The Euro skeptics and pro Europeans are finally united in an opinion!

We both agree that Nigel Farage is a complete moron.

Perhaps we should put a damp rag like the one he mentions in his mouth next time he opens it?

Nigel Farage, you’re an disgrace to yourself. The European parliament is no place for personal attacks, and you aren’t fit to carry the title Member of the European Parliament. Please keep the honour to yourself and resign.

Every sensible person outside of the U.K. thinks you should. Even the Euro skeptics do. You’re an embarrassment for your country and its culture, so I hope for the people in the U.K. that they’ll kick you out of politics.

I fear you’re just playing the populist card, and that you’ll even get votes for this from other morons.

Please don’t rewrite softwares (that are) written in .NET

This (super) cool .NET developer and good friend came to me at the FOSDEM bar to tell me he was confused about why during the Tracker presentation I was asking people to replace F-Spot and Banshee.

I hope I didn’t say it like that, I would never intent to say that. But I’ll review the video of the presentation as soon as Rob publishes it.

Anyway, to ensure everybody understood correctly what I did wanted to say (whether or not I did, is another question):

The call was to inspire people to reimplement or to provide different implementations of F-Spot’s and Banshee’s data backends, so that they would use an RDF store like tracker-store instead of each app its own metadata database.

I think I also mentioned Rhythmbox in the same sentence because the last thing I would want is to turn this into a .NET vs. anti-.NET debate. It just happens to be that the best GNOME softwares for photo and music management are written in .NET (and that has a good reason).

People who know me also know that I think those anti-.NET people are disruptive ignorable people. I also actively and willingly ignore them (and they should know this). I’m actually a big fan of the Mono platform.

I’ll try to ensure that I don’t create this confusion during presentations anymore.

SMASHED at FOSDEM?

This is to let Rob Taylor and David Schlesinger know that they better start organizing S.M.A.S.H.E.D.

Tumbler

Last few weeks I have been working on the new thumbnail infrastructure for future Maemo products.

Last year I made a specification for requesting thumbnails over D-Bus. Afterward I made a quick prototype and replaced the hildon-thumbnailer library of Maemo with it. This prototype will be deployed on the standard N900 image. It’s too late to replace Fremantle’s thumbnailer with the new stuff. It takes time to properly test it.

While I was developing both the specification and the prototype XFCE developer Jannis Pohlmann contacted me about rewriting my prototype for use in the XFCE project. Tumbler was born.

The nice people at Nokia are more interested in working with upstream projects instead of maintaining own products separately, so I shifted my focus from hildon-thumbnail to contributing to Jannis’ Tumbler project.

We realized that we needed different kinds of schedulers so while Jannis was developing Tumbler I kindly asked to consider abstracting scheduling a bit. Tumbler now has two schedulers. The background one sets I/O and scheduler priorities to IDLE and processes its thumbnail tasks in FIFO order. The foreground uses LIFO and will instead of grouping Ready signals together, emit them immediately after each single thumbnail is finished. Default is of course foreground.

We also realized that thumbnail flavors are going to be platform specific. So we added some support for this in the DBus APIs that we further fine tuned and versioned.

Congratulations and appreciation to Jannis who made Tumbler’s code and design really nice. Also thanks a lot for constructively considering our requirements and helping adapting Tumbler’s code to cope with them.

I know you for example worked one long night on this stuff, so I officially owe you a few beers and/or cocktails next conference.

How about FOSDEM?

Found this while surfing the internets

The Theory of Interstellar Trade. A paper by Paul Krugman, July 1978.

It should be noted that, while the subject of this paper is silly, the analysis actually does make sense. This paper, then, is a serious analysis of a ridiculous subject, which is of course the opposite of what is usual in economics.

Pat Condell on ultra tolerant liberal left people

Not watching youtubers very often I almost forgot about Pat Condell’s video blog. Today I decided to take a look at his latest video material.

Pat Condell is, just like me, an outspoken atheist who enjoys exercising his freedom of speech to criticize various religions. Fairly often he criticizes Islam.

