Radix Fidem Blog

Word for Word: The Other Half

Posted on December 27, 2010 by ehurst

When it comes to matters of great import, things which can scarcely be put into words, we rely heavily on first person communication. But when you and I seek to examine the noise of political propaganda, it is a wholly different thing. We need to strip away everything except the very essence of what the liars are trying to get us to do. Particularly on the Internet, about the only way to reduce things to their essence is by stripping out all the junk.

That means reading them in plain text.

I’ve already mourned here in previous posts how utterly shallow and silly our Western culture has become, as evidenced in part by the simple inability of people to write. So we have a plethora of YouTube videos, loaded with mountains of emotional manipulation, mimicking the propaganda tactics of the mainstream media, but we can easily reduce almost any 10-minute video to a single paragraph of text, even without sarcasm. Everyone is selling something.

They seek to overwhelm you, own your very soul for at least a few moments of time. They can’t trust you with simple facts, because you might not obey their subtext, their demand for action. It’s all part of that psychopathic control mechanism which denies your humanity. You are just a piece on a game board, so shut up, don’t you dare think and decide independently, and just play the moves.

This is a primary reason I love plain-text browsers. Even simple still images can impart an atmosphere to typed words which slants your reaction. It’s bad enough we have to struggle often to find the back-story deceptively left out. If the content of the communication is the feeling, then call it art, not information. Real art, like true spirituality, leaves the truth out there for you to handle on your own, but it’s never about politics. Even the very use of words can offer a tremendous opportunity to slant something, but as a wannabe writer, at least I’m expecting that sort of thing. I do fairly well at pushing aside the hysterical terminology to find most stuff has very little fact. But imagery is harder to ignore, and videos are perhaps the most dangerous, since the medium itself attacks the logic centers of the brain almost hypnotically.

In the school of Holy Cynicism, a primary weapon is the plain text web browser. Just give me the words.

Posted in social sciences | Tagged computers, culture, oppression, propaganda, resistance | Comments Off

Friendly Fire

Posted on December 26, 2010 by ehurst

He knew it would happen eventually.

After nearly two years of trying to get his ministry noticed, he was finally getting calls from churches who needed his help. There was no competition, no other ministry offering technical services and engineering on facilities, especially when the minister was licensed and certified through all the applicable authorities. There were too many buildings too long in use without basic maintenance, never mind mandatory upgrades to things like electrical and plumbing. Once word got out about his non-profit services, there were plenty of calls, and the offerings were sufficient to keep him alive and working.

But there were always those churches which just didn’t get it.

So he was now driving back toward his office with a heavy heart. He had only driven two miles from the church when his cellphone rang. He pulled off into one of all-too-numerous empty driveways of business which had closed during the depression which still hammered the region. Answering the phone, he recognized the voice of the senior pastor at the church he had just left.

“Brother, please! Tell me what happened.” It was the same famous voice many heard the radio daily.

“Pastor, your assistant was just a bit too zealous. It began friendly enough, asking questions and comparing notes on certain doctrines. In a rather short time he became rather aggressive and assertive. I have no quarrel with a man sharing his unique faith, but not to the point where it interferes with my work.”

“He interfered with your work?”

“Yes, sir. I still have two more appointments today, and I can’t slight them so one man can demand I stop what I’m doing while he makes his pitch. Given the high profile of your congregation, I seriously doubt anyone in the state hasn’t heard of you folks, and is not acquainted with what you teach. If I were interested, I’d have joined your congregation long ago…”

“So you felt it was a little insulting my assistant questioned the validity of your faith?”

“Not at all pastor. This is not about my feelings, but whether I can carry out my testing and assessment of your infrastructure. He kept insisting I stop working and give him my full attention, even to the point of physically interfering with what I was doing.”

“Oh.” The voice paused a few moments. “Do me a favor, please. Wait just a few minutes there where you are. Don’t drive any farther away. Let me call you back in five minutes. Can you wait that long?”

“Sure pastor.” The call ended.

He stared off into the distance. The lower layer of clouds were drifting far more quickly than the heavy blanket above. This was the time of year when storms struck with shocking fury and little notice. The coming winter promised to be even harsher than the last, and this particular church’s heating system had already proven unable to cope with the increasingly harsh winters they had been having.

His reverie was broken by fresh ringing of his cellphone. The display told him it was the church again. The pastor’s voice was a little less commanding this time.

