From 1 to 60 in One Blog

Seems I've made it. Big time. Skippy's List dropped a little love on me during what he coined Operation Leafblower.

I went from 1 comment in 3 years to 60 in a couple of hours. And among the more notable comments, I have:

• You might want to see about making posting easier.
  
• I'm going to say that you probably need to write more entries. You've been around nearly three years, but you only total in at 30 entries.
  
• Turn off owner approval for your comments. You can always go back and delete any offensive/spam comments later.
  

To which I'd have to reply:

• I'll be posting more often, and I've made it much easier to post.
  
• Based on the very perceptive comment posted on Skippy's List, to wit: "good gods, his stuff is dry and boring. Maybe a few booger jokes would increase his traffic." Ya think? Which is why I point people towards "Skippy's List". He and his cohorts are far better writers than I. Face it. Anyone who comes up with the list of things they are not allowed to do because they lived it (as opposed to just fantasized about it) is probably going to be a bit more fun than I. Sorry. Besides, I don't know any booger jokes. Would a good fart joke count?
  
• I've now turned off owner approval for comments. They should go directly to the page once you've posted them.
  

And, for the record, yet another comment back on Skippy's site was: "He’s gonna check his admin page one day and shit bricks at all the comments there." Yes. I did. I was actually trying to figure out how to make a simple change to the page using the "poke and hope" method when I clicked on the tab for comments and saw... everything. I thought, "Holy Crap! The spammers have found me!" Then I started reading the comments and realized, "No, these are for real." THEN I kept seeing "Skippy says Hi", and "Skippy this" and "Skippy that".

Didn't take long to realize that Skippy had passed some love my way.

To which I can only reply, "Thanks, Skip. I owe you one."

Okay, one more rant...

I said in my previous post that I'd turned over a new leaf. I was going to simply blog on technical subjects, especially my interest in the scientific programming of Freemat. Unfortunately, I have to break my fast on all things opinionated.

I'm about to start a graduate program. It's been awhile since I was an undergrad, so I need to freshen up my classroom skills. I've been studying probability, and it's led me to remember one thing I truly hated about textbooks. It's that textbook authors have a penchant for using phrases such as, "it's clear", "it's obvious", "it's easy to see", and "it is apparent". Frankly, those words should be instantly banned from any textbook. Period. Knowledge is a journey with pit stops along the way. The path from one stop to the next is only obvious to those who have been down the path before. Authors must always bear in mind that they've been down a particular path probably many times. The people reading their material, most likely students, have not.

The problem I have is that, every time I see these phrases, if I'm having a difficult time with the material, I begin to feel like an idiot. I mean, the author said "it can be clearly seen", which makes me feel as if I'm on the front of the Titanic, the lookout is screaming "Iceberg ahead!", and I can't see anything but water. Why do they do that? Is it easier than actually spelling out that which is "apparent"? Does it give them a feeling of superiority? Both? Neither?

Regardless, I reiterate my belief these phrases should be banned from all textbooks everywhere.

Obviously.

A New Leaf

Let's see. I've been online now for well over a year, and received a whopping 1 comment for any of my articles. The "Hmmm" factor is going gangbusters here. Considering that most of my posts have been political in nature, and considering that I obviously cannot write a well thought out political piece, I'd say that's a wrap. End of story. Full stop. Think I'll simply point people towards others, such as Mike the Marine and Blackfive (for military discussions) and Skippys List (for humor).Instead, I think I'll concentrate on technical discussions, primarily concerning Freemat and its many uses.
UPDATE: Okay, so I can't read a calendar. I've actually had this blog since November 2005. That means that I've been here for almost *3* years, with only one comment to show for it. One.
Sigh.

One Helicopter Away from Two Pieces of Lead

I'm one of those people that looks at history and imagines what would be if things had happened slightly differently. For example, what if the bomb placed under the table as Hitler was working in early 1945 had worked as planned? On that one, I think the war in Europe would have ended several months sooner. Berlin may not have fallen to the Russians because the Germans would have sued for peace with the Western Allies and surrendered to us. So long as we were able to get the Russians to stop right now.

