Kuro5hin.org
technology | culture | freedom & politics
columns | everything | internet
media | news | diaries
op-ed | mlp | meta
submit story | your account | faq | mission | links | search | IRC | K5 Store

Guns 'n OSes (Culture)
By Da Unicorn, Sat Nov 25th, 2000 at 06:45:23 PM EST +Hotlist

/etc I am not into politics, religion, music or a lot of the things I read about here I am into guns and computers.

I just did a Kuro5hin search for "firearm" "handgun" and "pistol". I was somewhat surprised that the searches returned a rather anemic list of stories. Perhaps it is just me. There were a few stories mostly news. Now, IAAA (I AM an American). At the risk of starting a Holy War on either side of thie firearms issue I ask the community for a bit of indulgence while I ramble on with my questions / museings / opinions.

 

Some background is in order. I am ~50, born and raised in the Midwestern U.S. I am NOT one of these "Take my gun from my cold, dead fingers" types but I do believe in the absolute right of an individual to defend their home, family and property. By any means available wherever they live. I am a country boy. I hunt for meat. I shoot for fun. Computers are an addiction and I do computer, network and technology consulting.

My arsenal has gone from dozens of firearms in the past to a mere handful at the present time. As far as rifles are concerned I have owned everything from a .17 Bee to a .300 Weatherbee Magnum, including many in the middle of this range. Many an odd duck cartridge has been in my collection like the .357 Roberts, .45-70's, et al. Much like computer Operating Systems they all do basically the same thing with different uses, advantages and FUD surrounding the "best" for whatever job was at hand. Experience has led me to the conclusion that, just like an O.S. there is no "one" that is good for everything. While that old .17 Bee could damn near put one bullet inside the hole of another at great range with very little recoil or noise, it was traveling so fast that it would damn near vaporize the light bullet on leaving the bore of the rifle and could be deflected or fragmented by a blade of grass. Not much knock down power, either. Now that .300 Weatherbee could disable a Mac truck at 300 yards and it was pretty accurate but it could dislocate your shoulder if fired improperly. Just 2 example rifles and the differences between 2 tools that do the same basic "thing". Both were fine, beautiful rifles. Each had its use and one was not "better" than the other beyond a specific use. The point being that if I had the need to stop a bull elephant or enraged rhino the .17 Bee would be all but useless while the .300 Weatherbee would do it with authority and finality, all things being equal. Nor would I use that .300 to clean gophers out of the hay field as it would be like swatting a bee with a sledgehammer. It would be dangerous to neighbors and livestock, expensive and extreme overkill. As well as a waste of resources.

NOTE: I do NOT advocate killing for pleasure and certainly not the killing of endangered species for any reason beyond self preservation.

A few years ago I started shifting my arsenal over to handguns for several reasons. Living in a relatively small farming state we do not have any "big game" hunting opportunities beyond the White Tail deer. The law allows shotguns only with handguns included lately. Large bore rifles are extremely dangerous in populated areas and with a limited legitimate need beyond target shooting I slowly sold most of them off.

About the same time I started shifting my arsenal over to handguns I discovered Linux. Slackware .99 I believe. I have always been a do it yourself kind of guy. I had reloaded my own ammunition for decades before this. Those first few Linux installs were a good parrallel to my "roll your own" philosophy WRT reloading. You could get what you wanted with a little effort and try some things that were not available otherwise. I guess I was an Ammo hacker. I found the same satisfaction in using Linux as I had in reloading. There were catastrophic failures in both endeavors but I never gave up. I learned from my mistakes. I now wear shooting glasses while reloading and shooting and I backup my data often. Guns and Ammo are inherantly more physically dangerous than computers. I blew the side out of a fine Winchester 30-06 by stuffing too much vigorous powder behind too heavy a bullet once. I've lost several hundred Megs of data by hitting <enter> in a telnet session (B4 ssh) without reading the command closely rm -rf / is a lot different than rm -rf ./ heh. I guess what I am saying is there is a lot to be said for being able to customize your tools and equipment but it comes at a cost in effort, time and perhaps safety. It is not for everyone.

OK, you got this far so I didn't bore you to tears or you found it entertaining or perhaps you just need some ammo for the flamethrower. Thats cool, I welcome your comments but hear me out.

This is NOT a firearms or Linux advocacy piece. Not everyone should have a firearm nor should everyone be a Linux user. I am only attempting to draw a parallel between customizing ammunition for a specific use with customizing your computer software for a specific use. You can save money doing both although at the expense of your time. Both can become an obsession if you let it. Niether will bring you great riches, except to a few. Both can be exceedingly rewarding. Both have led me on to new exciting uses of my hardware. Niether has brought me fame or fortune. A firearm and its ammunition are simply tools, ditto a computer and its OS. Tools which you can custom load with whatever you need to get the job done.

