[PLUG-TALK] reliance on technology (was: Redhat changes, fedora)
Russ Johnson
russj at dimstar.net
Thu Nov 6 07:23:57 UTC 2003
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 05 November 2003 05:31 pm, Jeme A Brelin wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Russ Johnson wrote:
> > My mail client (mutt btw) is perfectly capable. It's set up to do
> > exactly what it does.
>
> Well, it certainly wouldn't do something that it's not set up to do!
It could... But that would (maybe) be a bug.
> > I suggest that it does matter.
>
> In this instance, it doesn't. You ASSUMED that I wouldn't agree with me
> because I'm not as old as you are. That's not honor, that's ignorant
> prejudiced stereotyping (also known as bigotry).
Well, I do have opinions that many people that are young, are also idealistic
and in some ways naive about how the world works. I don't believe that makes
me bigoted.
The opinions I have witnessed from you lead me to believe that in some ways,
you have beliefs that don't mesh well with the way the world works. Maybe the
world should be different, and maybe your world is different than mine, but
in my world, a lot of the things that I see you profess just don't work for
me.
> > There's a reason the Native Americans held their elders in such high
> > esteem. I think the fact that honoring our elders has gone out of vogue,
> > at least in this country, is a bad thing.
>
> First, honor should be given equally to all human beings.
However, those who have done, should be listened to. This is honoring them. It
took me until I was almost 30 to realize that my dad was a lot wiser than I
believed him to be. There are many things that my dad is downright ignorant
about. But those things that he does know, are well worth listening to.
Honor and respect are earned. Earning them takes time.
When I was in the Air Force, we had a saying for officers that were complete
idiots. We had to respect the rank. However, we were not required to respect
the person in the uniform.
> Second, mere survival no longer denotes any kind of greater wisdom or
> maturity. Modern civilization allows even the most foolish and lazy to
> become "elders".
It should.
> Lastly, you're not that much older or more experienced than I am... I just
> look good for my age.
As do I. How old are you?
> I personally believe pragmatism is very destructive. You can never get
> from bad to good with compromises.
Never is a horrible word. Nothing is absolute.
> > If enough folks do it, well, maybe it was a good idea.
>
> The "goodness" of an idea has nothing to do with how many people do it.
Not usually. Lots of people drive cars. You believe this to be a bad thing.
> I would say that "not failing" is succeeding.
That doesn't make sense, given that my statement was, "repeated failure is a
road to depression."
"not failing" is succeeding. But failing is also not succeeding.
When you define your goal, you define what constitutes success. If you don't
attain success, you've failed in that goal.
> > Do, or do not. There is no try. -- Yoda.
>
> Hate to break this to you, but Yoda is a fucking muppet.
So? So's Big Bird, but he teaches many pre-schoolers the alphabet.
> > > Then you're willfully ignorant and a leech.
> >
> > We've disagreed on this before. I don't believe I have to learn all that
> > is learnable. Geez, that's another movie quote.
>
> And how does that make you not willfully ignorant and not a leech?
I don't believe it makes me that way, because I don't have to know all that is
knowable in order to be a productive member of society. I can give back more
than I receive without learning many things.
> > How is that not a bicycle? The training wheels are temporary. I've never
> > heard anyone say that bolting on training wheels truns a bike into
> > something else.
>
> Bicycles have two wheels. It's another one of the pesky definitions.
And a bike with training wheels does have two wheels. It also has props that
have wheels on them so they don't scrape.
Are you saying that if I removes the wheels from the training wheels, leaving
the brackets on, it would be a bike?
Training wheels are an accessory to a bicycle to allow a person to learn to
ride said bicycle. It doesn't make a bicycle any less a bicycle than adding a
camper to a pickup changes what a pickup is.
> Yes, they do. They can't do it, but they know HOW to do it.
That's contradictory. If you know how to do something, then you CAN do it.
> > SOME kids can get gyroscopic effect by four. But my contention is that
> > knowing what gyroscopic effect is, and how it is applied in the use of a
> > bicycle are not needed to use a bicycle.
>
> Well, as has been shown, gyroscopic effects have nothing to do with
> bicycles.
Not "nothing". Maybe less than I thought, but I know that as you go faster,
it's easier to maintain an upright attitude. Also, the reason a bicycle falls
when it's rear wheel is spinning is simply that it's static mass is still
able to overcome the effect generated.
The "trailing" as it was called helps too. It's called caster, and that's also
why the steering on cars will tend to self center.
For the record, I had a bike that I could turn the handlebars backwards. I
could ride it as well either way.
- --
Russ Johnson
Dimension 7/Stargate Online
http://www.dimstar.net
Top post? http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
Random thought #2 (Collect all 21)
"If thine enemy wrong thee, buy each of his children a drum." - Chinese
Proverb
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/qfcNmZEVNtY7YGsRAv6NAJ9EizLDGIPfvKkHAClhFybs0wN1bACfYvYo
oszPBwnYMOCRleKY81vJ5gU=
=l5W7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the PLUG-talk
mailing list