“Tell me what we need to do so you can come back and finish your work. Do you need some apology or something?”

“No, sir. Again, my feelings aren’t the issue. What we need is for your man to remove me from his target list. All he has to do is pretend I’m a fellow servant of the Lord for a half-hour while I complete my survey. Then you can turn him loose on the fund-raising program you’ll need to pay for the upgrade. So far, it appears something we can do with volunteer labor from your congregation, so we can keep the costs to a minimum. I still need to check the ducts in the ceiling, so if someone can just show me how to get up there…”

“Deal! Come on back, brother. I’ll make sure it happens that way.”

Posted in fiction | Tagged church, civility, religion | Comments Off

New Project: A Red Hat Server

Posted on December 25, 2010 by ehurst

Despite my misgivings about offering Red Hat (or its clones) to my clients for use on the desktop, I still need to have something to offer for churches and other organizations. That means I need to know a lot more about systems administration, networking and webmaster tasks. The only way to do any of that is hands-on, so I’m planning to turn my aging desktop into a server.

In my experience, not a single Linux distro can match Red Hat (and clones) for this mission. In particular, the latest RHEL 6.0 release is the best way to go, though for older machines I still know a lot about RHEL 5.x already (and 4.x for the really old machines, and so forth, since I’ve even used the 3.x and 2.x series). Chances are, I won’t be able to afford the actual Red Hat product, so I’m still waiting for CentOS to grind out their excellent work.

I’ve been reading the CentOS developer email list chatter and Red Hat has not made it easy for them. The actual release ISO images are lacking certain essential packages for building everything. Since the CentOS build is scripted differently than the way Red Hat does things, this means errors have to be fixed so that the whole thing can be done in one pass, if I understand correctly. It would surprise me if they weren’t the most eager of all folks to have gotten this done before today, but it didn’t happen. That means I’ll have to wait.

Although I have a version of Red Hat Beta modified and updated, this is not the way it will be done for any prospective clients. I need the experience of walking through the whole thing from scratch. This way I’ll be able to write it up in short tutorials, which can be posted here, posted at Open for Business and archived on my ministry site. These tutorials will be targeted at a very low technical level of folks who need lots of hand-holding. This is most of what I deal with every day, and I truly enjoy working with them.

That also means there will be fewer options up front. It’s pretty much: “Here; do this. Here’s why.” In the process, I’ll give them enough to build on so they can learn and customize to their heart’s contentment. For those of you with little Linux experience, determined to make RHEL/CentOS 6.0 your desktop, I’ll try to spin off a few ideas for you, as well.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged centos, computers, linux, redhat | Comments Off

Assange and Image Rehabilitation

Posted on December 24, 2010 by ehurst

Those most likely to support Assange where it counts are the ones who have been calling him on being too soft on Israel. He got the message, I believe. He recently denied any intent of taking money or other favors from Israeli agents, a story with poor credibility in itself, coming from a single source with a huge conflict of interest. But he has also promised he will show us what he has on Israel soon.

Tell you what: If he does, I’ll gladly eat my words. If what he unloads supports the obvious truth of Israel as the single greatest threat to peace in this world, I’ll change my tune. He has to know he did himself no real lasting favor by letting the mainstream press be his initial gatekeepers. Those news outlets are owned by Israeli interests. But I maintain my doubts simply because, were his trove of cablegrams really a threat to Israel, Assange would already be toast. Mossad could school the Mafia on making problems disappear.

I feel certain this is all theatrics. It’s not as if Assange has done nothing good. Let me cite one example: a piece of software called “surfraw” — look it up. According to the documentation, he coded the software himself, and it’s an excellent idea if you need significant privacy for research. I’ll settle for using Starting Page myself; it’s good enough. But the point is not whether Assange is a good or bad guy, but the effects of his work. It serves too many evil purposes, and weakens the cause of justice. Whether by choice or by ignorance, he has allowed himself to be a tool for TPTB. In exchange, he gets VIP treatment and a free ride, lots of excitement, the cloak of a martyr for truth, and some extra-curricular bedroom fun, to boot. He pointedly feeds cynicism about himself.

But I promise I’ll go back and add an update to every post I’ve made about him and write a fresh apology if he delivers much at all on his promises. I’m particularly interested in the business of hammering a certain notorious bank. It’s not possible to find any bank in the US which hasn’t done far more harm than good, so every little bit helps. I’ll certainly give Assange credit if he gives us the goods on that, but my promise applies to the stuff about Israel. Until then, I assert he serves their interests.

