Author Archive

Sinterklaas en Zwarte Pieten

OK, once again it is time for the cries of “War on Christmas” to begin, which are amusing since (1) the holiday has had problems since the Early Christian Fathers and (2) the people whining have no real reason to whine.

Anyway, over in the Netherlandish countries (Holland, Belgium, and sort of Luxembourg), they are having a row over this tradition for good reason.

I said I would post these pics from my time in Belgium

when I found them.

Vrolijk Kerstfeest!

BTW, be sure to check out “Six To Eight Black Men” by David Sedaris. Try to find the version where he compares this custom to US gun nuttery!

Not posting much

OK, it’s pretty obvious that the world is insane and trying to fix it seems to be a pointless task. Way too many fucked up and insane things going on in the world, but the internet makes me feel as if I am a voice screaming in the wilderness.

So, I am spending time trying to get my house in order. Literally. Contemplating a permanent move to somewhere in Europe, but not sure where. After Britain, Belgium seems most like home.

Posted 13/11/2018 by lacithedog in BREXIT, current events

Get_iplayer file storage

How do I change or specify where get_iplayer saves downloaded programmes?

We can set the output path of programmes get_iplayer downloads on a case by case basis. You can do this globally, but it makes more sense to do this on a programme by programme basis, particularly if you are trying to ensure the relevant XBMC and Plex folder structure conventions are met.

To specify the directory/folder get_iplayer outputs downloaded files to, we use the “output” command which looks like this:

--output

…to which we simply add the folder path:

--output "/path/to/output/folder/goes/here/" [...]

DON’T FORGET THE QUOTATION MARKS!

The file path should go within the quotation marks. You are free to type out the location and get_iplayer will create it for you if it doesn’t exist already, or it will simply add files to the directory if it already exists.

If you are unsure of the exact folder path to use, you can use the Graphical User Interface file explorer to navigate to the folder where you want the programmes to be downloaded and simply press “ctrl+L”.

On Ubuntu at least, this will reveal the folder path at the top of the explorer window, as shown in the example below, and you can just copy and paste this into the terminal window.

No wireless in Ubuntu 14.04

OK, this is a personal post.

First off, run the following code to find who made the wireless card.
lspci -vnn | grep Network

This page was the most helpful for solving the wireless issue:
https://askubuntu.com/questions/55868/installing-broadcom-wireless-drivers

So with that in mind, the following is what we have right now which is simplified in just 3 steps:

1. Knowing what Broadcom Wireless Card you have

There are dozens of Broadcom wireless cards and more seem to appear every day. The key to finding the correct driver for any network card is what is known as the PCI ID (PCI.ID). To find out which PCI.ID you have, we proceed to opening the terminal by pressing CTRL+ALT+T (It should open a window with a blank background) and inside this terminal we run the following command:

lspci -nn -d 14e4:

You will get something like the following if you have a Broadcom Wireless Adapter (The ID 14e4 used in the example above in most cases is a Broadcom Wireless Card):

Broadcom Corporation BCM4306 802.11bgn Wireless Network Adapter [14e4:4320] (rev 03)

The PCI.ID in this example is 14e4:4320 as seen inside the Brackets […]. In some cases you will also need the revision version (if it appears) for some special cases. In this case, the revision version is rev 03 as shown inside the Parentheses (…) at the end. So what you will need after this search is:

[14e4:4320] (rev 03)

With this new information you can look in the table below and select the appropriate method to install your driver. For example, In this case, since you have the 14e4:4320 rev 03, if we go down the list to the one that shows the exact same PCI.ID you will see that in the columns for Ubuntu 12.04, 13.10 or 14.04 it shows the firmware-b43-installer package driver. This means that you will only have to install this particular package since it appears in all Ubuntu version columns.

NOTE – Before proceeding, if you have previously installed any drivers, have blacklisted or uncommented any driver files or configuration files or have done any changes whatsoever to the system to make the drivers work in previous attempts, you will need to undo them in order to follow this guide. We assume you are doing this from scratch and have not changed any configuration files, modules or drivers in the system in any way (apart from updating the system). This includes any installations using apt-get, aptitude, synaptic, dpkg, software center or manual compilation and installation of the packages. The system has to start from scratch in order for this to work and to avoid any conflicts that may appear if earlier work was done.