Before I continue I’ll remind people that, like Pat Condell, I have nothing in particular against Islam. I don’t have anything against peaceful people in general. Christian, Muslim, atheist, Buddhist or whatever: I don’t care that much. I don’t believe any of those fairy tales, but it’s your freedom to do! I do care about it when, in for example Western countries, countless Christians try to expunge you from society because “you don’t believe in anything”. For many of them not believing is worse than believing in the wrong God, or being a Satanist, or being a sadist. I want to criticize religions and I want to stress the importance of having the right to criticize religions.

Pat takes on the ultra tolerant liberal left people in this video. Just like Pat I used to be on the liberal left. And just like Pat, because I believe in things like social justice, tolerance and respect, I am no longer on the liberal left. Here’s a quote from the video:

You people have certainly reminded me , as if I needed reminding, why my political views have changed in recent years. You see.. foolishly, perhaps, I used to take freedom for granted.

But now thanks to ultra tolerant self hating-multicultural lemmings like you, I don’t.

Politically I used to always be on the liberal left. Because I believe in things like social justice, tolerance and respect. You know, the good things in life. I still believe in those things, which is why I’m no longer on the liberal left.

Apologists for evil

In this video Pat talks about banning the burka. Given that wearing a burka in Western countries is most definitely only done to make a pathetic political statement, I think it is indeed a good idea to ban burkas. Besides you’re not allowed to wear ski masks when you enter a bank either. You’re not allowed to walk naked in the streets. Yet countless people are trying to claim that these women should have a right to wear burkas. Framing it that way is of course utter bullshit: the debate isn’t about women rights at all. Claiming that it is, is being intellectually dishonest. The debate is about the right for a Islamist husband to claim ownership over a woman or a girl. This isn’t a right in Western countries. The fact that it isn’t, is a good thing.

Pat also points out that Western feminists are rather silent about women rights in Islam. Usually feminists are assertive and confident but this time, apparently, feminists are muted on the issue. Why is that? Where are they?

Ban the burka

For the person who recently debated religion with me (you know who you are): I recently read “Letter to A Christian Nation” by Sam Harris. Very interesting read. I recommend it!

A ridiculous small shellscript

Now, we can finally replace Richard Stallman with a small shellscript

— Alp Toker, Gran Canaria at the Igalia party, 06 juli 2009

I’ll write it in C#

public void ActCrazy () {
   while (true) {
      be incorrect about Mono
   }
}

FWD: Entrepreneurs can change the world

Link for planets

And a thank you to Sally Shapiro and Johan Agebjörn

Thanks for your music Johan Agebjörn and Sally Shapiro.

It’s wonderful!

Hey Karoliina, Sally Shapiro sounds a bit like the stuff you make. I don’t know, maybe it’s a completely different style. Who cares?

When is your next song ready, by the way? Aha! Train Tracks. Listening.

Don’t stop making music! We addicts need our drug.

Utilitarianism

Introduction

In a discussion some concluded that technology X is ‘more tied to GNOME’ than technology Y because ‘more [GNOME] people are helped by X’ due to dependencies for Y. Dependencies that might be unacceptable for some people.

This smells like utilitarianism and therefore it’s subject to criticism.

Utilitarianism is probably best described by Jeremy Bentham as:

Ethics at large may be defined, the art of directing men’s actions to the production of the greatest possible quantity of happiness.

— Bentham, Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation

A situational example that, in my opinion, falsifies this:

You are standing near the handle of a railroad switch. Six people are attached to the rails. Five of them at one side of the switch, one at the other side of the switch. Currently the handle is set in such a way that five people will be killed. A train is coming. There’s no time to get help.

  • Is it immoral to use the handle and kill one person but save five others?
  • Is it immoral not to use the handle and let five people get killed?

The utilitarianist chooses the first option, right? He must direct his actions to the production of the greatest possible quantity of happiness.

Body of the discussion

Now imagine that you have to throw a person on the rails to save the lives of five others. The person would instantly get killed but the five others would be saved by you sacrificing one other.

A true utilitarianist would pick the first option in both exercises; he would use the handle and he would throw a person on the rails. In both cases he believes his total value of produced happiness is (+3) and he believes that in both situations picking the second option means his total value of produced happiness is (-4) + (+1) = (-3). The person who picks the second option is therefore considered ethically immoral by a true utilitarianist.

