The Feeling of the Present and of History

A drama is unfolding in Burma as I write. Monks and nuns, the most respected class of people in the Burmese society, are in open defiance against the ruling junta. Could it be just like two decades ago, when similar incidents culmulated in Aung San Suu Kyi's electoral victory? Right now, as it unfolds before the world's eyes, no one can guess where it will lead.

There is something that appears fundamentally different between knowing an event in history and an event unravelling in the present. In 1988, students took to the streets. Military suppressed them. Thousands were killed. It triggered elections. Aung San Suu Kyi won. The military refused to recognise election results. Their rule continued. That is history. It is as I know it. I was too young then to know it as it unfolded. I read it later in my life. I read it, as a piece of history, compressed and summarised. Time flowed in different beats: unimportant days were swept away in words no longer than a few seconds, and moments of importance were granted paragraphs after paragraphs that took minutes to read. The scaling of time when cast into words is twisted out of linear proportion.

But with the present, time is time. It is not scaled. It is not contorted. It is not shortened to slim boring periods and lengthen to fit critical events. One day is one day. One week is one week. One month is one month. The present becomes alive. Yesterday nuns took to the streets. Last week monks did so. Suppose a revolution were to come in a month's time. This month will not be a day long. It will not be a week long. It will be a month long. A month is a month. It is not like pages of a history book. Even if nothing goes on during this one month, time plods on unrelentlessly, unceasingly, unhurriedly.

That is, perhaps, why events unfolding as I read in the newspapers feel more real than events of the past. When I read an article about John Lennon's death there is a detached feeling about the whole incident. It is not as if I have not felt the loss of a great singer, but this loss feels muted. It feels as if the concrete of history has solidified. But when Luciano Pavarotti died, the concrete of history may have been laid, but it is still wet. Maybe this is the reason why people often say that times are getting more and more difficult.

Where will the events in Burma head from here? Will it be like two decades ago, a repetition of history? Or will a fresh chapter of democracy enter Burma's life? There is no flipping of pages to the important future events this time.

Feels so real, doesn't it?

The Thing About the Brotherhood

The Intelligent Singaporean was one blog aggregator that was born shortly after the mrbrown incident and evolved with amazing speed into one of the local blogosphere's greatest assets. Created by inspir3d, its aggregation style is a one-man (or possibly one-team, since its operations are not well known to me) effort in collecting and publishing relevant blog entries. This is a remarkable task, considering that it is a daily effort and one has to use his intelligence and wisdom to sieve out good entries. More information about the Intelligent Singaporean can be obtained from this Singapore Angle interview.

Its style has varied over time before settling into the plain links we see today, and it remains largely an aggregator except for some occasional posts by a mysterious "Brotherhood". The Brotherhood posts appear rather frequently, approximately once every two or three days - almost as common as the "daily reads" that publishes the aggregated entries. Their articles are long by blog entry standards, and I find them quite difficult to read because of the obscure way the articles are written.

The way they operate doesn't really make things clearer. The Brotherhood consists of several online personae, and they are usually the ones to post the first comments on these Brotherhood posts. These comments, written in apparent coded messages, are sometimes incomprehensible to people outside of the Brotherhood, and it does add frustration to one who yearns for transparent and clear arguments.

Usually, I follow everything on the Intelligent Singaporean, but after reading the first few Brotherhood posts, I decided to skip them altogether. Apparently, I am not alone in not reading the Brotherhood posts: in the comments of this entry by Mr Wang Say So, he said that

"I really don't know much about who these "Brotherhood" people are, and the way they write, I don't think I will find out.

And somewhere further down, a person signing off as "Rob" said,

"Can we move on away from the Brotherhood stuff? There's a reason why I don't visit IS anymore."

That being said, I must emphasize that the aggregator part of the Intelligent Singaporean is still a very worthy read as it is before the Brotherhood appeared. And since inspir3d has allowed the Brotherhood to publish their articles there, I presume that their articles are generating a reasonable amount of readership, so perhaps their posts appeal to some other people. People like me can just skip the Brotherhood posts.

However, I do wonder if having the Brotherhood posts is the best arrangement. Their articles are essentially blog entries, and thus quite a different nature from the "daily reads". Wouldn't it be better to separate them into two different sections? For that matter, why doesn't the Brotherhood get a blog for themselves? Certainly, this will make the main aggregator site neater. Just imagine a newcomer to the blogosphere being introduced to the Intelligent Singaporean as the best aggregator for local sociopolitical issues in Singapore; it is quite likely that he/she will be confounded by the recommendation.

