sudo-discuss

sudo-discuss@sudoroom.org

8 participants
7412 discussions

FYI: The spare Cisco 3550 Switch OS upgraded today (4/26/14).

by Somebody

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Thx! Daniel -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTXKeeAAoJEK2jBhiHY3O63nIIAKsORYFYe9ZJ6Qzd6ENkZSek Oryt20HPLpHgS7wfRsE/jdjuAWRW2VRNOtuyae9I8aMa+ThGWBtyqEeqFCS8HnBp /NuURY/oNISGQvxEFcvgmEZCzkRH8oU2fTjxpzIvk65DNHNjLTeaGdsAzwcxMflb +JLFMu/NQEGB7ZEAKq74Ck/dKRJhX3ww1/h70fm4b45EouxOI3PZ46neT9Fmt5xR bMLwzroSbsVRywKSKL8LsZdNS5fmNJUrNAXsklceEwfvInCSu5E/oBGXUnXDmMi6 HAM9wc0PUmyTI6ns2O8+Dtwm+jErBCChVkVlETWDAMJpWYXXPCrsHeUhty1OPo4= =i/11 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

11 years, 4 months

left my MBP power supply in the common room Thursday

by David Keenan

If anyone sees it, can you stash it in the BAPS room? Thanks! David

11 years, 4 months

Fwd: The Tyranny of Stuctureless

by Romy Snowyla

Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: Romy Ilano <romy.ilano(a)gmail.com> > Date: April 26, 2014 at 12:47:51 PM PDT > To: Romy Ilano <romy(a)snowyla.com> > Subject: The Tyranny of Stuctureless > > > http://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm > > The Tyranny of Stuctureless > > The basic problems didn't appear until individual rap groups exhausted the virtues of consciousness-raising and decided they wanted to do something more specific. At this point they usually foundered because most groups were unwilling to change their structure when they changed their tasks. Women had thoroughly accepted the idea of "structurelessness" without realizing the limitations of its uses. People would try to use the "structureless" group and the informal conference for purposes for which they were unsuitable out of a blind belief that no other means could possibly be anything but oppressive.If the movement is to grow beyond these elementary stages of development, it will have to disabuse itself of some of its prejudices about organization and structure. There is nothing inherently bad about either of these. They can be and often are misused, but to reject them out of hand because they are misused is to deny ourselves the necessary tools to further development. We need to understand why "structurelessness" does not work. > > FORMAL AND INFORMAL STRUCTURES > > Contrary to what we would like to believe, there is no such thing as a structureless group. Any group of people of whatever nature that comes together for any length of time for any purpose will inevitably structure itself in some fashion. The structure may be flexible; it may vary over time; it may evenly or unevenly distribute tasks, power and resources over the members of the group. But it will be formed regardless of the abilities, personalities, or intentions of the people involved. The very fact that we are individuals, with different talents, predispositions, and backgrounds makes this inevitable. Only if we refused to relate or interact on any basis whatsoever could we approximate structurelessness -- and that is not the nature of a human group.This means that to strive for a structureless group is as useful, and as deceptive, as to aim at an "objective" news story, "value-free" social science, or a "free" economy. A "laissez faire" group is about as realistic as a "laissez faire" society; the idea becomes a smokescreen for the strong or the lucky to establish unquestioned hegemony over others. This hegemony can be so easily established because the idea of "structurelessness" does not prevent the formation of informal structures, only formal ones. Similarly "laissez faire" philosophy did not prevent the economically powerful from establishing control over wages, prices, and distribution of goods; it only prevented the government from doing so. Thus structurelessness becomes a way of masking power, and within the women's movement is usually most strongly advocated by those who are the most powerful (whether they are conscious of their power or not). As long as the structure of the group is informal, the rules of how decisions are made are known only to a few and awareness of power is limited to those who know the rules. Those who do not know the rules and are not chosen for initiation must remain in confusion, or suffer from paranoid delusions that something is happening of which they are not quite aware. > > For everyone to have the opportunity to be involved in a given group and to participate in its activities the structure must be explicit, not implicit. The rules of decision-making must be open and available to everyone, and this can happen only if they are formalized. This is not to say that formalization of a structure of a group will destroy the informal structure. It usually doesn't. But it does hinder the informal structure from having predominant control and make available some means of attacking it if the people involved are not at least responsible to the needs of the group at large. "Structurelessness" is organizationally impossible. We cannot decide whether to have a structured or structureless group, only whether or not to have a formally structured one. Therefore the word will not be used any longer except to refer to the idea it represents. Unstructured will refer to those groups which have not been deliberately structured in a particular manner. Structured will refer to those which have. A Structured group always has formal structure, and may also have an informal, or covert, structure. It is this informal structure, particularly in Unstructured groups, which forms the basis for elites. > > THE NATURE OF ELITISM > > "Elitist" is probably the most abused word in the women's liberation movement. It is used as frequently, and for the same reasons, as "pinko" was used in the fifties. It is rarely used correctly. Within the movement it commonly refers to individuals, though the personal characteristics and activities of those to whom it is directed may differ widely: An individual, as an individual can never be an elitist, because the only proper application of the term "elite" is to groups. Any individual, regardless of how well-known that person may be, can never be an elite.Correctly, an elite refers to a small group of people who have power over a larger group of which they are part, usually without direct responsibility to that larger group, and often without their knowledge or consent. A person becomes an elitist by being part of, or advocating the rule by, such a small group, whether or not that individual is well known or not known at all. Notoriety is not a definition of an elitist. The most insidious elites are usually run by people not known to the larger public at all. Intelligent elitists are usually smart enough not to allow themselves to become well known; when they become known, they are watched, and the mask over their power is no longer firmly lodged.Elites are not conspiracies. Very seldom does a small group of people get together and deliberately try to take over a larger group for its own ends. Elites are nothing more, and nothing less, than groups of friends who also happen to participate in the same political activities. They would probably maintain their friendship whether or not they were involved in political activities; they would probably be involved in political activities whether or not they maintained their friendships. It is the coincidence of these two phenomena which creates elites in any group and