For most people that’s not what they meant the first time. Apparently ethics don’t allow you to always say (+4) + (-1) = (+3) about happiness. I’ll explain.

The essence of the discussion

Psychologically, less people will believe that throwing a person on the rails is morally the right thing to do. When we can impersonificate we make it more easy for our brains to handle such a decision. Ethically and morally the situation is the same. People feel filthy when they need to physically touch a person in a way that’ll get him killed. A handle makes it more easy to kill him.

Let’s get back to the Gnome technology discussion … If you consider pure utilitarianism as most ethical, then you should immediately stop developing for GNOME and start working at Microsoft: writing good Windows software at Microsoft would produce a greater possible quantity of happiness.

Please also consider reading criticism and defence of utilitarianism at wikipedia. Wikipedia is not necessarily a good source, but do click on some links on the page and you’ll find some reliable information.

Some scientists claim that we have a moral instinct, which is apparently programmed by our genes into our brains. I too believe that genetics probably explain why we have a moral system.

The developer of X built his case as following: My technology only promotes happiness. The technology doesn’t promote unhappiness.

It was a good attempt but there are multiple fallacies in his defense.

Firstly, in a similar way doesn’t technology Y promote unhappiness either. If this is assumed about X, neither promote unhappiness.

Secondly, how does the developer of X know that his technology promotes no unhappiness at all? Y also promotes some unhappiness and I don’t have to claim that it doesn’t. That’s a silly assumption.

Thirdly, let’s learn by example: downplaying the amount of unhappiness happens to be the exact same thing regimes having control over their media also did whenever they executed military action. The act of downplaying the amount of unhappiness should create a reason for the spectator to question it.

Finally, my opinion is that the very act of claiming that ‘X is more tied to GNOME’, will create unhappiness among the supporters of Y. Making the railroad example applicable anyway.

My conclusion and the reason for writing this

‘More’ and ‘less’ happiness doesn’t mean a lot if both are incommensurable. Valuations like “more tied to GNOME” and “less tied to GNOME” aren’t meaningful to me. That’s because I’m not a utilitarianist. I even believe that pure utilitarianism is dangerous for our species.

To conclude I think we should prevent that the GNOME philosophy is damaged by too much utilitarianism.

Just a quote …

Thinking must never submit itself, neither to a dogma, nor to a party, nor to a passion, nor to an interest, nor to a preconceived idea, nor to whatever it may be, if not to facts themselves, because, for it, to submit would be to cease to be.


La pensée ne doit jamais se soumettre, ni à un dogme, ni à un parti, ni à une passion, ni à un intérêt, ni à une idée préconçue, ni à quoi que ce soit, si ce n’est aux faits eux-mêmes, parce que, pour elle, se soumettre, ce serait cesser d’être.

— Henri Poincaré, Nov 1909 Brussels

Hey mr. Obama

Here’s an idea if you want to inspire the generation that voted for you:

Let’s go to Mars.

Mutual respect for other’s opinions

If I would have been a U.S. citizen, I would have voted for Obama now that Ron Paul was no more candidate. Although back then I didn’t know enough about Ron Paul to have voted for him instead of Obama.

That doesn’t mean I must somehow dislike McCain, although at the end of the race I didn’t like how he campaigned. He has regained much of my respect after his concession speech. I really hope both Democrats and Republicans will listen to what he told you guys in that speech.

A lot of what Europeans think is wrong in America is exactly the kind of black and white thinking that must be overcome and that McCain & Obama have seemingly tried to address in both their speeches. Although we have our share of black & white thinkers too, sure.

Wrong & right, evil & good, right or wrong: none of these concepts really exist. They are just models. I convinced myself that of all candidates, Obama understands this most. He will listen to you, especially when you disagree, he said.

It’s in disagreement that we humans learn most from each other. It’s in cooperation and mutual respect that we make most progression.

The only rational conclusion a rationalist like me can make is that there’s no black and white. There are many shades of gray and on top of that there are many eyes who all have shades of different opinions. War, is something that turns eyes into black and white.