I look at today's news and the BBC has an article on Mahmoud's visit to Iraq. All hugs, kisses, and kumbye-allah. He even said, and I quote, "Without the presence of the foreign troops the region will live in peace and brotherhood."



And I wonder, what if we hadn't lost all of those helicopters during the raid into Tehran in 1980? What if those Delta operators managed to get into the trucks, as planned, blown out the section of wall on the outside of the US embassy compound, and stormed the embassy? Old Mahmoud is lucky. Very lucky. Because when the Delta guys were storming the building, those holding our people captive were going to get a very special gift, courtesy of Uncle Sam. They were going to get two pieces of lead. Right between the eyes. Despite the fact that this was going to make our then-Secretary of State a bit queasy, they were going to meet their 72 virgins. (And, as Jeff Dunham said, did they realize that no one has ever said those virgins had to be female?)

There wouldn't be any doubt about Mahmoud's complicity in the takeover of our embassy. Because, buried in a file somewhere, would be a picture of his lifeless eyes staring into space, two (probably just one) neat holes dead set between them.

You got lucky once, Mahmoud. Once.

More Linux Frustrations

As stated in my previous post, I've managed to load Ubuntu Linux (my version of Ubuntu is a GUI over a Gnome Linux kernel), dual-boot my computer between Linux and WinXP, and start some very basic programming.

Er, I may have left out that last part about the programming.

I used Synaptic Package Manager to load the Gnu C Compiler (gcc) into Ubuntu. I even managed to get the basic "Hello, world!" program made and compiled. And that's when the frustrations started.

I went a step beyond the "Hello, world!" by writing a really small program that would calculate and display the value of sin(1). That's it. Nothing fancy. Just wanted to see how the output would look. How many digits it would display.

Here's the program:

#include
#include

main()

{

double x;

x = sin(1);

printf("%f", x);

}

As I said, absolutely nothing fancy. I could have probably made it simpler, but this was simple enough. Then, I compiled it with the following command:

gcc complex.c -o complex

and got the following message:

/tmp/ccNjXwiK.o: In function `main':
complex.c:(.text+0x17): undefined reference to `sin'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status

Those of you who are used to programming in Linux have seen the error. I did not include a link to the math libraries, meaning I didn't add the "-lm" switch with the command. Hence, my command should have been:

gcc complex.c -o complex -lm

That little switch tells the compiler to link to the math library.

Here's my obviously really stupid question: WHY do I have to link to the math library when I have #include math.h in the header of the program? When I compiled this exact same program in my Windows box, I received absolutely no errors with the following command:

cl complex.c

See how simple that was? Just typed in the command for the compiler, and it compiled. Wow! What a thought? Who would have thunk it?

Instead, I have to manually put in a switch telling the compiler to load the math library. When I have math.h in the header.

Yeah, Linux is so much better than Windows.

Its the New Year... And Now For Something Completely the Same

This will be a working log of my efforts to:

a) take a computer currently loaded with Windows XP Home edition,
b) re-partition the hard drive,
c) install Ubuntu Linux onto one of the new partitions,
d) install Windows 98 onto the remaining partition,
e) create a multi-boot system and
f) use the Ubuntu Linux system, along with Gnu C Compiler (GCC) to learn C programming.

To start, the system in question is a re-built Dell Dimension 4600. It currently holds 512 MB RAM, a 160 GB hard drive, and two generic CD-ROMs.

I'm initially going to try to use Symantec's Partition Magic 8.0 to re-partition the hard drive.

UPDATE: Using Partition Magic 8.0, I was able to re-partition the 160 GB hard drive into four logical drives. They are a 120 GB drive (C:, for Windows XP), a 20 GB, a 1.5 GB, and a 10 GB. These are all approximate sizes. But, combined, they take up all of the hard drives physical space. I formatted the 20 GB and the 10 GB drives as EXT3, the current standard Linux format. The third I created as a Linux SWAP drive. To go a bit more in-depth, I partitioned the hard drive between the primary (C:, where WinXP resides) and an extended. From the extended, I created the other three logical drives.

