The Book of Eli / The distro of Kubuntu

[woodsmoke]

Just for grins and giggles.

Inflection Point

Arguing "by definition"

woodsmoke

[woodsmoke]

thanks for all the fish! lol

Hi
This will be a relatively long and "complex" post.

Whether the gentle reader wants to read it is purely up to he or she.

However, to properly explain the thesis the post has to be both long and complex.

That is because there will be several instances in which I will have to refer "back to something else" because of the physical way in which a forum is set up, the way in which documents are formed and the simple structure of sentences.

The provision of the two links was completely a surprise to myself, as of the day before.

There was no "original intent" and no "nefarious scheme" on my part, it was totally serendiptitous and not planned two weeks ago or even three days ago.

Again, total serendiptity;.

I) First let us address the link, "arguing from definition".

a) When I was posting in a couple of other threads I fully expected that there would be replies about the "untruth" of the posted items. And that, in the face of documentation to the topic. In other words, there were established facts, that were reinforced by a variety of places but still what happened was....

The reason that I posted them was for a simple reason.

And that simple reason is that a lot of folks in the forums do not much look at "national news" and if they do it is on the "mainstream media", which were not reporting the information.

The replies to the posted items were that:

They were wrong because they were from Fox News.

This, EVEN THOUGH.....there were other news organizations confirming them, but Fox had reported first.

Thus, to repeat,

the information was not valid MERELY because it had been first reproted by Fox.

b) The second thing that happened was that my intelligence was called into question ....

MERELY because I had obtained the material from Fox News.

If I had posted the same information from CBS then nobody would have called it into quesiton.

And again, to repeat, that was even though CBS was then reporting the information that Fox had previously reported.

Again, the important thing was not the factual basis of the information but the SOURCE of the information.

c) It might be argued that this is a case of killing the messenger!

d) So why was it being done?

I think that it is the same reason for the replies made to my posts going back to Xandros.

i) I posted information that was verifiably, factually, correct, from government sources, etc. I had independent people who WORKED in the fields, posting that what was being pushed "in the agenda" was factually wrong FROM out "in the field".

The respondents to my posts then went to "agrument ad hominem" and "name calling".

ii) At another forum, i posted information from the "place" where the situation was occuring, that was being ranted upon in the forum, that showed, from the place itself, that the ranting was totally, and completely incorrect.... and I was banned from the forum.

iii) Most folks here do not recall the massive flame wars at the main Ubuntu forums over "avatars", because the Linux people just want to "put it behind them" but the underlying attitude is still there. I ran across a business site that had an "on the payroll" writer asking "Why do (they) want a Christian Ubuntu. It is just Ubuntu with a few apps provided as default".

iv) So, back to the main thing about "arguing from definition."

It is my considered opinion, from observing a very long history of people posting in Linux forums....

That "most" of the "high end" people in Linux think that they are always right because......they are always right.

Arguing from definition is that one says it is correct so it is, indeed correct, merely because the proposer says it is right.

(AND PUUUULLLEEEZE) let us please let go that "The Christians say the Bible is right so, it is by definition right). That is not "the point" of this post.

Ok, so to repeat, it is at least possible that the "high powered Linux people, and the Linux wannabee high powered people".... argue from definition ....that they are right because they are right...

How else could one in all conscience say that information from Fox News is incorrect, merely because it came from Fox News?

II) Inflection point.

Please read the WHOLE of the following even though you "think" you know what I am going to say, because...you don't.

We are two days away from the election of the President(and BTW, the Senate).

When the U.S. sneezes, the rest of the world catches a cold. A mantra of the liberal elite to put the U.S. down...

Again, do not dismiss the first sentence, next, merely because think you are smarter than woodsmoker and therefore are...smarter than the woodsmoker.

I think that the imminent election results will be an "inflection point" in ways which people here at the forum are not considering.

Please read the following not as a "political post" but as merely possible outcomes of the election.

1) There is a lot of pent up emotion, and therefore pent up hostility toward the "other side" from the election.

2) The pent up emotion WILL BE "released" no matter who is elected.

