anxiety, as I’m sure many other Gentoo users have, while trying to learn it and at times becoming frustrated at it. I attribute this again to my inner creature of habit who frets at the unfamiliar. There hasn’t been a single time I haven’t benefited from silencing the beast; each time I have gained valuable insights. Empowerment takes hold after realizing that you have the freedom to shape things as you’d like. This applies not just to Gentoo but life in general.
Throughout the years, the only other distribution I have given a serious chance was Ubuntu, only to be disappointed at how much obstruction was done to the user at the expense of ease of use. Don’t get me wrong, Linux is Linux, and I should be glad that any user using any Linux distribution is more market share for us. I definitely feel that I’ve learned the most from Gentoo, though.
What do you or have you used Gentoo for? Have you ever heard of it being used in large scale, industrial sized, or high profile systems? Do you use it in any peculiar or unique ways?
Ubuntu Linux: Good or Bad?
I can’t help but notice there are lots of people out there promoting and using Ubuntu Linux. It is one of the more popular Linux distributions. I have taken it for a ride before and have seen others use it so I’m fairly confident in saying it has a low learning curve.
I personally prefer Gentoo Linux. I feel that if I had used Ubuntu, I wouldn’t be as advanced of a Linux user as I am today. I feel there are countless Linux distributions whose learning curves are more steep than Ubuntu and I don’t think this is a coincidence.
I understand that a user who is a bit more advanced, but not quite advanced enough, may enjoy the ease of installation and use of Ubuntu. This is not a bad thing. Ubuntu is the perfect set of Linux training wheels. Acquiring more Linux users is also a good thing.
My problem with it is that it shields the user not only from self sufficiency but learning the proper ways of using Linux as well. I’m not sure Linux, even if shrink wrapped in Unity and presented to regular users, will ever be for regular users. Perhaps in some distant, heavenly future, but society isn’t quite there yet.
It wasn’t until I started to use Gentoo that I felt like I was actually taking command of my Linux usage. Gentoo forces you to look at things you wouldn’t normally look at in Ubuntu or a lot of other distributions. Some of these nuances are characteristic of Gentoo, but many of them are characteristic of Linux in general, such as kernel compilation.
Ubuntu users tend to enjoy its ease of use but I’m not sure Linux was meant to be easy. Many people complain about it being too difficult to learn or too high maintenance. That is equivalent to aspiring to be an auto mechanic, and then complaining about greasy, dirty hands. If you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen. Linux is meant for systems administrators and software engineers. The GNU Toolchain and various server and networking software that tends to be included with Linux distributions or readily available through their package management systems should be enough to convince you that Linux has an intended audience.
I don’t feel this harms Linux adoption. With the IT sector growing to behemoth size, there will be no surplus of programmers or systems administrators. The size of these groups is going to scale with the demand. This large population of people is going to need a good workbench with a good set of tools and Linux fulfills that role.
Regular users may want to use Linux because virus infection rates are low. This is fine, but I think that would result in a gross under-utilization of available resources. It’s like using dynamite to dig an inch-deep hole.
I don’t understand the rationale behind using Ubuntu and I think some day soon it will fade into the background. A regular user is better off using Windows or Mac OS and I don’t feel it is fair to compare either of the two to Linux.
Internet Trolls: A Definition
The following is a Google+ comment to a friend regarding a defense of Internet “trolls”: People who instigate others’ negative emotions. It is my opinion that “trolls” have always existed as mere critics and jesters striking at the nerve of society, yet their nature and definition is similar to “hackers”; people that have always existed but have been knighted with vocabulary indicative of the Information Age.
I would like to add that the definition of “troll” seems to be fading as the Internet creeps its way into the modern lexicon and dialogue of civilization and makes itself known and understood. A sad fact of reality is that they are defined as “trolls” in much the same way as “hackers” are depicted as basement dwelling males with Asperger’s. These are narrow and shortsighted definitions, at best.
In reality, “hackers” are just tinkerers- people who come up with interesting solutions to interesting problems. The true meaning of the word (spoken with any authority, anyway) has nothing to do with malice, masculinity, or technology. Henry Ford was a hacker because he revolutionized transportation. Jane Austen was a hacker because what she wrote shaped feminism and literature. Hitler was a hacker because he preyed on peoples’ fears enough to blind them to obvious bigotry. They are nothing short of philosophers or sages in words and in action, but their good or bad intentions may be separate from their brilliance.