makes them so difficult to break.These friendship groups function as networks of communication outside any regular channels for such communication that may have been set up by a group. If no channels are set up, they function as the only networks of communication. Because people are friends, because they usually share the same values and orientations, because they talk to each other socially and consult with each other when common decisions have to be made, the people involved in these networks have more power in the group than those who don't. And it is a rare group that does not establish some informal networks of communication through the friends that are made in it.Some groups, depending on their size, may have more than one such informal communications network. Networks may even overlap. When only one such network exists, it is the elite of an otherwise Unstructured group, whether the participants in it want to be elitists or not. If it is the only such network in a Structured group it may or may not be an elite depending on its composition and the nature of the formal Structure. If there are two or more such networks of friends, they may compete for power within the group, thus forming factions, or one may deliberately opt out of the competition, leaving the other as the elite. In a Structured group, two or more such friendship networks usually compete with each other for formal power. This is often the healthiest situation, as the other members are in a position to arbitrate between the two competitors for power and thus to make demands on those to whom they give their temporary allegiance.The inevitably elitist and exclusive nature of informal communication networks of friends is neither a new phenomenon characteristic of the women's movement nor a phenomenon new to women. Such informal relationships have excluded women for centuries from participating in integrated groups of which they were a part. In any profession or organization these networks have created the "locker room" mentality and the "old school" ties which have effectively prevented women as a group (as well as some men individually) from having equal access to the sources of power or social reward. Much of the energy of past women's movements has been directed to having the structures of decision-making and the selection processes formalized so that the exclusion of women could be confronted directly. As we well know, these efforts have not prevented the informal male-only networks from discriminating against women, but they have made it more difficult.Because elites are informal does not mean they are invisible. At any small group meeting anyone with a sharp eye and an acute ear can tell who is influencing whom. The members of a friendship group will relate more to each other than to other people. They listen more attentively, and interrupt less; they repeat each other's points and give in amiably; they tend to ignore or grapple with the "outs" whose approval is not necessary for making a decision. But it is necessary for the "outs" to stay on good terms with the "ins." Of course the lines are not as sharp as I have drawn them. They are nuances of interaction, not prewritten scripts. But they are discernible, and they do have their effect. Once one knows with whom it is important to check before a decision is made, and whose approval is the stamp of acceptance, one knows who is running things.Since movement groups have made no concrete decisions about who shall exercise power within them, many different criteria are used around the country. Most criteria are along the lines of traditional female characteristics. For instance, in the early days of the movement, marriage was usually a prerequisite for participation in the informal elite. As women have been traditionally taught, married women relate primarily to each other, and look upon single women as too threatening to have as close friends. In many cities, this criterion was further refined to include only those women married to New Left men. This standard had more than tradition behind it, however, because New Left men often had access to resources needed by the movement -- such as mailing lists, printing presses, contacts, and information -- and women were used to getting what they needed through men rather than independently. As the movement has charged through time, marriage has become a less universal criterion for effective participation, but all informal elites establish standards by which only women who possess certain material or personal characteristics may join. They frequently include: middle-class background (despite all the rhetoric about relating to the working class); being married; not being married but living with someone; being or pretending to be a lesbian; being between the ages of twenty and thirty; being college educated or at least having some college background; being "hip"; not being too "hip"; holding a certain political line or identification as a "radical"; having children or at least liking them; not having children; having certain "feminine" personality characteristics such as being "nice"; dressing right (whether in the traditional style or the antitraditional style); etc. There are also some characteristics which will almost always tag one as a "deviant" who should not be related to. They include: being too old; working full time, particularly if one is actively committed to a "career"; not being "nice"; and being avowedly single (i.e., neither actively heterosexual nor homosexual).Other criteria could be included, but they all have common themes. The characteristics prerequisite for participating in the informal elites of the movement, and thus for exercising power, concern one's background, personality, or allocation of time. They do not include one's competence, dedication to feminism, talents, or potential contribution to the movement. The former are the criteria one usually uses in determining one's friends. The latter are what any movement or organization has to use if it is going to be politically effective.The criteria of participation may differ from group to group, but the means of becoming a member of the informal elite if one meets those criteria art pretty much the same. The only main difference depends on whether one is in a group from the beginning, or joins it after it has begun. If involved from the beginning it is important to have as many of one's personal friends as possible also join. If no one knows anyone else very well, then one must deliberately form friendships with a select number and establish the informal interaction patterns crucial to the creation of an informal structure. Once the informal patterns are formed they act to maintain themselves, and one of the most successful tactics of maintenance is to continuously recruit new people who "fit in." One joins such an elite much the same way one pledges a sorority. If perceived as a potential addition, one is "rushed" by the members of the informal structure and eventually either dropped or initiated. If the sorority is not politically aware enough to actively engage in this process itself it can be started by the outsider pretty much the same way one joins any private club. Find a sponsor, i.e., pick some member of the elite who appears to be well respected within it, and actively cultivate that person's friendship. Eventually, she will most likely bring you into the inner circle. > > > > Sent from my iPhone

