I want to talk about something very important.
To do so, I want to mention three things. They will all have something in common. It's this very thing that we need to start looking at, for it will determine the future of the entire world.
The Kid's Table
"....Linux Users can't be trusted to behave if they are taken out into public."Much speculation was had on LXer regarding the latest blog entry of Helios. A question was asked why Google never mentions in its marketing that Android and Chromebooks are Linux-based. The above text is the essential message of the entry in question.
The problem is that speculation went way into left field so to speak. Yes, there is infighting in various group settings in Free and Open Source Software (FOSS). However, the same thing happens behind closed doors at proprietary software firms.
If that wasn't the case, we wouldn't hear about a CEO throwing a chair in a fit of anger at one of their own leaving for a rival company.
In essence, there are grown men and women who act like children in all walks of life. Seeing as how the quirky, eccentric, and nerdy were the ones who brought the Linux kernel to the dance so to speak, I'm seriously doubting that the infighting, name calling, unusual application names, and other unusual activity is what turns Google off of marketing Linux.
The important thing to do here is to read between the lines.
Think about it. Who owns the trademark to Linux? Linus Torvalds. Who helps protect the trademark and reputation of Linux? The Linux Foundation.
In the realm of FOSS, the supposed "greatest weakness" is actually its greatest strength. FOSS consists of individuals, and much like the Libertarian Party in the United States, trying to get a bunch of people to go along with the same exact idea is like herding a bunch of cats.
In reality, it's about control.
Google does not own the trademark to Linux. Therefore, they can't control it. Google is not in it to make Linux succeed. Google is in the game so that Google can succeed.
It's nothing personal. It's just business.
It's also the same reason Canonical has a copyright and trademark policy. The company allows the use of trademarks for non-commercial purposes, but for commercial purposes, certain procedures have to be followed.
Gun Control
We all know what happened at Sandy Hook, and it was indeed tragic. Those children didn't need to die. Like with Columbine and the Colorado theater shootings, there were calls for gun control in addition to blaming video games.
A TV show host called for gun control while railroading an individual who disagreed with him. A petition was started to deport the host in question, a British citizen. Said British citizen has one of the people behind said petition on his show.
Mixed commentary came as a result.
So let's step back for a moment. Should we really be listening to some blow hard on TV telling American citizens how to live their own lives? The same blow hard who was fired for alteration of photos regarding the Iraq war and was potentially implicated in another scandal?
What's this really about? Let's start by reading between the lines.
For starters, Connecticut already has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. Those laws did not stop the tragedy at Sandy Hook. That's because laws don't focus on the proverbial person behind the trigger.
The calls for real mental health care is a start in terms of reading between the lines and thinking outside the box. The only problem is that it will leave the door open to authoritarians labeling those who own firearms or want to do so as "mentally ill," thus potentially denying them their 2nd Amendment rights should such legislation be signed into law.
The bad part is that many of us are quite responsible for the mental anguish and suffering of those who could potentially become mass murderers, especially if we accuse them of being a potential murderer. This tidbit from Gina Tron drives the point home:
"In a small town like mine, everyone knew that the stories were about me, and more than a few people genuinely thought I was consumed with murderous rage. Even my parents, who worked towns away, were being told how troubled I was by their coworkers. No one tried to hide their fear and hatred of me either. When I walked down the halls of school it was like the parting of the Red Sea; crowded restaurants fell quiet when I entered; students who feared they were on my non-existent hit list dropped out of the classes they shared with me. My house was egged and I got French fries and soda thrown at me when I attempted to set foot inside the school cafeteria."
She began to sympathize with those who went on murdering sprees at school because they were tortured. After all, she was forced to take anti-depressants based on her outward appearance (italics added for emphasis).
Do you see it yet? It's not really about guns. It's actually about control. People who believe they know better than you are wanting to tell you how to live your life. In addition, they want to control your entire life in a sense so that they don't have to deal with any inconvenience coming from your individuality.
"I started pushing the limit of what I could get away with, and shifted from ignoring people’s remarks to ripping posters off the walls in front of them in an attempt at intimidation. On a few occasions I would actually chase people. And they would always run. It was funny. You want a psycho? I’ll give you a psycho. That was my logic, and it kind of became a game for me."
Ban guns? There will be knife stabbings instead. Ban knives? Ball bats will be used instead. Removing one weapon will only cause another to appear. It's about control.
A Thought Provoking Video
I want you to watch the entire video. I know that not everybody will agree with the points made. However, I want you to look for the common theme here; control. Notice how groups of people controlling individuals is the overall theme of the video in question.
Again, it's all about control.
Conclusion
Unless the individual takes charge and control of their own destiny, somebody else will determine what that destiny will be.
Those who want Linux and FOSS to be recognized and accepted by the masses need to stop relying on other groups and entities to do it for them. Form an advocacy group, raise money, and begin advertising it instead. How do you think Firefox became so successful?
If you want the keep your right to bear arms, then speak out! I personally made the choice not to own them, but that was my choice and I'll be damned if that choice is taken away from every single citizen in this country. There are plenty of advocacy groups out there, such as Gun Owners of America.
But don't just rely on advocacy groups yourself. Educate others and get them to realize that we need to focus on the person pulling the trigger and understand why they did what they did. There also needs to be mention of times when those who are armed have stopped violent activity.
Finally, you might start looking into the non-aggression principle.