3) Most, if not all, "computer pundits" are opining that this will be the "Christmas/year of the tablet and/or the touchscreen laptop".

4) It is the opinion of the old woodmoker that people will be buying or getting as gifts, tablets or touchscreen laptops for several reasons and some of them will have to do with the election.

5) It is not arguable that there will be one of three things happen after the election:
A) The economy will take off.
B) The economy will continue to be stagnant.
C) The economy will slowly, or rapidly, go into recession and depression.

6) So what does this have to do with touchscreen laptops and tablets?
1a ) I think that we can leave off the discussion the giving of the items as gifts.

2a ) If the economy "takes off" then it is arguable that people will buy them as "shiney objects"..merely
because they want to buy them(for multitudinous reasons).

3a) If the economy remains stagnant then they will PROBABLY not purchase a shiney object.

4a) If the economy goes into a nose dive they they will NOT purchase a shiney object.

III) So back to the previous point about "arguing by definition".
1b) No matter how much the Linux people may want to wring their hands and say "Linux is on the rise"....
The devices will have either of the two following OS on them:
-Windows
=Android.

So now, back to the above cases in terms of the inflection point.

2b) It is the considered opinion of the old woodsmoker that the horrible pent up tensions in people because of the economy AND the election that....

3b) if the economy rises and the shiney object is purchased the person will just play with the object AND SOME OF THEM....might decide to "play" with it and try installing another "free" but MORE ROBUST OS...ie.e. Linux.

4b) HOWEVER, if the economy continues to stagnate or goes into recession then the shiney object will be purchased because it is NEEDED to enhance one's income.

5b) Now, Windows 8 is coming PRE-LOADED with MS Office, the "productivity" suite.

6b) Speaking from experience, having an Android tablet in my possession, there is a "productivity suite" available for Android, but is a "for pay" app that shuts down after a week of use.

7b) So....again, if the shiney object is purchased as a something to enhance income and an Android device is purchased there are a couple of possible things that might happen.

8b) If the device is Android the user MAY....notice...MAY....

Since Android is vaguely associated in the public mind with "free operating system".....

It MAY be that at least a non-negligible number of these people may start "casting about" for ANOTHER free operating system.

Which "should" lead them to "Linux".


IV) So let us get back to "arguing from definition".

AND THIS IS NOT POLITICAL....duuuhhhhhh

IVa) If Pres. Obama is re-elected there will be dancing in all of the Linux fora across the U.S. and a lot of Europe.



And the simple reason for this is that Linux fora are overwhelmingly "liberal".

And......the "conservatives had better DUCK THEIR HEADS"......

IVb) If Gov. Romney is elected then there will NOT be dancing in Linux Fora across the U.S. and parts of Europe.



IF IT IS A LOSS BY HANGING CHADS.....





THE CONSERVATIVES and the Christians.....MIGHT AS WELL just LEAVE.....


And this is because.....if one always argues from definition there is no "fall back" position.

IVc) So back to both the "inflection point" and "arguing from definition".

The old woodsmoker thinks that no matter what happens after the inflection point.....

If the economy rises a few people will consider another OS.

If the economy remains stagnant or falls that a LOT of people will consider a FREE OS.

V) So what about "arguing from definition".

Since, by definition (sic), the people that might consider a Linux OS are probably going to be Windows people at least a significant part of them will be

conservatives

Christians

Linux people, by and large, especially the "elites" will be SO MAD....I mean, viscerally, gut wrenching down in the non-existend soul MAD about Pres. Obama not being elected that a LOT of the Linux fora will be seeing a lot of posts that harken back to the "good old days" of Linux fora.

a) RTFM
b) I have a RIGHT to not have to be offended by a Christian Avatar
c) Military Intelligence, what an oxymoron
d) Conservative....? What ROCK did YOU crawl out from under(please notice the incorrect sentence structure )
e) YOU WANT A WINDBLOWS APP IN LINUX.....go back to Winduuuhblows you idiot, Linux is Linux!!
f) The SEARCH FUNCTION IS YOUR FRIEND...you idiot!
g) ad nauseum....

And why do I think that this would happen?

Quite simply, ... from observation of what HAS happened in Linux fora for seven years.

