Dave Chappelle - Comedy

    Dave Chappelle is perhaps one of the most influential comedians in history, not simply influencing his own generation by crossing multiple sections and subsections of the public, though his material is far from tame or otherwise "middle of the road".  Which is one of the key metrics by which to judge how influential someone is, how "extra-ordinary" they are in the world of art and entertainment: longevity.  Dave has recently been speaking volumes on the state of the culture --more from a philosophical standpoint than a racial one (in the large), as has previously been his proclivity.  Speaking out about the state of Hip Hop and the state of the Union, in ways which --at least from my perspective, however limited-- is unprecedented, rarely is there such depth and foresight seen from a comedian who is also a commercial success.  Normally, those comedians who are considered the "comedians comedian" are those not well known to the public at large.  Those such as Hicks and Stanhope are more, shall we say: acquired tastes, to use the clique'.  Chappelle, however, whether in reference to his short running show on Comedy Central, or his stellar and very artistic comeback years later, is neither conventional nor obscure.  Audiences waiting on his every appearance and his shows selling out prior to bill being wholly presented.  Yet, like Corey Holcomb and others that get far less commercial billing, Dave "keeps it real", right or wrong --even in the face of economic adversity.  Where he has been able to use art to transcend race and stereotypes or otherwise leverage these social structures to his benefit.

    I would deduce this to come, at least partly, from his stage presence. Which speaks highly of his more formal education and is not entirely disconnected from his insane work ethic and the general rigor he places into his craft.  All things we can see others who are a success, particularly in the world of entertainment as of late, have gone to great lengths to tell everyone.  Dave is continually tearing down all the initial cultural perceptions which the majority of the general public have built-up around stand-up.  Certainly in his last Netflix specials, Chappelle was as unconventional as has been seen.  Short perhaps of Louis C.K.'s earlier efforts in self-production and self-promotion.  Perhaps still, Dave is following this new trend or composite-comedy, where those such as Rogan (and his ilk) along with many others have used a combination of podcasting, Stand-up and speaking opportunities to have a far more entrenched presence in the lives of their audience.  Though this seems to be the trend --however directed by each individual and the "channels" they subscribe to, Dave has certainly become a master of these changes quickly.  It then also bears mentioning that Chappelle is filling these social and cult roles while simultaneously speaking about highly complex topics on the very edges of sociocultural understanding --and in some way extracting humor!  As my ideas on these topics are far more shaky than at least the appearance given to Mr. Chappelle's, I will leave the interpretations on accuracy of his ideas up to the listener --but from an artistic standpoint, and in the consideration of the historical standard, Chappelle is a master of the mic.

    Having certainly comeback to the forefront in strides, Dave has more projects going now than I can personally keep up with.  As various as they are secretive. Though in this effort he is certainly navigating the cultural waters, shifting beneath the feet of us all.  Perhaps mostly in the realm of politics both social and federal, but comedy and the obligatory topics within comedy have certainly been under heavy criticism for some time now --primarily in league with other social movements and the upheaval currently being experienced by way of Trump and his chosen minions.  While this is no one "fault" --and to whatever degree that is not the way we should be looking at things, for whatever sentiment is worth-- there are certainly dynamic changes which, culturally, are especially effecting comedy in way of what material is acceptable.  A treacherous time to re-enter the game, if there ever was one.  Though Chappelle has done quite a bit and authored quite a body of work since his return.   There is admittedly some irony in his charging what he does and being "openly" in the elite class (in terms of wealth) and yet being so tremendously popular with both the capitalists and the socialists among the population.  In a very Carlin like way: Dave is using the very things which divide us to unite us, along with progress the conversation in a way which was not immediately obvious. 

---

    Chappelle did a summer comedy tour with Jon Stewart (previously of the Daily Show w/...).  Which was running through from mid June through the end of the month.  If you were not able to catch any of the shows, you will have another chance to catch Chappelle and guest, tomorrow (9-18-2018) with Lauryn Hill & Dave Chappelle at the Hollywood Bowl, in Los Angeles California.  Tickets run from $80 - $1,200, depending on seating.  Though my budget does not currently allow for such extravagances, I am sure it will be a great time, particularly for those with garden seats.  Not getting paid to drop that in here at the end, but genuinely shocked that there are even still seats available --as I am seeing some fairly high availability as of the writing. 

---

    As I am tenuously making a top ten comedians list, a task which is much more difficult than I originally considered, so much so that I may be extending that number to something far more grand; but, in digging through sets: Chappelle's certainly standout. Through watching Dave's progression you start to feel as though you know him more, you can see his progression in a more "raw" sense --more so than most of the comedian's I tend toward.  He is far less the "Black Comedian" and more the artist, who is surgically playing off peoples presuppositions, ego and cultural-bias --perhaps now more so now than before or at least in more intimate settings.  But from where-ever the organic substance of his material originates and regardless of how his culture has influenced his opinions and his philosophical leanings, his material is remarkably intriguing --comically of course-- but what I think is special, what may make him the best comedian who has ever lived is his gift for innovation.  Even his peers remark at this proclivity for creating and the rhetorical and proverbial depth of cultural insight present in his work, the MFDoom of comedy, if you will.  While these elements are seemingly lost on most audiences (as with Doom), lets hope, for the sake of humanity, that people really do learn more when they laugh --if so, we are in good hands.

Related:

Chappelle Upcoming Dates: 

• https://davechappelletickets2018.com/
• https://www.concertboom.com/dave-chappelle/tickets-2018/

Older Interview from 2017: 

---

---

Source: https://youtu.be/Q0XLCWv8RkE

Eminem Vs. MKG: Thoughts and perspectives.

As I have nearly completely retreated into the academic world, I have not been writing on anything more than what I see to be more long term projects. One of those is "A History of Hip Hop" --which is an upcoming book I am planning on releasing. I have currently been working on chapters on Kool G Rap and KRS One, along with the relation they have to the music as cultural icons. In relation to this I listened to some tracks and interviews which mentioned Eminem and have since been drawn into listening to the "diss tracks" between MGK and Eminem. 

    The interesting part is how I got here and not so much the tracks themselves. This has been one of the most impressive marketing campaigns I have seen in the business, or at least the one most dramatically successful within the last decade or more which I have also followed actively. While there is always a tinge of marketing in "Gangster Rap Battles", whether that be on part of the MC selling himself or on part of the record label drumming up business within the community, a "street following" --there is most often a sense of some conversations happening behind the third wall. And though this was certainly the case from the beginning and I am even more sure of Eminem getting Diddy's approval and financing in the most recent incarnation of this urbanized drama, I am just as sure of its overall success.

    The community and the content producers, particularly on You Tube, have seen fit to make this the drama of the week, replacing numerous attempts in other areas which have recently been falling flat. Just as Hip Hop has been struggling to reassert prior values, primarily surrounding lyricism, Eminem is drawn into this battle with another --one who he's never seemed to be anything but "friends" with, or associates at the least. MGK is many things but a serious contender in the top ten MC's of all time he is not. Which, at least among most, is not even a question. Though he has certainly needed some publicity, as has Eminem. So the timing of these events along with the interviews and the initial Kamikaze album are not wholly surprising. As I mention previously, the marketing strategy here is what is truly remarkable, if the targets have been intentionally dumbed down and corralled into accepting what they are being fed.

    The ability for the MC's to turn the drama in to more substantial profit, akin to a movie opening, gaining front page attention globally for the same, is almost as monumentally telling of popular cultures direction as if politicians started doing WWF style interviews. Oh...wait.

Political problems in the U.S.

:::: WTF Sunday Night ::::

    You know what is particularly fucked here is the way guns and Trump have basically taken over the political landscape.  Though there are several outlets talking about other things, the primary statements one hears are either nonsensical ramblings from Trump's supporters desperately trying to justify his foolery, or irrational claims and unsubstantiated moral pronouncements hell bent on being more ethical or morally extreme with each given iteration by the folks on the Left.  This folks is no way to run a political discourse.  Beyond the fact that it is nonproductive it has the additional negative value of being fucking irritating.  Not any one person but the larger whole and the way their cacophony of stupidity reverberates and injects such a significant amount of noise into social media as to render it even more time consuming to navigate than it once was. Given this could just generally be there is more and more bullshit cluttering the landscape in general, which is also true, but the just constant haranguing on nonsense, most of which is the same as yesterday and is getting ever more useless as time progresses.

    And keep in mind people, I have basically taken myself out of the game.  That's right folks, the kid is no dummy, not gonna catch me wasting 12 hours a day in a state of near arrhythmic screaming at my screen.  No way.  I put in four at the most.   Cut down from nearly twice that as many months ago. You know Ryan leaving may have been the best part of my week.  It is the first time I felt like we had a general humanitarian victory with him walking out the door.  That was up until I realized how much he would be making on talks and appearances in future.  Well fuck.  And I thought we were getting somewhere.  Chances are, in fact, in his free time, he may just decide that we need to hear from him more or will otherwise join the caravel in the form of the coming presidential elections.  Let us hope he thinks better of it.

    With any hope this next years election field will be small and stuttering with one Liberal, Atheist, Lebanese, former Navy Seal, Transgender, Pacific Cartographer, Oceanographic ethnographer with a propensity for abstract conventions of language decides to run as a spoiler or some such. As bar something so intensely satisfying to the soul, I will likely find someway of configuring a Rasberry Pi to aid me in the creation of a device capable of aiding me in implosion of a highly precise area which will provide me with the perfect opportunity to stream my own definition of a social justice metaphor prior to my ultimate but swift demise.  Thanks to Facebook and the governments general disregard for both privacy and constituents monies, I will able to bring this event to you live, in HD!   

    Going into the new week you would think that I could give you some impression that things will be good, I mean: deliver some motivational shit that would convey a more positive message, like: "sure, some of the planet is on fire...people and animals are dying at a terrific rate...the nation is run by a large buffoon dressed in an Orange man suit with the scruples of a slightly retarded baboon, but McDonald's is serving breakfast all day...so we won that one...yeah, it may kill us but it is cheap, so we have that".  Not so sure that is exactly what people are looking to hear right now, but you get my point.

    The fact that the president is regularly having shouting matches with other world leaders likely puts any thinking people off.  From the start surely he seems a bit crass, but when you put him in perspective with the majority of other psychopaths in the world wielding medieval like control on a present population and say you compare Trump to Caligula, you can see he has a way to go.  He has yet to start selling the Senator's wives, though that will surely be an interesting chapter in this little book of history.

    Overall we should be fairly content that he is not showing up to press conferences in his underwear, wearing a purposefully open bathrobe, exposing a strategically stuffed Speedo.  But kid yourself not folks, that shit is coming, very soon he will start breaking down.  Just a few days ago I had to watch Trump as an uncomfortable mess, constantly murmuring something about Muller being big and mean.  No, really, this "grown ass man" who just happens to be the president really sat on television with his arms crossed, berating a well known, accomplished, competent and decorated attorney with phrases as complex, cutting and personally-transformative as: a "...Disgraceful ...witch hunt"..."it's a disgrace"..."an attack...".    I am not sure he knows many words.  I mean sure, we all have our favorites, but he seems like he has a favorite 10 out of 20, or there about.  Are we still talking about Hillary, really dude, I think he is going to start bringing up Obama's birth certificate again soon, better that than WWIII I guess.

::::   

The Weed game.

Women are owning the Marijuana Market: 

The recent and interesting phenomena that has transpired here in the West (both globally and nationally) has been majority female owned Cannabis businesses.  As has come to so often be the case in an historical sense: women will likely once again be the savor of humanity.  There is a dramatic trend in females owning, operating and doing the majority of manufacturing and packaging for the legal cannabis trade.  I feel this is due, at least in large part, to the substantial amount of men previously running the illegal trade, where a significant percentage of those are now restricted from taking part in the legal version of the trade due primarily to previous legal infractions.  As most if not all of the states involved have significant laws regarding such peoples as the industry has become more officially regulated and curtailed by reams of arguably useless and constitutionally questionable bureaucracy.   While the vast amount of Bud tender's and labor's are generally still comprised of mixed company, the majority of ownership and the "preferred tenders" are primarily female when it comes to gender.

This could very well be an observation born out of bias(though there is a large grouping of textual support), proximity and a lack of other highly technical forms of data, as this is being based primarily on personal observations and (normally stoned) perusal of industry literature; though, it must be said --as the industry is still fairly small, the amount of women in comparison to other such fields is fairly staggering.  This could indeed be a significant inroad for female CEO's and other technically proficient women to develop a great deal of wealth particularly considering the few amount of actual seats available at the proverbial table.

Not that anything I am saying or wishing for has not been done previously and said far better.  What I think it is important we do is lift up other benighted communities in similar ways.  There are surely organic type initiatives like this happening in other sectors as well (see bellow) though if something then becomes a "best practice" things that are just done, then I would imagine the opposition, fiscal restrictions and legislative support would be adjusted to fit the ever evolving situation far more quickly.

Though this is certainly also a case of law being (again) far behind the cultural shifts along with the technology.  And to a certain extent this must be wholly troubling to the powers that be that have, for so long, made it their mission to be against pot.  Though one by one we are seeing a shift in the dynamic --no doubt due to mounting financial and social pressure from long atrophied infrastructure, policy and legislation. 

As one of the article's bellow mentions, "activism loves women".  The very vibe women give off will likely help the cause, particularly with conservatives.  While there is a likelihood that this would not be equated also to Black and Latino women this is just a reminder of how far we have to go, if some of us would have expected to be there by now.

From an economic perspective this may be a good opportunity for a great number of workers to start a career in a "low stress" field.  By definition, "Weed Shops" are a fairly low stress, low impact environment.  There are few rules other then those imposed by law, but one of them is certainly directly connected to keeping the stress, noise and complaints down to a minimum.   And although there is always the well placed drama or complex story that takes headlines, far-and-away, recreational marijuana establishments are by far the most relaxing place you will likely visit throughout the day.

Though the fact that a cannabis business and any other business, lounge or combined intoxicants are normally a heavily restricted area, there are several in legal states which have found interesting ways to combine multiple amenities, creating a type of tourist attraction (which for some reason the state is bound on restricting).  There seems to be particular legal concern over people smoking together, when such is done outside a private residence.   Right, the last thing we want is substantial groups of people getting along, how tragic.

At-any-rate, with the right amount of community and political support in place, this market will hopefully grow and provide many women with the opportunity to break into and essentially create a large and likely sizable section of the world economy.  And I really do not see that as overstating the point, as fond as I am for sarcasm and other such pleasures.  The high levels of conscientiousness and social agreeableness of women, along with the "natural teacher" aspects of many women's personalities will likely make them far more successful against the more aggressive and obtuse men they will be competing with.  Overall I think we can also look for this to be evident of a substantial change in business altogether --if there is a significant amount of companies being nice, communicating and putting customers first; along with making growing profits and developing highly organized and dynamic systems, the likelihood for substantial and sustained competition between the modern and more antiquated businesses seem nearly certain.  Though I have been critical of some female executives in the past, the majority of women business leaders I know or have looked into have done far better than their male counter parts, nationally and internationally.  Unfortunately this is not true in each and every country, there are a significant amount that are still living in something which could most rightly be considered the dark ages, in comparison to the modern West.

For all the problems and political turmoil alive and well in the West, there is a significant amount to be both thankful for and programs, projects, cities, people and business leaders to heap praise upon --legislation initiatives to get excited for and populations to support in their ever progressing fight for equality and social equity.  For all the faults of the West, it must be admitted that there has been a significant reduction in overall deaths, from war, famine or otherwise; there has been a burgeoning of social justice crusades that have made exponential progress over their decades old counterparts --while there has still be a significant amount of the population suffering; whether from poverty or the prison industrial complex, guns or drugs, or whether it be some other eventuality perpetuated by the substantial differential in wealth in the country --in any of the numerous ways that manifests-- by-and-large there are far less horrors and violations of rights than in previous generations; with any hope: ending of the drug war will be an addition to the continuum.

Related Articles

- "Weed Could be first... industry NOT dominated by men."-- (March 2015). newsweek.com/2015/08/28/women-weed-how-legal-marijuana-could-be-first-billion-dollar-industry-not-364249.html 

- "Reasons Why Weed and Women Go Together" -- (October 2016) --potent.media/reasons-why-weed-and-women-go-together 

- "Women in Weed..." -- (March 2018). Westword.com/marijuana/women-in-weed-documentary-shows-how-women-can-thrive-in-legal-industry-10057196

Update - 2018.25.02 - Fucking Trump, Really...and other things that likely will not interest you.

    Still really cannot bring myself to believe that Trump is president, it is nearly like living in an actual T.V. show.  Prior to him suggesting that teachers should have guns, it sounded like a good idea or at least one that was plausible...now I believe I have changed my position and become wiser.

This is really Trumps function in American politics, he is here to show us all the things we are doing wrong that we may have thought correct are indeed totally wrong and further confirm insufficient, all the ideas that some or all of us either questioned or rejected at some point in the past or otherwise those which we just always had a bad feeling about to begin with.

The "Alt-right", yep bad.  Jeff Sessions in a position of power, demonstratively bad idea.  Alex Jones, full of shit --clearly.  Pence's dealing with public policy and doing "damage control", horrible idea.  Breitbart...confirmed, racist and unstable.

This can go for supporters as well, if you had that relative that you thought was dumb, but you were never quite sure, well...if they are a Trump supporter, you can now put a big check in that fucking box.  Feel free to move on from these conundrums, and allow Trump to at least save you some time, if he thinks it's good, you can be reasonably sure it is not.  Just choose the opposite.  Think of it as him just eliminating some of the choices and simplifying the argument --there is surely  a Campbell's soup analogy here.

So really, what we have to do here is look on the bright side, be the Bob Ross of our proverbial life-painting, "make those trees happy trees" --there may be a psychopathic, misogynist with an IQ that contains a decimal point, but he can none-the-less be of some utilitarian use, help us in confirming the more nuanced and rhetorical questions of our social structure, so that others may learn from our mistakes and so we may yet live to try again. 

----

Moving to Windows 10, Politics, and Other Things

Some things that have been on my mind and in the news this week.  As well as some thoughts that are just generally related to my measly little life

Windows 10 Update:

Windows 10 will no doubt be a blight on the cultural landscape, as is the custom.  To do otherwise would be a far to strenuous a task for the drones Microsoft employs.  

The initial security concerns should have, and were for the most part, were expected by the community.  If you have a 'professional' -- which is a whole other conversation -- setting up your machine, don't be overly concerned -- you make the choice -- they make it work -- that is what you are paying for.  If you are setting up your machine; be especially concerned.(ie. lot's of reading required.) 

Technology changes. Expect this. Though Windows 10 won't be a huge change in the end, it doesn't add anything that I would say is significant other than Xbox and PC integration. (one source, though there are many: Search Much?)

So should you upgrade?  I guess, if you want.  If you don't, Windows 7 will be supported for a while yet.  Probably far longer than it should be in fact.  

Why is anyone talking about Donald Trump?

Getting beyond the hair, and just the general silliness of someone so transparently privileged being president: there is his lack of any sense of consideration for cultural, geographic or social differences, either in his comical attempts at speaking and certainly not when he is dreaming up policy.   Also, his obvious lack of any depth of knowledge in any particular area of study, Including, but certainly not limited to, business.  His complete lack of ability to utilize anything even closely resembling forethought when speaking in public or private, should --alone-- disqualify him from being president, in the mind of rational beings.  

Just because you know a bunch of lawyers, does not then mean you are making correct decision based on their advice; a deliberate and unabashed use of false authority to gain some level of political agency.  Anyone that has ever been faced with making legal decisions can tell you just how contrived and obtuse lawyers 'advice' can be.  Similarly: just because poor people work for you, does not then mean you understand the level and depth of their despair surrounding or have any insight on providing relief from their privation.  

Trump should be the new Hitler  of conversations.  Meaning: once someone mentions him in conversation it is a clear sign that nothing positive can further be extracted from its continuation. 

Oracle doesn't want your help.  Well yeah. 

First it is important to say that this isn't a person that is saying that they don't want help.  Not that I agree with her in the least -- though, in an attempt at full disclosure, I am not a fan of corporate cultures.  She is saying that she doesn't want bad help.  This should be an expected response from programmers in general.  It should be understood that she is talking about the license agreement, because that is the sort of thing you have to do as opposed to calling people stupid and useless, which to be fair, she does a bit of as well.  As per the community, she is supposed to be stating policy instead of calling people useless, which most of them are. 

As we have all come to know, in the tech industry, many times a bug is just the software highlighting someones stupidity.  

So she is saying some things that people may not like, but frankly, I am sure they get sent on a lot of wild goose chases, as well as the occasional real security hole.  Perhaps it may have been a smarter move, both technically and politically for her to focus her time on finding a solution to the problem on there end.  Where perhaps she could have employed a group of interns or created a lower-paid/entry-level position to monitor such traffic; filtering the noise.    

Though she choose the more aggressive approach, and it is hard not to stare and wonder if, at least in part, the response from the tech-public isn't more rooted in her being a woman, then it is in her being wrong.  

Often women get labeled as a bitch, just for stating a case.  Which essentially means that they are not being as approachable as is expected.  Which is clearly an admission that they should act in a way appropriate to their sex, which is clearly sexist.

It seems inappropriate not to mention that the people that often say such things just happen to be women.

I say this because it has been an awful harsh response when you consider how Apple, as a company and a culture, thinks about and acts toward their users and those that choose alternate directions.  Especially when it comes to reverse engineering, or in any way changing/adding-to/debugging their software.

This is also an argument that could be made about Nvidia, or Adobe as well.  I guess you can hold whatever opinions you want, as long as you do it in the right way, and your not a woman?   

Cutting the cord, kinda. 

Since I am moving, I am changing cable companies.  In doing this, I am cutting the proverbial cord.  Well kinda, but not really.  The TV that I do watch is all available through direct or third party services online, but this doesn't mean that I don't pay for it. I pay for cable to get access to it, although I don't watch it live.

I pay for the basic subscription, plus the internet access.  What I don't do is hook the TV up to the cable or box, other than using an antenna to get weather and emergency updates when needed.

The media center, basically a Linux box with some extra packages, is hooked up to the TV so that we can watch the handful of shows that we like and record those that we want to watch at some point(Usually well after the season and/or show itself has long ago ended.).  We get movies through a bunch of services.  Total, we probably have an expenditure of $65.00+/-$20.00 or so, per month for this, most of which $39.00 is the cost of the internet connection.  The rest is Amazon $38.00 per year, and HBO, $10.00 per month and the occasional movie rental($2-$7 or so.).   This is still rather expensive, based solely on my opinion, but I think it is the best that you can do and still get most of the live entertainment and TV shows that one would like from time to time. 

This works well for us, basically because we spend the majority of our time reading or doing something else that is more hands on (gaming, chess, model_building, etc) - so really the amount of time, and therefor need, is far less than some have grown accustomed to.  The only reason that I have TV services at all is because I like to be able to get access to a few shows, online, from the publisher or watch the occasional event(Olympics, football, rugby, bbc specials, and such.).  This it is fairly cheap and the least restrictive way of doing things, I've found. 

Especially since we are already paying the cost for the internet.  I don't have any real need for most live TV programming, especially since I don't take part in cable news but in only the most rare of circumstances. 

This has not been a smooth transition for the cable companies, mostly because they are losing shit tons of money.  Which, if you anything like me, the mere though of such a thing, just made you crack a smile.

I think they are starting to realize that  they can't stop the bleeding, no matter what they do.  Ultimately, the only step now, that should make sense to them from a profits and margins, is to slow the transition.  While they are trying to find new revenue streams and refine the current ones, they can make you pay a little more here and their to buffer their portfolios.  This won't be something that will scale well.  In fact, it is already starting to break down, since a lot of people, like me, are just starting to say that we just don't need it. 

They are reaching for relevancy right now.  A relevancy that is beginning to be all the more hard to find.  Not that this has not always been the case.  The suits are not particularly good at spotting something that will be popular with anyone other than their corny friends, who are almost by definition, not very popular -- even with those that like them.  

The door has been propped open for the amateur directors, DJ's, broadcasters, podcasters, artists, and makers.  Many have started stepping through it.  

Not to that we should forget about the professionals that have started their own, personal multimedia empires.  Like Adam Corolla, Dr. Drew, Joe Rogan, Marc Marion, Joey Diaz, and Ari Shaffir, just to name a few.  

These changes will likely have drastic effects on the spread of not only wealth, but also greatly affect the direction of the conversation in world.   We are in a time where a lot of people that didn't, and some that arguably shouldn't, have the ability to challenge the general consensus, and speak freely on the issues where their passions reside, now have that ability.  Almost at a level that is unchecked.  

So I would say that what entertainment that you choose, and the methods in which you choose to consume it, are equally important. 

Related links:

• http://linuxfonts.narod.ru/why-windows-10-sucks.html
• http://techcrunch.com/2015/08/16/microsoft-drops-another-windows-10-update/
• http://wonkette.com/588547/here-are-12-of-the-stupidest-things-ever-to-come-out-of-donald-trumps-mouth-hole
• http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/godwin/
• http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/03/godwins-law-mike-godwin-hitler-nazi-comparisons.html
• https://youtu.be/gjUBJRb7p7Q
• http://www.thedrum.com/news/2014/10/20/we-re-changing-guard-you-had-your-time-now-it-s-our-time-vice-ceo-shane-smith-s
• http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2014/03/04/vice-news-launches-promising-changing-of-the-guard-in-media/
• http://egbertowillies.com/2015/02/10/jon-stewart-slam-msm-brian-williams/
• http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/05/05/sheriff-david-clarke-mainstream-media-has-become-propaganda-wing-far-left
• http://ringoffireradio.com/2015/05/sanders-slams-mainstream-media-let-hillary-and-me-have-a-civil-debate-on-civil-issues/
• http://www.echo.net.au/2015/07/byron-filmmaker-slams-mainstream-emdia/
• https://www.shortoftheweek.com/news/has-hollywood-lost-its-way/
• http://www.raindance.org/what-mainstream-cinema-can-learn-from-independent-film/
• http://www.clipd.com/movies/1842/15-biggest-movie-failures-that-lost-millions#slide/0
• http://www.denofgeek.us/movies/17901/the-10-biggest-problems-with-modern-day-cinema\
• https://blog.cloudmark.com/2015/08/13/oracle-scolding-the-customers-who-try-to-help-them/
• http://thenextweb.com/opinion/2015/08/11/oracle-drinking-the-kool-aid/
• http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2015/08/oracle_cso_mary_ann_davidson_doesn_t_want_to_hear_about_software_vulnerabilities.html
• http://www.quora.com/When-people-say-mean-and-hurtful-things-to-you-when-they-are-angry-do-they-really-mean-all-those-things
• https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/2skeam/linus_torvalds_on_why_he_isnt_nice_i_dont_care/
• http://falkvinge.net/2013/10/21/acknowledging-the-important-value-of-hate-speech/
• http://blog.valerieaurora.org/2012/03/10/what-free-speech-really-means/
• https://youtu.be/n-IgqiTD4XA

Restructuring the way we look at computer service

The fact is, computer service as we knew it at one time is dead.  The conditions and the environment has changed, and unless you have a ton of enterprise clients that are supporting the majority of your business costs, it is hard to make a living at it.  If you are a freelance IT person it is likely you are working for temp service/s, finding work on BBS sites, poor, in debt, or all four.

Some Mom and Pop stores have been able to stay open based on a fairly large amount of repeat business, but usually if you fix the machine right, it will be a long time before you see them again.  There just aren't that many people that have complicated and dire enough problems that they would need to pay one to take care of things.  Not enough to be counted on as a steady income at-least.

Generally speaking, you can buy a computer and just keep adding things to it until it becomes too full or too broken, and then go buy a new one.   It used to be that one needed help to build a computer and install stuff on it.  For the most part today, most people that need powerful machines either buy them from Amazon or similar, or they build them on their own.  With Google and YouTube there is not much the person of average intelligence couldn't setup or do on a computer or related; reasonably.

So, things being as they are, what do you need the IT guy for.  He now has to go get a job at a company that can support thousands of users and get paid a lot less than he would have 20 years ago by opening up his/her own store.

This is not to say that people that specialize in technology aren't useful, skilled, or necessary.  Or that one couldn't open up a shop and do well, just that it isn't as easy as it once was, the specifics have changed.  The market has become smaller, many people are too poor, and still more just are not going to see enough value to pay for help.   In the enterprise and small business space there is a lot of noise and it is very crowded.  It is not enough to simply design web-sites, build computers, or install operating systems anymore.

If people were able to work on their own cars, without ensuring a catastrophe or death, they would do that at the same frequency.  This is a bit harder and generally more expensive then it once was when a tuneup solved most problems, this is also changing fast.  Perhaps at some point, with 3D printing and similar technologies, we will see the death of the auto dealer and other similar consumer sale companies.  If you can just purchase a variety of raw materials and actually produce the product on your own, inexpensively, and consistently most people will likely choose that option.


As technology moves forward it is obviously going to adversely affect some industries.   What is important is how we respond to these challenges.

Change is part of any successful system and must be dealt with; the sooner the better.

One way that the tech industry has continued to evolve is through the creation of the tech consultant.  In an effort to save the mid-level skill and experience positions, by the professionals themselves.  Similar to the way radio and entertainment personalities have transferred to the pod-casting platform as radio stations, newspapers and other forms of traditional media have been eroding.

This has been a great start, but we shouldn't see this as the limit to the transition, rather a stepping stone to the next step.

In order to employ people you need to be in a position to fix a problem.  This is not to say that you should build in externalities that force the problem to continually replicate it's self.   There still needs to be a concerted effort to clearly estimate market-size, demand, and possible scaling issues.  It is impossible to plan for every eventuality, but we can try.

You can not force a particular technology to stay relevant.  So you need to be far more diverse than one was once forced to be.  This is no easy task and shouldn't be seen as something that is just going to be apparent from an initial survey.  

This is a good position for the nerd to be in, since they are in their element.   For the average Joe, this may prove to be a challenge, but then again they probably should choose their career path according to their skills and interests.

In order to transition to new areas of technology you have to be flexible -- not in the dirty way, thought that may help in certain circles -- and find joy in the technical details of a project, though you may not be passionate about the content.  This is true in everything, but based on the amount of time you tend to spend with the content in tech, it is especially important to identify things you may not be able to stay focused on or work with creatively.

This is basically a verbose way of saying that you shouldn't necessarily limit yourself based on your dogma, experiences, or interests.  Some of us tend to do this as an almost defensive response.

Also, it is important to stay apprised of what is happening in industries that you may be abstractly connected to.  For instance reading avionics publications and white papers even though you work in web design.  Since there are applications for certain aspects of web technology in the aircraft and marine sector.

Ignoring this parallels may not necessarily hurt your chances of maintaining a good career, though you never know, you may also just learn something unique to one industry that you can use to make yourself invaluable in another.

Lastly, expand your interests in other completely unrelated areas.  Both for the networking possibilities and to make sure that your concepts and ideas don't become a victim of the environment they were conceived in.

Studying history, sports and rock climbing for instance may lead you to discover a way  you can implement a service to aid people in these areas.  Whether it be an actual technology related improvement, or if the information simply aids in your ability to connect with people socially, it is worth the time investment.

It is important to remember and be comfortable with allowing change to come in time, and to allow your ultimate concept of self to be detached from what you are working on.

Law Reform: Why are we continuing to do the wrong thing?

For some reason it seems near impossible to get politicians to work in the interest of the people.  Each time we go through an election cycle, we get told what we want to hear, and then as soon as all the confetti has been cleaned off he floor, it is right back to business as usual.

This is not to say that this is an easy job, at each turn, there are many things to consider.  Though I think it is fairly clear that our money and their time is not going to the places that we think it should go.  This is also a precarious position to take, since the mob mentality often ends up being misplaced.

So let us not assume that we should take the Group Think and run with it, but rather we should be looking for the true and factually based solutions to the problems we face.  For the most part every one seems to agree on the basics, but we have gone far off the reservation with the sheer amount and complexity of the law.

One of the most troubling things I have witnessed is the way private company policy is treated as law.  Combined with the blatant way that politicians do what is good for the few that own large companies and do little to help keep the playing field even for the workers.  Please don't confuse my compassion for the workers with a plea for unions, since they rarely place interest of the workers at the center of  their interest either.  My argument is simply that the overall good of the people should come before the profitability of the company in all circumstances.

Take for instance the laws surrounding a parking space.  If you pay for a space, you are in the act of renting a space from the city.   Now without going in the direction of allowing all out gatherings or other stretches of the imagination in the space, I think it is fair to argue that if you are using the space for it's intended purpose, parking a car, then that should be the limit of the control the municipality should have over your actions within that space.  Again, within reason.  This, however, is not the case.

There are any number of things you could be ticked for while in the space depending on what city or town you have rented in.  From smoking to license plate offenses.  Similar to the laws regarding what you can do in your car.  My feeling is, if you have rented the space, anything you do in that space that is not infringing on the rights of another to peacefully enjoy their space, is not a crime or violation, and shouldn't be made such.