While whatever the factory loads for the retail trade may do well for some, it is not for me. Reloading like Linux, BSD, et al are definitely not for everyone. It can provide a rewarding departure from the norm if you are willing to put forth a little effort.

Fdisking a factory install of M$ and slipping Debian/GNU 2.2 with a 2.2.17 kernel on the HD feels nearly as good as that well placed shot from the .44 Mag with 24 grains of H110 and a 240 gr. JHP handload that puts that fat doe in the freezer. Both help me retain my sanity. Both give me a sense of having accomplished something useful in my own way. The OS was free and the reloading components cost me less than a dime and a couple minutes. Both do exactly what I need no more and certainly no less. I have more I could blather on about but this has gotten pretty long and I can get into it in the discussion phase.

The questions are. Are there other communitiy members out there who reload ammunition? Are there other pastimes / hobbies that people engage in that have similar parallels? Am I totally and completely off my rocker?

Thanks for your time.

Da Unicorn

< kuro5hin SETI@home group (28 comments) | A HOWTO for Geek Political Involvement (42 comments) >
Sponsors
VA Linux Systems
o Hardware Solutions
o Build-to-Order Software Selector
vhosting.com
o Web Hosting / Colocation
o Domain Registration

gregstoll
o Moderate Submissions (0 new)
o User Info
o Your Comments
o Your Stories
o Your Diary
o New Diary Entry
o User Preferences
o Display Preferences
o Logout gregstoll

Poll
Do you shoot, if so what?
no
shotgun
semi auto pistol
revolver
rifle
all of 'em
you are an idiot
Pizza

203 Votes
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o Kuro5hin
o More on /etc
o Also by Da Unicorn

View: Display: Sort: Rate?
Guns 'n OSes | 235 comments (226 topical, 9 editorial, 0 pending) | Post A Comment
The problem is pepple don't want to be responsible (4.00) (#215)
by neuroprophet on Tue Nov 28th, 2000 at 12:03:22 PM EST
(User Info)

I am a US citizen and live in the US. I have been watching the US government's power grow, and the freedom of individuals to make simple decisions for themselves taken away. I believe the problem comes down to responsibilty. Slowly, more and more people in the United States don't want to have to take responsibility for the choices they make.

I will give some examples. Some of them may seem cruel, but it is how I feel.

Somebody earlier complained about a mother having to work 50 hours a week in a McDonalds at $6/hr to support her child and that simply saying, "Go to school and get a better job isn't the answer". While I agree that isn't the right answer, the question comes to me, why did somebody who can not properly support a child have one. It is a very irresponsible thing to do. She caused her situation herself, and I don't pity her of feel the government and my tax money should have to support her for doing something irresponsible. She needs to take responsibility for her actions herself.

There are all the people who want certain things censored/banned because they feel they are corrupting their children (porn on the internet, foul language in lyrics,etc.). Banning these things removes the right from people who would like to see such thing to see it. If people spent more time teaching their children, spending time with them, reading to them, then they would be more involved in their childrens lives and be able to steer them away from things they don't want them to see like a responsible parent should. It should not be the governments job to censore/ban all things you don't want your kids to see/hear. It is not the governments responsibilty, it is YOURS. It should be your resposnibility to screen your kids from what you feel is innapropriate. I may feel it's alright for my children to see things that you don't let your kids see. That should be my right. But as these things get banned, that right is being taken away.

I feel the US is destined to keep slipping towards a more european style of government where people are not required to be responsible. I feel this is a bad thing. I think people pay more attention to what they are doing and make better decisions when they know they will have to be resposible for the outcome.

[ Reply to This | ]



Making things happen (none) (#185)
by z on Mon Nov 27th, 2000 at 07:02:35 PM EST
(User Info)

One thing I learned before reaching 50, is that people who have the hacker mentality (in the hacker sense of that word), that is, those who like to get their hands on the inards of a system and see what they can do with it, take that approach with more than source code.

In the early days of personal computers it was easy to find the computer club meetings. You just looked for the cars with the ham radio antennas. People who were hacking radios easily transferred to hacking bytes. Others have mentioned building telescopes or airplanes.

There are some theories in psychology about the need to be creative or effective. But I don't know why some people have the hacker mentality and others don't.

z

Here's a quote that just seems to be relevant?

"Responsibility is not the price of freedom, but its reward. It is what keeps our lives from being trivial."


[ Reply to This | ]


 
Colt Woodsman, music, et al. (4.00) (#171)
by CAIMLAS on Mon Nov 27th, 2000 at 02:41:12 PM EST
(User Info)

I've got a pistol that I just adore - the Colt Woodsman. Sure, it's an old .22 pistol (1920 or something, I believe). It has a 10 round clip. It's the most balanced handgun I've ever seen, and fires quite well. As might be seen by it's age, it was also well built. This paticular gun has seen about 50 years of good, solid use on trap lines in NY state by my grandfather. He trapped foxes and coyotes to put his children, my mom and her siblings through college - Duke, Darmoth, and two other smaller schools most people woudln't have heard of. But aside from that... the gun is a beauty. :) It's a good symbolism of superior craftmanship that is rarely seen.