Posted in globalism | Tagged economics, internet, oppression, propaganda | Comments Off

He Said, “Free the Weed”

Posted on December 24, 2010 by ehurst

I’m not jumping on the bandwagon. I was driving it a long time ago.

So we see Pat Robertson is not in favor of harsh sentencing for petty drug possession. It’s about time, Pat. Where have you been?

In my youth, I was a fan of Pat Robertson and his ministry. It did me some good, but it was not without some measure of harm. That’s the real world. It’s not possible to have unalloyed good on this plane of existence. It took some years to wash out the purely cultural element of prissy middle class oppression. We owe the very existence of the police state to such culture. My primary complaint has always been: You can’t farm out social correction to impersonal forces of the state. God holds you directly responsible for acting to correct those within your family to protect the social order. He holds you responsible for reaching out to those lacking such a family network, but He also holds you responsible for recognizing the real threat is someone who rejects such a social order, because that was the social order He revealed as His command.

But in the ancient world, mercy was a part of the definition of justice. Only in recent Western thinking has it been separated. True justice is attempting to heal the moral fracture, and it requires a broad consideration of everything you can know about the situation. It requires evaluating sagely what drives the fracturing incident, and fixing the underlying problem. Yes, that sounds like liberal coddling, but liberals use the wrong philosophical assumptions, and thus the wrong methods, for addressing those problems. Liberals want to dissolve the family in favor of the state, and that’s just plain evil. Justice is the family taking responsibility for what their kin do to the social order God has commanded us to establish and preserve.

Yes, an improbable vision. So what can we do in the meantime? Let’s at least promote the idea harsh mandatory sentencing across the board is cutting off your nose to spite your face. It’s just an excuse for not dealing with real problems, a major case of NIMBY, the fantasy chasing of a perfect life defined by some damned lack of common sense. Yes, I used that word in it’s literal sense, because Satan loves that attitude. It allows him to sell one drug to one group, and sell another to some other group because the first bunch create Hell on earth, and people need to get away from that. Of course, you probably know the whole Drug War thing served a commercial purpose. It drives up the price of certain popular products so the backside of government can profit handsomely when it sponsors the shipment of those products into the US. Think the CIA and crack cocaine, which permitted the bonus of targeting certain ethnic groups for destruction. On top of that, the massive increase in convicts justified the massive new private contract prison industry. It’s well documented, but an unpopular truth.

So maybe a little sanity is leaking into the message of some crazed wannabe “prophets of God” — it’s about time!

Posted in social sciences | Tagged culture, economics, government, oppression, resistance | Comments Off

The Threat of Contemplation

Posted on December 23, 2010 by ehurst

There several kinds of human intelligence, several ways of measuring human intelligence. Despite the ocean of educational literature regarding the importance of encouraging development of synthesis of ideas, you will seldom see any evidence of synthetic intelligence arising from any government controlled educational institutions, and darn few private ones.

Even more remote is the likelihood of contemplative intelligence. Indeed, the very ability to contemplate is the last thing TPTB want to see. Our Western culture has been reduced to commercial exploitation, and it was easy to do, since it was founded on materialism. The very essence of middle class lifestyle is an empty legalistic morality paired with conspicuous consumption. Contemplation is the enemy of such a culture.

Contemplative intelligence is the very foundation of ancient civilizations. Contemplation comes at a high price in material terms. To become contemplative means to back off from investing so much energy in efficiency and production. Were we suddenly smitten with a genuine wave of contemplation, life would slow down, and people would stop scratching for the next consumable fixation.

We see today a consumer culture driven by acquisition for consumption. Durability of anything is counted against its value, because there is no newness and freshness inside the consumer. It must all come from the outside. Herein is the key: A person easily bored is himself boring. He has nothing inside himself, nothing within to produce the flowering freshness of creativity. Thus, creativity itself is limited to what can be sold, not because it is moving, but because it fills the emptiness. It need not result from any truly artistic talent, only the ability to thrill, or simply to shock.