So...it is the opinion of the old woodsmoker that

"Linux" has an inflection point of another kind.

And the inflection point is that the people who think they are "smart" by definition, and that all other people, expecially Conservatives and Christians....are not......

COULD choose to finally DO what they SAY.....

And that is...to accept Christians and conservatives as equal HUMAN BEINGS....

a) who do not have to "keep their mouths shut" because they are Christian or Conservative.
b) who can have an avatar of Christ or a (local nation war hero) if the forum "gleefully emblazons" an 'in your face Christian" Muslim Avatar, or one of Cezar Chavez.

In other words....

The Christians will not NEED a "Christian Ubuntu".

++++++++++++++++

Does anyone here know "what identifies" an Elk to another Elk?

It is not a secret handshake. lol



It is not a U.S. flag.

It is not a Bible.

It is not a large roll of money to buy drinks in the bar! lol

It is an Elks membership card.

++++++++++++++++++

The Kubuntu forums has lost....they just left...... the Kubuntu forums has lost...

people who just did not "feel welcome" because they were either "conservative" or "Christian".

++++++++++++++++++

Maybe after this inflection point

all of the people who just detest Christians and Conservatives

or that are DISMISSIVE of Christians and Conservatives

Can quit sayng one thing and then doing another,

Can quit insulting by inuendo, and outright insult....

Maybe they can TRY to actually walk the walk instead of just talking the talk...



And accept new people as Linux (hopefully Kubuntu) users.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

PPS:

Historically there have been several methods that Linux forum people have used to get those "uppity people" to shut up or leave:

a) shut down the social/political talk, that way the Linux forum people that detest Christians and conservatives can continue to play in their little pond and "talk", and have an unseen forum that is not seen by the GREAT UNWASHED....and make a few public posts about being inclusive and yada yada yada.

b) search out a real A##&ole to be the moderator of the "talk forum "so that the Linux forum people who hate Christians and conservatives.....can then "blame the A##&ole".

c) Ban the Christian or conservative as soon as they say anything that contravenes the opinions of the people who say that they accept all opinions and beliefs.

d) Others too numerous to mention.

+++++++++++++++++++++++

So, since this will be the old woodsmoker's last post, I will now expose my political and religious "leanings"....

As to "politics" I have voted and advocated for both parties, and for the independent, at different times in my life.

Presently, I am Libertarian in most things except defense upon which I am conservative.

As to "religion" I was "the first kid" baptized and catechized in a Lutheran Church, was married to an atheist( really ) for most of my life. Over my life time I've spent quite a few years in the B.O.T.A.(Qbalah and Tarot) and Zen, and in the later years moved back to organized relition in the form of a loose affiliation with "Disciples of Christ" and "Cowboy Church" (I've actually "trail drived"cattle for a living early in my life, surprising as it may seem given the time frames).

So, nowadays, I go along with the saying that was/is over many Buddhist temples entrances:

"Through this door walks a thousand people and a thousand religions".

As to science, I've actually DONE research in recombinant DNA and evolution so I accept, not believe, the Theory of Evolution.

There really are people who can walk and chew gum at the same time.

As to "What do you teach to those students" woodsmoke.

I'm considered to be a "master teacher" in all of the sciences. I've given presentations for the National Science Foundation, the state and local teachers organizations, the "Principal's group" on a variety of teaching methods, including what used to be known as "Enquiry Learning". I have had articles written about me by "left wing newspapers" about my innovative methodologies.

I have always used almost "continuous laboratory activities" and the "Socratic Method" to teach the sciences. "Percentage wise" more students from my little bohunk school went into "science/medicine/technology" than the big, unionized, going broke, schools. And this was not because of me, personally, it was because the students were still "independent" not "dependent" and "hands on" as opposed to being caught up in "simulations".

Presently I teach two courses, although I have taught three, in college.

A) Environmental science wherein, because it is FRAUGHT with political stuff, I presented both the "alternate" view along side the "left wing" view that is in the books.

Unfortunately, the "alternate view" has been shown to be correct... the books have dropped it like a lead sinker... so, that means that I am "verboten" in the normal left wing precincts.

