Can We do Good?

I’ve often written about religion, both supporting many of its inherent qualities, and criticizing its more superficial adoption and the wider ramifications of such carelessness. A quote comes to mind, the essence of which is, you will always have people doing good acts and evil acts, but it takes religion to make a good person do evil acts. It’s not just religion, though. It is any belief that has not been fully examined.

You might say that Wall Street people, the banking people and our Washington leaders have a religion. Perhaps it’s a little like that golden calf the Jewish people made by collecting up all the people’s gold, melting into an image of idolatry, and worshiped in place of God. But what happens if we do not give up our gold?

Government is not evil, necessarily. It has a potential to unite us in common causes, just like religion. Just like the pursuit of idols. The important thing to remember is that all are human creations, whose purpose was, at least at one time, to help us unite our collective selves together.

Ideologies and beliefs are powerful. They are often even stronger than tradition and habit. It is the easy path, thinking in habitual ways. These ways are safe, they require little effort, and you can find many people to back you up. However, these ways are never the way of the hero. The habitual is not the way of the martyr. Change requires a sacrifice of one thing for another.

It is this line of thinking from which the often touted term “jihad” emerges. But what is holy to us? A tattered and dilapidated notion of true freedom? Some intangible fluff represented by “the pursuit of happiness”? Some radically unbalanced notion of Justice? It takes belief to make a good person do evil.

Right now, the United States has more people in prison than anyone else in the world. We are utterly without peer for taking away people’s freedom. We also invade more countries and fight more wars than any other country on Earth. We bribe and coerce more governments than anyone else, to insure that America’s “best interests” are realized. What are these interests? Well, in South America it was making certain our oil companies and other corporate interests were firmly rooted, and that nobody there had free health care or easy access to education. This, in exchange for a promise of prosperity under dictatorships and coups we staged. This is why Iran dislikes and distrusts us, too. And England. We are not a good country.

Yes paradoxically, we are good. Almost all of us, individually, are good people. So how is it that our leaders, both locally and nationally, somehow turn us into this giant black-hearted oppression machine? We don’t want people be killed so that Exxon can get more oil. We don’t want millions of people to slowly starve to death because they won’t agree to grow just a few select crops and import the rest from us, and other key partners. We don’t think people should be left to die when they don’t have money. We don’t want people to be tortured.

It is obvious that our government does not represent our wishes. Instead, our government represents ideologies that are devoid of a human conscience. However, our government is large. Many social programs within our government do represent our wishes. Unfortunately, the prevailing ideologies believe that we have limitless money to spend on the industries devoted to killling people, yet no money to spend upon ourselves, for the benefit of even our most basic humanity.

I can scarcely imagine what society we might create if we devoted our resources toward our own betterment instead of siphoning out all our resources to feed the machinery that only can kill. I don’t even mind the idea of a very large government, as long as it served the true best interests of the United States, which is the interests of all its people.

Unfortunately, it is ingrained into us from early on that our best course, as an individual, is to seek all that we want and desire for ourselves. There is little thought given to seeking what would be best for all people, not just ourselves. This mentality lingers even still. What business owner does not create and dangle carrots of hope before his employees, yet always holds absolute control within themselves? What intents and arrangements are formed between business people that do not, inevitably, lead to the fulfillment and triumph of one self-interested strategy over another? Is it any wonder that we normal people, when placed in a position of power, become corrupt by the inherent idolatry that has permeated the very formation of our character, and as such, is often invisible, even to ourselves?

When you are a religious person who tries seeing the world from outside the limiting scope of your belief, you encounter one of the greatest challenges that anyone might face. That challenge is, truly looking at yourself. This is the challenge we face. Any change that comes without meeting this challenge will be only the most superficial and meaningless change.

And in the spirit of government being capable of good, I have to mention Heidi. She lives deep in the bowels of the Center for Disease Control in California with all her biology ickyness — I mean goodness. We have a very long history. Heidi is an extraordinarily intelligent person, and I don’t say that lightly. She’s probably smarter than me, though I’ll never admit it. Strangely, I can never remember us ever really arguing about anything, though we have some fairly pronounced differences. She is exceptionally gracious. I could say that I am, at least, more honest than her, but I’d be dishonest saying it. I love Heidi — she is one of a kind.