I agree with what the author has to say here. I've experienced several parallels in different fields. I play drums, and there's a /similar/ parallel there. Every drummer who groks his drums -needs- to have them set up in a certain fashion, or he's somewhat disabled - he has become accustomed to how he has them positioned, and anything else causes a slowdown or inefficiency. Model building (customizing a car/plane/etc), model railroading (designing your own cars, making your own scenery and buildings, setting the set's era), or hardware hacking - all draw parallels. There are always people that go beyond the expected norm and maximize the 'geekyness' of their hobby.

(Now back to wasting away on school work...)

[ Reply to This | ]



 
It goes deeper than that (3.66) (#143)
by Darth Yoshi on Mon Nov 27th, 2000 at 10:56:57 AM EST
(User Info)

I've given it some thought and I think that the pro- and anti-gun control groups are just a symptom of a deeper problem. The whole issue is really a conflict between basic assumptions. To simplify a bit, on one side you have the "american" perspective; that is, people are independent, capable, and responsible for their own actions. You can do almost anything you want, so long as you don't interfere with anyone else's right to do anything they want (remember, this is a simplification). Governments are formed for the convenience of the citizens. If you assume this, then guns are just a tool like hammers and saws, if you misuse them, then your fellow citizens (or their designated representitives (i.e.; police (remember, the "american" system is not "anti-government" just "anti-big-government"))) come down on you like a ton of bricks.

The other perspective (I call it the "european" perspective) is that governments are formed to take care of their citizens. Citizens are not required to be independent or capable or responsible (I'm not saying they aren't or can't be just that it's not required). In this case, the government has to govern to the lowest common demominator and has to protect the citizens from themselves. Guns are dangerous and therefore strictly regulated. Police are representives of the government, not (directly) the citizens.

Both systems have "government" and "citizens", the difference is which is more important. The "american" system considers the citizens more important, the "european" system considers government more important.

I'm not saying either system is bad. Obviously both approaches work. People are born, live, and die under both systems. There's a measure of malice, greed, and incompetence under both systems. What I am saying is that I think we in the US are moving from an "american" style of government to a "european" style of government and the current debate about gun control is just one symptom of that change. Of course the next question is "do we want to go to a european style of government", but that question opens up a whole 'nother can of worms.

---
Have a nice day.

[ Reply to This | ]


Afraid (4.00) (#111)
by flamingcow (ian@penguinhosting.net) on Sun Nov 26th, 2000 at 05:28:21 PM EST
(User Info) http://www.penguinhosting.net/~ian/

I know more of you are thinking it, but everyone in the US is afraid to say or even think it.


The second amendment was not put in place to guarantee our right to hunt or to protect ourselves from invasion; it was put in place to allow us to protect ourselves from our own government. Should our government decide to throw all the rules out the window, stop elections and take over completely, that part of the constitution is there to insure that alot of citizens have guns, and can defend themselves against the government.


It may sound silly that a group of citizens could ever fight against a government with a professional military behind it. However, even if that military is willing to fight the populace, remember Vietnam. The best military in the world can't control a populace that doesn't want to be controlled; it just doesn't work.


The second amendment should be titled "The Right of Violent Overthrow of the Government" and we should be damn proud that we have it. It is our final defense against dictatorship.

[ Reply to This | ]


I like building things... (3.20) (#106)
by slambo on Sun Nov 26th, 2000 at 04:31:37 PM EST
(User Info)

For me, the attraction to Linux and other open OSes is the idea that I can build it myself. I've always liked to make and build things, as is evident in my other hobbies: model railroading, cooking, candlemaking and writing. For me it's the attraction that I can put something out in front of everyone and say (like at the end of the X-Files...) "I made this." There is a great deal of satisfaction in completing such a project.
--
Sean Lamb
"A day without laughter is a day wasted." -- Groucho Marx
[ Reply to This | ]


 
DIY astronomy... (3.00) (#101)
by porkchop_d_clown (michaelheinz@att.net) on Sun Nov 26th, 2000 at 03:04:56 PM EST
(User Info)

As others here have noted, the common thread isn't Linux and guns, it's Linux and doing-it-yourself.

My grandfather is a reloader; although I don't think he has the chance to hunt much anymore. (Heh. He tells stories about taking the Philadelphia trolley to go hunting as a boy. Really seems like a different world).