B) Intro Biology. This is a very "canned" course to meet state requirements. It is also considered to be a "terminal" course, in that the people that are taking it "just can't quite cut it academically". However, I have had SO MANY people actually take up a science major...(meaning that they had to "go back" and take other courses that are pre-reqs ) that ..... an "outlying campus" that is actually THE high tech biology and chemistry campus.....requested that I be transferred there..... The politically correct instructors at the main campus heaved a great sigh of relief....

But the student body is moving to my present campus if they are going to go into anything "technical"...so I get to work with people who are written off as "terminal students"....but actually are the GOOD ONES!! lol

This is "lecture - lab". But, I do not use the "canned lectures" that the rest of the instructors use...( the excuse being various...."I don't have time to make new lectures" "Not my job to make new lectures" "I have other things to do, this is just a job until I can get into research".

Since I actually KNOW my stuff as opposed to saying that I know it...my very first lectures, done in PPT were "universal statements" about each topic that were written in a "timeless" way...in other words in a REAL SCIENCE way....as opposed to "closed source, from the book".

I can just "rearrange slides" instead of having to "learn a whole new lecture set with a new book".

And, of course, now I produce my presentations with Kpresenter(Kalligra) and the initial slides have the "K" emblazoned on them, just to remind the students that there is a free, as in free and free beer, available.

C) Physical Science.

I was asked to do this, since my M.S.(Plant Ecology) is not in "physics" because the head of the department wanted somebody who knew the stuff so "inside and out" that I could do NOTHING but labs...

The head of the department wanted me to "provide outreach" to elementary education teachers to "empower them" to KNOW that that they KNOW.

This so that they would not have to rely on kits from a science supply house and a recipe built class from a book publisher.

This so that they would not be DEPENDENT on an old guy like me to go "running to the science guy(it is still a male chauvinist situation in education no matter what the educationists prattle on about) for help".

We do labs in lecture. (ummm we also do labs in lab meetings ! ) The head of the department has showered me with equipment.

And, I use the Socratic Method, question and answer, about the labs and the material in the book.

One might consider that I teach somewhat in the manner shown on the two following videos:

Mr. Wizard

Juliua Sumner Miller:

By using this method.... at the end of the class the students will know....that they know....

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

And since I have insulted just about everybody on the forum that is regular poster on the forum....

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

And, ummm, why did the old woodsmoker put "The Book of Eli" in the title?

Ummmm because I was watching the movie when the idea of the post occurred to my little feverish brain! lol

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Thanks for all the fish!

woodsmoke

[claydoh]

way, waayyy tl;dr!! (and I already have a headache)

The reality is that on the intarwebz, everyone pretty much shoots from the hip, types the first thing that pops into their heads. I am guilty of this as much as anyone. The thing is, in the corners of the web I frequent, and those people I follow/hang out with/whatever you wanna call it, generally are (in terms of the USA) left-ish in their quick draws. There are other places that are (again, in USA terms) right-ish with their ten fingers. A dissenting view brings out the shoot-first-ask-questions-later comment diarrhea and outrageous meme-fests. My theory is that even though we are communicating to a larger group, we as individuals are essentially physically alone in front of an input device. We have this human tendency to say things in this "private" way that we would never say while physically in public. It is also my sci-fi theory that this in conjunction with the polarization, the actual digitization of thought and opinion coursing over the 'net, may be something that helps brings on the Singularity

Now, of course people are going to bash someone for using Fox News as a source, which even conservatives have to admit is biased, but pretty much openly so (though I do remember when I did watch it in the past, I seemed to find more differences of opinion there than in others) But using such a biased and obviously contentious source is simply begging for it to be discredited, so it is stupid, just as silly as not doing a fact check. And who checks the fact checkers, who filters out the opinion and/or blathering in a blog from actual news reporting?

I know this is probably way of course from the topic (again, tl;dr) but I'll say it up front: You have in the past projected the image of a knee-jerk neo-con Republican, whether intentional or not I know you confuse the living heck out of me, but I am not a smart guy.

