Re: General advice beyond Org

["Alan E. Davis" <lngndvs@gmail.com>]

I worked as a teacher in a school in a third world context, where the
district was severely underfunded.  I held out as much as I could.  I had
to use proprietary systems, eventually, to report attendance and grades, so
I installed Virtual Box.  It was a long and hard battle: printer drivers
were not up to snuff; networking was difficult compared to the M$
approach.  Back in the day---I started using GNU/Linux in the pre-1.0
kernel days---many things did not work smoothly, but the Linux
Documentation Project was a breath of fresh air, and a beam of light
enlightened the scene.  (As an aside, I note with misgivings that the LDP
is not well maintained---but I am partially responsible for this, because I
didn't work on documentation as perhaps I ought to have.  Then again, the
state of the "Linux Desktop" is such that other supports are available and
many of the hands on configuration and administration tasks are either
automatic or much simpler and more intuitive.).

I would suggest, in your context, that you do not have to abandon free
software, nor, I sense, are you advised to refuse to use the infrastructure
that has been given.  I use emacs for much, I really like org-mode a lot
and even thought I am not able to take advantage of many of the more
sophisticated tools of org-mode.  You may find, like many before you, that
the tools of free and open source software many streamline your workflow,
and give you an edge, even while you are using the ordained tools for your
specific disciplinary work.  When people see that the free and open tools
work for you, gradually you may make inroads, and not at the expense of
your career.

I believe this approach has been behind much of the achieved success of
Free and Open Source software and operating systems.

I am rooting for you.

Alan Davis


On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 8:31 AM, <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 08:50:32AM -0500, Kevin Buchs wrote:
> > As a student, you simply need to go along with your supervisor's
> > recommendations. You are not in a position to dictate the terms.
>
> Nobody talks about dictating anything. Some supervisors are more
> enlightened than other, so trying to talk to them doesn't seem
> wrong.
>
> >                                                            Using the
> > proprietary tools will not hurt you, unless you need to buy your own.
>
> With that I disagree strongly: free is not primarily about price
> (more so in the OP's case, as he stated clearly). Reducing "free"
> to price totally misses the point, IMO.
>
> [...]
>
> > So, you need to adjust your attitude. It may be that you are presenting
> the
> > issue of principles - I prefer free, you prefer proprietary, but that is
> > not really the true issue. Maybe you don't know the proprietary tools and
> > don't want to learn them or feel you can't learn them. Choice of tools
> you
> > use is no reason to switch graduate programs.
>
> This whole paragraph comes across as somewhat... condescending.
>
> > This is entirely a matter of getting along with other people, not being
> > selfish, etc. These are life skills we are talking about.
>
> Definitely. And part of this getting along is trying to negotiate
> what matters to oneself and to others. I do agree that an intransigent
> attitude isn't helpful, but Edgar didn't show something like that.
>
> Fostering free software is exactly about "not being selfish".
>
> Cheers
> - -- tomás
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlr+8e0ACgkQBcgs9XrR2kax+wCfbKhTlIUw6n2SL106P2GgS4qa
> SWYAnjKwfLqGw5KnPqBCPPb1GHutiLfQ
> =szdJ
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>


-- 
[Fill in the blanks]

The use of corrupt manipulations and blatant rhetorical ploys ...---
outright lying, flagwaving, personal attacks, setting up phony
alternatives, misdirection, jargon-mongering, evading key issues, feigning
disinterested objectivity, willful misunderstanding of other points of
view---suggests that ... lacks both credibility and evidence.

             ---- Edward Tufte (in context of making presentations)