I conclude that the moral of respect for other opinions is still a successful meme: we saw McCain shush his audience when they were being disrespectful for the outcome of the election, we saw him giving a brave and gentleman concession speech. I repeat that I consider this meme to be the most important one humanity ever got convinced of. And for this reason, McCain has regained my respect.

Today, I’m happy that I visited the Boston Summit this year. I was in America when there was hope, now I can visit it again when there will be change.

Right?

They say the grass is greener on the other side,

… but maybe it’s the sheep who have been telling me lies

ps. Marked as ‘extremely condescending’, since it is condescending for the sheep on the other side.

Moral indulgence

In the last few days people seemingly implying a descent from superiority of moral highground to me, have called upon me (in private conversations) to decide for my readers if the content that I write is morally acceptable for planet.gnome.org. Their reasoning is that I should feel an implied responsibility for the content of that website.

If I don’t take the responsibility that readers have themselves already, I’m to be considered a coward. That’s because, according to these people, I avoid the moral responsibility to uphold an imaginary highground reputation of the organization behind said website.

It needs no illustration that this is just the opinion of a group within the GNOME community. Not the entire community. Nonetheless this seemingly moral superiority is not to be mistaken with a condescending circus show.

The moral of respect for other opinions is a meme that for the last decades (and I hope in future too) has been a very successful one. I consider this meme to be the most important one humanity ever got convinced of.

Moral superiors do not need to present empirical proof of correctness in their Sophia. The truth of their moral values are unquestionable.

Let’s assume this to be the case: it’s immoral to only assume that your readers will make up their own minds about ideas that appear on websites like planet.gnome.org. Instead, it’s a necessity that each and every author of a blog, from which planet.gnome.org pulls content, is required to have a “responsibility of content”.

I conclude that it isn’t necessary that the audience of that website gets an honest illustration of who we are: human beings who are sometimes geniuses and sometimes idiots.

Instead it’s necessary that we are portrayed as good role models. Concepts such as good and bad are of course defined by the superiors. Those concepts are unquestionable.

Let me be clear that I disagree with this.

I questioned whether only intent can either be good or bad, but that question was refuted as irrelevant. For it’s the beholder who matters. Not the producer.

The reason for this irrelevance being that an audience doesn’t take the responsibility of trying to understand intent. I disagree with this conclusion. I think the audience does understand intent.

I have decided to tag my future posts as “condescending” in case I feel the content might be interpreted as showing superiority. Don’t be surprised if the majority of posts will be tagged as such.

The freedom to choose is morally more important to me than the necessity to mark responsible content. Therefore I ask my audience, and planet maintainers, to decide for themselves.

Pro-vagina voting!

The shift of female voters going from Obama to McCain once Palin got appointed as running mate for McCain basically shows that the pro-vaginas voters in the United States want a vagina in power.

Do these voters also care about having people in power who actually know something about foreign policy? I mean, a lipstick pitbull? Seriously … what the fuck? The more I find about this person, the more her no-knowledge about politics makes me cry. This is clearly a “election” running mate: a running mate to steal as much as possible pro-vagina voters away from Obama. Not a “real” running mate.

The sex organs of an individual, and if you are a real feminist you’ll even agree with this, shouldn’t matter when voting for a president and his/her running mate. No matter how pissed you are about Obama having less female-looking sex organs than Hillary.

This is just ridiculous.

Unlike the vast majority of the Hollywood movies doesn’t the real world guarantee a happy ending. I hope McCain realizes this, now that he decided to turn this election into a Soap like Beverly Hills 90210.

New music by Karoliina

Karoliina just E-mailed me to tell me that she just finished her new song.

This one sounds more like Vangelis than I have ever done before. It combines some symphonic elements (some (sampled) instruments from symphonic orchestra were used) with synthetic sounds.

— Karoliina Salminen

The song

A video with the song as background showing the cathedral in Mechelen (filmed by Karoliina and Kate during Akademy)

I like it!

Russia

My naive opinion on the current strategy for dealing with Russia

Maybe Cold War organizations like NATO don’t see it, as their people are indoctrinated by the need for a unified strategy against a common enemy (keep Russia out, Germany down and the United States in).

But the world has changed since 1989.