Personally, I enjoy building and working with a variety of gadgets. For example, I built my own telescope: an 8" dobsonian (picture a cannon 10" in diameter and 50" long, with a revolving mount for aiming). I also built my own astronomy software.

Like many hackers & coders I get more pleasure out of building things than actually using them.


------
This space available for parties, birthdays and .sig messages. Please call 555-1212 for more information.
[ Reply to This | ]


 
This is simple... (1.72) (#92)
by TheLocust (ben [at] thelocust [dot] org) on Sun Nov 26th, 2000 at 12:27:28 PM EST
(User Info) http://thelocust.org

Guns Kill.
Linux Doesn't.

End of Story.


.......o- thelocust -o.........
ignorant people speak of people
average people speak of events
great people speak of ideas

[ Reply to This | ]



  • Software can kill by Xenophon Fenderson, the Carbon(d)ated, 11/28/2000 11:25:18 AM (none)
  • Nope by trhurler, 11/27/2000 02:21:42 PM (2.00)
  • Correction.. by Chiron, 11/26/2000 12:32:51 PM (3.66)
    • heh heh by Smiling Dragon, 11/26/2000 05:19:40 PM (2.00)
I don't understand you. (IANAA) (4.00) (#88)
by holdfast (Scott@secret.address.in.the.uk) on Sun Nov 26th, 2000 at 11:25:51 AM EST
(User Info)

This attitude of some people in the USA about firearms is completely incomprehensible to many of us elsewhere. I am not saying it is wrong. It is just completely bizzare.
Why do people in developed countries need guns? If bad people wander into town with guns, the police can deal with it. If a crazy dictator decides to invade my country, we have armed forces and alliances. That where some of my tax money goes.
If we are invaded, I can assure you that the last thing the Army needs is a load of people rolling in with automatic weapons and assorted camoflauged vehicles. Soldiers are trained to work with other soldiers. If I wanted to be ready to help, I would join the reserve. I was in it when I was at college. I know what to do with a rifle and other nasty stuff. The trouble is that I am not part of the system now. I would just get in the way.
Why do you need guns to get food? Like yours, most of my country is civilised. I come from a less developed bit of it. I go to work. I get money. I go to shops. I buy food. I may grow some food. It is not really neccessary. I might fish. I had an Air Rifle. I shot rabbits when I was younger. I stopped doing that a while ago. If I want better quality meat, I go to a better quality supplier.
Personal freedom? I am free. Democracy? I live in a multi-party (more than 2) democracy and my election results are decided by vote counters, not lawyers and judges.


"Holy war is an oxymoron."
Lazarus Long
[ Reply to This | ]


  • You're wrong. by trhurler, 11/27/2000 02:25:03 PM (2.50)
  • your .sig and your attitude by barooo, 11/27/2000 01:00:08 PM (none)
  • complex issue by monkeyfish, 11/26/2000 06:49:32 PM (4.33)
  • A small explanation.. by Sheepdot, 11/26/2000 12:39:16 PM (1.25)
    • Utterly wrong... by deefer, 11/29/2000 09:39:24 AM (4.00)
    • RE: A small explanation by Spook, 11/26/2000 02:30:12 PM (4.75)
      • Not insulting unless you take it that way by Sheepdot, 11/26/2000 02:41:22 PM (1.25)
        • nothing wrong with socialism by Spook, 11/28/2000 11:09:36 PM (none)
        • Re: Not insulting unless you take it that way by use strict, 11/27/2000 02:09:52 AM (4.00)
          • LOL! by Sheepdot, 11/28/2000 08:11:05 PM (5.00)
        • It isn't wrong. It just doesn't work. by holdfast, 11/26/2000 07:03:11 PM (2.00)
          • Life, Liberty, and the Third one by Sheepdot, 11/28/2000 08:23:50 PM (5.00)
            • Socialism died out years ago! by holdfast, 11/29/2000 07:
              Some more points (4.45) (#86)
              by naasking on Sun Nov 26th, 2000 at 10:42:35 AM EST
              (User Info)

              I've seen alot of good comments and discussion here. Both sides have some very interesting views and there are good points on both sides of the issue. But in reading all of these discussions, I came to a realization about this the whole gun control issue: whether or not there should be gun control depends on how much destruction you're willing to put in the hands of the average person.

              That's what it really comes down to. I'm sure you wouldn't want every person to have a nuke would you? Of course not. Why? Because they are FAR too destructive. But I would also bet you wouldn't mind too much if they owned a bat*. Why? Because a bat is not that destructive. The amount of damage/harm that could result from a bat is much less than from a nuke. The same goes for just about anything else that may cause harm; in the end it comes down to the question of whether you want the average person to have access to a device with this destructive capability. I believe this is undisputible.

