The Linux Show
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| salparadise Oct 10, 2005 11:31 AM EDT |
Does anyone know when the Linux Show is coming back? |
| Koriel Oct 10, 2005 1:34 PM EDT |
No idea sorry, I also saw the post that it was coming back but they were still working on a return date. |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 26, 2005 2:54 PM EDT |
I'm looking forward to their return. There are other shows, each good in their own way, but I miss the "free-floating" feeling in TLS. Like any subject was going to come up and be discussed. I like the British Linux show, Lug Radio, http://www.lugradio.org/ but seriously I get tired of their constant profanity. I know it's normal British English, I guess I'm just too American. |
| salparadise Oct 26, 2005 9:19 PM EDT |
Yup, sigh!
I agree with you. It's not big and it's not clever. I'm aware of some of the people involved and that's the way they are. I'm afraid that in the UK we like to swear. A lot. I suspect it's somewhat out of control. No sense of decency anymore, just a sense of appalling cynicism and disregard for all that once was. |
| jimf Oct 26, 2005 10:19 PM EDT |
Huh... I don't know where Bob_Robertson's been hiding, but America can't take any swearing highground :) |
| Koriel Oct 27, 2005 3:00 AM EDT |
I miss Arnie having his weekly rant at some idiot journo :) |
| number6x Oct 27, 2005 4:56 AM EDT |
post a message to luni@luni.org luni is the Linux Users of Northern Illinois. Jeff Gerhardt of the Linux show posts there often, and may have better info. luni's website is minimal, but you can search their archives and sign up to their mailing list there. http://luni.org/ luni's meetings are very informal and never technical. At a coffee shop with buttery baked goods in Chicago's Ukranian village. |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 27, 2005 1:54 PM EDT |
Jimf, indeed American mass media is a minefield. That's one of the reasons I avoid mass media. I must admit that the movie _Snatch_, while quite as laced with invective as possible, worked very well and I even bought a copy of the movie. As Jeff Cooper has written, profanity is often used in place of actually thinking about what is being said. It is an indication of a lack of vocabulary, since profanity is almost always very repetitive. ...with the exception of Marine drill seargents. |
| tadelste Oct 27, 2005 6:29 PM EDT |
Ann Colter made an interesting statement today regarding Harriet Miers withdrawing from consideration as an appointee to the Supreme Court. She said that mass media lives in New York and Los Angeles and that they have a monopoly. (Sounds like Microsoft). Monopolies tend to protect their market position and their cash flow sources. Several years ago, the media persecuted the Church of Scientology. Finally, they began advertising in the main media and the persecution stopped. A person I knew said he recommended that strategy to them. Interesting. |
| jimf Oct 27, 2005 8:10 PM EDT |
Profanity is the least important aspect of our disintegrating news media. We were always assured that a news reporter stuck with reporting the facts, while a commentator gave you a prospective on those facts. Even the news media pretty much held to that view at one time, but over my lifetime, those definitions have become increasingly muddy. I hadn't really thought about how bad it had become until while listening to Wolf Blitzer, in an interview with Clinton a while ago, I heard him state that "it's our job to 'make' the news".... I think that pretty much says it all. |
| dave Oct 27, 2005 8:11 PM EDT |
I'll add my 2 cents: I quit posting LugRadio's weekly announcements to LXer after I listened to them. I heard more profanity per minute than I have ever heard in my life. It is crude, unintelligent, purposeless, and frankly, aggressive. I would never want my wife or my children to listen to that base courseness. Dave |
| helios Oct 28, 2005 11:36 AM EDT |
I suppose Linux is no different than any other on-line community...one has to be mindful of the young ones. I do a weekly appearance at a local middle school (Jr. high school in most other areas) and facilitate an after-school Linux Lab. As a matter of course (pun fully intended) I give them selected websites to visit and from which to learn. Lxer is one of them. I myself am a bit careless with my language and am known to spell things like a horses @$$ to disquise it. There are certainly places on the Internet we don't want our children or any children to visit for that matter. It is fortunate that Lxer is not one of them. helios |