The CDC has started requiring a couple days off each month, I am imagining, as a result of budget constraints. With this small bit of free time, Heidi has started offering health consultancy. I have no idea why, considering she is also a professor at UC SF and UC Berkeley. Her research specialties are sexually transmitted diseases and women’s health issues, including the insidious HPV, and also the collection of medical data for analysis. I mention this because some of you are policy makers who can most certainly benefit by listening to someone of Heidi’s character and expertise, and you, Johnny my boy, Mr. Big Wig at Planned Parenthood, if you guys need some serious research expertise.

Anyway, you can contact Heidi and learn more about the all-around sexy creature herself on her website. But don’t get the wrong idea from my silly words, this woman is hard-core. Mind like a vice grip. Now you’ve been warned, too.

We need to spend all that we possibly can on education for people. We need to focus our thoughts and energies into bettering our lives, and realizing that a better life does not, in any way, mean the accumulation of money credits. A better life is simply, just about each other.

Trust, In the Long Run

I never know what to make of new people. I’ll usually just watch them making themselves. It says more. They can say or do anything, whether it is true or not. Time makes everyone honest, eventually.

It’s often said that you know a good, honest person by their actions when their back is up against the wall. There is some truth in that. But even more truth can be found in someone’s actions when they are utterly embarrassed or humiliated. People avoid this, more than anything.

I’ve spent my whole life asking questions, even the most intimate and penetrating, as all of you who know me can attest. I do it to gain further insight into people and myself. It is also, inevitably, a test of character. I think I live up to my end. It is, perhaps, not entirely fair to expect others to. And I don’t. After a while, the questions aren’t even important. It is everything around them that tell the truer story.

Ask a guy how often he plays with himself. If he answers seriously, “I don’t, I’ve got a girlfriend” or “I just get laid”, you know he’s propping up his insecurity with some notion of “manhood” he holds important, and is willing to lie instead of feeling even insecure. If he answers, “none of your business,” you know that he has some rigid boundaries to watch out for. If he answers, “as much as possible,” you know there is much more likely a true, confident and solid person there.

In other words, going for the throat, or the root, so to speak, can be an efficient and accurate means to divine the more fundamental character of another, at least in part. I have no idea how Obama would answer that question, but imagining it has lead to a wide variety of scenarios. But it is not a question for the public sphere, yet, I suppose. And when it is, it will have lost its efficacy.

A few days ago, someone left some comments on an article I wrote a few years ago about Andy, Mark and marriage in Canada, and even moreso, about the decisions we make in life that effect us through time. This is what he had to say:

“fags. a bunch fucking asseating,cocksucking fags. hope you get aids faggot motherfuckers.”

I ask you, do you think he plays with himself? How would he answer that question?

People do not have such strong emotions unless something very personal is involved. This presents interesting problems for we people, who are mostly bisexual to one degree or another, who live in a society strongly slanted against same-sex love, despite our conceit of some “modern” acceptance. This acceptance exists only barely in our larger society, and sadly, rarely for any individual who ever finds themselves attracted to someone of the same sex.

This certainly leads to a lot of self-loathing, which can manifest in many bizarre and seemingly unrelated ways. But for the bisexual, it’s not always so difficult just choosing the path of being “straight”. What is important to remember, that such things are a choice. In other words, you cannot be straight simply by saying that you are, or even trying to believe it. That’s a good thing to keep in mind when you head to the voting polls. Some things are choices, and some things are not. Who we are capable of loving is not a choice. It just is. And it is the most wonderful thing we can ever hope to experience. And any time that love becomes more, and stronger in the world, we should help it to grow. We all need that.

So if you hear someone talking like this, I suppose it’s okay to get angry. My reaction is more akin to pity, because something within them is truly eating them up. I would try to help, based upon who they were. If that took anger, they would have it. If it took patience and persistence, they would have that. I would want to help, and not for myself either.

So the next time a guy tells you that they cannot tell if other guys are good looking or not, because they like girls, feel sorry them — try to help. Nobody is so insanely straight that they become blind to the aesthetic of half the world’s population. They become blind only as a means, and this is a confessional. If confronted with this fact, their next position is to admit, well, of course the can tell, but they’re not sexually attracted to men. It’s a hot spot, again, so to speak.

Sex is a very strong motive power for us, especially in men. Sparta harnessed this to create one of the world’s greatest armies. But when self-loathing is involved, any attraction can turn to aggression and even the machismo camaraderie of war.