Whenever the Soviet Union was stubborn, it was also predictable. Today’s Russia is not predictable. It is and has been pushing its real goals in a rather subtle way (even if you think the Georgian crisis was not subtle, the real Russian goal is). You can no longer just contain Russia. Neither can you easily engage with them. You need to ‘negotiate’ your relationship with it.

By kicking Russia out of treaties and organizations, all you will achieve is that Russia will start doing business with individual European countries rather than with the European Union. Which means different market rules will play. Less control over mutual interests in Europe: more competition among the individual European countries over Russia’s resources and market, sharper differences between Western -and Eastern Europe.

In the long run the result of that will be a split of Europe into Western -and Eastern Europe. This would be followed by a decline of Western power over Eastern European countries. Strategically seen, this would be a perfect outcome for Russia. A dream come true, for them.

Without the wealthy Western Europe, both the economy and industry of many of Eastern Europe’s countries are still underdeveloped and not yet ready to compete, on their own, against three major economic powers. As a result would Eastern Europe become yet another unstable region in the World.

Russia conducting the Orchestra of opposition politics in those countries, and Russian media influence, will for many sound like an answer to their dissatisfactions.

I think it’s for that reason that keeping Eastern Europe within the group called “Europe”, is something you want to strive for. A split with Western Europe would inevitably mean major influence from Russia in these Eastern European countries and regions.

It’s in fact already taking place here and there. If you take off your by propaganda blinded glasses and go look for the facts, you’ll see.

My own naive proposal

Russia’s regime is doomed the moment the Russian elite looses its European legitimacy. Russia’s future wealth depends on Europe’s willingness to continue doing business with them. This business must be in both directions. Just selling gas yet remaining isolated from the World markets means that for example your currency can easily be devaluated outside of your borders. Meaning that you are selling your resources too cheap or that the actual price that you got for it depends on the politics of other nations (like petrodollars). Replace currency with any other valuable resource located within your own borders.

The Russian elite who keep people like Vladimir Putin in power are the same people who are doing business selling Russian gas to Europe. If we want a peaceful world, we can seize the opportunity of doing business with these Russian elites to convince them of at least certain of European’s values. Values like free markets. Especially as we integrate our European businesses into Russia and especially if Russian elites start seeing the benefits of that (wealth), will European values further influence Russian politics.

If we kick them out of our organizations, they’ll just continue doing business with individual European countries. Making it harder to keep Europe united. They very well know that Europe needs energy. They know individual European countries will continue buying gas from Russia.

It would be insane because if we don’t, China will. And then China instead will get a strategic partnership with Russia. Pushing their values and culture. Rising new economies are the circumstances of today. Containment is not an answer to changed circumstances.

Europeans want a multipolar World, right? This is the opportunity to have Russia, China, United States and Europe as different economic powers (I simplified it, I of course know there are more economic centers).

My naive conclusion

A new kind of World is coming towards us. Although the history book on the shelve is always repeating itself, all we can do is learn from the past.

Learning however, is not the same as maintaining a strategy designed for completely different past circumstances. We are called humans because unlike many other species we can intelligently adapt ourselves. Let’s consume that capability.

In order to succeed as a people, as a nation and as a culture you have to synchronize your strategy with today’s circumstances.

It’s our time and our generation, to cope with them.

Indoctrinating defenseless people with .. music

To make sure I indoctrinate the defenseless Qt and KDE people with my extraordinary ideas for Maemo and GMAE/GNOME related things (like Vala, GObject-Introspection, Tracker, Xesam, Desktop/tablet search, Tinymail, Modest, IMAP + Lemonade and E-mail in general a.k.a. things that interest me) I decided to show up in Mechelen (well, actually Sint-Katelijne Waver) where the guys organizing Akademy had picked a nice and peaceful spot in my warm and fuzzy country to do KDE’s yearly conference.

Always nice to see Nokia doing the same thing at conferences! I decided to have a few chats with the Akonadi guys, watched a few presentations like the one about Decibel (they are using Telepathy! Awesome!). And then I met Kate and Karollina again. Nokians!

Among the things I asked Karoliina was whether or not she was still making music. Guess what, she is! She told me she made this one for her cat and for Kate’s phone as a ring tone. It’s a quite relaxing song that ‘opens the mind in your brains’. I don’t know if that makes any sense in the English language, but nevertheless it’s what I came up with after the second time listening to it.