              Now, with guns specifically, you have a great capacity to do harm. In the average case, all you need to is squeeze the trigger once, and someone is dead. If you compare a gun to a nuke where you'd kill millions of people with one squeeze, then you can see it's far less dangerous than a nuclear weapon. Compared to a bat which would take multiple swings(in the average case) to kill someone, it's obvious that a gun is more dangerous than a bat.

              So there's a tradeoff point, and the only thing that has to be decided, is whether or not guns are destructive enough(ie. it's easy enough to do a sufficient amount of harm) that they warrant control like nukes and other explosives. In short, do you want the average joe to be able to carry around an item with this amount of destructive capacity with said ease of destruction? An obvious example of this point is the fact that some guns ARE outlawed. Uzi's and other automatic weapons simply make it too easy to do harm and cause too much damage to allow the average person to carry around, hence they were banned.

              Now I believe that we have reached the point in the debate where most people disagree. The pro-gun people believe it's ok to own guns because they feel they can handle the responsibility of this destructive device. They feel they can make intelligent decisions about how and when to use it so it will not cause unintentional harm. The gun control people say that MOST people CANNOT handle the responsibility because people are, for the most part, irrational and emotional and hence, prone to make stupid decisions. Having such a destructive device just makes it easier to do harm when they make these irrational decisions/mistakes. All it takes is one squeeze, and you can't take it back.

              So you see, I don't think both sides are even in disagreement with each other. I think it's simply a case of arguing completely unrelated points. In fact, I bet that both sides would agree with the points I've made. The only thing they disagree on, is how to solve the problem.

              So the question then becomes: how do we resolve this? To be honest, I do think that people should be able to own guns if they want, but I also support a certain amount of gun control. Gun control does not necessarily preclude owning guns. I don't think that guns should be banned because they have their place and their legitimate uses. But I don't think we should make guns easily accessible to simply anyone. You wouldn't just give anyone a car would you? You need a license to drive which requires you to prove your proficiency and responsibility in handling the potentially destructive device that is a car. So why not with guns? Sure it's more hassle to have to register or get a license of some sort to prove you can handle a gun if you are a gun owner, but if it makes it that much more difficult for someone wanting to use a gun for harm to get one, don't you think it's worth it?

              So in conclusion, I'd like to say to the pro-gun people that not every gun control proposal is trying to take away your right to own a gun. I'd also like to say to the pro-gun-control people that if you try and limit a persons freedom to do what they want, they will fight you to the death so you're really not going to get anywhere. To both sides: problem solving requires thought and listening, not irrational evangelism and vehement defensiveness.


              * Note: Yes, I'm well aware of the fact that bats have other uses than destruction, but that doesn't lessen it's destructive potential so it's still a good item to use in this analysis.

              [ Reply to This | ]


              Satisfaction & Self sufficiency is the reward (3.87) (#60)
              by Da Unicorn on Sun Nov 26th, 2000 at 01:11:09 AM EST
              (User Info)

              Yesterday I posted this story. I was quite happy that the piece sparked some dialog. Despite the controversial nature of chemically propelled projectile weapons I got less flamage than I expected. Trying not to use the G word here!

              One thing I was sad to see was that very few people actually got my point. This is likely due to the rambling nature of the story and the apparent subject. Many just grabbed the controversial section of the subject and ran with that.

              This story is an attempt to make my point from a different, less controversial angle.

              It comes down to one concept: satisfaction in doing something in the way that best suits your needs and abilities / resources.

              I like to do things my own way. I still believe in concepts like honesty and honor. By living my life the way I do I find great satisfaction in how I do what I do.

              One of the things I like is knowing that I can take a run of the mill PC and a Debian/GNU Linux CD and build a reliable gateway or fileserver and do it with whatever tools installed that I need without hassles about how many installs I made from MY CD (a point made in another comment, also). The Awesome configurability of a Linux system coupled with the multitasking makes it very satisfying for the time & effort.

              I get the same feeling from processing my own food, be it veggies from the garden or butchering an animal I have raised or taken while hunting. This extends to creating tastey dishes with the produce of that labor.

              People who have no concept of how meat and fish get to their table should refrain from chastiseing those of us who actually can kill, dress and process a carcass for food. It is an ancient survival skill that has been replaced by exchangeing pieces of paper for plastic wrapped packages of flesh.

              We burn wood to heat our home. We sold logs awhile back so I have a huge stash of cull logs and tops for blocking up into stovewood. By the time I have cut, split, hauled and stacked the wood I have gotten a good workout, a few liters of clean air and some dirt under my nails. When the wind blows and the mercury is in the bottom of the tube that wood feels mighty satisfying burning away in the stove.

              The way I do things isn't for everyone but it works for me. I use Debian for the same reasons I process a portion of my own food and burn wood to keep warm. Because it seems to be the right way for me to accomplish the goal at hand. Like the food and the wood I learned it as I went along by reading and picking it up from others as I did it.