My next step was to install Ubuntu. I started with an Ubuntu 6 (6.10) CD. I placed it in the drive, re-started the computer, and then ensured that the computer booted from the CD-ROM. It did, and I was brought up in a standard Ubuntu Linux desktop graphical environment. One of the icons stated "Install Ubuntu". I double-clicked that icon. In short order, I was asked to provide my name, a name for my user account, and a password. I was also asked to confirm the date and time. The next screens were the important ones.

At one point during the install, I was brought to the screen where I have to select an option to partition the hard drive. Apparently, the Partition Magic didn't do everything that Ubuntu wanted in order to install the OS. The first screen provided three options:

• Resize the primary partition (hda1) & use the freed space.
• Erase the entire disk (NOTE: Self-defeating. Not an option.)
  
• Manually edit the partition table.

I selected the third option to manually edit the partition table. I set the 20 GB partition as the root ("/") drive, the 10 GB partition as the media drive, and the 1.5 GB drive as the swap drive. I made sure that all other drives were removed (select the blank option at each menu), and checked "reformat drive" next to the three Linux drives. I then clicked on "Next". The screen that came up said that it was ready to install Ubuntu and it would install "Grub" on "hd0". Grub is the program used to select the particular OS in a multi-boot environment. I clicked on "Install". Ubuntu required ~20 minutes to install the Linux OS.

After install, the system re-started and the Grub program kicked in. The menu that came up had three options for Ubuntu (normal mode, safe mode, and a memory test) and one for Windows XP. I selected the normal mode (which was highlighted by default), and Ubuntu came up properly. Ubuntu popped up a window telling me to download certain updates. I did so, which took some time. There were 217 updates! After that, Ubuntu re-started. This time, Grub had 5 options for Ubuntu (6.10, 6.12) and one for WinXP. I selected the top one (highlighted by default) and came up in the Ubuntu environment. I then upgraded Ubuntu to the latest version (7.04). Again, after re-starting, there were now 7 options for Ubuntu (6.10, 6.12, and 7.04) in Grub. Selected the default entry for Ubuntu 7.04 and entered the Ubuntu environment.

Once it finished loading, I started up Firefox and web surfed. Everything worked properly.

I re-started the computer and selected Windows XP. WinXP also came up properly. However, Skypemate and Norton Anti-Virus no longer have icons in the system tray. This probably has nothing to do with the partitioning of the hard drive. The last thing I did in WinXP was to load both some Windows updates and some Norton updates. Most likely, these created some hiccup in the system.

Re-booted back into Ubuntu. I've noticed that Ubuntu comes up much faster than previously when I'd loaded it onto a different computer.

Started Synaptic (System -> Administration -> Synaptic Package Manager). Discovered that the GNU C Compiler is already installed. I know this because I checked under "Development" and "gcc" (which stands for GNU C Compiler) was already checked. I opened a command terminal and typed "gcc". When I hit enter, it replied, "gcc: no input files". It appears to be working.

I've now re-partitioned the hard drive (step (b) is complete), installed Ubuntu Linux on the other partition (step (c) is complete), created a multi-boot system (step (e) is partially complete) and GCC is loaded onto the Linux system (I'm ready for step (f)).

Showing "Cred"

This from CNN, concerning how much "cred" the candidates have. Gotta love John Edwards response of "I was with Benazir Bhutto in Abu Dhabi in the Middle East just a few years ago. We spoke at the same conference..." Geez, John. That close? You know, I was with George W. Bush. Yes, my wife and I had dinner in DC just last week. And Dubya himself was in town parked at the White House. Our restaurant was just down the street. So, you know, my wife and I are, like, in. We, of course, couldn't help but stop in and give The Man himself some pointers on how he can not look like a complete ass.

I realize CNN couldn't help but finish the article by throwing a jab at Dubya. They ended by stating,

But ignorance of Pakistan's travails may not necessarily prove damaging to a candidate's political aspirations. In 1999, shortly after Musharraf seized power in a bloodless coup, a Boston television reporter asked a U.S. presidential candidate if he could name the general in charge.

