All hail the Karmic Koala

If you don't know who (er, what) Karmic Koala is, I will gladly educate. Karmic Koala is the upcoming Ubuntu 9.10 release, which came out October 29, 2009. With all the press talking about Windows 7, this latest update from Canonical has all but been lost in the noise.

But fair enough. Why should you (or anyone) care?

Believe it or not, for most purposes (that is, the purposes most people put to their computers) Ubuntu Linux works quite well. Web browsing (Firefox), email (Evolution, Thunderbird, etc.), Word Processing (Open Office), music (scads of apps, but Rhythmbox is very popular). It even comes with a torrent peer, ZIP/RAR file tool, PDF display tool, and the list of available applications certainly doesn't end there. The really cool thing is that all these applications are cost free. You ain't got to pay anyone a dime to use 'em. Contrast that to Windows. The lack of any need for virus protection, alone, should make a difference.

Just today I installed Ubuntu Karmic Netbook Remix on my netbook, and though getting everything set up again has taken most the afternoon, I'm basically quite pleased with the new look. My ongoing objective is to keep the netbook lean, clean, and relatively uncustomized in order to make future upgrades smoother and simpler.

One new feature is Ubuntu One, which is 2GB of "free" cloud storage integrated into Ubuntu. That would be fine with me, except: 1) it's not encrypted, and 2) the file upload blew up both times I tried it. Maybe I'll try again later, but so far it doesn't look very promising. Stay tuned, I may post more as I have more to post.

A Far Sun: Update

As a follow-on to my post last month, I am making very good progress. The tendency to which I had eluded--that of being an inveterate story-teller and discovery writer--well, I am getting better at recognizing this in my writing, and catching myself before I've gone off on any really long tangents. This time around I detected no fewer than four sub-plots I was following (how does this happen? he asks), and while they are/were all interesting, they did not all get me closer to the end. As in: they weren't necessary to the plot.

Let me just say for the record, that I really, really want to finish this damn thing. I'm loving it, but I'm ready to put it down awhile and work on something else.

I unwrote two sub-plots and materially changed one other to set it up for a quicker ending. I also figured out I had three sub-plots all converging on a single point, so that enabled me to keep the really interesting one involving the native girl who gets hurt, because I knew it was ending. No, she doesn't die.

Her story is being used to show the larger cultural conflict in microcosm; I think it fits perfectly. This story is being told at human level. No grand, sweeping movements of hundreds, just the good (or bad) intentions and flawed actions of human beings trying to do what they think is best.

In all I cut about 8K words, setting my new total about 80K for "book 2," after having cleaved off "book 1" after 118K words. So, that puts my grand total about 198K. I am counting, since I really don't want this second volume to go over 120K. I still think I can do it.

On a final note: I know why I got off track and wrote more than needed. In this part of the story my heroes are at "the Library" where the remaining "pale-skins" live, along with a larger number of natives (I call them "sun-skins"). While sun-skin life is interesting in its own way, it's not nearly as intriguing as all the politics and competing agendas in place at the Library. It's too easy to get off-track chasing down everyone's story, which is exactly what I'd done. There may be a thousand stories to tell, but only a few will get me to the end. That's my story, and I'm sticking with it.

Until it's done, anyway.

Life is an adventure

My stepdaughter is a senior in art school. Money is tight, so we have offered to have her come live with us. This really is much easier and less expensive than trying to help her monetarily, otherwise. As long as we don't fall on any really bad financial hardships, collectively, we should be fine.

Now my biggest problem is clearing out our office (really the front bedroom in our two bedroom condo) to make room for her. This means no home for either of our desktop computers. I've started looking into making my computer an Ubuntu Linux file share, since it has 1.5 TB of disk space, but I still do need to boot a Windows machine for no other damn good reason than I am chained to Quicken for home financial management. Methinks I will start looking for a better alternative, but not right away.

My wife Carmen will get a new laptop, probably with Ubuntu, for all her web surfing and letter writing needs. Open Office and Firefox are both familiar in this household; she uses Firefox already so there's no real problem.

We're already wireless, here, so we should be in good shape with just a couple purchases of new laptop equipment. For printing I'm going to look for a wireless printer that supports CUPS, and we'll all use it for our everyday printing needs. I'm pretty sure we'll be able to print, wired, to either of our existing printers (both Dell, BTW), but wired printing would mean moving to where the printer is. Who knows, it might not be a huge problem.

On a personal note, I am very excited to have Emily here. I could gush on and on about how great she is, but in the off chance she actually reads this blog, I think I'll just say what I've already said and leave it at that.

I know there are a lot of logistical things to be worked out, but these should pose no real problem. The dog will probably have to learn not to bark at night if/when she gets up, but we're all prepared to deal with him when the time comes.

I may or may not post more about this change in our lifestyle as time goes on, but I thought I would at least share, this time.

Follow-on to my post about racism

[T]he problem of race in America has never been solely or predominantly a minority issue. It is first and foremost, as Carter said, a problem of whiteness.

A little while back I posted my opinion of folks who are making very vocal complaints about being labeled racist. Today I come across this article which expands the point even further. It is a bit long but worth reading, especially if you care about eliminating the issue of race as a divisor in our society. The author makes a point I think bears repeating; it's summarized above.

