flippyblog.html

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
  <head>
    <title>Jesse Erwin's Blog</title>
    <meta charset="utf-8" />
    <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="flippy.css" />
    <link
      href="https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Source+Serif+Pro"
      rel="stylesheet"
    />
  </head>

  <body>
    <h1>Jesse Erwin's Blog</h1>

    <p>
      Music, GNU/Linux, and ramblings. Posts are sorted by most recent. You can
      subscribe via <a href="/rss.xml">RSS.</a> You can find an index of this
      blog's posts <a href="/blogindex.html">here</a>.
    </p>

    <!-- LB -->

    <div class="entry">
      <head>
        <link href=https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Cormorant+Garamond
        rel=stylesheet>
      </head>
      <h2 id="emo-music-what-is-it">Emo Music: What is it?</h2>
      <small
        >[<a href="blog.html#emo-music-what-is-it">link</a>&mdash;<a
          href="blog/emo-music-what-is-it.html"
          >standalone</a
        >]</small
      >

      <p>
        When most people think of Emo, a few images tend to arise; black
        eyeliner, choppy hair, and bands like My Chemical Romance (MCR) are a
        few of the things that you might associate with the word. Emo is just
        sad and edgy rock made by depressed bands, right? Wrong. Well, mostly
        wrong, at least. Emo is a term that gained much traction in the
        mid-2000's from the popular Emo fashion; that is, the choppy hair and
        sidebangs, black clothes from Hot Topic, and eyeliner on guys. In a way,
        this fashion tarnished the name of Emo music, so I'm hoping to provide a
        clearer insight into the topic and genre.
      </p>

      <p>
        Emo saw its beginnings in the 1980's as a child of the Washington D.C.
        hardcore punk scene. This new subgenre of hardcore punk was known as
        emotional-hardcore, or emocore for short. It had the same speed and grit
        as its father, hardcore punk, but focused on more emotional topics such
        as heartbreak and despair. I don't listen to much of this, but the first
        band attributed to being an emocore band is
        <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzvt4Gao39k"
          >Rites of Spring,</a
        >
        who pioneered the emocore genre. If you don't listen closely, it sounds
        just like hardcore punk.
      </p>

      <p>
        In the 90's, emo gave birth to another new genre, called screamo
        (commonly called skramz now). I don't know very much about this one and
        don't listen to it, so if you want to learn more, check out bands like
        <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LBNMOeD2gc">I Have Dreams</a>
        and
        <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57Hq9U3kwWU">Moss Icon</a> then
        read the pages on <a href="http://fourfa.com">this website</a> that are
        about 'emo' and 'hardcore emo.' The general idea though, is that this
        departed more from the hardcore punk side of things, and ventured into
        raw negative emotion with screaming and actual crying at some points.
      </p>

      <p>
        This brings me to the emo I know the most about: Midwest Emo. This is
        what happens when emocore and indie rock get married and have a child.
        It arose in the mid to late 90's out of no-name small towns in the
        Midwest, and Chicago, hence the name 'Midwest' Emo. This genre brings
        the emotion and topics from emocore into a softer, much less
        punk-influenced shell. This music is heavy on 'twinkly' guitar riffs,
        and songs complaining about first-world problems, though the emotion we
        see here isn't always a negative one. When most people refer to emo,
        they're probably referring to this. Bands to check out include
        <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VG9VhC0hiTg"
          >American Football,</a
        >
        <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkFeXjRf3GA">Cap'n Jazz,</a>
        <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jypydesbp8E"
          >Sunny Day Real Estate,</a
        >
        and
        <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3kOyzJL7SY">Mineral.</a> There
        are a lot of other bands and small subgenres that have emerged from
        Midwest Emo, especially in the mid-2010's up until now. One notable
        subgenre is 'twinkledaddies,' which is a more abrasive emo than Midwest
        Emo, with twinkly guitars and yelled or screamed vocals. Notable bands
        there include Snowing, Algernon Cadwallader, and Tiny Moving Parts.
      </p>

      <p>
        Finally, I should explain why bands like Black Veil Brides, Pierce the
        Veil, and the aforementioned My Chemical Romance are
        <strong>not</strong> emo. For starters, they don't retain very many
        influences from punk rock, or the original emocore. The genres I've
        mentioned before are very anti-commercial, that is, most bands charged
        only enough for their records to break even, and did most shows for
        free. Most bands also existed on no record label, or on small
        independent ones that they might have founded themselves. This is very
        much aligned with the spirit of punk, and is why I consider Midwest Emo
        to be an emo genre. The emo of the mid-2000's was commercialized, with
        big record labels, pricey shows, and well-known bands that didn't even
        consider themselves emo. Gerard Way, the lead singer of MCR, even
        <a
          href="https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/my-chemical-romances-gerard-way-taps-another-nail-into-emo-coffin-101867/"
          >wanted nothing to do with emo music.</a
        >
        Most of the bands that are commonly called emo are actually pop-punk or
        a sappy post-hardcore act.
      </p>
      <small>Tue, 27 Nov 2018 19:39:48 -0500</small>
    </div>