For example, if you have previously installed the bcmwl-kernel-source package, you will need to remove it by using the purge method:

sudo apt-get purge bcmwl-kernel-source

2. Preparing the System

If you have just installed Ubuntu, you will need to build an index of available packages before we can install your driver if you have not done so already:

sudo apt update

I would even go so further as to update the Ubuntu list of PCI.IDs:

sudo update-pciids

Just in case the ID of a particular new Broadcom Device you are using has just appeared.

Now using the PCI.ID you found in the steps above, we then search in the list below to find the matching PCI.ID and the method to install the driver associated with it in a simple and correct way. The terminal will be used to avoid any GUI related issues. This applies with all cases, except as noted. The installation procedure is done only via terminal and also while connected to the internet with a temporary wired ethernet connection or USB modem or any means possible that can give your PC, for the time, Internet access. After you find in the list below the correct package we then proceed with the installation.

3. Installing the Package (online)

Assuming you used the PCI.ID 14e4:4320 rev 03 as found in your search above, and then looked at the table below and found that the correct package to install is the firmware-b43-installer, we then proceed to simply install this package in the terminal:

sudo apt install firmware-b43-installer

and then reboot

sudo reboot

The format to install is pretty simple, it’s just:

sudo apt install <PACKAGE_NAME>

In the example above, the PACKAGE_NAME is firmware-b43-installer.

Anyway, that got me back up and running.

Posted 08/10/2018 by lacithedog in Computers, Computing, Linux, Ubuntu, Wireless

Don’t quote the Founders on republics

I have serious questions about anyone who venerated the founders, who had no fucking idea what they were doing. That’s pretty much of an understatement for anyone who has any idea of early American history. Patrick Henry had an inkling he was making a mistake when he said:

Whether this (Independence) will prove a blessing or a curse, will depend upon the use our people will make of the blessings which a gracious God hath bestowed on us. If they are wise, they will be great and happy. If they are of a contrary character, they will be miserable.Righteousness alone cannot exalt us as a nation. Reader! Whoever thou art, remember this; and in thy sphere practice virtue thyself, and encourage it in others.

Not sure how anyone who was paying off the cost of a war would think that having another one would solve any problems. Toss in all the other issues that were left unaddressed because a bunch of hotheads wanted another war.

Anyway, their love for republics was yet another aspect of their ignorance. The Roman republic may have lasted for nearly 500 years but

Unlike the Pax Romana of the Roman Empire, the Republic was in a state of quasi-perpetual war throughout its existence. Its first enemies were its Latin and Etruscan neighbours, as well as the Gauls, who even sacked the city in 387 BC. The Republic nonetheless demonstrated extreme resilience and always managed to overcome its losses, however catastrophic…At home, the Republic similarly experienced a long streak of social and political crises, which ended in several bloody civil wars.

Toss in the French revolution would demonstrate that republics were anything but stable.

So, for all their attempts at trying to show a difference between a republic and a democracy. there probably wasn’t that much of one even in classical times,. But it sounds nice if one is starting on shaky ground.

Originalism and the Second Amendment

This is all very simple since according to people who claim to believe in Originalism, “Constitutional interpretation should remain anchored in the original meaning of the Constitution’s text, which is the source of the Court’s authority and legitimacy.” Using that definition:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The text of the Second Amendment begins with “A well regulated Militia” which is “necessary to the security of a free State“. The language of the text does not mention Self-defence, hunting, target practise, or any other non-militia uses. It is a well established rule or statutory interpretation that inclusio unius est exclusio alterius  which means  that ‘including one excludes another’. The example given where I found this was the statement ‘no dogs allowed’ under this rule would mean that panthers were allowed.

Likewise, the fact that the Militia is specifically referenced would lead one to conclude that this text addresses the militia, but does not cover uses other than the militia.

Likewise, a search of the US Constitution shows that it addresses the militia, but personal defence is not addressed. Likewise, the preamble of the text makes it clear that one of the reasons for adopting the Constitution is to deal with matters of the common defence. However, there are people who claim to follow originalism who are willing to ignore the actual text of the Constitution to advance their beliefs.