A somewhat longer quote gets to the heart of the matter:

It's a one-sided deal for people of color; as "post-racial" in effect means post-black, post-brown, post-red and post-yellow, while leaving the normative racial framework of whiteness intact. Race is the challenge people of color must confront and, dare I say, "get over."

But a post-racial America does not demand the same of those who identify with, and claim the social construction of, whiteness and perceived privileges and cultural superiority therein.

This is why, it would seem, Obama's body standing behind the American presidential seal has a critical segment of America losing its hold on reality -- a reality, I would argue, few have ever been forced to acknowledge up to this point.

Whether it's the birthers, tea-baggers, deathers, indoctrinators, or "You lie!"-ers, they have neither veiled their racial animus nor cloaked their white nationalism. The prevalence of racist images of Obama brandished by protesters juxtaposed with calls of "taking our country back" are reminiscent of D.W. Griffith's fictional America as depicted in the film Birth of a Nation.

And the pride with which this segment of society has rallied the troops around its shared sense of whiteness reveals that their skin color is the one true object of pledged allegiance and determinant of professed patriotism. [Emphasis mine.]

Those who protest so very strongly that they resent being called racist not only are racist, but have reversed the historical role of an oppressed minority: they have become the oppressed minority of "white supremacy racists" in America. As well they should be.

Enjoy that label while you can, boys. [/sarcasm]

We speak of "playing the race card." Now it's become "playing the racist card." The first step in overcoming a problem is realizing you have one. Some of us are already past that point; some may never get there. But everyone dies, so I see a solution in sight. My family is largely Hispanic--of color--so I'm encouraged that my grandchildren will grow up not thinking they're "white" and that whiteness is somehow the preferred state. I mean really, just how pure are any of us?

I know I'm an "evil librul," but I see great beauty in diversity. There's an exotic newness; a great opportunity to learn and become better informed. But I do see a great division between people. It's between the educated and the critical thinkers, and the un-educated and slavish believers by choice. There is nothing at all noble or right about being ignorant, and certainly nothing to be proud of.

Don't believe everything you're told. Listen. Question everything. Think.

That is all.

Subjectivity (and objectivity) of thought

I came across this short post quoting Owen Flanagan from The Problem of the Soul. He mentions subjectivity of thought in regards to evaluating science against other "forms of discourse":

My view is that if you are going to claim that all forms of discourse are equally subjective, you better have real familiarity with all the forms of discourse you aim to level.

But science really isn't a subjective form of discourse. It's horrendously objective, which seems to be the biggest complaint against it, these days. Or maybe it's because it isn't. Hard to tell. Point is: one cannot have it both ways. If everything is subjective, then everything is equally dismissible out of hand. Opinions, then, would be the only things that matter. But if this is not the case, then anything said to be objective can be scrutinized. Subject to objective measurement and comparison, as it were.

If science is a subjective form of discourse, then disagreement about science and religion (for example) are simply differences of opinion, and we agree to disagree. No problem. But I see developments, particularly here in the US, that seek to bring religion into the classroom and teach it as if it were science. Objectively. Or maybe subjectively. Hard to tell. I'm pretty sure science is not subjective mumbo-jumbo, because it doesn't depend on whether I believe in it, or not. It's going to work (as long as you do it right) every time. (Let me posit that most aspects of religious practice do not "work" so predictably. But perhaps we're just not doing it right.)

Having religious beliefs is fine. They can help make you a better person, but of course religion is not the only path to being good, and it doesn't guarantee you'll actually be better (or even good). If they make you feel better, then they are a "good thing" on that basis. I have no disagreement with that. But religion is not the only way.

Speaking of belief systems, some argue that science is just as much faith and belief as religion. It's not, mostly because of the continual testing and verification. Evolution, for example, doesn't survive because the Darwin Priesthood says it must. It survives and grows because it makes predictions that are relentlessly tested, and the supporting evidence is so wide-spread--from many, many different disciplines--that it becomes virtually impossible to fit in another equally plausible hypothesis (that doesn't include the same features). It's no wonder scientists laugh when creationists try to get their ideas "equal time" in the scientific discourse.

By way of example: I sometimes laugh when I encounter people who don't understand how computers work. Many times they follow "rules" that make no sense, claiming that if they don't do them just so, then the computer won't work. Sometimes there's a grain of truth in what they're saying, but two unrelated things are still unrelated whether we think they are, or not. When I look at the code, I can tell what it does, and I'm certain it's doing only what I observe. It doesn't matter how much you think otherwise, it simply cannot be working for the reasons you think. This is the dichotomy I feel when folks try to take things and ascribe supernatural causes to them. While I may not be a scientist "looking at the code" of biology (for example) there are many who are, and do observe what's happening. If we can explain nature in unequivocal terms (such as the things a computer does) then no amount of imaginary fancy will change a thing. My computer will not suddenly start working if I yell at it. Or pray at it, either. Can you imagine the chaos if praying to the computer actually worked? (I want a $1,000,000 salary. Pay it to me!)

Many people argue that understanding the science behind certain "non-sciency" things sorta ruins them. I understand that falling in love is chemical, but it still feels good at the time. I understand what made the mountains and the weather, but I can still marvel at a magnificent vista. I'm just amazed by it all, no matter what the cause. Knowing why and wanting to know more ruins nothing. If you have to have mysterious supernatural explanations for things in order to feel good, then fine, go have them. Just don't try to tell me that your fantastic imaginings are on par with scientific findings.