[Arm-netbook] Logging and journaling

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68


On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 4:36 AM, Julie Marchant <onpon4 at riseup.net> wrote:
> On 02/11/2017 05:51 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>> you're going
>> to have to demonstrate to me that systemd has been developed (and
>> deployed) in a 100% ethical manner
>
> So systemd is guilty until proven innocent?

 it's been demonstrated already to have been unethically developed and
deployed (the problem being in this conversation that any time i
mention why i believe that to be the case, it's dismissed or rejected
- often violently. these reactions *being* symptomatic of the very
underlying reason and cause of my deeply-felt concern... concern that
i am having a lot of difficulty expressing)

i was inviting people to evaluate that for themselves, for two
reasons: firstly i'm completely exhausted so don't have time or energy
to go over it, and secondly, if i provide all the answers that removes
all opportunity and possibility for learning.

 an ethical act is defined as "increasing the truth, love, awareness
or creativity
 (those qualities being synonymous guide-words for the same underlying
 concept) of one or more people without reducing the same qualities
for *anyone*".

 now, before asking the crucial questions, i have to ask people to
consider answering them *without judgement*, and *without implied or
expressed criticism*, in an *objective* fashion.  if i ask questions
and people react, "what are you saying???? are you saying that
debian's process is incompetent??? how DARE you!!!" or much worse
reactions than that, we're not going to get anywhere.

 we know that there's an underlying systemic breakdown that is *not
anyone's fault*.  reacting badly by assuming that any *discussion* of
the underlying systemic breakdown *is* one particular group or
individual's fault is itself part of the problem.

 so please don't do it.  not on this list.

 so.  the question is: what behaviours or decisions in the development
and deployment of systemd can be shown to have caused a reduction of
truth, love, awareness or creativity in at least one person?

 put another way (in terms of energy expenditure and resources, which
is a parallel and identical way to ask the exact same question):

 has any individual, anywhere in the world, had to spend extensive
amounts of time and energy as a result of (1) the development or (2)
the deployment of systemd, which *could* have been avoided and,
because it was not, resulted in a reduction of or diversion of their
resources, time or energy?




> Alright then, unless you can demonstrate to me that the EOMA68-A20 has
> been developed and deployed in a 100% "ethical" manner (where I am not
> going to explain what "ethical" means),

 julie, sorry, but that's not reasonable or rational.  reading the
lines i believe i understand the point you are trying to make.  bear
in mind i didn't come across an actual definition of an "ethical act"
until about 6 months ago, which doesn't help, much of what i've been
*trying* to do has been subconscious or just not possible to properly
express.

 so,

> I am going to assume that it is
> unethical and refuse to support it.
>
> Except I'm not actually going to do that, because that would be
> unreasonable.

 un-reason-able.  you can think of a good *reason* why such action
would cause a reduction of truth/love/awareness/creativity.  you
operate by an ethical code.  this is fantastic.

> There's a reason our courts don't work this way.

 interestingly dutch law has a fundamental basis that if someone may
show something to be "unreasonable", it is acceptable and *overrides*
existing laws.  first country i ever heard of that has such a basis.

l.