11 years, 4 months

important news about the new 3D printer

by Jake

if you are interested in printing at sudoroom, whether it's 2D conventional printing or new 3D printing, please join the sudo-prints email list. https://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-prints i'm about to post a message on that list about the TAZ Lulzbot 3D printer that we recently got. it's good news. also, if you know anything about any of the printers at sudoroom, you should join this list. Soon all the sudoroom printers will have labels on them that say "Email sudo-prints(a)lists.sudoroom.org for information about how to use this printer!" if you just want to raed the list, i suppose you can just click here: https://lists.sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-prints/ -jake

11 years, 4 months

Tonight: [AWS-Oakland] Reminder - Scaling on AWS for the First 10 Million Users on Thursday, April 24

by eddan.com

Spark Art is across 22nd St. from 2141 Broadway. > AWS Oakland - > > We are looking forward to seeing everyone on Thursday, April 24th at 7:00 hosted at Sparkart where: > > Sami Zuhuruddin, Amazon Web Services Solutions Architect, will be presenting “Scaling on AWS for the First 10 Million Users”. > > Matt Trescot, StudyBlue’s Head of Operations, will be presenting how StudyBlue uses Stackdriver to monitor their AWS resources as they rapidly approach the 10 million user mark. > > The address is 2201 Broadway Ste 100, Oakland, CA. > > AWS will be providing pizza (vegetarian included) and refreshments (Beer, Soda, & Water). > > Please remember to RSVP on the AWS-Oakland Meetup site. > > The more the merrier, > AWS Oakland Team > > > >