| tuxchick Oct 28, 2005 12:18 PM EDT |
who cares about the kiddies- it's my own tender sensibilities that I want to protect! I also think that folks who can't say two words in a row without using profanity are lazy and unthinking. waste of time. |
| salparadise Oct 28, 2005 9:38 PM EDT |
Hmmmm, I have to admit that a well placed F*** can be more satisfying than it ought to be. (Reads back previous sentence - hmm - that could be taken two ways). There are times when swearing underlines sentiments or sentences in a most delightful and often funny way. But not just for the sake of it - "hey I'm a grown up now which means I can swear and no one can stop me anymore." If you can't say "what time is it?" without swearing then you have a problem. On the other hand, if you can say "oh look ,another Microsoft advert" without swearing then you might have another problem. But I'll agree it has little place midst intelligent debate. |
| jimf Oct 28, 2005 10:20 PM EDT |
Well, there was a time when an expletive had actual shock value. Used Judiciously that 'used to be' very effective. But, of course, some have to spoil it for everyone, and, we now have a situation where repetition has reduced profanity to just so much meaningless and vulgar noise.... |
| dinotrac Oct 29, 2005 3:50 AM EDT |
All - Oh my Great Garloo!!!!!! Intelligent and civilized public discourse by adults who are not afraid to be called prudes, grannies, boy/girl scouts, etc. for finding random and routine crudity just plain stupid and offensive. Excuse me while I go grab my medicine -- I don't think my heart can take this. |
| TxtEdMacs Oct 29, 2005 6:43 AM EDT |
Quoting: ... adults who are not afraid to be called prudes, grannies, boy/girl scouts, etc. But the real question is: "Do they run in terror when accused of being 'Girlie Men!' or 'Unpattiotic [Liberals]' by such staunch defenders of Truth and The American Way!? Just askin ... |
| dinotrac Oct 29, 2005 8:42 AM EDT |
TxtEdMacs -Quoting:Do they run in terror when accused of being 'Girlie Men!' or 'Unpattiotic [Liberals]' Only if they actually are Girlie Men or unpatriotic liberals. One question, though -- Why are liberals so defensive about having their patriotism questioned? I should think that: a) Given all their invocation of the First Amendment, they should applaud and support the First Amendment right of others to question their patriotism, and b) as patriots, should have little or no trouble addressing the questions, unless c) they really are unpatriotic and the whole thing makes them uncomfortable. |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 29, 2005 9:44 AM EDT |
Dino, no kidding! I was watching _The Last Castle_ with Robert Redford, and even though he's a staunch "liberal" the adoration of the military is obvious. Ultra-patriotic military people are given a great deal of screen time. |
| tuxchick Oct 29, 2005 11:53 AM EDT |
Dino, it's tedious and not conducive to having an actual discussion to be accused of being unpatriotic every time you say something someone else doesn't want to hear. Rather like the chanting sheep in "Animal Farm." Yeah, name-calling and using such tactics to deliberately try to derail actual intelligent discourse is protected speech. But it's not discussion, it's obstruction. |
| dinotrac Oct 29, 2005 12:13 PM EDT |
tuxchick - There you go, taking a tiny grain of truth and stretching it into a big defensive bulwark. I will admit that I know what you're talking about because liberals are as bad as, if not worse than, conservatives. Wish I knew how many times I've had people immediately bring up abortion clinic bombings when my wife or I tell them that we are pro-life. My wife and I have never tried to bomb an abortion clinic, however, so, tiresome as it is, we don't have much trouble dealing with the issue. People who criticize an administration at war in ways that can reasonably be seen as giving comfort to the enemy should not be surprised that their patriotism is questioned. It is a reasonable question to ask. The First Amendment protects your right say things, it doesn't protect you from being criticized yourself. As a patriot, you should have little or no trouble deflecting such criticism. After all, someone who truly and conscientiously objects to the government's action has a duty to speak up in opposition -- a patriotic duty, if you will. Such a person will be able to explain their actions to the satisfaction of most reasonable people. On the other hand, if you are motivated by hatred of the country, or hatred of the current administration, it might just be one of those quacks like a duck things. |