[Jonas]

I've read this post only once so I may be wrong here .. anyway ... here goes

Woodsmoke, you seem offended that you may have offended some people, don't let it get to you. I may not agree with everyone, or you in some cases, but I'd never back down from what I believe in, nor should you.

I would politically consider myself as a libertarian-communist (in many regards "anarchist"). I know this would be against me to "out" on a forum where most are from the US, not because all people from the US is consistent in their views (and most may bash the communist) but because political ideas and discussions convey, mildly put, "#¤%y poorly on the internet. (though some I agree with here isn't socialists to any extent).

As to the dogmas from some forum members who think a avatar that say "On the first day god created Linux - the rest was easy" is blasphemy, they are of course right to believe that, but to try to forbid it would be out of line. I don't agree or think it was appropriate that there is a signature saying that I would (or should?) "go to hell", but I made my own signature instead (believing a charlatan would ridicule myself). I consider religion is blasphemy of science, no matter church, mosque, temple of scientology etc. If science lead me to hell, then to hell I'll go.

It goes both ways.


As for media coverage the mainstream media are biased, regardless of FOX, CBS, BBC, Svt they cover what's on the agenda of the rulers, though they may have different rulers. There's more sources then FOX vs/& Other public media - just read and bring them on, that is science.

From a non-US position think this US election has brought some unwanted tension to this forum (though in the long run I think it's for the better). Open (heated) debate is always better then closed grudge. Thus the "dialectics of knowledge", should be welcomed.

Woodsmoke, there's also been debates over the years that me and others have agreed with you. Don't forget that.

In the end you do what you feel you have to do, and with respect from all at KFN.

b.r

Jonas

[luckyone]

I can probably get upset over some things. But the truth is that in 200 years it won't make a bit of difference what is done at this point in time. Not by anyone or any group. Ask the Huguenot you know, a Medici, or anyone or any group from the past. Time marches right over such people and buries them.
We could do a lot better in the now. It's a shame we don't. I suspect that things won't be so well thought of in two hundred years. As I don't really think that two hundred years ago today is anything to be proud of. At least with very few exceptions.

[SteveRiley]

But the truth is that in 200 years it won't make a bit of difference what is done at this point in time. Not by anyone or any group.

Oh, I'm not sure it's all that bad... one evening in December 1773, a bunch of guys got upset about taxes, threw some stuff off a boat, and, well, formed a new country

[Jonas]

Oh, I'm not sure it's all that bad... one evening in December 1773, a bunch of guys got upset about taxes, threw some stuff off a boat, and, well, formed a new country

Indeed! All things matter.

Keep in mind that those people were "terrorists" at the time, worth to consider in these times.

b.r

Jonas

[bsniadajewski]

Oh no! A commie!

I consider religion is blasphemy of science, no matter church, mosque, temple of scientology etc. If science lead me to hell, then to hell I'll go.

I'd disagree on that part. Some religions are (I'm looking at you, fundamentalists), but some like the Catholic Church (I'm a Catholic, BTW) have embraced science and scientific theories (maybe not at first, have since, esp. after Galileo. In fact, IIRC the Church has (JPII I think) has since apologized (I think that's the word) .

[Qqmike]

Indeed, an interesting an encouraged discussion of science and religion.

But ... wait! WTH? I just noticed the title of this thread " ... / the distro of Kubuntu"
Ha! the distro of Kubuntu!? Kubuntu? Ah, the packaging of, of ..., of things ...
;-)

It's a great life. Now, thanks to Vinny, I can easily spell check my posts again (see relevant thread up there somewhere).

[SteveRiley]

some like the Catholic Church (I'm a Catholic, BTW) have embraced science and scientific theories

Um, transubstantiation?

[luckyone]

Oh, I'm not sure it's all that bad... one evening in December 1773, a bunch of guys got upset about taxes, threw some stuff off a boat, and, well, formed a new country

Check your history. It wasn't about taxes as you understand them.

And (I'm not Catholic) Transubstantiation is spiritual in nature. Not physical.