Honesty is a rare quality. Even when brutal, it always leads to greater things. Imagine the trust you might place in another person, entering into a relationship with them, in love, or even in business. If they are willing to lie, rather than feel any degree of embarrassment or humiliation, how likely do you think it is that they would lie to you about selling you out for their own benefit, in one way or another, which is itself, a humiliating and embarrassing thing to do, and confess?

I suppose it might be like a little cache box of personal treasures that we keep hidden, for only our own eyes. Because if we reveal them, we are no longer special. We are no longer what we want to be, or wish we were. We become, only and simply, who we are. And we do not realize, that is where our true magnifisence begins.

Justin, you might be surprised to hear me say this, but you are the “straightest” guy I know, out of all these years, and all these people. Even considering that bizarre Swedish biker fantasy you shared with me. This isn’t a prize. Nor is it a curse. It’s just been a while since I told you that I love you, and I miss you, and in particular your clear, refreshing and utter honesty in all things, that even overwhelms me sometimes. Maybe it is a prize, if I had one to give, that could ever match that.

So here is hoping that should change come, that its foundation is rooted in the truth of all our vulnerabilities and our worth. May our separateness change directions. And our inadequacies find people that can fill them. May we no longer fear, and even have the reason.

The Librarian, the Banker and General

One of my earliest memories is sitting on a little wooden chair with a row of giant Dr. Seuss books, spines aligned revealing their titles, seated neatly on the half-height bookcases at our local public library. Once a week my mother and her friend Ramona, who was the playground teacher/arts and crafts person at our local elementary school, would take me so I could choose the books I wanted to read during the next week. I liked Dr. Suess books a lot, and books about the sun, even though I didn’t understand much of what they said.

I’m told that I was reading before I entered kindergarten, but I have no memories that are in relation to time or place, to know for myself. I do remember first grade, sitting in circles, reading books out loud with other children, being so bored and laughing at “see Spot run! Run Spot, run!” repeated over and over again. I also remember being told by the teacher that I cannot tell the other children what the words are; they must figure them out for themselves. It was a frustrating process for me. It was an exercise in patience.

It was largely my mother’s fault, I am certain. I remember her taping the written name on everything in the house. I remember the sounds of letters, and struggling to understand why “th” or “ough” was the way it was. I remember when sounding out letters became more than just that — when the words started forming their associated objects in my mind, and reading comprehension began. I can only presume that is what made Spot running and running so boring to read.

Today I was reminded of this by a Seattle Times article about a huge jump in library use by the public. They attribute people’s more frequent library visits to our economic downturn. I would be interested to know what types of books are being checked out. We are known to be one of the most literate places in the country, and our King County Library System is second only to Queens Borough, NY in use. Nationally, 68 percent of Americans now have a library card.

Even more surprising, at least to me, is we are reading more actual literature. The article claims that for the first time in 25 years, more of us are wanting to read something substantial. Half of us, in fact. If you look at 18-24 year old people, the increase is even more substantial. This is very good news, considering the vast majority of university degrees are currently in business. My hope is that people are beginning to question, and are seeking answers, that focusing alone upon business and money simply cannot provide.

Social sciences come in second to business, with around half as many undergraduates. That is an interesting group of people, whose powers can be used for good or ill by the predominantly business world. The same holds true for the third and fourth place disciplines of education and psychology. It is interesting noting that our society, characterized by its dominance by business and marketing, produces people educated mostly with degrees in business, psychology and broad social sciences. Our education is dominated by business, and then the disciplines of studying the mind, and the society, and back to education.

Most surprising to me is that philosophy majors, though a tiny minority, have been slowly yet steadily increasing. These are the people trained to think beyond any given discipline. They question everything, and seek answers. Possibly this trend reflects what people are doing on their own, by reading more literature. We attribute the invention of the public library system to one of our country’s founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin. What we might forget is that many of our founding fathers were also deep into the philosophical writings and ideas of the time, that were wandering about in Europe. These philosopher’s critiques of their own cultures, and their ideas for better ones, could be played out and realized in our nascent America, which was not burdened by the traditions and power structures firmly established in their European societies. And this, our founding fathers did.