| tuxchick Oct 29, 2005 1:31 PM EDT |
Dino, I think you are talking to yourself- "taking a tiny grain of truth and stretching it into a big defensive bulwark." - is there is a discussion hidden somewhere in that morass of labeling and characterizations you just posted? It's like "make one statement, and Dino immediately drags in a full box of things that bother him, whether or not they are related." Did I lump you into a particular group? This whole "liberals are foo and conservatives are blah" is unproductive and inaccurate. Then you drag in giving aid and comfort to the enemy, and hatred of country- man, it doesn't make much to set you off. All I addressed was the difference between having real discussions, which includes a willingness to listen, and having the courtesy to leave out the hot-button, needlessly provocative stuff. It feels like you are responding to a whole bunch of things I'm not even thinking, let alone saying, and assuming all sorts of things about what I stand for and believe. Getting back to dealing with accusations of unpatriotism- "People who criticize an administration at war in ways that can reasonably be seen as giving comfort to the enemy should not be surprised that their patriotism is questioned. It is a reasonable question to ask." Reasonable people don't make those accusations in the first place without very good reasons, and can make a plain, clear case why such statements can be considered as unpatriotic, and giving aid and comfort to the enemy. I will go out on a limb and generalize that folks who are quick to make such accusations are not interested in a real two-way discussion, but only shushing and discrediting. If they can make a case for their position, I'll listen- but I have little patience with garden-variety bigotry. I'm starting to think you have a problem with me personally. That's your privilege, and if that's the case it might be better for LXer if we just don't talk to each other. |
| dinotrac Oct 29, 2005 1:56 PM EDT |
tuxchick - Goodness!! Ruffled some feathers, did I? Please do not take anything I say personally. I don't even know you. The fact is, I like most of the things you say. Nobody lines up 100%, however, and we should all be glad for that. You are free to consider me an unmitigated ass and you would not be alone. I've been known to rant and rave, but I try (sometimes fail) to keep it from being personal. |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 29, 2005 5:42 PM EDT |
Dino, it's interesting that the concept of patriotism has come up. Have you heard of Socrates? Rather than just "corrupting the morals of youth", do you know what the crime actually was? His students were more interested in the truth than in Athens as an absolute. They were, strictly speaking, no longer blindly patriotic. That's quite a crime, at a time when a politician can say with all earnestness that "You're either for my policies, or you're a terrorist." |
| jimf Oct 29, 2005 7:00 PM EDT |
dino: Speaking of inappropriate, I've rarely seen anyone hijack a thread so adeptly and managed to yank everyone's chain in the process. Unfortunately none of this crap has anything to do with Linux or FOSS or much of anything else here. If you can't play nice with adults, then, I suggest you take it to an appropriate political forum where you can rant to your hearts content... |
| dinotrac Oct 30, 2005 2:49 AM EDT |
Bob - Blind patriotism is not patriotic at all. As I said in my post, conscientious dissent is itself a patriotic act. I believe that quite deeply, and still have my gas mask from my days of running from cops with big sticks and their badges stuck in a pocket out of sight. |
| dinotrac Oct 30, 2005 3:08 AM EDT |
Jimf - Presuming it's even possible to hijack a thread, I didn't do it. TxtEdMacs might have, with his slap at conservatives, but he stayed out of the fray, which is precisely how you end such a thing. My response to his post was short, maybe ten or twelve lines, and addressed directly towards his comments. Push and push back. Everything I've posted in this thread is a direct response to someone else's post, which means a band of hijackers. Hmmm. Perhaps hijacking is the wrong word. I think we've chartered the thread. |
| dave Oct 30, 2005 5:03 AM EDT |
