Friends of Armed & Dangerous 2019

Once again I will be at Penguicon and hosting a party for all friends of this blog. This coming Friday evening, room number not yet known, it will be posted at the con.

Those of you who participated in the design of the Great Beast may be interested to know that I expect to receive its successor at Penguicon – a Greater Beast built from a 64-core Threadripper chip. The machine might well be at the party.

UPDATE: room 507, 9pm, Friday

28 thoughts on “Friends of Armed & Dangerous 2019

    • >Tempting. Checking my calendar….

      If you can be there Friday morning we night be able to get you into Geeks With Guns.

      In any case, Cathy and I would be very pleased if you attended.

      • ESR,

        Check your e-mail please.

        I want to confirm that I’m saving the last two GwG spots for you and Cathy. (Or would it be just you?)

        R

          • I have you down. If you bring Mark we’ll fit him in, even if he’s 21 of our planned 20 attendees.

            Eastpoint Action Impact, same as last year. (NOT Southfield)

            E-mail sent with address and phone of range and info

            1 pm safety brief. 1:30 range time start

    • I doubt it. Penguicon disappointed my wife and I so badly 4 years ago and we haven’t been back since. Every year I check the programming and every year I don’t feel one bit disappointed that we don’t go anymore.

  1. It’s a shame that Penguicon appeals to me not in the slightest….Geeks With Guns seems like the place to be ;)

    How does one even attend GwG anyway? It seems very limited (20 slots?), so is there some selection process? First come first served?

    • >How does one even attend GwG anyway? It seems very limited (20 slots?), so is there some selection process? First come first served?

      Basically first come first served, yeah. We do try to hold open a few slots for newbies, because acculturating new gunfolks is part of the point.

    • We have to cap Geeks with Guns for a couple reasons. The first is due to the range. We rent a 10 lane bay at an indoor range that we have all to ourselves. Their range rules limit it to two shooters per bay so that caps it at 20.

      Aside from that, about 20 is the max to have it run efficiently and safely. We have held it at an outdoor range in the past, and may do so again, and will likely allow a few more people then the indoor range.

      The con is also paying the range fee and 20 is the number they’ve set in the budget.

    • Oh, and I forgot:

      To register contact me at guns@penguicon.org.

      This year is full but I can put you on the “please contact” list for next year.

      The e mail address goes to whoever runs the event so if I step down (unlikely as this is my first year running it) someone else will have access

      • The e mail address goes to whoever runs the event so if I step down (unlikely as this is my first year running it) someone else will have access

        And I just wanted to say here that Rob graciously agreed to take it over from me after I was unable to attend the ‘con this year. I appreciated all his help in the past, and am very glad that he was able to carry it forward now and into the future.

        Thank you!

    • Thanks for all the feedback guys :)

      Since I am not inclined to attend Penguicon, I will not be making the long drive for GwG alone. If you ever do a GwG event elsewhere, I’ll see if I can swing it, and drop you a line if so.

      I’m far from a newbie anyway, so it is far better that I do not occupy a slot that a far more deserving (and needy) person would benefit from.

      But it would be cool to hang out with you geeks and make some noise ;)

  2. I managed to make it to Penguicon and FAD exactly once. Penguicon was fun, but mostly because I hung out around the gaming area and went to only one panel (on slide show improvisation, which was just good old-fashioned fun). FAD was fun in the same way it sounds like GwG would be fun. Alas, I can make neither, because I’m working at Baltimore’s Kinetic Sculpture Race this weekend.

    That said, it’s starting to sound like GwG, not Penguicon, is the place to be.

    • If they’re right, then everything the FSF has ever said about the GPL is wrong. The GPL explicitly says that a licensee need not have paid a dime to the licensor, and it’s always been promoted under the idea that the benefit contributors receive is the value of others’ contributions, so they can’t claim there was no consideration and therefore no contract.

      • Actions speak louder than words. The FSF has always and continues to require copyright assignment for any “contributions” of code they will accept.