              Therein lies the recurring theme. To find the best way to accomplish your goals utilizing the best tools you can find in an economical and useful manner.

              I hope this clarifies my point without the controversy.

              Da

              [ Reply to This | ]



              writing poetry...coding (4.00) (#51)
              by AtomZombie (atomic AT morgul.net) on Sat Nov 25th, 2000 at 08:59:53 PM EST
              (User Info) http://web.morgul.net/~atomic

              Are there other pastimes / hobbies that people engage in that have similar parallels?

              getting over the fact that this post had to do with guns, i would like to respond to the actual point of the story rather than the example.

              i am a writer. i am an observation junkie; i rely on my own ability to remain insane. writing can become an obsession, just as having a writer's block can become an agony, a hell. during my freshman year in college i had a dry spell of about 4 months. i felt like i was losing my identity. when the first poem in months began to find its way from my brain to my fingers to the screen it was ecstacy. for a writer, especially one who wraps herself around it so much, getting a poem to work your thoughts into exactly what they should look like in linear form is a wonderful feeling; a relief after a terrible thirst.

              i am very new to coding. not so new to web design. but getting a program to do exactly what i want it to do, to work, gives me the same feeling of relief, thrill, and completion as writing a poem or story that is the sum of my thoughts and observations. getting my web pages to communicate to the eye exactly what i want them to is equal to writing a coherant essay, missing no angle.




              atomic.

              "why did they have to call it UNIX. that's kind of... ewww." -mom.
              [ Reply to This | ]


               
              Computers, guns, hacking, self-reliance (3.88) (#47)
              by gbroiles on Sat Nov 25th, 2000 at 08:22:59 PM EST
              (User Info)

              Eric Raymond has written some about guns and his fondness for shooting.

              Some of the enjoyment people get is perhaps because they're engaged in a task which is complicated enough to keep their attention, but not so hard it's frustrating - as described in Flow by Csikszentmihalyi.

              I think there's more to this than that, though - you can get some satisfaction or fulfillment from any number of tasks. I find that I get the most satisfaction from doing things which not only create a "flow" experience, but from those which enhance or maintain my own self-sufficiency and proficiency at important things.

              Computer/net-related things are on that list for me - as is shooting, though I haven't taken up reloading, and law, and electronics, and auto mechanics, photography, and politics. I really enjoy learning about, manipulating, building, fixing, and teaching others about the things that are important to me in my environment. (The list above isn't complete - there's tons of other stuff I want to learn about - but real learning takes time, and resources.)

              Also, I enjoy working with things which are susceptible to tinkering and hacking and exploring - like Unix, like older cars, like 1911-pattern semiautos or AR-15's, like PC architecture hardware. I can appreciate the quality and design of some things which aren't really intended for tinkerers - like Macs, or Glocks, or newer BMW's - but I find I don't enjoy using them as much as I enjoy using things I can monkey with myself. (That's not meant as a slam against those things - there's a Glock in the gun safe on my nightstand, and I bought my mom an iMac, just because they're hard to screw up if you're not in a good position to fuss around with details or appreciate configurability.

              Some things - like modern 35mm SLR cameras - can give you the best of both worlds. I've got one of those fancy cameras another commentator didn't like. I bought it after spending a day with another friend who took a lot of unrepeatable pictures with her manual 35mm camera - turned out after we developed them that they were underexposed due to misconfiguration. It's great to have the ability to monkey with aperture and exposure when I want to take artistic risks - but it's also really nice to be able to use the "green box" setting (on the Canon EOS series) and be confident that I'll get sensible exposures if it's crucial that I get a reasonable if less expressive exposure (like these from a protest in Berkeley - no way I'd ever get to reshoot, if I'd judged the settings wrong.)

              I think there's a lot of crossover between different vocations or hobbies that are susceptible to people teaching themselves about technology - some people enjoy learning, and enjoy a feeling of understanding and mastery over their immediate surroundings. I realize that sounds kinda old-fashioned and macho, and not very PC - but it's what I experience. It feels good to know that I built my computer from parts by hand, that I set up the OS myself, that I keep it running myself - that if my truck breaks I can fix it again, probably with the tools that I've got on hand, that my home is comfortable for me because I've made it that way, and I can protect myself and my dogs and my family from harm which others might cause.

              Am I in control of everything? Nope. If the hard disk crashes, I don't have the skills or the tools to recover it at the hard disk level. I've rebuilt engines, but don't really have the time for that any more. If an earthquake swallows my home, it's gone. And, sure, there's a limit to the protection I can expect from my own weapons and training. None of these things is absolute.

              Still, I feel a lot better when I'm operating in a world where I can understand what's going on, and how to change it if I want to. That's the underlying motivation behind my adoption and use of open-source software, and a lot of other things, too.