I like both dinotrac and tuxchick very much, and I'm sorry to see where this thread went. :( My gardening site is the same way. People can be absolutely best friends until they discover their political or religious differences. Isn't it better to leave that out, and enjoy each other in the context of our similarities (in this case, Linux)? Let's keep politics (and religion!) to a minimum, and promote friendship and commeradery where possible! Dave |
| dinotrac Oct 30, 2005 5:59 AM EDT |
Dave - I'm sorry to dismay you and I'm sorry that tuxchick would take anything I write as a personal attack. I'll admit to a readily jerking knee, formed, I imagine, by being a lonely red dot in a vast blue sea up here in Chicagoland. It's tough, sometimes, keeping your hat straight, and shifting gears as needed. I belong to one very lively mailing list where I am in a very tiny minority. We get pretty heated at times, but sneak a little light in, too -- somehow managing to stay friends in the process. I belong to another group that gets together to write. Politics and religion are strictly verboten topics except, it seems, for Bush as chimp jokes and constant references to religious conservatives as Neanderthal hate-mongers. It's not politics, I guess, if it conforms to your own beliefs. In short, where you have people, you have politics. I will try to behave myself here. I have no desire to hurt anybody's feelings or even to bore them out of their gourds. I ask a little compassion, understanding, and patience. I'm only human, and far from the best example of the breed. |
| Abe Oct 30, 2005 6:05 AM EDT |
Well said Dave. I like and enjoy political and religious discussions but not on a chat or posting site, I prefer them in person. On-line discussions lack a lot of interpersonal signals, impressions, and emotions; not enough chemistry and eventually lead to confrontations. On-line discussions are good for technical subjects. Let us kiss and make up guys! |
| PaulFerris Oct 30, 2005 9:31 AM EDT |
Abe: I second that. Dean: You're a great guy, and you brighten my day (So does Tuxchick, and the rest of you people for that matter). During normal discourse of conversation, things happen. On a discussion site, they're written with indelible markers, so it's harder to forget them. Regardless, ... Where was I going? Oh, yeah, let's forget it. Sincerely, --FeriCyde |
| TxtEdMacs Oct 30, 2005 2:32 PM EDT |
Sorry, been away doing more serious sort of Girlie Man things. I still wonder what that term could possibly be, and of course I was NOT enlightened by the response. Nonetheless, I had planned on responding tomorrow. Abe Quoting: Let us kiss and make up guys! Sorry that may be one possible interpretation of Girlie Men, but the term was invented by a moderate, he would be more cautious than that, since the breath his aspersion was so widely cast. Indeed I was leaning towards the possibility that he meant your dose of anabolic steroids were too low, which at least could be argued was consistent with the source's past behaviour. Since I never experimented with illicit (or even legal) drugs - I can only conclude I am real Girlie Man. Be back tomorrow, need to catch up to see what I have been missing. |
| TxtEdMacs Oct 31, 2005 2:30 PM EDT |
Sorry again, busy have to delay my response for at least another day. However, when I wrote the note above it was mostly in jest. Nonetheless, I realized my statement about drugs use was in error. That is, when I wrote I never used illicit drugs (meaning both explicitly illegal and those now yet recognized as dangerous but not yet per se illegal) that holds. What I had in mind when I wrote the second part about legal drugs was prescription drugs, that too holds. However, I have to admit I consider both tobacco and ethyl alcohol consumption as drugs despite their legality. On both I have to admit to having sort of using both. The first when I was younger than 10 an intended inhale inoculated me for life other than some very short periods of puffing, so I have really been a consistent non-smoker. Regarding the latter, I have been a light to non-user for most of my life too. Alcohol was present when I was young, however, I was unimpressed by the taste. In the last year, I can remember less than one bottle of beer consumed in late May of this year. Many years I have abstained completely. Sorry to have misled you. My remarks are difficult to compose, because the target will be mostly myself though a few barbs may hit others. Do not expect the Terminator when Girlie Man returns with his critique. |
You cannot post until you login.