We are a people as empty containers, leaking and lidless. We rush about splashing whatever has been put in, adding nothing to it, and certainly taking nothing from it, since it contains nothing of value in the first place. We have no idea what we are, much less what we could be. Western Civilization is corrupt and empty, collapsing under its own weight. Were any of this frenzied seeking stop, and people begin to build from within, we might have a shot at seeing something worthwhile replacing this mess.

Posted in sanity | Tagged culture, education, intelligence, psychology | 1 Comment

Word for Word

Posted on December 21, 2010 by ehurst

The words in any given language for “word,” and their definition, gives a clue to the orientation of the culture behind the language. In English, we have only one. In biblical studies, we see the Greek offers two commonly used terms: rhema and logos. The second (logos) we are quite familiar with, as it forms a root with many of our words. It comes to us as the term for the basic intellectual grasp of an idea. It implies something which is or can be written down. The first (rhema) bears the connotation a live performance, something you are hearing right now. Thus, we think in terms of written word or spoken word.

But the Bible does not carry with it the cultural foundation for such a distinction. In the original Hebrew, there is only one term: dabar. Other Hebrew words get translated into English as “word,” but that does not change the basic and radical departure between the two cultures. The Hebrew word emphasizes spoken communication. Indeed, many have said Hebrew was not meant to be written in the first place.

There is a good fundamental reason for that. Clear and meaningful communication requires context. In Hebrew and related tongues, context is everything. There are but some 800 root words in Hebrew, and while there are combinations and conjugations, the whole point is those words are all about verbal communication as a live performance. This is what makes Hebrew Scripture so difficult at times to translate. The Hebrew people suffered a massive shift in cultural and intellectual assumptions when their scholars embraced Hellenism a few centuries before Christ. To this day, their scholars insist this was a good thing. Most Gentile scholars agree. I’m among a tiny minority who decry the shift, and decry the defense even more.

I take the position God Himself does not approve of the shift, that something in what Jesus taught reflects that. His debates with the leadership of His nation are often sensible only if you realize He calls them back to the ancient Hebrew epistemology. That intellectual foundation is the one laid by God upon which to build His revelation of Himself. Moving out of that ancient territory offers no advantage, but a severe hindrance.

In my life I’ve had many opportunities for public speaking. I’ve also written an awful lot of stuff. No one is surprised when we discover there is quite a difference in the impact between the two forms of communication, even covering the same material. Why do so many writers get asked to lecture on their writing? It’s because it makes a big difference in understanding the writing. I freely admit I am less talented in speaking; my writing is far better (however good it may be). I am not a polished speaker. Yet, I know from personal experience my spoken presentations have far more impact.

Despite the differences in various learner styles — visual, auditory, kinesthetic, etc. — the point remains we learn the most from someone personally present sharing some experience. That’s because a personal presentation strikes just about the whole range of perception, and when artfully done, is much harder to forget. But our Western cultural heritage has done all it can to destroy our ability to sit still for such a presentation.

We have been conditioned to demand high speed, high efficiency transfer of data and impressions, all of which serve to isolate us from each other. In the Hebrew culture, you do not learn facts from a presentation; you absorb the person giving it. That is, if someone wants to recount an event for which you weren’t present to witness, you don’t get the facts. You get the impression it made on the person who is telling it. You would naturally realize this and place what you received in context. You would consider the source. Not because you expect to filter them out and get at the real objective truth, because there is no such thing. Rather, you translate their impressions through your own filters and decode it into your own impression. That’s good enough. You weren’t there, and it didn’t change you, but it will change those who were there, and you have to live with them.

Reality, such as it may be perceived, is not about knowing it in the raw, but how it affects your life. You need to know, more than anything else, what to expect from your fellow humans. From them you learn something about the non-human world you experience, but you can test most of that by direct observation. People are a totally different game. There is no objective reality about people, because they, of all the creatures you encounter, are burdened with a moral responsibility.

Everything in the universe is infused with a morally guided response to the morality of our actions. This whole business of revelation from God is not about knowing some objective reality, but knowing a moral character, the personality of the Creator. Facts are just tools for choosing a moral response to the context. Thus, the Hebrew culture posits “word” as a revelation, an expression of some personal character. You can suffer some serious misunderstanding of that divine character — I know I still struggle with it — but to refuse the moral burden is wrong regardless of the facts. It won’t matter if you do what is objectively appropriate as discerned by the weight of scientific observation and testing; it remains wrong when you approach the question from the wrong angle.