"A new Pakistani general has just been elected," the candidate responded, then corrected himself. "He's not elected. This guy took over office. He appears he's going to bring stability to the country, and I think that's good news for the subcontinent."

"And you can name him?" the reporter asked.

"General. I can name the general," the candidate said.
advertisement

"And it's?" the reporter pressed.

"General," said Texas Gov. George W. Bush.

Oh, you go, guys. Now, let me throw a hypothetical at you. Tomorrow, the head of the country of Yemen announces that they've killed Osama bin Laden and will be providing his body for confirmation to any country with interest. (I know, I know. Fat chance. But this is a hypothetical.) Okay, who would that person be?

Why All Big Companies Suck

I work for a big company. A VERY big company. And, frankly, it sucks. Don't know if its because of the example shown by the Bush administration (Ve must ave all power at ze top!) or what. But the amount of bullying we, the American people, are allowing is, well, bad. And getting worse.

My bitch today? I use Mathcad. A lot. And today it won't run. Don't know the reason. But when a piece of software, for which I've paid over one thousand dollars to have the rare privilege of running, doesn't work, what is the first thing most Internet-savvy people do? They go to that company's web site and look under "Support". When Mathsoft owned Mathcad, it was complicated enough. Mathsoft became a big company. And it was a pain. Log in, find the right forum, dig for the answer. It was truly annoying. Now, what happens when a big company gets bought out by an even bigger company? It becomes even more of a pain. Tell me this. Why does a person have to "log in" when looking for tech support? Is there some deep, dark secret waiting in the bowels of the support web site? Or, as I suspect, is it that the company wants to watch what you're looking for to figure out if you should be targeted better for ads? Of these two, which is more likely?

Okay, I've made my point that having to log in for tech support, again for a program for which I paid over a thousand dollars, is annoying. What's more annoying than that is when I have to re-sign up every time the company switches hands. Mathsoft was bought by PTC (whoever the *#*@&! they are). So, now, I have to re-sign up through PTC to gain access to their tech support, again for a program for which I paid over one THOUSAND dollars! (Are you getting a hint here that when the price goes over several weeks of income the support should go up accordingly?)

What a complete, total, utter crock.

UPDATE: It works now. No thanks to PTC (which obviously stands for "Pathetic Total Cockbreaths"), either. Turns out that they have a special licensing program running in the background. I thought that Paint Shop Pro had loaded that. Nope. It was Mathcad. I turned that licensing program off just yesterday. When I turned it back on, lo & behold! It works again! As for PTC, when I finally logged in, I discovered that I don't have the "privileges" to peruse the technical support! UFB!

Why Linux Will Never Be More Popular than Windows

I tried to jump on the Linux bandwagon. It's free and I had an older computer, a Linux CD, and I loaded the latter onto the former. Worked great. No problems. Loaded sans errors. All that did, however, was give me the basic operating system. Which means that I have a box that I can look at (using my video screen), move a mouse around on (using my mouse) and occasionally type away at (using my keyboard).

But I want my computer to do more than that. I actually want it to work. The first thing I did was to load OpenOffice. Think of OpenOffice as the open-source version of Microsoft Office. It has a word processor, spreadsheet, presentation, and database program. In the Windows environment, loading a new program simply involves locating the appropriate .exe file, double-clicking it with the mouse, and (typically) voila! It now works. Things aren't so simple in Linux. Loading things in Linux involve command lines ("sudo apt-get install X"), moving around directories, compiling, creating source code, the list seems is endless. When things don't work as they are supposed to, it can take days to work through the problem. The OpenOffice did load fairly quickly and (somewhat) painlessly. It was also a steep learning curve. At that time, I learned about being a root user ("su") and permissions and authentications and a myriad of other details.

Shortly thereafter, I wanted to be able to print what I was writing or reading. Here we go again. Command lines, CUPS, printer daemons, on and on and on. I managed to get the printer working, even though its on a network server. Again, another day and a half of getting it to work.

But the flatbed scanner remains on my primary system, which remains as Windows. Why? you ask. For the simple reason that I just tried to get a small USB-to-phone box working on my Linux system. I've now spent well over 12 hours trying to get it working. I believe I've now seen every form of computer error code known to mankind. I may have even seen some unique ones. For all that effort, it still does not work. Do you know how long it took to get it to work on the Windows box? About five minutes. The same goes for my many external hard drives, my 12-in-1 external card reader, my gaming joystick, my iPaq cradle, on and on.

Yes, all you Linux geeks out there can mock Windoze or M$ or Micro$oft or Winblows or whatever spurious name you wish to give it. But it works. And it works simply

I already hear the Linux protesters out there. "Everything is designed for Windows. Almost no one designs things for Linux!" True. Why do you think everyone designs their products for Windows? Yes, it's the most popular operating system. But I also see people writing software and designing products for Macs. Frankly, I think there's an issue thats bigger than the OS popularity. It's commonality. One copy of Windows XP Home is the same as another. And a copy of Mac OS X is the same as another. But Linux? Let's see, you have Ubuntu, Debian, Gentoo, the list seems is endless.

Oh, and don't bother boring me with the "One is the OS and the other is a GUI". I don't care. To me, the GUI is the OS. They're one and the same. I'm a user. I. Just. Need. It. To. Work. And I need it to work simply. I hate the command line. I don't want to have to load development libraries and worry about whether I have the correct authentication.

I. Just. Need. It. To. Work.

In the meantime, we Windows users will continue to make Bill Gates the second wealthiest man person in the world. Not that I'm happy about that, but until we see some commonality and simpler interfaces in the Linux world, the watch-word for Bill Gates will continue to be "ka-CHING".

And Then What...?

I see that the protesters are at it again.

Do something in Darfur!

Here's my question, Do what? Send in troops? Not on a bet. You geniuses believe that the best way to "stop the war" in Iraq is to "Bring the troops home". Yeah. Do that. Bring'em home. That will end the war.

Not.

All that will do is allow all the various factions (Sunni, Shia, al-Qaeda, whomever) to have a simple crack at each other. The war will not only not end, it will get worse.

So, instead, we should pull them out and send them into Darfur? Huh-unh. How many times have we sent in troops in amongst an Islamic factional feud, a pan-Arab feud, or a pan-African feud and actually had a lasting peace? Anyone? Anyone?

Give yourself a cookie if you said, "Zero!" That's right. A big, fat goose egg for ya. Let's tally up the scoresheet, shall we?

• Beirut, Lebanon - 1957 - 1958
• Afghanistan - 1980s
  
• Beirut, Lebanon - 1983
• Somalia - 1992
  
• The Balkans - 1990s
• Afghanistan - 2001
• Iraq - 2003

Note that, of all of these fights, we can only take credit for starting one (Iraq, 2003). All of the others were the people of the region themselves picking up arms and starting the slaughter. We came in afterwards and tried to help. We wound up getting our troops killed instead. Mind you, these people have been killing each other for centuries without any help from us.

Ending a war is similar to making psychological therapy work; it will only happen if the patient (combatants) want it to happen. The Arabs and Muslims (many times one and the same) seem to have a gene that says, "I must fight, kill and die!" Hence, we can try to "negotiate, compromise, rationalize" with them all we want. And it won't do a damn bit of good.

The best thing to do: Cut'em off. I mean completely. Forget simple embargoes. I mean totally, absolutely, ruthlessly. Don't send our troops into a region. Surround the region. Nothing goes in. Nothing comes out. Our troops have a much easier time of telling who are the good guys and who are the bad guys. The good guys are the guys already outside the war zone. The bad guys are anyone inside the war zone. No one leaves, no one goes in. Same for anything animal, vegetable, or mineral. Negotiations for a permanent peace begin once everyone has used up all of his ammo, food, and/or people. When whoever is left shows up at the border waving white flags, then and only then will we discuss things.

Until then, do anything in Darfur? Not a chance.