        >”The GPL explicitly says that a licensee need not have paid a dime to the licensor,”

        Indeed: the licensor has not required consideration from the licensee.

        >”and it’s always been promoted under the idea that the benefit contributors receive is the value of others’ contributions”

        The licensees are not required to create derivative works as “payment” for the permissions given in the license. There is no bargained-for-consideration here; just speculative future benefits not required to take under the license.
        Sapna Kumar’s paper touches on this, read it.

        >”, so they can’t claim there was no consideration and therefore no contract.”

        They can claim exactly that: since it is true. The licensee is not required to perform any act benefiting the copyright holder. He is not required to pay the copyright holder, he is not required to do any work for the copyright owner, nothing, (in order to receive these permissions and “promises”)

        In return he gets: the permission to use the software, modify the software, create derivative works of the software, and even DISTRIBUTE derivative works of the software alongside the license text under the same permissions specified by the copyright holder, and DISTRIBUTE modified or original versions of the work of authorship under the same permissions specified by the copyright holder.

        All for nothing. Absolutely nothing.
        And he(the licensee) doesn’t have to do any of it.

        It’s not consideration.

    • This again? I see mikeeusa is getting involved. Supporting my suspicion that the anti-CoC revokist crowd mainly consists of trolls and griefers with little if any actual code in the kernel and almost no skin in the game.

      • I wonder how much of this is false-flag ops on the part of the SJWs. I suspect that a lot of the people who don’t support this madness mostly just keep their heads down and try to keep working, praying that some harpy doesn’t decide to descend upon them.

        • My guess: none of it. I think most if not all of the revokist shitposting being conducted here and on lkml has been mikeeUSA himself. Note that when one of the revokist posts appears here, it often gets sidetracked into ramblings about how men built open source and how an adult man should be able to marry, rape, or rape and then marry a girl as young as 12 or 13 per Biblical law. These are all mikee talking points. Have been since 2005. They could be a really good faker, but I doubt anyone would risk shitting up lkml with nonsense, trigger the more senstive readers, or just act like an unprofessional ass if they want to remain in good standing.

          Besides, Mikee put his revokist theories to the test earlier this year, by attempting to rescind modification and distribution rights under the GPL from Geek Feminism wiki members to the only significant code he’s ever written: a shitty text mode slot machine game.

          Nothing more to see here. Revokism is a failed revolution by a single man — a man who has made no substantive contribution to open source and who believes that God gave him the right to fuck kids.

  3. How is the “Greater Beast”? I thought the Great Beast was pretty amazing.

    Will we get a detailed post on all the other goodies that came along with the 32 cores?

    Will the Great Beast go into retirement, or is there a cluster connection with it’s new bigger sibling in the future?

    • >How is the “Greater Beast”? I thought the Great Beast was pretty amazing.

      Post upcoming once its teething troubles have resolved.

  4. My favorite (Internet) author writing about ESR’s favorite (novel) author: https://www.takimag.com/article/heinlein_in_hindsight_the_moses_of_nerds1/

    Of Heinleins many ideas, the one that impressed me most was that you should learn math and languages because these two enable you to learn everything else. This made me realize why we consider humanities easy today and STEM hard: because people in humanities no longer learn much in the way of languages. Humanities weren’t that easy back when it was expected that, say, philosophers will read both Plato and Kant in the original. And that wasn’t even that long ago, Umberto Eco’s How To Write A Thesis, 1977 was very much in this spirit.

    • That’s not the only reason humanities are “easier” than STEM. Another issue is that STEM graduates are judged by their employers on the quality (and volume) of their knowledge of the subject of their degree, while most humanities graduates aren’t. In the sorts of jobs that History majors get, it doesn’t matter whether they remember what happened at Canossa, and employers won’t really care if they think Shakespeare’s plays were written by a Jewish woman. So the History (and other Humanities) faculty can slowly reduce the amount of work (they have to grade) to get a degree without getting lots of complaints from the outside, while the Engineering faculty can’t.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *