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

Why Microsoft Can't Change the Windows Interface; Too Much

Microsoft has long been the operating system of choice for many to write software.  Though not all industries count on it they way they once did, most still do.  And here lies the problem.

With lots of software come lots of responsibility.  This is one of the many places where Linux and it's variants have troubled enterprise and residential clients in the past.  If your software worked yesterday, you would expect it to work tomorrow. 

Since most people aren't very fluent in computer, even the least little change can cause great confusion.  To expect one thing and get another is a frustrating thing even if you are used to speaking digital.  This is why enterprise IT departments don't like untested software, changes or devices.  

So you can surely understand the reasons for people being unhappy with Microsoft's changes to the desktop and it's function in the Windows 8 release.  

Well we can look forward to similar changes with the Window's 10 release.   This insistence to make such major interface changes seems short sighted and possibly led to the decision to make the release free for valid, current users.  The possibility also exist that Microsoft was simply concerned about the market share that other OS's have been gaining, though it's still a small portion, the numbers are significant enough to warrant paying closer attention. 

The heart of the interface change is with regards to current software.  Windows is far larger in size than it would otherwise be based on the backwards compatibility it offers.  Far more so than Linux, Mac or other choices offer.  Macintosh forces this issue far more than other operating systems and it works for them.  The difference being that Mac customers want the latest and greatest.  Where there are far more people on the Microsoft and Linux side that tend to run older software.  This is especially prevalent in large companies, where software changes are not looked upon favorably.  If it ain't broke, don't fix it. 

Though they have back tracked from the travesty that was Windows 8, I imagine there will still be a fairly, large segment of Windows users that will want to wait as long as possible to make the change.  

There are many more reasons to be confident in Microsoft's products than skeptical, but that doesn't mean that people will be accepting enough to take the chance with their personal data.  

People tend to feel lost and uncomfortable when things don't look familiar.  The advantage of change it that you can introduce new features, implemented in a unique way.  The downside: people will be confused at first and may not adopt the changes.  

Apple seems to think that people will like whatever they will do, which they tend to.  There is an overall advantage to forcing upgrades, mainly that you don't have to continue to support your mistakes.  There are always going to be bugs, I guess that question is then, old bugs or new bugs.  

New bugs may be mysterious, but this option gives you the ability to fix the old nagging bugs that you don't like.   Continuing to support the previous system means that more of the bugs are known and you tend to have better security.  So like everything else, you must decided what your priorities are. 

It is obvious that Microsoft has wrestled with these things and we shall see if Windows 10 is a better mixture of form and function than Windows 8 was.  Taking money off the table was, I feel, a good move, and may lead to a bit more adoption than if people were expected to be paying for what seems to mostly be an upgrade and ultimately a revision of the Windows 8 fiasco. 

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.

You have been spoiled by technology.

Have you ever listed to all the complaining concerning technology?  Most people are able to do far more by using technology then they otherwise would be able to without it.  This is fairly easy to see; if you don't see this as a fact, you should take this time to throw yourself down a steep embankment.   

I have watched quite a few videos relating to people hating one technology or another, from operating systems to phones. Most people wouldn't be able to do half the things they are able to do now if someone didn't package the technology for them.  This is clear when you look more advanced operating systems market share.  The more computer friendly something is the harder it is to use; the opposite is also true, if something is user-friendly it is going to use a lot of resources.  This is going to basically transform into a pernicious investment in hardware for the user and does not guarantee the availability of advanced functionality.   

People proclaim to know about computers are usually full of shit.  It is more likely that they are regurgitating something they heard or read from someone that actually understands what they are talking about -- though few of the tech pundits these day do.  If they are having a problem with something they own, it is likely a problem they are causing in some way, shape, or form.  This is not to insinuate that people are idiots, though most humans are, just that they lack the ability to be especially proficient in multiple areas.  This is not as much of a fault as it is a result of being average; and let me assure you people, there is a lot of bellow-average out there.  If you don't work with computers for a living, chances are, you may still be better than your tech guy at work -- though that isn't saying much, is it? 

It is not that people are incapable of understanding, they just need to be motivated. They understand and are proficient at using things that they want to use, but when it comes to something that challenges them on a fundamental level, they have to have some inner motivation for figuring it out. 

Just take a look at all the primates yelling about Windows on Youtube.  It would be more useful for them to run about dragging their knuckles on the ground grunting; what we should do is just put actual chimps in front of the camera and get their opinion -- I think this would not only be more productive -- serving to be a research tool for several fields of study -- but it would also be more entertaining to watch.

Microsoft's Windows operating system is one of the most successful* operating systems produced, it has dominated in the business workstation and desktop space for virtually the entire time that business and personal PC's have been a major industry.  That says that they are doing something right, even if this isn't necessarily something that you agree with; but then again, if you knew what you were talking about you would have written a better version yourself.  Please don't confuse this with me saying Windows[*] is the best thing out there, it is just something that works that has won in the market; clearly. 
 
When someone say's that they are having a problem with a particular technology, and it is automatically the programmer/developers fault.  They don't think for a second that they could be doing something wrong; or perhaps they are using the wrong product for their use-case; until it is blatantly pointed out. Computers are complicated.  New Technology used to be something that was more able to be easily understood, as things have progressed they have become much more complicated, and you must take the time to digest smaller sections at a time -- since the whole is just to large and abstract to understand by taking it in all at once.  This is similar to most things when you get to a lower, more percise level of focus.

Regardless of the operating system that we are talking about, the people that worked on it have done everything in their ability to improve the user experience and/or the general functionality.  At times this will be off base, this can be related to a number of issues; one thing it is not however, it is not intentional. In most cases a decision to do one thing or another comes down to complicated choices that all have trade offs in one direction or another.  This could also be related to something as out of the developers control as vendor support for a product, a particular service unavailable on that particular platform, or some intricate software licensing issues that are all too often at the root of the problem. 

For most developers, we are doing it because we are passionate about technology and have a talent for figuring out problems in general.  The same people that you are screaming about doing this or that, are the ones providing you with the work-around to the problem many times.   

I have worked for businesses that have made decisions with a piece of software that I haven't agreed with as the developer of that software, though that is not really my decision.  My job is to do what I am told, and that usually means taking direction from a person who doesn't really understand how computers work and are making their decisions based on other peoples opinions.  So you may end up with a product that has a limitation that is based solely on corporates inability to listen to specialists they are paying.  Then again, this is your fault, since you are the ones buying the product.  If you don't like how the program works, don't use.  Perhaps there is a better choice out there for you; how about using your energy you are putting into hating stuff to do some diligent research? 

This isn't to say that this is the way things should work, but this is the way things often do work.  Now this is also not to say that the software is bad, it usually works quite well for the average use-case, though the more powerful or niche features aren't going to be there in many cases -- either because of money, time, or both.  If you want software that is especially full featured you are going to have to pay for it.  And if you want really good software, especially customized to your use-case, start looking for investors and a market in which to sell that software in; because it is going to be far more expensive to produce for personal use.  Though this isn't true in all cases, this is generally true if we are talking about something at the level of Photoshop, OSX, or say Windows[*].  Programers need to eat too! 

Lets be clear, I am not saying that it is not ok to complain about a program or feature.  What I am saying is that it is not useful to make statements that are so general.  If people spent some time researching a particular application and making specific points about needed functionality changes, chances are they would quickly find the answer to their particular problem or would gain a greater understanding of the program as a whole, which would lead to useful feedback by default.  Since they now understand what they are working with, to a degree, this also allows one to now be a type of contributor.  If not directly by contributing code, one could contribute to the community by writing documentation, providing general help and guidance for other users, or simply by giving useful feedback to the development team. Saying, "... this sucks..." does not count as useful feedback.  Chances are if it is broke, and it is not a particular hardware issue, someone knows and there is a reason why it isn't fixed yet. 

For some reason it is rare that you hear from people when things go as planned.  For all those times that you turned on your computer and it ran flawlessly you didn't think of sending those hardworking, pencil pushers over-there at Microsoft some thanks.  No notes, no nothing; but as soon as something is wrong (ie. you broke it), fuck them; right?  Just because someone makes it look easy, it isn't, and that goes for whatever it is.  From freestyle motocross, to flying, to programming.  It takes years, and then it take more years to refine.  But by all means, if you think you can do it better, please pull up a chair, a keyboard, and a text editor, and start pushing up some commits -- if that is not in your skill set, this would be a good time for you to STFU! Thanks.


Samples of what people who don't know what they are doing say and do: 

• Now this is a bit tangential, though I think it is still fairly relevant since he is really driving the point home about not understanding software; clearly. http://youtu.be/eD3Isw4dzU4
• now this is just crazy, but i did start following dude just because he was talented in other areas and generally entertaining: http://youtu.be/TmPiYZnrWlk
• Now I feel a little bad here, this is pure frustration(funny though): http://youtu.be/l9t5-qXcNLk  
• This is the gentleman that prompted by earlier GNU/Linux article; and got me trolling around for the other 'tech-hate' videos; idiocy at it's finest: http://youtu.be/oTiztqndGco

 Things that People who understand technology talk about: 

• TEDxTelAviv - Paul Pablos Holman - Hacking the Future: http://youtu.be/8Kga-CHf-pU
• Colloquium on Computer Systems Seminar Series: http://youtu.be/x8ZLNxnYslM
• Java is "heavyweight, verbose, and everyone loves to hate it," but Wall still thinks you should know it...: http://youtu.be/LR8fQiskYII
• Greg Kroah Hartman on the Linux Kernel:  http://youtu.be/L2SED6sewRw 
• "Nobody should call themselves a professional if they only knew one language.": http://youtu.be/NvWTnIoQZj4
• Problems with the Linux Desktop and what could be done to solve those problems: http://youtu.be/YoYL4R3Te2s  
• alternative for those using Microsoft Windows: Linux Mint.  http://youtu.be/7G7TJyZPKPo

Putting Research Into Practice

  For some reason no matter how much research we seem to have in an area; people still don't seem to believe what the research says. From climate change to LED technology and other renewable resources; the scientists seem to be ever questioned. Though when they are in personal crisis they seem very quick to rely on what the scientist says.

  I find it odd that from the same people I hear two completely different political voices, depending on the situation.  When it comes to money, meaning ones personal supply, many Democrats seem to be a republican -- though when the group or businesses money is in play, they are far more liberal.  You can see this same phenomenon when it comes to the republicans and medical treatment.  When it seems like it is a project for the group they seem to be less trusting of the science -- though when they or a family member is ill, they are all for science, and put all their trust in it.

  The really interesting part is that this is not a point of contention each and every time these topics come up, only when one is personally involved -- you can really see this when you have an argument with one or the other on such topics and relate them to personal experience.  Though most would rather gnaw off their own leg then to admit that they would like to force someone to make a decision that they themselves wouldn't make.  The really entertaining bit comes when you give them a set of circumstances, reducing to the ridiculous, that insist they go against their original argument; now sit back and watch the fundamentalist come unglued.   I am not really on either side here, just recognizing the hypocrisy.

  Unfortunately the problem the problem extends even further when we talk about speech and business.  The churches don't want their speech or behavior to be criticized while still insisting, based solely on their existence alone if nothing else, on criticizing everyone else. And again with business processes -- Republicans and Libertarians alike are always one's to want less if any regulation on businesses, right until you try to put a 'marijuana store' next to a church or school -- then it must be regulated.  Though if you don't want a drilling company to be depositing nuclear materials in your local waste disposal facility, well that is just some hippy bullshit.  Similar to how the people that work at the school act and the expectation they have of the children attending the school, night and day(I think it is also fair to say that this applies to university as well).

To say that one is supposed to have free speech and then we as a society try to control that speech when we find it to be uncomfortable is just as bad, if not worse than, denying the right to free speech all together. We saw this in the Anthony Cumia debacle and others.  I don't see anyone from either side coming to the defense of those that are attacked for simply saying something.  Though it seems we do, in both main groups,   protect people for their egregious actions; curious.