The actual wording of the Constitution makes it clear that the Militia and Common defence are covered, but personal uses of weapons aren’t.  I am not going to get into the grammar of the Second Amendment since that isn’t really germane if one is going solely upon the text. Anyway, Dennis Baron addresses that issue in his amicus brief to the Heller decision and this essay where he demonstrates that the founders would indeed have seen this as only relating to the militia.

Reading the Second Amendment as a statement in which every word counts follows from the opinion articulated by Chief Justice John Marshall: “It cannot be presumed that any clause in the constitution is intended to be without effect” (Marbury v. Madison, 1803). But even without that landmark ruling, it would have been clear to 18 th -century readers that the first part of the Second Amendment was bound to the second part in a cause-and- effect relationship, that the right to bear arms was tied by the framers directly to the need for a well-regulated militia.

The Second Amendment was pretty much considered settled case law which was thrown into disarray by Heller and McDonald. US v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875) wasn’t very helpful since it addressed private action, but Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252 (1886) and US v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939) both made it clear that the Second Amendment related to the Militia. Miller is usually not properly represented in recent “Second Amendment Scholarship” and totally ignored in the Heller and McDonald decisions because it is “not helpful”.

Indeed, it is not helpful to the recent decisions which were ultra vires because they amended the Constitution to add a new meaning to the Second Amendment, as this essay demonstrated. I would also add that Justice William O. Douglas addressed Miller and glossed it in his dissent in Adams v. Williams, 407 U.S 143, 150 -51 (1972) , which somehow is omitted in lists of SCOTUS cases mentioning the Second Amendment. Which is too bad since Justice Douglas was a member of the Supreme Court when Miller was decided, which makes him a very good source for how that case should be read.

Justice Douglas pointed out that in Second Amendment jurisprudence:

The leading case is United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174, upholding a federal law making criminal the shipment in interstate commerce of a sawed-off shotgun. The law was upheld, there being no evidence that a sawed-off shotgun had “some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.” Id., at 178. The Second Amendment, it was held, “must be interpreted and applied” with the view of maintaining a “militia.”
“The Militia which the States were expected to maintain and train is set in contrast with Troops which they were forbidden to keep without the consent of Congress. The sentiment of the time strongly disfavored standing armies; the common view was that adequate defense of country and laws could be secured through the Militia – civilians primarily, soldiers on occasion.” Id., at 178-179.

The Heller and McDonald decisions are examples of Judges failing to follow the rule of law, precedent, and their claimed theory of judicial interpretation. As I pointed out, those two decisions are ultra vires and should be ignored, which is easy since they are incredibly limited in their scope. But even then, some daring justice should show that the emperor has no clothes in these decisions.

Anyway, one doesn’t need to go far if you believe that the text of the Constitution is determining in how to interpret the Second Amendment that it only applies to the militia. It is quite obvious that the Second Amendment relates to the militia from the text. But the Heller and McDonald decisions made it clear that the text was optional, which means that Originalism is a nonsensical school of constitutional interpretation.

What was the real war that led to US Independence?

Nope, not the War for Independence/American Revolution: It was La Conquête  (the Conquest), which was really the tail end of the “French and Indian War”. There is a much longer post coming out of this, which has been stewing in my brain for a while and is still in process. The gist of it is that it was the event that made it possible for Independence to seem possible: even though there are a lot of myths and misinformation about this event out there.

Let’s say that the real pioneers were the French habitants who were well into the interior of North America when this happened, but they didn’t count in the Anglo-American scheme of things. The Quebec Act (the British North America (Quebec) Act 1774 [14 Geo. III c. 83] ) was an annoyance to the “patriots” of  the 13  Colonies.

Another issue was the Native American who were going to be screwed by losing the protection of the French. The Native Americans were far more important in all this than the French, which means the French and Indian War would be better served if it was called the Indians and French War since the French were not as important as the Indians. Although, the nature of the war had changed when it turned into La Conquête to become yet another European style war.

The bottom line is that the British Victory in this event removed French influence from North America, which meant that the Native Americans would lose any protection from the settlers of the English Colonies and what that nation would become. While New France was something, the relationship between the French and the Native Americans was far more important to building the United States,

See also:

  • Phillip Marchand, Ghost Empire How the French Almost Conquered North America
  • Fred Anderson, The War That Made America: A Short History of the French and Indian War
  • Walter Borneman, The French and Indian War: Deciding the Fate of North America