Monday, October 20, 2014
I like this guy from the wrong side of the Social Register becoming The Guru at Mighty Microsoft. I like him a whole lot better than his predecessor, whom I considered to be an arrogant son-of-a-bitch. I wish him well.
Two thoughts: "He who would be a leader of men must first of all be their servant." and "This isn't a Social Club, it's a benevolent dictatorship!"
I spend an inordinate amount of time with Microsoft's products - hours daily - and as a habitual user, and borderline paranoiac, my big concern is security.
The non-Microsoft security experts claim that Microsoft's own security programs are insufficiently effective at providing an acceptable level of user protection.
This focuses our attention on two questions: (1.) How good is it? and (2.) Who do we believe?
The Cloud: Us paranoiacs need to see some proof that Microsoft's Cloud is or will be virtually "bulletproof" before we're going to be willing to trust it with all of our precious data, like those porn films we don't want Grandma to find out about, or those photos we took on vacation in Aruba last year while everyone thought we were on a business conference in Paris. Discretion being the better part of valor, we need absolute assurance that our data is going to be stored in a place where only God can see it without our permission. Can Microsoft deliver that level of security, and prove it? That's the challenge, Folks.
I didn't copy the whole article, because I hate to see a grown man cry, especially one I like, so I cut to the chase nearer the ending here. I'm impressed with his embracing inclusivism, but again, may I point out that we as users of these products expect their producers to be the best available, not just the best ethnically-diverse available. Don't settle for a token Indian if our token Black can make him look like a rank amateur! The best-qualified should get the jobs, no matter what their critics say. This, remember, isn't a democracy but rather a benevolent dictatorship. And as the little Italian mother of nine said in response to the Pope's edicts on birth control, "You no play da game, you no make-a da rules!"
Sunday, October 19, 2014
His Holiness is on the right track with his sought-after reforms. I wish him every success in his efforts.
The church is very old. If I remember my "Faith of Millions" for converts correctly, it goes back to about the year 40 A.D., and St. Peter, and Christ saying "You are a rock, and upon this rock I will build my church." And Peter then beginning that task after the Ascension.
The church is very big on tradition. It still holds to precepts founded in medieval times, when societies were agrarian, infant mortality was high, and we needed all the offspring we could produce to provide the manpower for the agriculture which was the backbone of society.
The industrial revolution and advancing technology has now changed all that, and advances in medical science have virtually eliminated infant mortality in most civilized countries. The church, however, has not kept up with such changes, and has not adjusted its practices to suit our modern society. Making cosmetic adjustments to Mass, such as having it all in the language of the parishioners, rather than in its two-language format of Latin and common language doesn't constitute real reform, and reverting that again to its former system, and re-issuing The Missal at $200.00 a copy isn't the kind of real reform we were hoping for. His Holiness knows this, just as we do.
May we please have some real reform to suit our changing times? The religion of the ancient Egyptians thrived for over two millennia, but it eventually faded away because it didn't adapt to its evolving society, and therefore no longer served its purpose. Catholicism is in danger of going the way of Isis, Osiris and Horus, and those other families of gods and goddesses, unless it can adapt to its users' needs and continue to be relevant in a modern world. God isn't stuck in the past, so why should the church be? May we please have some updating?