Month: December 2003

Darwin progress report

Well, after a couple of attempts at installing tcltk (so I can install and run darwinports) the dependencies have been whittled down from 31 to 12.

The following 12 additional packages will be installed:
anacron daemonic findutils libxml2 libxml2-bin libxml2-shlibs man python-nox
tcltk-dev tcltk-shlibs xfree86-base zlib

I’m going to divide and conquer here and see what happens: I’ll see if I can get xfree86-base to build and if it fails (my suspicion is that it’s gumming up the works), I’ll install a binary version and work around it.

The other alternative is to punt on fink altogether and see if there’s a way to install tcltk from source: I tried that first but it failed and I went with fink, thinking it might be easier. That may not have been the right way to go after all. I don’t want to install a myriad of unnecessary dependencies. I should know how this all works out by the end of today.

unk unks

Plain English Campaign: Annual Awards

Reports that say that something hasn’t happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns — the ones we don’t know we don’t know.

US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld at press briefing in 2003. This quote was selected as the 2003 “Foot in Mouth” award winner.

This kind of obfuscated gibberish is more common than we realize. At the startup I worked at 2000, the VP of engineering referred to “unk unks” or unknown unknowns. That was my first exposure to that, but I’m guessing it’s not uncommon in the defense/aerospace establishment (that fellow was a Boeing alumnus).

inside the iPod

The Guts of a New Machine

Inside the iPod are bits and pieces made by a mix of companies but kept shrouded by Apple beneath a veil of nondisclosure agreements.

I read a similar article a few months back that I thought I had referenced here. Steve Jobs’ inflammatory quotes are always worth reading . . . .

<UPDATE> This is the article I read before on how the iPod came together.

Democrats looking to kick ass

94.9 KUOW: Seattle’s NPR News and Information Station

Are Liberals Too Nice?

Do liberals need to adopt more of the attack dog tactics of conservatives? Veteran strategist Democratic National Committee Ann Lewis says yes, Democrats have been too nice.

Now the official party weblog is called ”Kicking Ass”. A liberal group is closing deals on five radio stations to start their own liberal talk show network designed to counter Rush Limbaugh and his local minions. Veteran conservative organizer Paul Weyrich says Republicans had better worry because angry people are motivated to get out and vote. But does anger work for liberals? It stirs up the troops to heap invective on your opponents, but can it create backlash? Will it turn off Americans in the middle? Is there something illiberal about ceaseless aggression?
Continue reading “Democrats looking to kick ass”

How true is this of today’s discourse?

To fit in with the change of events, words, too had to change their usual meanings. What used to be described as a thoughtless act of aggression was now regarded as the courage one would expect to find in a party member; to think of the future and wait was merely another way of saying one was a coward; any idea of moderation was just an attempt to disguise one’s unmanly character; ability to understand a question from all sides meant that one was totally unfitted for action. Fanatical enthusiasm was the mark of a real man, and to plot against an enemy behind his back was perfectly legitimate self-defence. Anyone who held violent opinions could always be trusted, and anyone who objected to them became a suspect.

As the result . . . . there was a general deterioration of character throughout the [ . . . ] world. The simple way of looking at things, which is so much the mark of a noble nature, was regarded as a ridiculous quality and soon ceased to exist. Society had become divided into two ideologically hostile camps, and each side viewed the other with suspicion.

This sounds a lot like a description of current political discourse . . . . . read on to learn more.
Continue reading “How true is this of today’s discourse?”