              [ Reply to This | ]



               
              I don't totally disagree (2.85) (#46)
              by Dacta (maillist at dontspamme nicklothian dot com) on Sat Nov 25th, 2000 at 08:08:02 PM EST
              (User Info)

              I'm not totally anti-gun. I think they have their place, even if I think the concept of a "right to bear arms" is a stupid idea (yeah, IAMNA - I am not American).

              However:

              A firearm and its ammunition are simply tools, ditto a computer and its OS. Tools which you can custom load with whatever you need to get the job done.

              That argument is meaningless - you can use it for anything. A nuclear bomb is just a tool (see how China wanted to do engineering with them?), so should everyone be allowed to have one?



              ---
              Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. (Stolen /. sig)
              [ Reply to This | ]


              foooood (2.83) (#45)
              by goosedaemon (matthew@syn/phusis/.com) on Sat Nov 25th, 2000 at 08:05:18 PM EST
              (User Info)

              i think homesteading is a good parallel. grow your own food, experiment with it, play with animals and their behavior. lots of fun. very roll-your-own-ish. a related link is www.countrysidemag.com. and self-sufficiencistic. yes, that's a word. at least now it is.

              THERE IS NO 'N' IN 'PHUSIS'!
              [ Reply to This | ]


               
              Love the message, dislike the messenger (3.40) (#42)
              by Saxifrage (wesleym AT teleport.com) on Sat Nov 25th, 2000 at 07:49:17 PM EST
              (User Info)

              I think you have an awesome point there. There are certainly similar parallels which make us want to use Linux, and I think that it's a fair analogy to make.

              The question is, what are they? After all, not everybody gets into it because they have the roll-your-own mentality. I started using Linux just before my fourteenth birthday, and have been ever since then. I dropped the Windows habit two years ago now, and haven't looked back since.

              But at thirteen, I didn't have any sort of analogy to the roll-your-own philosophy, nor did my parents. Unlike a lot of nerds out there, I come from reasonably affluent stock, and I never saw my parents doing a lot of fix-up projects. I mean, there was always that aspect -- he could fix stuff, sure, but seldom did for lack of time -- but it was never prominent. So what brought me into it?

              Part of the nature of Linux is that, while your point is true for a number of people, there are lots of reasons to start using Linux. I mean, I use it because I live for stability, and because I do programming and that sort of thing. (You have to give up something, too; I do web design, and I hate The GIMP. I still own Windows copies of Photoshop, and I'm still planning to build myself a box to run Windows on anyway, because I can't afford not to have it anymore.)

              I think it's key that the mentality is there, but I just wanted to make the point that the roll-your-own isn't the only reason to get into it.
              "I may disagree vehemently with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." - Francois-Marie Arouet de Voltaire
              [ Reply to This | ]


              Creativity & flexibility are good (2.60) (#33)
              by gunner800 (gunner800@yahoo.spamisbad.com) on Sat Nov 25th, 2000 at 05:11:01 PM EST
              (User Info) http://www.asomethingiknownotwhat.com

              With enough time, knowledge, and willpower I could use linux and an old 486 to make a serviceable firewall. Obviously not the ideal solution, but a challenging and fun one to implement. Just try putting Windows 2000 on a 486 and see what happens.

              With practice and a lot of refinement of my equipment, I can knock over targets at 100 yards with my .357 revolver (a short Ruger Security-Six, intended for defensive use at maybe 10-20 yards). Not as effectively as I can with a high-powered rifle, but it's more fun with the revolver. Try that with a cheap or poorly-maintained gun and ammo you didn't pay attention to when reloading.

              I like to customize. I like being able to take things apart without destroying them. I like knowing that no matter how good I am, there's always something more challenging to try. I like being able to find out what's really going on inside my stuff, what makes it go. I like having enough fine control to try something that isn't really supposed to work.

              I get all that by building and upgrading computers rather than buying proprietary stuff. I get it from using linux more than from Windows. And I get it from target shooting.


              [This space intentionally left, uh, mostly blank]
              [ Reply to This | ]



               
              Heh. (3.44) (#23)
              by simmons75 (simmons75 USA net) on Sat Nov 25th, 2000 at 03:01:29 PM EST
              (User Info)

              If this gets dumped, it won't be my fault. =) I voted +1, front page.

              Maybe it's because I'm a Linux bigot, but I love hearing stories like this. I can identify with this. Quite frankly, though, my Linux story is sadly typical: I discovered it in college and haven't let go yet. The weird thing is that once I got to univerity level I switched from CS to Journalism, but refuse to quit using Linux. I'm not a reloading type, but my father is. I blame my parents for my love of Linux for the same reason you credit your Linux usage: my parents are do-it-yourselfers and it rubbed off on me.

