[conspire] Offlist mail thread about my Feb. 2nd talk at SVLUG

[Rick Moen]

So it goes.

I probably shouldn't have snapped at him, even mildly, but the
Microsoft-centrism (spare me from Windows 'power users' and their
prejudices) and certain artifacts that I've corrected in the quotation
below (really bad linebreaks, 'LINUX', etc.), not to mention attitude,
rubbed me the wrong way.




Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 20:38:14 -0800
From: Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com>
To: [a guy]
Subject: Re: your mail

Quoting [a guy]:

> Nope, it doesn't seem as if you couldn't get a presenter for February,
> not a tiny bit.  This actually sounds like a great topic, and I'm sure
> you dazzle and inform.(ed.)

Hi, [name]!  Sorry you missed it.  It was fun.

> My ususal problem (on SocSecDisability == no car & no home ISP)
> results in my not receiving your invitation until late Wednesday (at
> the earliest) and not being able to attend.  (Are most of your
> attendees developers, themselves, or are they mostly users?)

It's a mixed lot.  Judging from who laughs at which jokes, there's maybe
30% software-industry (etc.) insiders.  Beyond that, I'm not entirely
sure what the breakdown would be.

> Are any of your Hot AntiSPAM Tips applicable to any outside the LINUX
> arena, and have you posted them anywhere I could read 'em?  ("How the
> Web Went Wrong"!!  Wow, such a manifesto it must make!  {Danny O'Brian
> and Tim Bernors-Lee should be notified, as well!  BUT, perhaps they
> already Know Too Much!}  Are  you conjuring a
> book/utility/webscreed...?)

If you look on the front page of www.svlug.org, you'll see a download
link for my lecture slides (OpenOffice.org format) and the lecture notes
that go with them (ASCII text).  And one of the 'further resources'
linked from the slides is this related article that I wrote a year ago,
that was in large part the basis of my talk:

http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/firefox.html

Although my suggestions (in both that article and in this past
Wednesday's SVLUG presentation) concerning Web browser configuration and
extensions were phrased in Linux terms (e.g., pointing out what a huge
advantage it is to be able to use Linux distro package maintainers as
quality and security gatekeepers), almost everything is equally
applicable to people on all other OSes where Firefox runs.  Because,
well, it's Firefox, which is multiplatform, and because Firefox
extensions run atop Firefox and therefore are likewise multiplatform.

Even my suggestions about running a local instance of Unbound as a
local-to-you DNS nameserver works for other-OS people, as that software
is equally well available for Macintosh OS X, other Unixes, and
Microsoft Windows.




From: [a guy]
To: rick at linuxmafia.com
Subject: RE: The February Lecture

Ah.  My lack of web skills should embarrass even me, if only I weren't
so sleepy.  (I could actually do my homework and get the kernel of each
lecture this way.  Who needs to make friends and go out to cafes....)

>... almost everything is equally applicable...Firefox, which is
> multiplatform,....

Of (obvious) course; now that I see it's all about Firefox.  Regarding
which:

Power-userish friends are snarling about The Fox...how they switched to
it in its early versions to escape the bloatware of (and suspected
prejudicial agenda behind) IE, and how it has been unable to avoid the
bloat ("middle-aged spread"?) itself.

You seem [at first glance --- I haven't read your notes through]
enthusiastic about Firefox.  You don't think people should be moving to
Chrome or something?  (The Stanford students I know seem to be
supporting this browser shift.) What redeems Firefox, other than it's
The Devil You Know, and one is so invested in it?  Those of us rooted in
older single-core tech. have to ask, "How does it overcome its tendency
to slow things down, or make up for it in some way?"





Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 21:05:13 -0800
From: Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com>
To: [a guy]
Subject: Re: The February Lecture

Quoting [a guy]:

> You seem [at first glance --- I haven't read your notes through]
> enthusiastic about Firefox.  You don't think people should be moving
> to Chrome or something?  

Tell you what:  Why don't you hold such questions until after you've
looked at my lecture notes, slides (both linked from www.svlug.org), and
related article (http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/firefox.html).  I do
mention in detail Firefox's most compelling feature (extensions
interface), why Google Chrome is an obviously dumb idea (proprietary
browser from a firm with a severe conflict of interest) and why Google
Chromium's markedly better and worth keeping track of but still a bit
problematic (open source code with some excellent pioneering features
and ideas, reportedly hampered by a relatively somewhat subpar
extensions interface, and issued by a firm with a severe conflict of
interest).[1]

Along the way, you'll see mention of Swiftfox (proprietary) and
Swiftweasel (open source), which highlight what Firefox _should_ be 
when and if built more carefully.  (There is, e.g., current discussion 
within the Debian Project about better-security compilation practices
for their Iceweasel variant.)

So, your current questions are pretty much redundant to what I wrote.
Pardon me if I'm starting to sound a little peevish (which is, sorry,
likely), but it's irksome to have been crystal-clear in writing at some
cost in time and effort, and then have people pepper me with questions
solely because they didn't bother to read what I said.  It suggests not
valuing my time, or perhaps valuing it at cost after getting it for
free.


Also, after you do get around to reading what I've already taken some
pains to detail in writing -- speaking of my peeves -- I would
very strongly prefer to hold the resulting conversation in public, e.g.,
on the svlug at lists.svlug.org (SVLUG) or conspire at linuxmafia.com (CABAL)
public mailing list.  Why?  Largely because I participate in the open
source community in order to benefit _the open source community_, which
doesn't really work very well when it veers off into a myriad of private
conversations that other people seek with me.

(And you're perfectly welcome to attempt to apply my ideas to Firefox on 
proprietary-OS platforms, as mentioned, but I honestly, at the end of
the day, really don't give a damn about them or what their users want or
prefer.  So, if they say they want MSIE, Google Chrome, or whatever, I
have no comment, don't care, and have zero interest in discussing the
matter with them.)


[1] Are you surprised that I see Google Chrome's licensing and conflict
of interest as a problem, and were you unaware of Google Chromium?  
Does the notion of seeking to avoid proprietary code seem outlandish?  
I often observe astonishment at those points among MS-Windows users, who
typically gave up on any notion of security and computing autonomy
decades ago.  But I'm basically not talking to them.