[SGVLUG] September Meeting

[serross at ix.netcom.com]

I've got to agree with Dustin. We are all involved in "computing" and we should want to know what the idustry is doing and what direction it's going. Networks and desktops are not all Linux, the lion share of servers and desktops are from Bill Gates and yes they have done some good things (not many). Unless you live in a black box, your going to be exposed to other things - keep an open mind. I think we should look to having a MS rep talk - they do have an excelent speaker at the Santa Monica office. Another area is security - like Network Associates and others. Hardware venders (we all do use them).
Maybe you don't use some things but that doesn't mean you should stick your head in the sand.

Stephen

-----Original Message-----
From: Dustin <laurence at alice.caltech.edu>
Sent: Jul 23, 2005 12:00 PM
To: "SGVLUG Discussion List." <sgvlug at sgvlug.net>
Subject: Re: [SGVLUG] September Meeting

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005, David Lawyer wrote:

> Well, I think it wrong for sgvlug to have any presentations that are
> not pro free software (pro GPL plus).

I don't know if it will surprise anyone, but I entirely disagree with
this.  It's very worthwhile to know what people are doing and saying,
whether we agree with them or not.  I'd be happy to have a Microsoft rep.
give us a talk--not because I expect to agree with him, but because I want
to know what they're saying this month.  I'd even consider a SCO talk, of
all things.  We're big boys, we can make up our own minds without needing
to censor the talk schedule to avoid leading the sheep astray with
incorrect thoughts.

> I guess that it's too late to change this for the Solaris presentation
> but something to keep in mind for the future.

Why should it be changed at all?  It is bad manners and also bad strategy
to make it a confrontational forum.  We should be quite happy to have Matt
Ingenthron (sp?) tell us about Solaris--first, the technical side of
things should be interesting regardless of politics, and I will be happy
to hear about the code.  Second, it's always a terrible idea not to know
what others did right so you can make sure you're up to snuff.  Second, we
can always discuss the politics later.

It isn't necessary to turn a presentation into a debate--we can do that
afterwards at BC. :-)  Or on the relevant mailing lists....

> The statement above re GPL is intended to be ironic.  But I think that
> if J.S.  made a presentation to a Linux group he would avoid saying some
> of the things he's said in the past, like his support of software
> patents.  So if we have him speak here (fat chance) I would ask that
> we give someone equal time to remind him of his anti-Linux statements.

First--Hershel schedules for UUASC, not us, so the talk I suggested
wouldn't be for a LUG.  Second--to be brutally frank, Schwartz is a lot
more likely to give a talk to UUASC than to us anyway.  Third--everything
I said above.  If he did talk here and was willing to do a live debate,
that would be great--I'd immediately want to invite a RedHat rep and make
it a real red-meat event, and I like a good prizefight as much as the next
guy.  But it is terrible manners to assume that he must do that to talk at
all, and also bad strategy (to the extent that anyone cares about
"strategy").  To paraphrase Sun Tsu: "If you know only yourself your
chances are fifty-fifty.  If you know yourself and your enemy you are not
in danger in a hundred battles."  Let's by all means have talks that let
us know "the enemy", not just ones about "ourselves".

Plus, that way we also serve all those who just run Linux because it is 
more stable and secure, and don't care a fig for the politics.  There 
might just be one or two of them around, and they're important too. :-)

Dustin