    <div class="entry">
      <head>
        <link href=https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Cormorant+Garamond
        rel=stylesheet>
      </head>
      <h2 id="kpop-should-be-illegal">KPop Should be Illegal</h2>
      <small
        >[<a href="blog.html#kpop-should-be-illegal">link</a>&mdash;<a
          href="blog/kpop-should-be-illegal.html"
          >standalone</a
        >]</small
      >

      <p>
        K-Pop should be illegal for a number of reasons. In this post, I will
        try to detail the injustices that K-Pop directs at its listeners. These
        wrongs are numerous, and detrimental to the unknowing victims that are
        ensnared in the music form's trap of lies. Some of these are listed
        below.
      </p>

      <ul>
        <li>
          K-Pop causes premature death. This is because the synthesizer that is
          commonly used in the genre actually emits 25khz frequencies that
          vibrate the stem of the human brain, causing intense suicidal
          thoughts.
        </li>

        <li>
          <a
            href="https://www.8satire.com/jamaica-becomes-the-first-country-to-make-k-pop-illegal/"
          >
            Jamaica has banned K-Pop,</a
          >
          stating that it causes gayness in boys, and makes every other fan just
          plain annoying.
        </li>
        <li>
          K-Pop corrupts good music taste by subjecting young brains to an
          autotuned slur of non-English words. Take note that the issue is not a
          lack of English, but rather that a steady diet of Korean music fosters
          a disdain for proper American and European culture, which will
          eventually be the downfall of our nation
        </li>
        <li>
          K-Pop promotes unrealistic beauty standards for both boys and girls.
          Have you ever seen an unattractic K-Pop singer? I think not. That's
          because K-Pop is a corporate controlled cash cow that recruits only
          those who will be idolized by impressionable Americans based on their
          looks.
        </li>
      </ul>
      <small>Thu, 22 Nov 2018 15:47:13 -0500</small>
    </div>

    <div class="entry">
      <head>
        <link href=https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Cormorant+Garamond
        rel=stylesheet>
      </head>
      <h2 id="why-apple-sucks">Why Apple Sucks</h2>
      <small
        >[<a href="blog.html#why-apple-sucks">link</a>&mdash;<a
          href="blog/why-apple-sucks.html"
          >standalone</a
        >]</small
      >

      <p>
        I have an iPhone 4S. It certainly isn't the most glamorous device, but
        it was a hand-me-down and it gets the job done. Using this older device
        for a long time has made me notice some shortcomings of Apple's devices
        that make them a lot harder to use. Here are some:
      </p>

      <ul>
        <li>
          Apple devices don't allow you to use the software that you want.
        </li>
        <li>
          Apple tries to prevent users from repairing the hardware that they
          own.
        </li>
        <li>
          Apple's software creates an exclusive ecosystem that is hard to avoid
          when you use their products.
        </li>
        <li>
          Apple intentionally slows down their older products to force the
          consumer to buy new ones.
        </li>
      </ul>

      <p>
        I'd like to go into further detail on the first point. Apple iPhones are
        computers, and when you purchase a computer it should do what you want
        it to do; not what Apple wants it to do. You can only use software that
        is approved of by Apple, unless you jailbreak the device, which unlocks
        the system so that software that Apple hasn't approved of can run. Apple
        frequently tries to prevent jailbreaking of the devices, further locking
        the user into their proprietary ecosystem. I like to compare these
        things to cars. When you purchase a vehicle, you expect that you'll be
        able to change the oil and replace parts as needed by yourself. However,
        if you bought a car and you needed approval of the manufacturer every
        time maintenence or upgrades were needed, you would quickly sell the car
        and buy a new one; it is your car, not the manufacurer's.
      </p>

      <p>
        This brings me to point number two. Apple tries to prevent users from
        repairing the hardware that they own, and makes it as hard as possible
        for independent repair shops to repair their products without approval.
        Of course, this is so they might make as much money as possible by
        <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2_SZ4tfLns"
          >overcharging for simple repairs.</a
        >
        The car analogy comes into play here again: You shouldn't need a
        corporation's approval to modify or repair something that you own.
      </p>