But as with all free things, some one, some group, or some prevailing purpose or idea will seek to take ahold. For us, this is money. It is money, at the cost of us caring for one another. It is a monstrous industry grown up around war and destruction — of control, painted in the guise of “security”. It is the pursuit of money, where all else is secondary, even life.

There is no way I can express how happy it makes me, learning that people are reading more. How happy I am that they are seeking alternate ideas and perspectives. How happy I am, that it matters to them.

Thousands of letters were sent to families of soldiers who died, and these letters were signed, looking like a human, by a computer. Each letter named this family’s son or daughter, “John Doe”. For some reason, the Pentagon said this horrified them. But what is the difference? Nobody from the Pentagon saw or signed the letters, anyway. The soldiers are John Doe, even if the names were right. I suppose you could say, it is the efficiency of business.

Our President in a national interview claimed that one of the greatest successes of his Presidency, looking back, is the triumph over Al Qaeda in Iraq. When reminded that there was no Al Qaeda in Iraq until he attacked it, his response was, “Yeah, so what?” In the meantime, millions of people are dead and crippled in horrific ways, while a very few others become even richer, and our government and economy go bankrupt.

And by example, Israel, which was created a few years ago forcibly on Palestinian land, subsequently locks the Palestinian people into walled-off areas where their food, medical supplies and power are all controlled by Israel. The Palestinian people elect, legitimately, through a democratic voting process, Hamas to be their government leaders. We and Israel refuse to recognize the outcome of this election because Hamas is not a supplicant to the Israeli will. Instead, we kill thousands of Palestinians. It is true that Palestinians have fought against Israel occupying their land. It is not ethically correct for them to kill Israelis for this. Nor was it ethically correct for Israel to be established there in the first place. Nor is it ethically correct for Israel to do what they are now doing, to the Palestinian people. Nor is it right for us to say to Israel, we are behind you 100%.

War is easy. It is also highly profitably for the few correctly-positioned people. High short-term gains. It takes a lot of money to be elected. When we take into account emergency and supplemental spending, the United States is giving around $1 trillion dollars each year, into the military/industrial complex. This is more than all other nations on Earth, combined. At the same time, we are the only wealthy and industrialized nation that does not provide health care to its citizens, yet we pay more per capita for health care than any of them by far, to insurance companies and hospitals.

I wonder what might happen if we took even half the money we spend on destruction and spend it, instead, on the constructive, both here and for other people around the world. This might hurt the oil industry, and the pharmaceutical industry. And if we provide ourselves with cheaper universal health care, we would certainly hurt the medical insurance industry. But maybe George Bush’s wisdom isn’t really all that far off: “Yeah, so what?”

Move beyond the psychologists and sociologists. Look at the true images of war and death. Find out why so many of our soldiers are committing suicide. Find out why so many Israeli soldiers are. Imagine why our own soldiers, thousands of killed young men and women, are never seen, nor the many, many thousands more that have been mutilated, yet still live. Move beyond the business people and look at what a war economy means. Move beyond the business people and look at care and compassion, only for those with money, really means.

It is hopeful, believing that people are questioning. We stand on the brink of so many possibilities that science and technology have brought us. Just imagine what we might be capable of, if we can bring our more pround sense of humanity into this future. A future that instead values life over all.

Learning to Breathe

I enjoy my internal world. I enjoy it so much that sometimes I find the morning light outside, when there should be only darkness flecked with shimmering at a distance. It’s then that I realize I am in a room.

Nearly every night I move my body around symmetrical lines and curves while dripping sweat. After, I will breathe, sitting still in silence, in centered ways. In different ways. I will breathe until my mind is empty of all things that it can be. It is good, feeling this.

This night thoughts wandered in, like ghostly shapes around a boundless periphery. There is a very fine line between life and death, even when we are safe. The ghostly thought shapes made me wonder what you thought about this.

Vishvarupa, the AllThere is a subtle yet profound difference between having a capacity or having an ability. That difference defines and restricts you, as you consider such questions. The conscious mind lumbers through modifications in an effort to know, and so control. Or, perhaps, to wall away from sight.

This is why I thought, this maple bar is far too intense in its sweetness. Its experience is unreal, far beyond the pleasure of the blueberries just a moment before. The sweetness and texture was a visceral overload, like a bomb that blasts your attention toward meaningless things that always want more. I thought, I prefer the quiet flavor of a sweet yogurt with mint.