11 years, 4 months

Running late for the OMNI meeting, 1hr approx.

by Somebody

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 thx! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTWbjIAAoJEK2jBhiHY3O67FYH/jM95stB+EhbmckwhlbnrwQI kD0KSKv2osgvnqgwYNKXjPFaAw6RX+DNgcJ1rsMX0H8je9dEAGM0KLkT2liJsEOJ NVk+MEiVvd+JI5P0wnzx7VZvZUofHSSudLOnStpRR5xLLvsZJAvbyhO+OrEyvqML 9vVlFtD88SM/lFnEPcS7audBj9q29NX56m8gTgmSxmp0e0YKTzthexdHY6UWjZ1z LcmeVp6+A+LbEJ6/Ux0GeYfKhSTVeEsLN+v6hTXB8u2AnkYPrpKFKutOSJa1IEUQ gcZVNGIATf2YPqNOGIT7GD0t03zRa0V79OlsA5iF22PawUFyv33L1bCEUojmOKU= =icx+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

11 years, 4 months

Fwd: [personal-clouds] First Indie Box Meetup

by Phil Wolff

fyi. kindred spirits of sudo mesh. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Johannes Ernst <jernst(a)cldstr.com> Date: Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 10:45 AM Subject: [personal-clouds] First Indie Box Meetup To: "personal-clouds(a)lists.pde.cc List" <personal-clouds(a)lists.pde.cc> The Indie Box Project is planning our first Indie Box Meetup: on May 12, 2014 from 6:30-8:00pm at the Hacker Dojo in Mountain View, CA price: free registration: http://bit.ly/1lJoDyx If you want to talk Indie Box, Personal Clouds, and anything related, come by! We're probably have a couple demos, and discuss how you run your own web applications at home. Or write apps for Indie Box that you and others can use. Bring your own hardware and we'll work on getting Indie Box software running on it. (x86, Raspberry Pi, and the like) Cheers, Johannes. ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: personal-clouds(a)lists.pde.cc To be removed from the list, send any message to: personal-clouds-unsubscribe(a)lists.pde.cc For all list information and functions, see: http://lists.pde.cc/lists/info/personal-clouds

11 years, 4 months

[vision] Sudo Reboot

by Matthew Senate

Hey all, What does it mean to have a sudo reboot? What do we see? What do we want to put our energy and effort towards? We've come a long way. I'd like to start a thread just hearing what folks think about rebooting sudo room. *If you had a chance to re-write sudo room from scratch, what would would you do differently?* We now have something like this chance.

11 years, 4 months

[Minutes] Last Night's Meeting

by Matthew Senate

Hey all, The notes from last night's meeting are posted here: https://sudoroom.org/wiki/Meeting_Notes_2014-04-23 // Matt p.s. Auspiciously the 23rd.

11 years, 4 months

Redefining Work panel at 2141?

by Vicky Knox

Hi all! I just sent you an email about the freedom from full-time event at Hotel Zorba on the 29th <http://www.nowsf.org/#!schedule/cee5>. One of the speakers, Chris Carlsson, is going to inquire with folks he knows to see if they'd be interested in doing a panel discussion at 2141. If you're interested in connecting with these folks and talking with them about what we're doing to redefine work/productivity/contribution, I'd recommend checking out the event!! I'm unfortunately stuck in sunny SoCal paradise until the 5th (scroll down). About Chris: he is kind of like a Sudoer's kindred spirit, his activism starting in the 70s against corporate SF. He's one of the people who published Processed World <http://processedworld.com/> (an anti-market labor maga/zine we have copies of and will be getting more of through Chris), is one of the cofounders of Critical Mass, and is a radical historian and archivist. And he loves Sudo Room! ____ v _( :[ ) _ ^ _ v (___)__) '_\V/ ` ' oX` X v X -HELP! X . X \O/ |\ X.a##a. M |_\ .aa########a.>> __|__ .a################aa. \ / ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

11 years, 4 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

sudo-discuss