      <p>
        I won't go into detail on the other two points I listed, but there's an
        important question that must be asked by users of Apple products: Do I
        own my devices, or does Apple? Apple certainly doesn't want you to own
        things that you bought, and that's why they try to maintain strict
        control over them. Join me in resisting Apple's injustices against users
        by not purchasing products from a company that doesn't want you to own
        them, and by spitefully modifying and repairing the products that you do
        own.
      </p>
      <small>Tue, 06 Nov 2018 19:20:38 -0500</small>
    </div>

    <div class="entry">
      <head>
        <link href=https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Cormorant+Garamond
        rel=stylesheet>
      </head>
      <h2 id="why-i-use-gnu-plus-linux">Why I use GNU plus Linux</h2>
      <small
        >[<a href="blog.html#why-i-use-gnu-plus-linux">link</a>&mdash;<a
          href="blog/why-i-use-gnu-plus-linux.html"
          >standalone</a
        >]</small
      >

      <p>
        People ask me sometimes why I choose to use GNU/Linux instead of an easy
        'just werks' OS like Windows. Usually this is coupled with a statement
        calling me stupid for not playing Fortnite (since Fortnite doesn't work
        on Linux). The biggest reasoning for me is ease of use and
        customization. I enjoy tinkering with things and tweaking them to look
        just the way I want them, and you can't do that with Windows. It takes a
        lot of effort to get any customization working, and that is usually at
        the cost of security and system resources.
      </p>

      <p></p>

      <p>
        Since I've mentioned system resources, I might as well go into detail on
        the advantages Linux has over Windows in that department. One of Linux's
        largest strengths is its minimal resource requirement. I have found that
        Windows uses on average 2 gigabytes of RAM while the computer is idling.
        In fact, 2 gigabytes is the minimum requirement just for Windows to
        work. My setup of Arch Linux, in contrast, uses an average of 230
        megabytes. This leaves more resources for tasks the I want to complete.
        The laptop I'm typing this on has 5gb of usuable RAM, and that leaves
        only 3gb available when I run Windows. This doesn't even take into
        account the outrageous disk and processor usage of Windows.
      </p>

      <p>
        Windows is also hard to fix. Only Microsoft has access to the source
        code, meaning the average joe won't be able to repair a bug without help
        from Microsoft. In addition, the main method of fixing any issue seems
        to be reinstall Windows or install an obscure third-party tool. This
        could be the reason malware is so prevalent, as well. Linux is easy to
        repair, however, due to its open-source nature, user and developer made
        documentation, and an a usually ready-to-help community. Fixing a
        problem is a breeze in the world of Linux. Linux is also much more
        secure and doesn't have many issues with malware at all. I don't have
        any sort of anti-malware (antivirus) software installed on my systems.
      </p>

      <p>
        I mentioned in the last post that macOS and GNU/Linux are pretty similar
        and support much of the same software. I choose not to use macOS for a
        couple reasons. First, it's pretty difficult to get working on a
        computer that isn't a Mac. Second, Apple has a bad habit of being an
        evil corporation that spies on you, and their software isn't
        freedom-respecting.
      </p>

      <p>
        You're probably wondering now, what's freedom-respecting software? In
        short, it's software that doesn't disrespect the personal liberty of the
        user. I have a definition
        <a href="/pages/freesoftware/whatsfreesoftware.html">posted here</a>
        that explains exactly what this means. I'm no free software purist and I
        use some proprietary software, but free software is usually much more
        convenient and secure. Anyway, those are the reasons I use Linux.
      </p>

      <p>
        Edit: I totally forgot to add a link to Richard Stallman's reasons for
        not using Microsoft products and Windows.
        <a href="https://stallman.org/microsoft.html">Here's the page.</a>
      </p>

      <small>Fri, 02 Nov 2018 15:35:43 -0400</small>
    </div>

    <div class="entry">
      <head>
        <link href=https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Cormorant+Garamond
        rel=stylesheet>
      </head>
      <h2 id="whats-gnu-slash-linux">What's Gnu slash Linux?</h2>
      <small
        >[<a href="blog.html#whats-gnu-slash-linux">link</a>&mdash;<a
          href="blog/whats-gnu-slash-linux.html"
          >standalone</a
        >]</small
      >

      <p>
        You might be wondering, what exactly is GNU/Linux? I hope to clarify
        that in this post and provide some insight into the history of this
        system.
      </p>