I imagined, this must be like sky diving, or various other thrill-seeking pursuits. A visceral overload intended to reveal just what living is like. Or so it is said. It is telling, however, how subdued and introspective these people can become, later in life. Something led them, eventually, to the stillness of blueberries.

Sometimes it is difficult knowing what is sacred and what is not.

I wonder if it is like Christians, proud to be killing in war. What else are we supposed to do, they ask. As the terrorists are getting ready to kill us, should we be all kum-ba-yah? Is it not the teaching of Christ, your Lord, that you should die, rather than kill another? Don’t be a lawyer with me. If nothing else, then yes, you should be all kum-ba-yah.

And you Jews of Israel. God told you that all people, in all their diversity, exist so that you can better know yourself. What is it that you are learning about yourself now? Just look how high the Christians have raised you up.

At least the Muslims can be understood better, on a more human level, as a people who rise up to fight against invaders and pillagers. But this religion, too, has been co-opted as another tool that guides the modifications of mind toward the unholy.

Ah, well. I suppose the oldest religion in the world might be right. “The faith of each is in accordance with one’s own nature.” What we see now is the nature of people, not their better spirit. Where is the belief that people claim to have? “Man is made by his belief. As he believes, so he is.” I can only assume that, though they say otherwise, they have no true belief.

Rather, “Living in the abyss of ignorance, the deluded think themselves blessed. Attached to works, they know not God.” Our acts, and their acts, are obscene. “As one acts and conducts himself, so does he become. The doer of good becomes good. The doer of evil becomes evil.”

There is such a thin barrier between life and death, existence and non-existence. We are all so unique. Everything is so unique. The scale of this is staggering for the mind, yet blissful for the heart. They are one, and the same.

“The wise man should surrender his words to his mind;
and this he should surrender to the Knowing Self;
and the Knowing Self he should surrender to the Great Self;
and that he should surrender to the Peaceful Self.”

I suppose doing that is harder than killing someone and then asking for forgiveness. Or conjuring through the mind some peculiar sense of duty, that flies in the face of both rationality and the true heart. But it is always harder to walk the walk, than to talk the talk. We know the difference, though, don’t we?

The difference is the blueberries. It is the silence, with only your breath. It is that other person who might be your friend, or someone you love. Other spirits who breathe. They are remarkable. They are beautiful. They are everything.

“The little space within the heart is as great as the vast universe. The heavens and the earth are there, and the sun and the moon and the stars. Fire and lightening and winds are there, and all that now is and all that is not.”

These are all words from the oldest of religions. From the most ancient civilization. Judaism and its offshoots of Christianity and Muslim are barely teenagers in comparison. Rowdy, unruly, and dangerous teenagers. Selfish teenagers. Thugs.

It is time now, I think. We have to grow up. We have to start taking care of each other — to help and to share. To enjoy blueberries, and all the other little things. To put aside the maple bars. To focus on that which allows our existence to be meaningful. Doing so is not an act of destruction. On the contrary, it is an act of creation. It allows us to see and feel the simple yet overwhelming importance of another. And in doing so, it becomes an act of creation, within ourselves.

“Creation is only the projection into form of that which already exists.”

Distractions From Christmas

Oh no. I should be baking shortbread cookies for Christmas tomorrow. But I’ve had Linux on the mind the past few days and just read an article that exemplifies several issues related to the popular perception of Linux. I have to put off the shortbread for a bit, or I’ll end up somewhere else. Don’t worry, Kim, I’ll be getting all the cooking done I promised, and a little more.

GNU/Linux is an operating system that lets you interact with your computer’s hardware. Microsoft’s Windows is also an OS. So is Apple’s OSX. The article I will be taking as a reference is called OS shoot-out: Windows vs. Mac OS X vs. Linux published at InfoWorld.

You might infer from the title, which evokes images of people with guns trying to kill each other, discussions of OS superiority are generally heated. And also, since people are not actually firing guns at each other, you can see that the title is purposefully provocative, in the “best” ad/marketing tradition.

As expected, the content of the article is woefully short on facts, while being long on broad generalisations. This doesn’t bother me as long as the generalisations can be traced back to fact, and are not sloppy in what they lead the reader toward. I’m hoping to help cut through some of the prevailing marketing deception to give a clearer picture that is not biased.