In this sense, “trolls” are much more than the average critic- they are quite adept at striking at the nerve of society. They may be comparable to photojournalists who strike at content so volatile they commit suicide because of their direct role in it. They may be comparable to a televangelist like Pat Robertson, not necessarily agreeable to all but definitely a sign of the extremism and fundamentalism that is out there at the very least.
It is in this sense that you are correct in saying that it is arguable whether their standards are high or noble. To me, “trolling” has existed since man could talk. The aristocracy was trolled hard when the printing press spread literature everywhere, wresting control enabled by literacy, or lack thereof, out of elitists’ hands. The media industry was trolled hard when piracy came along and forced musicians and other artists to rethink intellectual property, something still under way.
It is hard for me to say this because in the process I know I will get trolled, but there has definitely been what I would call “intolerable” content out there. I’m not talking about your run of the mill Viagra spam. I’m talking about the stuff that will become the future’s comedy.
Parody is an excellent example. Night at the Roxbury is an excellent treatise on the absurdity of club goers. The Blaxploitation film genre is extremely developed. I’ve got to hand it to comedians for having enough balls to tell it like it is. Somebody’s got to.
At one point or another the truth is going to hurt your feelings. This is a natural part of personal growth. It’s like having good friends, you can only count on those closest to you to reveal your biggest flaws as much as you may dislike hearing it; acquaintances cannot and will not help you.
Allow me to make my acquaintance. Your content will be screened thoroughly for quality over quantity. I may forget about you if you don’t have anything meaningful to contribute to my life. I did not come here for advertisements. Your short time with my attention span is to be valued. Disagreeing with me is not enough. Explaining why you disagree with me is awesome. Challenge me. Tell me why the things I think suck don’t suck, and make me believe it, damnit.
TL;DR: Famous people are trolls, “trolls” is a term invented by 13 year olds surfing 4chan.
Residential ISPs and Hosting
When I first started taking my IT career seriously, one of the first things I learned was the Apache web server, and how to use it to host a website. It wasn’t too long before I realized that hosting services was a violation of most (if not all) residential ISPs’ contracts. This struck me as an unethical practice back then, and, despite having spoken to many Networking people who have offered strong counter points, still does.
Network administration is hardly my area of expertise so I may not make the most informed statements here, nor am I a lawyer. Others may be able to offer insight into this topic beyond my level of expertise. That being said, I realize there is a cost of entry into the market. I realize there are parts, labor, and maintenance which must be funded and I realize operation costs for ISPs are not cheap. I realize this money cannot come out of customers’ pockets and I realize growth, advertising, and marketing aren’t cheap either. However, I can’t help but observe the profit margins of ISPs and wonder where all that money is going.
I’m not saying someone is pocketing the money. Okay, maybe I am, just a little bit. But the fact that I can’t do what I want with a service I’m paying for really bothers me. I’m not advocating for child pornography or piracy, but I am advocating free speech. I understand that running a host service from my connection may add to the network’s bandwidth traffic and latency, but I can’t help but ask myself, isn’t that what I’m paying for in the first place? If the money from my subscription isn’t going towards upgrading network capacity, where is it going?
If you manage to generate that much traffic, I’d think the ISP would be honored to be your host. With regards to the media industry, several high profile artists have already come forward to say they’d happily have their intellectual property pirated if it gets them more market share; it means they’re popular and they understand the mechanics of their own trade. ISPs could use this as a marketing vector. They could leverage hosting a famous person as competition in terms of their own network capacity.
To me, these issues are much more ethical and philosophical in nature than they are concrete, and it’s unfortunate that many people don’t understand their impact. An ISP is telling you the terms and conditions with which you may use their service. It sounds fair enough, right? But not questioning this just seems suspect and docile to me. Again, I understand ISPs need to shield themselves against pornography, piracy, illegal substance abuse, and all things deemed bad by society, lest they be cast as a safe harbor for such things. It just seems to me as if they are throwing the regular, ethical users into the same category and censoring them just in case.
That brings me to my next point. I would expect better from a country that prides itself on its own constitutional rights and liberties. Jurisdiction is jurisdiction, and I have no say as to what goes on in other countries, but I’m an American-born citizen and I am going to exercise my birth rights here and now. It’s too bad ISPs within the U.S. don’t offer these rights, which seems like a symmetrical enough of a context to me. Why do ISPs deny freedom of speech and freedom of the press on the Internet? According to most of their contracts, it is them and not the U.S. Constitution that determines what I can and can’t publish. I can’t host a simple web page expressing some of my own views. We call that “censorship” where I’m from. That would be proving my guilt before my innocence, lacking even a jury.