      <p>
        You're probably very familiar with Microsoft Windows and Apple macOS;
        they power most of the personal computing market. However, you probably
        don't know very much about GNU/Linux, which is commonly shortened to
        just 'Linux.' These are operating systems: the software that drives a
        computer and allows use of it. GNU/Linux is very similar to macOS, and
        not quite so similar to Windows, but they all generally allow you to do
        the same things, albeit in different ways.
      </p>

      <p>
        Windows is based on MS-DOS, an old operating system that your parents
        probably used, and GNU/Linux and macOS are based on an operating system
        made by AT&T-Bell Labs called Unix. MacOS and GNU/Linux function
        similarly and support much of the same software, as do other operating
        systems such as FreeBSD and OpenBSD (macOS is based on a BSD
        distribution called Darwin, which is the Unix variant created at
        Berkeley under the name Berkeley Software Distribution). While BSD is
        basically a direct descendent of the original Unix, GNU/Linux are simply
        based upon its structure.
      </p>

      <p>
        Unlike the other operating systems mentioned, GNU/Linux was not created
        for monetary gain and business purposes, but instead was created for
        moral and political reasons. In 1983, a hacker named
        <a href="http://stallman.org">Richard Stallman,</a> who currently worked
        at the MIT AI Laboratory announced the
        <a href="https://gnu.org">GNU Project</a> , an operating system meant to
        protect the personal liberty of its users. You see, Stallman had come
        from a time when computing was open. The human-readable code of every
        program (not the 1's and 0's that the computer understands) was
        available to its users, and they could edit it in order to make it work
        the way they wished. For example, at one time Stallman edited the
        printing program for an MIT building so that the users were sent a
        notification whenever their document had finished printing, so that they
        didn't need to get up and wait at the printer until it was finished.
        This wasn't possible with the new wave of programs that were becoming
        popular in the 80's. These new operating systems only provided the
        machine code of programs, which isn't easily readable or modifiable.
      </p>

      <p>
        Through the next several years, Stallman and his team worked to piece
        together a new operating system, using Unix as their template. They were
        almost finished creating their OS in the 90's, but they were missing one
        crucial part of the system: the kernel. The kernel is the core of the
        operating system. It allocates the resources of the computer (CPU, RAM,
        etc.) and contains device drivers. Essentially, anything that you see on
        a computer has to go through a kernel before it reaches you. A Finnish
        computer science student, Linus Torvalds, had written a freedom
        respecting kernel, which he named Linux. This was added to the GNU
        system, creating a complete GNU system using Linux as the kernel. This
        is where the name GNU/Linux comes from.
      </p>

      <p>
        Of course, while Linux is used in GNU systems, that isn't the only place
        you see it. Linux is actually the kernel for the Android mobile OS,
        meaning that everyone with an Android smartphone has Linux in their
        pocket (but not GNU). Linux and GNU based systems power most of the
        internet, as they are very secure and well suited for servers. In
        conclusion, GNU/Linux is an operating system with a rich history and
        eccentric creator. In my next post I will detail why I choose to use
        GNU/Linux over something like macOS, Windows, or FreeBSD.
      </p>
      <small>Thu, 01 Nov 2018 21:01:43 -0400</small>
    </div>

    <div class="entry">
      <head>
        <link href=https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Cormorant+Garamond
        rel=stylesheet>
      </head>
      <h2 id="funtoo-linux-not-the-fun-version-of-gentoo">
        Funtoo Linux: Not the Fun Version of Gentoo
      </h2>
      <small
        >[<a href="blog.html#funtoo-linux-not-the-fun-version-of-gentoo">link</a
        >&mdash;<a href="blog/funtoo-linux-not-the-fun-version-of-gentoo.html"
          >standalone</a
        >]</small
      >

      <p>
        On Monday I began a three day journey into Hell. By Hell, I of course
        mean the scourge known as Funtoo Linux. A bit of background before I
        begin: Funtoo is a derivative of Gentoo, the distribution that is known
        for being notoriously laborious to install and keep stable. There are
        minor differences in Funtoo and Gentoo, those being that Funtoo has a
        precompiled kernel available, doesn't have documentation nearly as good
        as Gentoo, and uses git instead of rsync for some things. Of course,
        these differences are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, as
        Funtoo is supposed to be 100% compatible with upstream Gentoo. I didn't
        install Funtoo for these edits, I installed it because judging by its
        name, I assumed it would simply be a fun version of Gentoo. It is not a
        fun version of Gentoo, but a worse version. Never make the mistake I
        did, and install Funtoo. With outdated documentation, I spent three days
        struggling through compiling and configuring xorg and my touchpad, with
        my touchpad never working. I gave up and reinstalled Arch Linux, and
        will attempt vanilla Gentoo soon.
      </p>
      <small>Thu, 25 Oct 2018 19:30:21 -0400</small>
    </div>