              My dad started as a mechanic, and does woodworking. My mother did some woodworking and currently does a small craft-show circuit with hand-woven rugs. I don't carve, I'm all thumbs, but I dig Linux. Something not working right? Fix it. That's my philosophy. I'm terrible at math so I'm not going to code the next Quake. I've forgotten most the theory I learned in CS classes so I'm not going to be coding the next Linux filesystem, the next UN*X graphical user interface or anything of that nature. To me, my Linux box is a '68 Camaro in the back yard. I tinker with it, beef it up a little here and there, and generally try to squeeze the most performance out of the thing as possible. It doesn't require an engineering degree or a CS degree.

              Nice to see that other "normal" folks treat Linux as a hobby. =)

              [ Reply to This | ]


               
              Sigh. Another flame war. (2.81) (#19)
              by porkchop_d_clown (michaelheinz@att.net) on Sat Nov 25th, 2000 at 02:36:48 PM EST
              (User Info)

              Okay; is this topic really neccessary? We all know how this will go - a few gun owners and supporters, and a few lets-talk-about-this-rationally types will be drowned in a sea of invective from people who firmly believe that the only way to make themselves safe is to destroy all guns. (The fact that any schmuck who paid attention in high-school chemistry can wipe out an office building is never to be paid attention to, along with the fact that cars kill 10 times the number of people guns do every year.)

              Nor can people seem to discuss rationally the fact that crime falls in cities that pass right-to-carry laws, or the idea that the purpose of the 2nd ammendment isn't hunting - it's self defence. Heck, people freak at the site of a fingernail cleaner.

              So, since we all know how this is going to go, why bother talking about it? I've seen it over and over again, on bulletin boards and in real life. I don't have the strength to go through it again.


              ------
              This space available for parties, birthdays and .sig messages. Please call 555-1212 for more information.
              [ Reply to This | ]


              Tools aren't good or evil (3.41) (#12)
              by Luke Scharf on Sat Nov 25th, 2000 at 01:38:34 PM EST
              (User Info)

              Discplaimer: IAAA

              <rant>

              Tools aren't good or evil - they do whatever the person who is weilding wants.

              For instance, take the lug wrench that's part of the spare-tire kit in every car. The one on my car is a piece of springy steel that's about two and a half feet long. It provides great leverage for getting the lug nuts off and the finally wheel off of the car. I can use to change a tire for stranger in distress - out of the highest moral aims. I could also use it to beat the poor driver senseless and take his/her valuables.

              Computers and guns fall into the same catagory as the wrench - they are tools, and do what we tell them. AFAIK, nobody in their right mind would advocate banning lug wrenches on the basis that they can be used to commit crimes.

              </rant>

              <rant>

              One other rant - it seems to me that most people who are afraid of guns haven't really used one. I went shooting not too long ago with my friend who has a .243. For those of you who don't know, that's a rifle that's big enough to kill a deer, but not as big as some people use. The weapon was just powerful enough to let you know what you had in your hands - a tool that can kill things. The limits also become very obvious - it will ONLY kill things that you point it towards. Obviously, nobody in their right mind will point it at a person. These constraints are, as far as I know, the foundation of gun safety.

              The other thing that came very evident at the shooting range was that everyone's lives depend on being civilized and following the protocol. And I could see that everyone else there was aware of this. The situation is the same in normal life (traffic for instance), but people aren't aware of it as often. I want share this insight with other people in the hopes that people will realize exactly how good we have it here in this part of America, and so that they don't mess it up by being reckless.

              </rant>

              And yes, I plan to get a rifle once I get my DVD player and digital camera. Hitting a piece of paper that's 100yd away is difficult enough that I think I can put in the effort required to get good at it.



              [ Reply to This | ]


              Guns are bad. (2.67) (#10)
              by Eloquence on Sat Nov 25th, 2000 at 11:48:45 AM EST
              (User Info)

              You are, in fact, "totally and completely off your rocker", whatever that means. The fact that you draw a parallel between an operating system and deadly weapons already seems to be the result of a twisted way of thinking, a symptom of the American gun-obsession. I can think of no useful discussion to come out of this other than the dreaded handgun control debate, and if anyone is really interested in it, they can find a good collection of facts here.

              I don't have a strong opinion on hunting for food or for pleasure (and I don't believe you if you say it ain't for pleasure); although I would prefer if the people doing it could stick to playing Quake 3 Arena and leave the animals alone. I do have a strong opinion if kids are involved in this kind of activity. The kind of people who install porn-filters at home to prevent their kids from seeing a dick or a pussy but teach them to make their own amno, frankly, just piss me off. And then they'll probably tell you that the kids shouldn't see nudity because it would make them violent..
              --
              Keep up-to-date on copyright, file sharing, privacy, anonymity, cyber liberties. Read infoAnarchy.
              [ Reply to This | ]