e pur si muove

City of Tuttle, OK computer manager Jerry Taylor mistakes a misconfigured operating system for a hacker’s intrusion and sends threatening emails to CentOS developers. Egg-on-the-face ensues.

Here is the local news story, and here is the entire email exchange reposted onto the CentOS forum.

Clearly, 22 years of IT experience doesn’t include common sense, manners, knowledge of proper use of English punctuation, or any kind of notion as to the psyche of an actual hacker. Nor does it necessarily imply familiarity with network management, open-source software, or the Internet. I mean, what kind of hacker leaves an email address behind on a hacked webpage, along with detailed instructions on how to fix it?

And what kind of IT manager demands the Internet to be shut down? WTF?

One of the most bizarre contradictions in modern political ideology is the supposition that a meritocratic society can fully support truly democratic institutions.

Such as voting, for example. It seems simple enough, doesn’t it? Each citizen gets a vote, the vote gets cast (in secret, ideally), the votes get tallied, and the guy with the most votes wins the election.

Except, perhaps that every one’s vote is supposed to count equally. It seems unfair, doesn’t it? Why should the lady who merely clears trash from your office have equal say as the CEO? Shouldn’t the executive officer, being a person in a leadership role, know better than entry-level staff? Shouldn’t her say carry more weight, have more authority? It happens all the time in the office, especially when it comes to important corporate decisions. So why isn’t it the case that in something as vitally important as the future of the country, all that experience and responsibility doesn’t get to count at all?

And then there’s all that brouhaha over the tyranny of the majority. Thanks to Mill, we are now aware of the truly horrific things that society as a body politic can do to its individual members. Peer pressure, social ostracism, exile are but three examples of how callous the vast majority can be. How can it be, then, that the majority of the citizenry, so acclimatized to groupthink, can be trusted to ever make the right decisions for themselves?

And get this one: political activism. Like seriously, if any political party has a genuinely good platform, its merits should be self-evident right? Because if they were better, then they would win. That’s the best part about meritocracy: the best people are always the most successful. Why should one stoop so low as petty marketing and campaigning, making fools of oneselves just to advance the cause of a particular political party? Never mind that effort should be part of merit, some kinds of effort are simply not worth it. Besides, it would distort the whole package presented to the body politic.

And these silly voters, all they think about are material gains. Who cares if some political party is trying to woo your vote with new parks, fresh coats of paint, or even (gasp) cash handouts? The responsible voter should not be thinking about local municipal issues, the responsible voter ought to be considering the good of the nation first. One should not be so superficial and consider market forces and personal gain when faced with the future of one’s own country. No, of course not.

The effect of such considerations on you, the voter, should be obvious. Why should your vote matter? Why could you even care who is the specific representative for your ward? When you look at the rep, you aren’t supposed to see a person you can turn to for help. He’s not going to be pulling strings for you just because you have some sob story about feeding five children and your invalid mother on a shoestring budget and minimum wage. Can’t you see that the rep represents the political party to you, not the other way round?

There is no ‘affective divide’: Catherine Lim just doesn’t understand how democracy works in a meritocratic society. That’s why municipal issues should be divided and squared cleanly apart from national ones. How else can we preserve the fragile equilibrium that constitutes the identity of our nation state? Why, if there were even such things as civil disobedience in a meritocracy, that would be such a big no-no. I mean, the country’s leaders are at the top because they are the best, so how can someone not on top be possibly correct in criticising policies from Up There? They wouldn’t get the irony even if it danced in front of them in a cutesy bear suit.

I mean seriously, just because decadent Western societies have this whole democracy thing ass-backwards doesn’t mean that we enlightened folk of the Far East should fall for the same logical fallacies. No no no, it’s obvious that meritocracy is working out so well for us on this side of the world. Leave your messy demonstrations against abuses of power and civil disobedience populist pap on your hemisphere, thank you very much.

All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and their entrances; and one man in his time plays many parts. That why this sound and fury about erections shouldn’t be allowed to distract you from your daily retinue of contributing toward the country’s gross domestic product: in the end, it signifies nothing. It’s just one of those bothersome responsibilities of democratic government. Like come on, go through the motions, get through the system, and then get on with your life. I mean, isn’t it tough enough as it is, with this ginormous rat race of getting married with the correct spouse, having exactly 1.2 children, buying the correct apartment in the correct neighbourhood, sending your 1.2 kids off to the correct schools and extra-curricular activities, and bask in the ultimate irony of self-perpetuation?

Because in a meritocracy, only the very best could ever rise to the top, where they are now. So when it comes to voting time, it’s really simple: just vote for the best. 

That’s why all this erection business, ultimately, isn’t even worth a moderate arousal. Get with the program, folks. Now go add a few more dollars to the GDP, and stop complaining about how expensive life is getting.

technorati tags: voting, electorate

For the past few months, the rumors have been flying in my lab. Ever since the Big Award, my boss has been traveling just about every week. And some places, in particular, more than just once. Which has been really suspicious, n’est ce pas?

Guess what. My boss just told us that he’s planning to stay in the Silicon Prairie. And I think a lot of you fell completely for the April fish. (see comments) the University of Paris XII has tendered an offer he just can’t resist. So we’re going to be getting relocation stipends, and preparing to start coding in French.

Goodbye, silicon prairie; ‘Allo, la vie cité!