We have a very long way to go, a vast territory to cross, before we are in a position to face the moral obligations inherent in the tangible universe in which we exist.

Posted in social sciences | Tagged culture, education, religion, scripture | 2 Comments

I’m a Terrorist

Posted on December 20, 2010 by ehurst

Chances are you are a terrorist, too, if you read stuff such as I write.

Today that label — terrorist — is the tyrant’s excuse for any convenient oppression. Thus, Julian Assange is a terrorist. Of course, I’ve written here Assange is helping the real terrorists, the shadow government which runs the US and a few other nations, so perhaps there is a sense in which it is true. But of course, not in the sense of the fear mongering by our national leaders.

By their definition, I’m a terrorist. I’ve written often, as compellingly as I know how, the proper understanding of our ruling regime’s policies (just calling them that earns me the label “terrorist”) is to call them sinful and evil. From every possible angle, it is impossible to allege they fulfill any valid function of government. I’ve laid out the proper biblical understanding and backed it up with clear theological explication. It’s your turn; use your own metaphysical approach to show how it’s bad stuff.

More, I would with alacrity expose any similar secrets which came into my hands. The difference is, I would never edit or filter the contents. If I understood some part of it, I might offer some commentary based on my long experience with the US military and other government funded service I’ve performed. Otherwise, I’m all for simply laying bare the truth of matters.

Yes, I would name names, because I expect nothing less regarding myself. My greatest aspiration is utter transparency. Let me be the first one to tell you my flaws, in case they weren’t apparent to you. Don’t trust me to get things right; be entertained and moved to think for yourself. Yes, I have an agenda, not at all hidden. That’s my calling from God, so fuss at Him if you are bothered. I can do no other. Poke at me with your own words and be sure you tell folks my name so they’ll know what you are talking about.

I invite that because that’s the antithesis of everything we see from human governments in the world today. That’s what makes us threats to them, terrorists. We want to change the policies of evil. We are willing to perform explosive acts of defiance, destroying the vast infrastructure of lies, trying to shake people from their slumber. We want people to join us in storming the citadel of hatred and slavery. Of course, none of this metaphorical language can be taken literally, but you may have heard how government thugs lack the intelligence to differentiate; they have been ordered to think like blockheads, to look for any excuse to feed any random individual into the brutal system for torture. Their superiors are psychopaths.

I’m trying to expose that. I’m trying to lay bare the foundations of humane thought as contrasted by evil secrecy. I want to rip off the cover of their filthy hatred for humanity, their lust for control and their greed. I want them to howl in misery as they are confronted with their own nastiness. I want to use these terror tactics to force a change in government policy.

So that makes me a terrorist by their definition. Are you a terrorist, too?

Posted in social sciences | Tagged government, peace, propaganda, resistance | Comments Off

Quirk the Internet

Posted on December 19, 2010 by ehurst

The Net, as it exists more or less, is an uncontrolled means of communication. That is, whether the information is good, bad or indifferent, it is unrestricted. It is the ultimate expression of freedom and voluntary cooperation. There are numerous forces at work trying to destroy the Net as we know it, and they have already made some progress.

The corporate world has been trying for a long time, using several approaches. Most obvious to me is the dope dealer approach with entertainment, trying to get the average consumer hooked on a particular type of content. If the demand is strong enough, no one can argue when the system becomes dominated by the delivery of this content.

One of my most popular posts on this blog continues to be the brief examination of running one Linux distro without a GUI on an old laptop. The heart of this article is not the technology, but my dissatisfaction with graphical computing. Not just a personal bias, this is the result of years studying how the mind works, how it should work. I don’t care how radical and curmudgeonly it sounds; I insist we would all be considerably more intelligent if computers didn’t have a GUI. Yes, I appreciate the visual richness of the graphical interface, and use it every day. But at the same time, I know I it more because there is really no other way to get things done. There are no really good text-mode browsers for a graphical Internet.

Graphical representations of mere information — charts, scales, meters — are not the problem. It’s the vast billions of dollars spent researching how best to overcome human resistance to false information by use of enticing graphical and auditory massaging of the message. Folks now assume it can’t be done any other way. People working so hard to get truth out in the open can’t imagine doing it without Youtube. If we want their information at all, we must pull down whole megabytes of data, use up big chunks of computing power, and surrender fifteen minutes of our time for, say a tutorial which could be typed up in less than a single page.

