Yes, it's Christmas, the time to give the "Bad Religion"Crossbusters Logo a workout, for it's that time of yearwhen Christians wear their religion on their sleeve :)To do my part, I've temporarily changed my desktop background frommy sigil to their logo, and it's visible at Coffee Tree. :)
Oh, by the way -- I'm cleaning off packages from my laptop and fromdachte that I don't need, and notice that.. yes, pax is there. RMSand his GNU Project are normallypretty sane, but in this case, like with GNU Info, they've produceda stupid, pointless program. Info is the result of what happened afterlynx and man (a web browser and the standard documentation viewer on Unix)got drunk one night, and produced an ugly, disfigured child, inferior toboth its parents. And pax? What does it do? Well, it can make and extractfrom cpio archives.. oh, but cpio can do that! Well, it can open tar archivestoo... oh, but why not use tar for that? Ahh, but it can also open gzippedtar archives.. oh, but tar can do that too! Yes, pax is stupid. Likeinfo, it's what happened when two perfectly fine pieces of software,in this case GNU tar and GNU cpio did something foolish, and produced achild that's less useful than either of the parents. My advice? Take thatpiece of junk off of your system. I might see exactly how open the newFedora process is, by suggesting that RedHat remove it from the standarddistribution.
Oh, a warning to windows users -- yet another trojan *snicker*horse is going around.Word on the street is that the "anti-spam" billrecently passed is anything but, and is actually seen as a good thingby the spammers. *sigh*
Oh, here's a fun quote by a dead white guy..."Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people... it is true that most stupid people are conservative." -- John Stuart MillI found it on this page.....I really love all the quote collections on the net..
In fairness to the opposition, here's a link to a bunchof christians who've spent a lot of time attacking science that says thingsthat hurt their religion. I found it by stumbling across this subpageon thermodyanmics, and while they're wrong, they're wrong in ways that mostcausual sciency folk won't see through it. Go ahead, my readers, sharpen yourteeth on this (rare) set of sophisticated arguments between Xians andothers.
The government grows ever scarier -- now they can demand logs fromservice providers, and demand that they not tell the spied-upon person.You might notice that I don't have a privacy statement on my webpage. It'smy server, and I'll do whatever the hell I want with it. As of right now,I don't actually collect any data that you're likely to need to worry aboutwhat I do with it, and anything I do collect, you'll just need to decide,based on what you know of me, if you want to give it to me or not -- barringany particular understanding between us, I make no promises. However, let metell you this..I, Pat Gunn, hereby do swear on the same standard of honesty and integritythat binds me as a philosopher, that if the government attempts to get mylogs, that I will do my very best to 'lose' them, and that I will make agood effort to tell the world about it, provided that I don't think you'resomeone who deserves to be caught.
Some people are too sensitive. I'd hound such people, if only I knew whothey are. It's called a motherboard, not a mainboard, and I'll do my best toavoid buying disks that use the wrong terminology.. but, alas, one of thethings about markets like this is that if there arn't counterincentives,the distributed cost of irritating millions of geeks with politically correctterminology is less than not being able to do business with a lucrative partner.I guess though, in any bunch there're some .. *characters*. Here's a nod topeople from my ex-party, the Libertarians, who had some peopleprotesting affirmative action by selling cookies to people, at prices that varyby the race of the buyer. For the record, though I'm no longer Libertarian,I still agree with them on this point, and think the symbolism is appropriate,the metaphor apt.
During the cleaning of the bookmarks, I found that Jonathan Brandis,an actor I liked, suicided about 20 days ago. Oh well. I guess, unlike mostpeople, I don't view suicide as being a taboo topic, nor do I think it deservesthe knee-jerk dismissal that so many people give it. The thing is, barringsuperstitious notions attached to it, suicide is not something that can reallybe judged very well from a subjective POV -- in life, we evaluate thingsaccording to our ends, but this style of thought simply has no way toconsider elimination of the self, outside of what one wants for society orothers, and while those factors often do play a large role in how we makebig decisions in life, usually we also pay a lot of attention to how ourexperiences will be altered by our actions. With no meaningful directionfrom there, a type of experience that is at least not silent on every othertopic of life, how can we really say that one can ever judge one's own deathor suicide rationally or irrationally? It is, by nature, a very special typeof decision where the regular practices and rules don't apply.
Heh, amusingly, as much as it amuses me to be doing so, I appear to havegiven you a stocking-stuffer style entry again :O