Say for instance that I am not wearing my seat belt.  Should I really be ticketed for this?  This is equipment on my car, that effects no one other persons safety.  Yet, there is a penalty if I choose not to follow this rule.  Penalizing me for my own behavior that effects only me, is simply a tax -- and an especially prejudicial one at that.  This is not a public safety issue (which is what the state sites when it makes such laws), like say not having headlights. So this is not an area that should be legislated or one that should be able to be enforced by the court, since it is not violating the rights of another. 

Now I am sure that I will hear the argument about texting and driving as and argument against my point.  Shouldn't the government be able to make laws that prevent me from acting negligent?  I would say that you are exactly right.  There are things that one could do that could end in others being injured.  Though that is a very slippery slope.  Next you could say that drinking coffee while driving can cause and accident -- as the German's have.  Should I be able to be ticked for this as well?  This really makes you question the thought process of a drive through window.  I would say that someone eating a meal is far less able to react to an emergency situation at high speed on the highway, then someone that is reassuring their wife that they are indeed stuck in traffic.

The fact that something bad could happen, shouldn't determine whether or not you have the right to do something.  Though there is a possibility for me to be neglectful in this capacity, it should not be assumed that such a thing would occur.  And I definitely shouldn't be fined or otherwise sanctioned for such an assumption.

Now the situation completely changes if I cause an accident while watching Youtube videos while doing 90mph on the highway.  Since I would be, in such a case, negligent -- as most reasonable people, and likely a jury, is sure to determine.  There are plenty of methods of evidence collection for such crimes. That is not to say that it is not a tragedy for such an event to occur in the first place, but simply to say that we already have laws for such an occurrences.  There is no need to add complexity.

The fact that you have to wear a seat belt, in the same world wear you can buy a motorcycle and launch yourself through the air at twice the speed allowed on most highways, should cause all to question the system we are living in. 

This is not taking a stance alined with chaos or anarchy, simply one that regards personal responsibility as the barrier against crime; not simply the law.  The law should be reasonable and logical; following a natural progression.

For instance, if I can use my radio in my car, then I can use my cell phone(or other such device) in my car; or both should be deemed illegal or against best practices.  Since the argument that something is a general distraction from your duties as a driver can be made, reasonably, in both circumstances.

The fact should remain that if I am doing something that a reasonable person would consider negligent, and I cause injury or property damage to another, then I should be held liable as such -- but not before an offense has been committed.  That is a clear violation of personal freedom.  The responsibility to know of, accept, reject, or mitigate the risk of an activity should be solely the responsibility of the individual.  Looking at things this way, we are able to adjust far more easily to technological and social progressions.

It is not as if the prosecution of thought crime -- whether by public opinion, through corporate policy, and/or by way of judicial decision -- has been a rare occurrence or a recent invention in the United States.  This should not stand to mean that it should continue unaddressed.

Private companies, groups, and organizations have been allowed to influence politics and public policy for far too long.  Especially in regards to religious and various other political groups, while untaxed as a group, they continue to affect personal rights.  This is not uniquely an American problem, but a world wide epidemic.  You can point to any society in history, and see how it's government functions directly opposed to and constantly fights against the will of the people; rarely in a crusade to help a disadvantaged group.  If this occurs, it is usually an externality.

From slavery to the bank bailouts, rarely are the items the government are focused on something that is going to be good for the people as a whole.  The governments actions often, if unintentionally, subvert the needs of the population.  Change that is good for the people is accomplished, more-often-then-not, by forcing the government to change by dragging it along -- usually loosing some additional freedoms along the way.  Progress would be immensely faster if the government was a body that could anticipate the needs of the people, while protecting their rights against infringement, even if that were to mean allowing some to subvert system (which is already happening anyway, mainly for the rich.).  This is a natural occurrence in any system, and usually leads to the best results;  ie. the internet.  The time rights are most needed is when they are in direct opposition to the majority opinion. 

It is critical to fairness in any social system, that logical connections be made, and held against bigoted opposition.  Which unarguably the most crucial part of personal liberty.   So is every system designed to be fair? No.  Inherently, there are going to be things that favor one group or another slightly.  The amount of disparage that is clearly evident in our laws ans policies is the what I am arguing.  Naturally there is a financial focus, though that is designed into the system.  Evidenced by congress voting themselves pay raises at a higher rate than those of the average worker.   There is inevitably going to be times that a situation is just unfortunate regardless of how good our intentions or how well we plan for every inevitability.  There is no chance that we will react without flaw in every situation, though that isn't an excuse to go completely in the opposite direction.

To say that a lawyer is someone that has to go to school for 12+ years in order to gain proficiency in one or two areas of practice, but then to force the rest of the untrained population to know such a complex system, is unconscionable.

It is not possible for one to know all of the particulars of each of the laws in each of the towns, cities, and states they plan to live, do business, or travel.  Proof of this?  Lawyers need to take a bar in each state in most cases, even though they understand the overall mechanisms that govern the workings of the law, and they are relatively similar, most attorneys that I have spoken with would suggest that you speak to an attorney in the specific state in question. 

Along with all of the federal laws that may be applicable depending on the situation you will have recent decisions and definition of terms to contend with. Do not forget, also, that the law is ever evolving, so much so that lawyers must subscribe to an expensive service just to keep up with the  recent changes.  How accessible is the patent system to the small business man, who's ideas it was designed to protect?

So would you then assume then, that it is reasonable that the average person be held to account for all these variables?  Is it reasonable to expect each citizen to consult a lawyer for each decision they make in their daily life?  If so, we better start talking much more seriously about significantly increasing the minimum wage.


________________

Related:
http://www.stupidlaws.com/
http://www.dumblaws.com/
http://www.businessinsider.com/most-ridiculous-law-in-every-state-2014-2 
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/394022/yes-stupid-laws-help-kill-people-david-harsanyi
http://www.usattorneylegalservices.com/stupid-laws.html




  

Linux?

Unfortunately there is little known about Linux among average computer users.  Even if you ask your tech guy, chances are, he/she really doesn't have a good handle on the differences between Window and Linux.  This is not really there fault, more of an issue of lack of exposure.  When you ask about Linux you can usually expect to hear something to do with it being  "very difficult", for "professionals", "it's just for web-server"(a particularly annoying one), or something like, "blah...blah...we don't support it...blah blah".  

  If you don't use it, any knowledge that you have is cursory at best -- unless you are a Ph.D. in computer science or a related field.  It has most of the same utilities as other operating systems, and most people haven't any need for it's more powerful utilities. 

I wouldn't say that Linux is difficult for the average user, since they can't fix their computer anyway. Though many think they can. This is what is know as: job security. 