First, it is important to know that Windows is made by a company named Microsoft. OS X is made by a company named Apple. GNU/Linux is not made by a company, but rather by hundreds (and I’m sure thousands) of companies and individuals around the world.

OS X is based upon Unix. Unix can (sloppily) be thought of as a very well-designed and academic way of doing things in your computer. GNU/Linux is also based upon Unix, and carries the “tradition” much further. Windows is not based upon Unix.

Apple and Microsoft’s primary goal is to make money. It has to be, by law. GNU/Linux’s primary goal is to do the best stuff, in the best way possible. As such, Apple and Microsoft care a great deal about the percentage of the OS market they dominate, while GNU/Linux has no care whatsoever about any market share. That’s not entirely true, though. Some GNU/Linux people see growing market share as an indication that what they have contributed is something as beautiful and wonderful as they imagined it was, while other GNU/Linux people will see their growing market share as being good progress in their effort to “free” people from the domination of purely corporate interests. The mindset is different. Apple and Microsoft development is driven by a strategy that wants to dominate the marketplace of users. GNU/Linux development is driven by a strategy that wants to create the best thing possible.

Everyone knows that Microsoft has a long history of doing bad and bully-ing things, while many people believe that Apple is an altruistic, cool and good company. The truthier thing is, Microsoft has been so bad and mean that their gigantic marketing department could not even alter the public’s perception entirely, to make them seem good. Apple focuses their marketing on the sexy and cool, while their bad behavior goes largely unnoticed. And from the fallout of these marketing wars, GNU/Linux gets stuck with an impression of freakish computer geniuses doing arcane stuff that is well beyond the reach of most users. Or rebels using piece-meal computer equipment fastened with duct tape who just hack.

Hello I'm Linux

Don’t believe the hype. The InfoWorld article suggests that Apple’s OS X may be “the best operating system available.” Yet, at the same time, they claim that the growing adoption of OS X within business is not because of IT department choices, but rather users who push the IT guys until get it. This suggests an entrenchment in Microsoft products within IT departments that Apple is working very hard to overcome. I’m happy seeing that, because Microsoft-based products have a tendency to grow considerably in cost, as you need to add functionality that other platforms like Apple’s and GNU/Linux, already have.

From the IT department’s standpoint, heterogeneous operating system environments are a problem. First, you must have people who know about each different platform. Second, there must be a way for those platforms to work together. This is where standards are important. Just like people, no matter what background you come from, if you can speak the same language, you can get stuff done. Microsoft has a long history of trying to take control of language then twisting certain words and phrases so that only people from the land of Microsoft can understand it. This influences people to wish they were from the land of Microsoft. Microsoft calls this subversion, enhancement. The GNU/Linux people call this Microsoft tactic, Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish. They seem to attempt this tactic with nearly anything created that they do not control. Fortunately, people’s creativity appears to outpace Microsoft’s capabilities to wage this tactic on every new development. Now, they must be more selective about their targets.

Standards are also important to enable the complexities of various computer hardware to function together, as a whole unit. Apple is very aware of this. It is why they choose, very selectively, which hardware goes into their Mac systems. It is also why you can only purchase OS X and run it on Apple-purchased computers. If you try making OS X run on hardware other than Apple-purchased hardware, you may well find yourself sued by Apple. Apple claims these draconian tactics are in the best interest of people, because it assures that OS X will always run beautifully, since you can only run it on Apple-purchased hardware. It’s certainly in the best interest of Apple. Microsoft doesn’t care what hardware on which you run Windows. Neither does GNU/Linux.

Now, suppose you need to do something that’s never been done before. In both OS X and Windows, you can, to a degree. But Microsoft and Apple only allow you access to the way your computer functions in limited ways. A Microsoft or Apple employee will have had to imagine already something similar to what you wish to accomplish, if even in abstract terms. You only can access your computer in ways they allow and control. In GNU/Linux, you have absolutely no restrictions, and you can see or change everything, if you choose to.

This is why strange, new things are often created using GNU/Linux. I was amazed on my tour of astronomical observatories that the use of GNU/Linux was so prevalent. The world’s fastest supercomputers, the Large Hadron Collider, little microwave communication towers or sensing stations – anything that might require very low level access to a computer hardware system – Linux is likely the best choice. Not always. But when it is not, Windows or OS X certainly is not. Unless you are designing your new computer hardware system specifically for Windows or OS X.

