Just a heads up

On a normal blog, this sort of thing would belong on the blog roll, but I don't know how to work it and I would like to add my comment to it anyway.

A friend of mine (Skenmee!) has recently posted to his blog about a rather silly development in Oklahoma about the teaching of science in school in relation to religion. Here's the link:

Oklahoma Waters Down Science

The thing that makes me think that this is stupid is not that people are being allowed to express their beliefs, sure, do that – but this sort of grading and awarding really discourages any sort of logical or independent thinking – at least when teaching real science students are expected to demonstrate an eagerness to learn and understand more and more as they progress through education – religion, on the other hand, promotes acceptance and not understanding.

I am not saying that religious people shouldn't be allowed to study and become qualified in science, it's just that there's a right and a wrong way to go about it – I know people who do both – there's the friend who tries to bring creationism in biology lessons, or the friend who keeps his faith out of his science lessons entirely. I personally approve of the latter and I would encourage others to do the same, though this is just my opinion and you should really listen to someone who actually takes a science as a subject, such as the guy who wrote the blog that I linked to above! :D

Why music is sometimes good but also sometimes bad.

Sorry for the stupid title, couldn't think of anything better.

People who know me well will know that I have odd tastes in music. Here are the things that I will openly admit to liking at the moment:

• Dan Le Sac Vs. Scroobius Pip
  
• Tom Rosenthal
  
• Metallica (Specifically, For Whom the Bell Tolls, Dunun Dunun Daa!)
  
• Josh Woodward
  
• Newton Faulkner
  

This is just to name a few. However, there are other things that I will usually pretend not to like but secretly enjoy (incidentally, these are also the bands that certain people would hit me for liking):

• James Blunt (Shut up)
  
• Linkin Park ('s why I still wear that really old t-shirt)
  
• The Flaming Lips
  
• The Darkness (What the fuck.)
  
• Jamie T
  

Now, if you still have enough respect for me to read the rest of this post, I am going to explain why I like these artists. The reason is not because they are shoved down my throat repeatedly, or have been in the past, but because they represent variety and individuality – each one of these artists has or had something about them that was different. In some cases different enough to have whole groups of people build a sense of identity around them. Perhaps this is not the case with James Blunt, who I like because he drove a tank (Vroom) and because he plays piano music and sings with a silly high voice, but it is more obvious with Linkin Park and the Flaming Lips, both of which were the pretty much definitive of their respective genres. A really extreme example of this is Metallica in the first list, who for a long time pretty much defined metal – their pervasion into teenage culture is incredible; there are still people who wear outfits with "Metallica" plastered on their outfits, many of whom don't even know the music at all!

This also explains why there are so many artists that I really hate. There's no definitive R&B artist, for example, just lots of indistinguishable ones, all of whom are marketed excessively and thrown at us from all angles, leaving extreme bouts of nausea and disorientation (in my case, at least). I really hate that song called "Soldier Boy", because it embodies repetition. The hook of the song is "BOOO dabawabadie" (There are probably words there that I cannot hear), and this hook is repeated hundreds of times so as to become irreversibly embedded in the memory of the listener, luring them in past the point of no return! On the plus side, it's a great money maker for the record companies, who, lets face it, have so much of their music stolen that they are positively impoverished!

Let’s stop whining about Microsoft, Mmkay?

This is an uncharacteristic thing for me to say. For a long time now I have been a proponent of open source software, the GNU foundation and Linux based operating systems. I also have this habit of complaining loudly any time someone mentions Windows.

But now is the time for a change of attitude. From this point on I have decided to rant equally about Windows, Linux and Mac OSX (freeBSD gets off lightly), in fair proportions. Why is this, Dominic? I hear you ask. Well, keep your shoes on and don't get your socks in a twist, because I am going to tell you.

The answer is simpler than you might think – Microsoft appears to actually be trying. Most of my prejudices against Windows and Microsoft software come from the fact that so much of it is, well, terrible. Take Windows through the ages, for example. It has basically been bolted together from lots of different components – every time something new needs to be added, it's added on top. Microsoft offers simplicity to the users, but the price uncontrollable complexity underneath; this is why there is such a large attack surface for the creators of malware to exploit. But now, Microsoft is making changes. Recent details about Windows 8 and the underlying technologies that Microsoft is looking to use suggest that they are at last moving towards a more modular, distributed and well managed operating system. There is even tell of an operating system that is not Windows at all! Insanity!

In a more immediate sense, Microsoft has created the ".net" architecture for application developers. To a user, this looks like a hefty download that allows applications to provide the same functionality, seemingly slower. Even to a power user it looks like a clone of Java – a way in which Microsoft hopes to steal a little market share off an open source company. But if you're an application developer, ".net" represents consistency, simplicity and a better way of looking at code and the way it is written. For the first time ever, the same code can be executed on a PC and on a games console! This is something that has been sorely lacking in the past for Windows, a really easy way to develop object orientated programs that work exactly how the developer expects them to (Linux has got a really good standard for this in the form of Python and Perl. Mac OSX provides X-code, which is based around Objective C and supposedly fulfils a similar role).

So why are Microsoft making all of these changes? I am sure that I cannot possibly hope to fully understand, me being a speculating student with a D in AS business studies; Microsoft is a really large business and hundreds of economical factors have an effect on every single decision made on their part. I have a gut feeling though, I think it's...

Fear!

Ahem. Sorry about that. But yes, I think that Microsoft is genuinely worried about its competitors. It's getting to the point now where there's really not much differentiation between OSX and Linux and Windows. At the moment Microsoft is living on borrowed time – if they do not improve then soon enough people will realise that they can get the same product for free. This is at last forcing Microsoft to write some really awesome software that really kicks the shit out of that n00b Torvalds! :D