Anyway. Refreshing and opening my mind (and my airways) is exactly why I also go to saunas. I’m confident that this piece of audio will therefore be a perfect match with a nice sauna experience.

Playing poker while the game is Chess

Notwithstanding that (it smells like) the United State’s propaganda machine is trying hard to control our European media once more, let’s try to get as much information from both sides of the story this time.

I thought that since U.S. is supporting Georgia there would be some control over the situation in South Ossetia and that there would be a peaceful solution to the conflict. But what is happening there now it’s not just war, but war crimes. George Bush and [Georgian president] Mikhail Saakashvili should answer to the crimes that are being committed – the killing of innocent people, running over by tanks of children and women, throwing grenades into cellars where people are hiding,

— Joe Mestas. A United States citizen in the conflict zone, according to Russia Today [video footage].

As this conflict escalates both sides are as usual trying to politically involve the European Union. I think Europe should restrain from supporting Georgia as it clearly committed war crimes. I’m quite certain we will soon see hard proof of this coming from the Russians. Proof that will be ten times more accurate than an idiot like Colin Powell throwing away his career and credibility a few years ago.

The European population wont support supporting a war criminal. Hanging our European flag in your office while doing a speech on World Television, is ridiculous and didn’t convince serious people in Europe at all.

Militarily seen, it’s a not even a question: You can’t fight Russians a few kilometers from their own border. It would mean a military humiliation.

Europe is not a war continent anymore. If you want lasting peace with Europe, the only way is by doing business with us. Supplying us with what we need (which in case of Russia is energy in the form of gas), buying from us what you need (which in case of Russia are European investments in their country and culture).

What Europe can do about this conflict would be to decrease the amount of European investment in Russia. Just stopping the gas supplies from Russia would probably destroy Germany’s economy in a few months and would that way drastically weaken any kind of power Europe has. This is not the kind of stuff that we want (in Europe), and we are not naive enough (anymore) to be convinced that this is what should be done.

My conclusion is that the rest of the world better stops hoping that Europe will help a Georgian war criminal.

Although I know that I shouldn’t drag the U.S. in this conflict, I’m quite confident that behind the scenes it’s pretty obvious that this is Russia showing its newly gained might to the U.S.

The New World Order line that the Bush administration seems to have tried by falsely promising to support Georgia if Georgia would send troops to Iraq turned out to be a foolish one.Then again, we are getting used to foolish U.S. strategy with Cheney and Bush trying to play poker with the rest of the World.

As a result Russia has a moral ground to do what they are doing (in the end, they had a peacekeeping mandate over the region). The United States can only watch and suffer as Easter European countries will now have learned that all what Bush senior had build up as political trust, is now unveiled as pure U.S. rubbish.

That is likely going to be the end conclusion of the foreign policy of the administration that has ruled the U.S. for the last decade. That all the achievements of Bush senior will have been flushed through the toilet.

Russia is and will keep gaining power. China is and will keep growing its economy and energy consumption. Iran is and will keep gaining more power over the Middle East (the U.S.’s propaganda about their nuclear weapons programs is among the weakest I have ever received). Etcetera.

In a curious way a New World Order is forming indeed. Regretfully for the Neoconservatives they will most likely not play the role of World Leaders. At least not as a coherent group.

I blame their own incompetence for that.

Their “New World Order”-meme was both strategically and diplomatically supported by weak people. They played poker while the game on the table was Chess. And they lost.

The money they did win turned out to be printed by the Federal Reserve as it was needed. That inflated the Dollar and is increasing the gap between rich and poor in their own country. Meanwhile it enriched the super elite involved in the war machine while the sons of poorer patriotic families got sent to the battle ground.

The man in the streets in the United States is paying for all this.

I think this new conflict in Georgia wont be the last thing we’ll see as a result of the poker and Chess games of 200n.

ps. Planet.gnome picks the categories it wants to syndicate from my blog. I don’t send blog items to planet.gnome myself. Instead, planet.gnome picks them. I have a category specifically dedicated to technology. This item is specifically not categorized in a technical category. Don’t blame me for political content on planet.gnome.