Google+ Real Names
The Internet has a lot to offer in terms of anonymity and pseudonymity. This is why I don’t think Google+’s Real Name woes are ever really going away. Political activists and rogue agents place a high value on that kind of security through obscurity, which is what I think Facebook has to offer over Google+, but only by virtue of fate. I’m sure Facebook seriously contemplated enforcing a real names policy while its website is wreaking political havoc elsewhere. There is something about Google+ that seems cleaner, much more polished, but I feel it is also at risk of losing credibility or appeal due to the real names issue. Regardless of whatever social media platform comes along, planners will be biting their nails when it comes time to decide upon real names. It isn’t just Twitter’s problem, MySpace’s problem, Google+’s problem, or Facebook’s problem either. The magnitude of this is more like “Internet” problem.
Posted from WordPress for Android
Can Apple survive without Steve Jobs?
My first computer was a Macintosh Performa 6200 CD. It had a PowerPC chip, which I think Motorola made. It was around 1993, and Apple’s then ISP, eWorld, was about to get shut down. One day I tried to log on, but got a message telling me that eWorld was going to shut down, and to join AOL. It was when Apple was about to raise itself out of the ashes like a Phoenix in its near death experience in the 90s.
What made me want a Mac? (My dad let me pick which computer he was buying for me) The advertising, of course. There were these infomercials that Apple had, showcasing how much use a typical American family would get out of a Mac. To a typical 13 year old with no bearing whatsoever on the ideas of economics and market share, it didn’t seem like a bad choice. This isn’t the part where I say it was a bad choice, though.
Time went on, I learned that there was much more interesting software for the Windows platform, but that required a PC, entirely new hardware that we wouldn’t be able to afford for a while. As more time passed, I learned all about what I was missing out on and why I was missing out on it. Hello, Economics. I finally got my PC when broadband started to show up in the late 90s, circa 1998 because the PC was a Compaq with Windows 98 on it.
So there I was, gaming with broadband and awesome 3D graphics on Windows. What could I possibly have been missing out on now? Out of the frying pan and into the fire, as they say. It would be a few more years before I discovered Linux, the operating system that would affect my being for the rest of my life. But this is not a Linux evangelism post. This is a post about my observations on Apple for the last 20 years.
I don’t think Apple will survive without Steve Jobs. I think Steve Jobs and the Apple evangelism that got them out of their slump in the 90s are inextricably linked. Granted, there is a man named Guy Kawasaki that has a lot to do with that too, but I think he is the lesser of the two in terms of personifying Apple. Apple is not just a technology company, they’re a slick brand of marketing as well.
When I got suckered by their infomercials into buying their pre-90s-slump Mac, I sold myself into the bondage of a company that would have a historically low share of the software market. Not that being under the pseudoliberal “freedom” of Windows and its software selection was any better, in retrospect.
Apple has boxed itself into a corner in which it must maintain its products as status symbols. I didn’t used to think of them that way when I was a child and now I am acutely aware of the classism inherent in their marketing, so I must say, Mission Accomplished.
Apple is good at making a product, a “toy” is what we call it in my circles, and this is the important part, marketing it. Contrast this with a company like Google who has focused on providing services like search, email, and now social media. The quality of a service doesn’t need to be original, it just needs to meet or exceed consumer demands. To me, it appears that Google’s business strategy is one that recognizes that consumers are a force to be reckoned with.
Considering that Apple has, for the most part, taken one foot out of the PC market and stuck it in the mobile devices market, that is where its strengths and weaknesses will lie. It might not be able to compete as well in the PC market, with other players focused solely on that market. Apple has invested a lot in the mobile market with iPod, iPhone, and iPad. I think it is a crucial phase of transition for the company, independent of Jobs’ resignation. The mobile market is here to stay, but I don’t think it will ever completely obsolete the PC market. I, for one, will still be building desktop machines for the foreseeable future. There is more room for better hardware. Technology might be getting smaller, but will it get more affordable too? We shall see.
I like to joke about Apple being Steve Jobs and this triggering stock selloffs, but it is not the entire truth. From what I read, Wozniak was the nice one anyway. The Apple experience is marketed as a user experience, one that emphasizes cleanliness, modernity, simplicity, and ease of use: “user friendliness”.
There’s a lot wrapped up in user experience, but ultimately it boils down to different strokes for different folks. As a veteran computer user, Apple’s user experience is similar to that of training wheels. I’ve heard many people boast about its simplicity over Windows. People assimilate their sense of control differently, I suppose.
In the end, I think Apple will be left for dead. Their competitors, strong in their domains and able to focus, will cannibalize and assimilate Apple’s strongest products and business strategies.