I have no say as to how the Intelligent Singaporean is run, and I certainly do not know the relationship between inspir3d and the Brotherhood (I suspect they are personal acquaintances). But I think the Intelligent Singaporean will serve its purpose better if the Brotherhood articles are not featured so prominently. At least, it should be given the same "status" as the normal aggregated posts.

Ubuntu - Linux for Human Beings

One of the major hurdles one finds when attempting to install Linux on his/her computer is the installation itself. Not only do you need to partition your hard disk if you have not done so (unless you have a physically second hard disk), you also need to know your computer specifications (like what ethernet card it is using). And some Linux distribution installers are not able to recognise SATA hard disks which most laptops (including mine - IBM Thinkpad T43) use. This is the case when I tried to install the powerful Debian which all SPS computer uses.

Fortunately, Ubuntu cuts out most of that job. Okay, partitioning of hard disk still remains but that's not really a screwy job as it may sound, though it may be daunting if it's your first time tweaking with the foundations of your computer. I recommend using the Disk Management in Windows to partition the hard drive itself; it is easy to use, comes along with Windows XP, and since it is running on that partition itself, there's little risk of destroying your Windows partition. (Note that two partitions are needed, a "\root" where the Linux will run and a small "\temp" with the memory size same as your RAM.) Apart from partitioning, Ubuntu's graphical installer really makes it friendlier than other distributions' text based installer.

The default interface is Gnome, one of the most popular interfaces for Linux (if you want KDE, go for Kubuntu). Slick and clean and not too different from the Windows interface, the only dissatisfaction I have with it is the huge icon sizes. As compared to Windows, these Linux interfaces' greatest advantage is the multiple desktops, which is most wonderful (but not limited to) situations when you're running programs that uses a copious amount of windows (like Adobe Photoshop or its open-source equivalent, The GIMP; I was tempted to say Internet Explorer for its poor popup blocking abilities, but since IE7 is out, I shall forgive it).

Most programs in Windows have an equivalent in Linux. OpenOffice.org is Linux's equivalent of Microsoft Office (OpenOffice.org is also available in Windows, for those who are too poor to own an original copy or too lofty to have a pirated one). There's of course Firefox in Linux that's equivalent to , well, Firefox in Windows! Thunderbird also works in Linux, or you can also have Evolution Mail which comes pre-installed in Gnome. Ubuntu also has music/video/CD players, as well as instant messaging client Gaim, or if you want an MSN clone, aMSN.

For programs like Thunderbird and aMSN that don't come installed, all you need is a working Internet connection. Then, under the Applications menu (the Start menu equivalent of Windows), choose "Add/Remove...". It works something like the "Add/Remove Programs" in Windows' Control Panel, but unlike the latter which only searches for programs installed in your computer, it goes onto the Internet and search for lists of programs available (from the Ubuntu repositories, which can be modified if you wish). Installing and uninstalling involves just a few clicks. However, installing programs that are not on the repositories can be a headache; fortunately, that situation seldom surfaces.

The best thing about these programs, other than, to a computer programmer, being open source, is that it is free! No more having to fork out hundreds of dollars for programs; no more having to resort to piracy! Of course, that alone means that many Windows-only program like ABAQUS and AutoCAD are not available, which is why I recommend keeping your Windows system alongside with Linux (i.e. dual boot). Alternatively, you can use Wine, a Windows emulator that runs well for quite a handful of Windows-only programs. In fact, according to Wine's official database, games like Diablo 2, Counter-Strike, Warcraft III and World of Warcraft works pretty satisfactorily. But if it is your work computer you should not even have such abominations in it in the first place...

Another advantage I find in Linux is that it takes much shorter for the system to start up. For my laptop to boot Windows completely, I gotta wait for about half a minute before the login dialog drags itself onto screen, then another two or three minutes for Windows to stop spinning my hard disk. For Ubuntu, it takes less than half a minute for the login dialog box to appear, and less than ten seconds after logging in for the system to be ready. Talking about speed!

Other minor plus points about Linux is that it naturally comes with a C compiler (GNU Compiler Collection, or "gcc"), as anyone with formal education in C programming would know (however, it doesn't come pre-installed in Ubuntu, though a "apt-get install build-essential" in the Terminal will resolve that. Gnome also has an amazing amount of screensavers. Also, you can fetch files from any account in your Windows system (which goes to show the security, or lack thereof, of Windows systems).

Personally, I strongly urge one to try out Ubuntu. If anything, take it as an exploration into the various dimensions of computers. For once, don't be a bluepill. Live no longer in the Blue Screen of Death. Free your (computer's) mind.