Which brings us to hardware drivers. Hardware drivers are pieces of programming that live, pretty much, between your OS’s “brain”, and a given piece of hardware that must communicate with that brain. Sometimes strange hardware can avoid the necessity of having a special driver, if that hardware follows standards. But if it does not follow standards, or cannot, then the people who made the hardware are generally the people who write the driver. Almost always they will write a Windows driver. Often they will write an OS X driver, now that Apple has gained more market share. Rarely will they write a GNU/Linux driver. Two very notable exceptions to this are the primary video card manufacturers, Nvidia and ATI. They have been creating GNU/Linux drivers for a long time.

As the InfoWorld article points out, hardware driver availability is a headache in Linux. There is some truth to this, but there are also benefits to this, as well as headaches. When a company produces a hardware product and does not write a Linux driver, it is usually only a matter of time before an employee of that company, or a Linux user somewhere in the world who likes that hardware, writes one themselves, and then gives it out to the rest of the world. Once this is done, Linux forever supports that hardware. Here is the benefit in that:

My workstation computer system has a few pieces of strange hardware. When I install Windows on it, I have to go hunting for the disks that came with that hardware, so that I can install the drivers, so my computer can boot with Windows. It sometimes takes me a long time to find those driver installation disks, and I have to hope that they are still good. However, with Linux, I don’t have to go find any disks, because Linux knows about the hardware. The drivers have become part of Linux. Apple faces the same problem as Microsoft in this, if you purchased any hardware that did not come from Apple, for your Apple computer system. It is far less effort, and fewer steps, for me to install, say, Ubuntu, than it is to install Windows. And I can’t install OS X, because my hardware was not purchased from Apple – and even if I did, the nice Mac guy might come chasing me with an ax.

But the key point is fundamentally a perceptual one. What is reality, and what is marketing? It’s not always easy to tell in a technically complex field. The InfoWorld article mentions virtualization software, where OS X users and Linux users can actually run programs written for Windows. However, they also say, “Because Linux distributions run on Windows-compatible hardware, it’s straightforward to use desktop virtualization software.” This makes it sound like GNU/Linux is trying to run on hardware meant for Windows, and mentions nothing else. Actually, Microsoft’s Windows runs only on Intel’s x86 hardware platform (and derivatives) while GNU/Linux runs on this, and many others — even Apple’s former hardware platform, before Apple, also, moved to this “Windows-compatible” hardware. GNU/Linux systems are not limited by hardware platforms the way Apple and Microsoft are.

For the end user, who normally purchases computers based upon the x86 platform, and yes, that includes Apple now, that flexibility is not so important. What is important is being able to use the computer, in ways that matter to you. Similarly important, to some, is “doing the right thing” by not supporting companies that seek to control what you can and cannot do.

I know, from an IT perspective, it is far less expensive and much easier to maintain a huge fleet of GNU/Linux systems. But as IT people, we are there for the end users. Most of them have no idea what using GNU/Linux can be like. Many now know what using OS X can be like, and they are asking for more. As always, the best place to look is individual experience because it reflects the diversity of need. The rhetoric of marketing wars, or “shoot-outs”, distract from reality.

Explore. Have an open mind. Educate yourselves. Learn to distinguish between marketing and reality. The best choice is not always the best choice. Nor is the worst, the worst. Openness, and open minds. Trust. Intent. Even purpose. Motives.

GNU/Linux does not mean that everything should be free, as in never make money. It means, what is out there, ought to be free, as in liberated, not hidden, and no hidden agendas, either. That distinction has taken a very long time to settle in, and probably will take a very long time more.

Think of it as a big, Merry Christmas gift, that will always be there, year ’round, waiting for you to open, under that big as the world tree. It’s a gift for people, as well as businesses. And for some reason, it’s a gift that makes a lot of people shoutin’ mad. Strange, isn’t it?

I’ve put the cookies off for far too long, saying more than I intended, and not nearly enough. Merry Christmas to those of you I won’t see or talk to. This isn’t a very holiday thing to write, I suppose. A bit of a digression, too, though not completely, from the material consciousness/spirit issue lately. But Merry Christmas anyway! I’ll never get all this cooking done now… damn distractions. Oh, Merry Christmas!