  A user familiar with using a Windows system is less likely to be able to use Mac's interface efficiently at first either and it is considered to be one of, if not the most user-friendly.  In most cases they are able to utilize the basic functionality, but lack the understand to dive deep into concepts and troubleshooting procedures.  I have found that this is mostly do to the change in interface more than it has to do with end functionality or the bits of software involved.  You can write the best software, but if it is foreign to the user it will be deemed crap.  Over time if the user were to continue with the Mac (or any other system), they would become as proficient as necessity.  Once people get used to doing things a certain way, they become hard habits to break -- at a certain point you just assume, ..." this is the way it is done...".  With no thought to how other may be accomplishing the same, or perhaps getting better, results.  This is often argued about in tech circles and is usually referred to as a religious war.  Songs, website, and software forks are the fog of war.  

  Linux is ultimately a tool to complete tasks.  In every real sense it is not superior to windows perse  -- it is basically the same, ie. 'Church-Turing Thesis' .  The real differences live in the general operation, how processes are handled, configuration options, and what software is available -- all things that really don't matter to the non-programmer.  This is far above the heads of most users - so we try to simplify these technical bits into non-technical globs of information to sell the user -- 'more secure', 'not able to get viruses', etc.  The problem tends to be attached directly to making generalized statements.  This is compounded by making such statements in technically literate company or just generally amount those from a different camp. 

  I once read a paper (In the Beginning there was the command line...) long ago that compared windows to Linux using a tank vs. cars analogy.

  ...Linux, which is right next door, and which is not a business at all. It's a bunch of RVs, yurts, tepees, and geodesic domes set up in a field and organized by consensus. The people who live there are making tanks. These are not old-fashioned, cast-iron Soviet tanks; these are more like the M1 tanks of the U.S. Army, made of space-age materials and jammed with sophisticated technology from one end to the other. But they are better than Army tanks. They've been modified in such a way that they never, ever break down, are light and maneuverable enough to use on ordinary streets, and use no more fuel than a subcompact car. These tanks are being cranked out, on the spot, at a terrific pace, and a vast number of them are lined up along the edge of the road with keys in the ignition. Anyone who wants can simply climb into one and drive it away for free. 

  The Author makes the claim that Linux really is like a tank supported by the community for free; and suggests that this is the optimal choice, as opposed to buying a Ford focus (or other standard vehicle).  The problem here is; this is a more literal implication than the writer intends.

  Assume for instance;  all your coworkers, friends, etc., are driving cars (or car-like contraptions) -- and one day you announce to them that you have decided sell your old ride, keep the money, and start driving a free tank that they are giving out at the dealership next door.  To your surprise, everyone is against the whole tank thing -- most assuming that anything that is free must have a catch somewhere -- and your like "... but it's a free tank, ... no one is going to be able to hurt the tank if they hit me..., ..." etc.  Let's not forget the best bit -- tanks are cool, and free tanks are even cooler -- right?

  The immediate problems that most people see with taking the free tank, relates to compatibility with their current environment and technical knowledge related to the actual operation of the tank.   They don't know if it is going to fit in the garage, will it go fast enough on the highway, what about gas mileage.  Then there is the actual operation -- not many people would feel confident in their abilities to just jump in a tank and take off.  These are all relevant concerns. Though most Tank people will tell you that everything will be fine once you get used to the change, ..."if anything you will want to expand the abilities of your tank and really see what it can do...", they often reply.  Then, when you take it for a dive it seems that your fears are confirmed.  It doesn't fit in your garage, there is no where to park it at work, the cup-holders are too long for your favorite mug, and you can't seem to figure out how everything works.  Every time you get in it, you have to remember how everything works, since it is so different then all the cars you've been used to over the years.   

  To complicate things further, you don't understand most of it's controls and features.  What you really want is just something to get you to the store and you don't want to become a tank engineer or read a bunch of manuals to make this happen.

  Now, if you are a non-technical user (or even some of the most technical users), and you have used Linux , then you can understand what I am talking about.  You download and install Linux and your video driver doesn't work, or there is no audio, wifi doesn't work, etc.  Now you have gone from what you were told was going to be an easy install, to feeling frustrated, doubting your abilities, and just being generally frustrated.  This is not they type of first experience to keep them coming back. Though some crave this experience. We are known as nerds.  This has been mostly taken care of over the years -- though there is still some of these annoying problems hanging around that take some time, skill, and experience to figure out.  

  This is mostly due to vendor support issues for certain hardware devices or software. At-any-rate, this is the same result that you will get if you have ever done a clean install of Windows.  

  Most of the time, the OEM systems that people purchase are already configured with much of the software they will need (and much that they neither want nor need) -- since the vendors understand that if their customer has trouble figuring out their product, they will be less likely to keep using it.  There are options available for pre-installed Linux, though there are few and they are considerably  more expensive (from a general comparison) since the hardware is usually better quality -- though you are getting a lot for the price.  (ZAReason for instance.) But if you don't understand why that particular hardware component is better (and especially if you are aware of cheaper options), this will be of little comfort to you.  

  In the end you will find yourself with a better machine and more options for the future -- but this is not easily explained to new or non-technical users.  The Technical among us either has tried or will try every operating system we can, but we are a different breed. 

  There have been a few times that I can remember when companies have tried selling pre-installed, configured Linux systems in big-box-stores.  Though it has happened on occasion, it always seem to end with mixed results.

  The rate of Linux adoption has suffered due mainly to a lack of official support that regular people can understand (ie. phone or local support. as opposed to bbs.boards & mailing.lists), or a lack of compatibility with systems in use by their employer or educator.  Many websites and applications are built with Windows in mind -- since Windows is on most of the machines out there this makes sense to a degree.  

  The lack of support from computer shops is staggering.  I know one in the area (meaning 25 or so miles^2), and that is because myself and another avid Linux user convinced him to install it for his customers in a number of carefully designed use cases(over a period of nearly 3 years of demos and explanation).  The added benefit to him is that we are available to support any corner-cases that might arise -- this may be a problem for other shops that don't have the experience to reliably offer support.  Though it has been adopted by nearly 50% of his clients, it is by no means an easy sell.  Mostly people want what their friends have, or what they are used to -- if it is available and they can afford it. 

  So I guess the question is: "how do we fix this and gain Linux adoption by the average Joe/Jane more readily. "  This is more complicated then it seems at first, to the Linux user this is an easy choice (based on experience) but for most people stepping into a new world, especially when they depend on their machine to get work done (mostly this is a question of what software they need installed).  Most of the non-technical users that I have spoken to about their choice to switch to Linux make it mainly because they have had enough of fixing windows (viruses) and/or they can't afford Apple.  As in anything, money is the prevailing reason for the switch. 