    <div class="entry">
      <head>
        <link href=https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Cormorant+Garamond
        rel=stylesheet>
      </head>
      <h2 id="suckless-the-good-and-bad">Suckless: The Good and Bad</h2>
      <small
        >[<a href="blog.html#suckless-the-good-and-bad">link</a>&mdash;<a
          href="blog/suckless-the-good-and-bad.html"
          >standalone</a
        >]</small
      >

      <p>
        There seem to be some misunderstandings regarding suckless and their
        software philosophy, so I'll lay out the basics here, and what I think
        is good and bad about their programs.
      </p>

      <p>
        If you don't know, <a href="https://suckless.org">suckless</a> is a
        collective of hackers that write minimal software meant for advanced
        users. They've released well-known programs that include dmenu, dwm, st,
        and others. Perhaps the most notable quality of these programs is their
        "non-features," that is, they are lacking of common features and must be
        configured by editing a C header file and then recompiling the software
        with every change that you make. This sounds like a hassle, but because
        the software is small, it will compile in a fraction of a second.
      </p>

      <p>
        Suckless software is admittedly harder to configure and install than
        other programs, so why use it? At first glance, it just looks like a
        good attempt at messing up package maintainers, as you can't effectively
        distribute binaries of these programs. There are numerous advantages to
        this, in addition to the disadvantages.
      </p>

      <p>
        Before I go further, I should explain exactly what suckless does with
        its code. The basic idea is that code quality should not be measured by
        quantity, but rather simplicity. Suckless prides itself on the low
        resource footprint of its programs, for example, dwm is less than 2000
        lines of C. Programs are delibrately written without common features,
        and those features are usually distributed via patches in .diff files.
        This keeps code fast, easy to write, and modular, hence the Unix way.
        the general idea behind all of this is stated on their site: "Ingenious
        ideas are simple. Ingenious software is simple. Simplicity is the heart
        of the Unix philosophy. The more code lines you have removed, the more
        progress you have made. As the number of lines of code in your software
        shrinks, the more skilled you have become and the less your software
        sucks." To sum it up, the more simple you can make a solution, the
        better a solution is.
      </p>

      <p>
        Suckless isn't all good though. Like I stated above, you have to
        recompile a program every time a configuration edit is made to it in
        order for the change to stick. This makes it difficult to distribute by
        a distro's repositories, since the user would be getting a version they
        can't configure. Also, the software is hard to use and configure in many
        cases.
      </p>

      <p>
        Note that suckless software isn't meant for most people. It is stated on
        <a href="https://suckless.org/philosophy/">their philosophy page</a>
        that the programs are meant for experienced and advanced users. If you
        don't want to edit a C header file and recompile every time you want a
        different colorscheme, then suckless isn't for you. It's a model that
        can be appealing to a lot of people, though.
      </p>
      <small>Sun, 21 Oct 2018 18:25:32 -0400</small>
    </div>

    <div class="entry">
      <head>
        <link href=https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Cormorant+Garamond
        rel=stylesheet>
      </head>
      <h2 id="anime-should-be-illegal">Anime Should Be Illegal</h2>
      <small
        >[<a href="blog.html#anime-should-be-illegal">link</a>&mdash;<a
          href="blog/anime-should-be-illegal.html"
          >standalone</a
        >]</small
      >

      <p>
        People who watch anime are the scum of the earth. Here's why: you see
        them running around with their "Nayrooto" lookin' arms flapping around
        behind them like they're paralyzed from the shoulders down. They
        frequently speak Wapanese, a false dialect of Japanese, and call
        eachother "Onii-chan" and "Senpai." They may deny their weeb status,
        calling themselves "Otaku," but this is a lie and only further confirms
        their status as weebs. Remember, a weeaboo is anyone who watches anime
        or reads "main gahs." This is not good American culture, and it should
        be stopped. No true patriot would ever wear any clothes made by a filthy
        jap, especially after the tragedy known as Pearl Harbor. Please join me
        in firmly rejecting these evil communist sympathizers in the following
        ways:
      </p>
      <ul>
        <li>Buy gasoline and burn anime stores.</li>
        <li>
          Sign a petition calling for banishment of anime in American schools.
        </li>
        <li>
          Watch American-Made film and television, such as Spongebob Squarepants
          or any MTV production.
        </li>
      </ul>
      <small>Thu, 18 Oct 2018 19:15:48 -0400</small>
    </div>
  </body>
</html>