This seduction by corporate interests would not be possible were it not for the corporate raider tactics of Bill Gates and Microsoft. Windows is the ultimate example of dope dealing as a metaphor. It is not the least bit good for you, but once you’ve used it much, you find you can’t do without it. It completely rewires your interaction with the Internet by offering a shallow and selective enhancement of certain useless features, certain “wow” factors which distract from what really matters. You come to the Net seeking rain for the dry fields of your fertile intelligence. What you get is someone pissing on your leg and telling it’s raining.

The Windows-based ecosystem is shot through with frauds against the consumer, but the government stands ready to protect the big technology corporations. Most especially government protects Microsoft, with show trials which only serve to acknowledge near-monopoly control of the consumer market where it really counts, at the lower end of the price range. So great is the monopoly control, even the government can’t function without that ecosystem, so nothing really happens except a little better cooperation between the government and the industry.

Now the government is in on the act of seeking control. This business of Wikileaks is merely a reverse psychology game. Give Assange a bunch of embarrassing stuff. Make sure it contains nothing really damaging, and make darn sure it all boils down to supporting the primary propaganda already presented in other avenues. Make all sorts of noise about how horrible and irresponsible it was to threaten government’s oh-so essential secret operations, all so we have an excuse for government to take a much tighter control over this wild frontier in the virtual world of the Internet. Even the antics of Anonymous appear to play into this theatrical production.

During this brief interval of years, those who really wanted and needed free access to information have been shoved aside. It’s not so much they were hugely outnumbered by the mindless hordes who merely lusted for the next fix of entertainment, but the number of dollars which those hordes were willing to spend. That’s all the corporations and government really ever wanted. You see, I used the word “government” ambiguously on purpose. The point I make here is the face of government with which you interact is not the real government. There is a shadow government behind all this, which seeks to control for one reason, and that is to gain control of all the wealth.

I suppose the hackers and Net geeks will always find a way around these things. The hackers are merely truth seekers expressing their search for truth in a particular field which offers a rich opportunity to the rest of us. We can’t do much to save the hordes, but we can strive to keep the channels open for those who share our drive for truth. We are wise enough to realize truth to us is noise for another, and vice versa, so it’s the freedom itself we must try to save. We have to invest our energy, and our dwindling resources, into keeping at least some part of the Internet accessible to that free flow. Given what I consider the zero likelihood we can steer policy in safe directions, we have to focus more on using and promoting the technology which will keep us free.

That could be an argument for migrating from Windows to Linux, but that’s not my point. We have to be ready to acquaint ourselves with methods, with ways of using a computer which don’t lend themselves to cramming useless features down our throats. That means learning how to do stuff with computers for which the hordes would never bother. This is more than my simple infatuation with the plain-text interface (AKA “TUI” — textual user interface), but a call to keep an eye open for anything which secures and maintains that open link.

The forces we are fighting seek to gain centralized control over something which is inherently de-centralized. It won’t work as they hope, but it will hurt. With my limited knowledge of such things, I strongly suspect we will end up with a Net which is essentially the same at the machine level, but with extra helpings of barriers for those who aren’t aware of the way things work behind that pretty GUI, or that there is even anything behind it. I don’t mean becoming a networking technician, because the hackers and developers are all too willing to meet us halfway. What makes things more convenient for them makes it simpler for us. But the point is to help my readers consider what it means to invest a little more effort in finding a reasonable half-way point.

I don’t pretend to know, nor even estimate where that point would be, but I am utterly certain it means learning more than how to turn the computer on, and how to use more than a standard graphical browser and Google. Surely it will mean examining what’s out there in terms of specialized tools, some of the dozens of odd-ball browsers and other communication tools which by-pass the mainstream computer and Internet experience. If the computer matters to you, and you intend to keep using it until the situation becomes hopeless, you’ll need to treat it like the important tool it is. This applies equally with just about every other tool.

Be quirky. Networking protocols have to be standardized to some degree, or they won’t work at all. So it is with any human language, but within that standardization is a wide range of possibilities for individualization. Learn the limits; understand what you have to accept, but always be willing to push at the boundaries. Find your own way, because the biggest threat to the shadow forces is a high variation, all over the map of what’s possible, imaginable, and even some unimaginable. For you as in individual, that means being unique and independent.

Posted in computers, sanity | Tagged culture, government, linux, propaganda, resistance, windows | Comments Off