  The main problem revolves around understanding what a computer really does and identifying what jobs/tasks you are going to be using it for.  Many (including some rather tech-savy people) have commented on how hard Linux is to learn, or there favorite piece of software(game) isn't available on it.  Now this is not to say that these people understand Windows either, they just choose to use it because it is familiar, most tasks can be completed visually (ie. they're GUI_Drivers), and they have a friend they can call for help when things go tits-up.  So in the end, there is just less incentive to learn it; since it has a bit of a steeper learning curve when it comes to system administration tasks, and Windows does work well after all. 

  There exist here a ray of light.  As hardware and software costs increase, you can see Open Source Software adoption increase as well.  This is mainly about the money and not necessarily to do with the ability of the technology; but I'll take it.  

  The goal should be to have a high enough level of adoption that it incentives the hardware and software vendors to support it.  Lets be honest, this is the only real reason that we care whether or not you use Linux.  

  I don't personally care about your level of productivity or up-time (unless you are paying me to do so.).  Though I do have a better chance of having hardware and software compatible with my OS of choice if more people use it.  It is really that simple.  

  Changes to the technological ecosystem that have helped FOSS adoption have come in the form of inexpensive Netbooks, and the Android operating systems popularity on mobile devices.  Now we are able to say to users that their operating system on their phone is the same as having Linux on their computer (for all intensive purposes).  This increases the initial comfort level, because they have already had the experience of using the device and don't feel so intimidated by the general concept of something new. 

  So I have taken a similar approach with customers in explaining the switch to Linux in the enterprise market.  Instead of telling them how stable it is, or how they don't have to worry about viruses (though this still comes up at some point), or how much faster it is -- this all means little to the non-technical users; since they can't put these things in proper context.  Instead I just tell them that I have a platform they should try that will give their machine a bit more life and save them money on upgrade and licensing costs.

  That is really, when it comes right down to it, what consumers and business people alike understand.  If it is cheaper, and will provide the same functionality, they are in -- if it is more stable in the long run, that is just a bonus to them included without the need for them to spend time sorting through technical information. 

  Though this seems strange way to make decisions to the engineer minded among us, this is the default setting for humans when they can't understand the more technical bits of a larger purchase or change.  

  Car dealers have learned this long ago, which is why you spend your time with the salesmen instead of a technical representative for the car company.  In reality the salesman knows and understands little about the inter workings of the vehicle, but that isn't within the scope of his job.  His purpose is to make you feel comfortable with the purchase and if you need any bits of technical information, he will be the facilitator. This doesn't usually end up with you getting the best product possible, or the best deal, just one that suits your basic needs or the ones you were keen enough to express. 

   For the technical customer, there is no need to offer such simple insights.  When we go into a car dealership, we tell them what car we want and what it should include.  We have done our research at a deeper level than the average consumer, and  -- even though we may not have any experience with the vehicle at this point -- we understand it's functionality at a deep enough level to make the most seasoned mechanic doubt his ability and understanding after just a short conversation. 

  So we already know what we like about it, what we don't, and if there is anything that we need to know.  In fact, if the salesman decides to give us their pitch, we will immediately explain to them that they are an imbecile, and go on to tangentially explain why their understanding of the concepts of this fine automobile -- and mechanical engineering in general -- are on par with a dim-witted third grader -- and perhaps they should seek some kind of refund from whatever institution was responsible for educating them.  

  For the average user though, explaining the details is a waste of your time and theirs.  First of all, they are not going to understand what you are telling them, and secondly, they don't care. 

 I have seen, from observing users that are new to Linux, that as soon as they have figured out how to do what they need to do - the name and flavor of the operating system just seem to fade into the background.  At a certain point they no longer think about the OS not being windows.  Mainly because, when configured correctly, it just works.  One of the things that has really helped this is the introduction of the Software Center by Canonical and others.  

  Before, when a user wanted to install new software or hardware they either had to: enter the command line (ie. scary stuff!), Google it and download a GUI tool to do it (If available.), or they had to get someone to do it for them (which drives up the cost).  Now that there is a way for them to just click a link, go to the store, search for what they need (as they are already accustom to from using similar stores; Itunes, Android Stores.) and install their choice in software.  For some of my clients, that have a tendency to install lots of stuff, I limit their access to software sources so to avoid them breaking their machine by adding some of the more technical bits of software unintentionally.  For most people I have installed Linux for, my initial configuration gives them access to far more software then they ever need (Except in rare cases.). 

  Moving forward we should make sure that we are not overselling Linux and making promises that it may not be able to keep in the end.  This simply comes down to semantics, ie. ..."Linux is less susceptible to viruses..."; being careful not to say "...it is impossible for Linux to get a virus..." -- though as advanced users know, it is highly unlikely scenario for a multitude of reasons.

  Recent changes with Adobe's Linux support model have made things harder for Linux Desktop adoption -- this is really less of a problem for most home users than has been reported, but it is still a concern (since many local, state, and federal offices are using electronic documents supported only by Adobe.).  This is also one of the biggest reasons to use open-source; avoiding vendor lock in.  If you start in on the topic of licensing with the average user, chances are you will be able to hear their eyes rolling.  

  I use a bunch of operating systems (Debian, Arch, Plan9, Haiku, and Puppy Linux), but this is for convenience and ease of use more than it has to do with other factors.  For me personally I don't care what OS I use -- again Church-Turing.  I use open source because I believe in community and I think it is the most logical way to go from a development and support standpoint.  Having the extra software is nice, but the same software utilities are available on other platforms as well, so I don't see this as a selling point.  Even though I believe that FOSS works better and makes me more productive in many cases -- that is conjecture  -- and the same can be said for the other choices involved when configured correctly.  One of the things that we need to push is the pure open-source model.  Give away the product and charge to support it.

   This is no different then getting a custom car built, though usually much cheaper.  So you are paying the amount you are in order to save you both the time of doing the work, and the time learning how to do the work (the longest bit).  We are all about paying for convenience.  

  Building your own computer should be considered just as a challenging endeavor as building your own car.  The engineering in terms of the computer is far more complicated and far more sensitive to minor changes.  For some reason, people that would never open the hood of their car, start cutting wires, and fiddling around have no problem doing it with there computer.  The worst part is when they screw it all up, or there is a situation they don't understand they decide the operating system is at fault, and blame it.  This is usually Linux or Windows -- though I have seen cases involving Mac(especially since moving back to the West Coast.)

  Please don't take any of this to mean that I am not in favor of you downloading a Linux distribution and giving it a go.  Also, don't take this to mean that you are stupid, or incapable.  If I can do it anyone with a heart beat has a fairly good chance of making me look foolish -- though I have to say I am quite good at doing that on my own. 

  Understand; computing is complicated, and there may be some challenges -- and if you didn't study hard in physics, there will be some additional challenges.  Though there will usually be some reason why things don't work exactly as planned, especially when you are new to the Operating System, device, etc. Feel free to install and explore but don't blame Linux if everything isn't to your liking; it is just doing what you tell it to.