All that said, I find the most dangerous thing in the world is religion. When people believe in something that's not part of the physical world they seem to be lost. And then other people come along and show them a book that's 1400 (Islam didn't have anything written for 200-300 years after Muhammad died), 1800 (Christianity didn't have anything written for about 200 CE years), or most of 3000 (Hebrews had parts of there bible around 1600 BCE) years old and tell them it's divinely inspired and therefore the only Truth. It makes doing anything they want to people that are outside of their 'faith' targets of various kinds.

The most dangerous thing in the world is someone that believes they are right without physical proof.

[SteveRiley]

Check your history. It wasn't about taxes as you understand them.

I know that. The Wikipedia article actually explains it pretty well. My post was just to insert a bit of humor.

And (I'm not Catholic) Transubstantiation is spiritual in nature. Not physical.

It involves the poorly-argued substance theory, a pile of bogus handwaving that asserts the underlying constituent components of a thing can be changed while the visible "accidents" perceived by the senses do not change. Bah.

[claydoh]

I think I will probably go bit deeper into the water than I usually do here, probably light a few sparks off. but what the hay. I tend to be a knee-jerk contrarian sometimes. I know I am off-topic (or i believe I am, lol as I have not read the whole thing :eek:, and probably
won't) but what the heck.

I do not understand why faith and science cannot coexist. There are atheists out there who are no different from some evangelicals, who pounce on any reference to a god or faith. They have become quite as obnoxious as any of the obnoxious or nasty sects out there. Lumping everyone of faith in with those of one particular small corner of a religion is ludicrous and plain wrong. I say this as an atheist (or rather someone who simply doesn't give 2 flying figs if there is a deity or not, and would not 'worship' one even if there we, and wire).

Atheism is developing into its own faith, even a religion of sorts, with its own dogma and mantra. In other words, many of you hardcore godless folks are becoming the very thing you shout against in many ways. You have faith in the science, or rather the Word of the Scientists quite often. So lighten up. When someone says "thank god more people weren't hurt in the hurricane" or "I pray for those who lost their lives in the Hurricane" or whatever, LIGHTEN UP and stop being mindless knee-jerk jerks!!

And those of you out there who bash Unity, while thinking Gnome 3.6 is pretty good are just plain..............................stupid? morons? idiots? OMG!!!!!

[Qqmike]

The source of our debt problems is certainly not Obama's doing. There have been enough bi-partisan analysts explaining the dynamics of this these past few years, pointing at Bush, along the lines of oshunluvr's excellent post #3.


Republican party out of touch, in trouble, about BOTH social issues and economic issues. Not much argument about it now: Just 24 hours post election, I know you are also catching the bi-partisan consensus, analyses on what happened. E.g., Steve Schmidt, republican strategist, MS NBC round table, after midnight, says if the republican party does not change, it will likely lose not only the next election but elections for the next decade or more; the republican leadership must show some leadership toward the center and compromise, distance themselves from whacko's (Limbaugh and Trump were specifically mentioned as examples). Do your own google-ing to get more. I don't like the looks of the word "googling," but will probably have to get used to it at some point.


luckyone says, "The most dangerous thing in the world is someone that believes they are right without physical proof."

True, imo. In fact, true about ANY belief held by the human brain. Religion is especially troublesome as it leads to killings, dead humans. (Religion--for the masses--is also a good thing as it helps keeps the lid on anarchy propensities, helps to keep us [our behavior] halfway civilized/peaceful). If religion actually "worked," more people would practice their beliefs. As it is, they pay and pray one day a week, and do whatever the h* they want to do on the other six days, disregarding the fundamental teachings of their founding mystic (Christ, whoever).


Any questions?


New Year's is upon us soon. My resolution will be the same as it's been the past 63 years: to lighten up.
;-)

[Qqmike]

claydoh: "I do not understand why faith and science cannot coexist."

I agree. In fact ... though not a "Christian," I believe Christianity (or any religion or belief system) can co-exist with science (and its modern discoveries, theories). It would seem that modern astrophysics supports (or, at least, does not contradict) various mystical belief systems, including Christianity, along with, of course, Buddhism, Zen, and various primitive religions (e.g., early Native American).

btw, I hadn't read claydoh's post when I posted mine (# 14).