Friday, January 13, 2017

After a Windows 10 Shutdown, Linux (Ubuntu) Will Not Boot

Windows 10 periodically (without notification) resets certain defaults when system updates occur. That can be quite irritating when it affects your computing operations in either Windows and/or Linux. In the most recent update, the the "fast shutdown" feature for Windows 10 was reactivated.  This has the unfortunate effect of leaving the computer's hard drive in a state of hibernation that precluded Ubuntu from booting.
There is no obvious indication when shutting down Windows 10 that the  "fast shutdown" feature was placed into effect. Previously, I had turned it off at least a couple of times. Since it does not happen often, I forgot how to identify and solve this issue. I spent a couple of fun filled hours dwelling on this before realizing what happened. A tutorial concerning how to fully shutdown Windows 10 is located here. How to fully shut down Windows 10.  An additional article for additional thoughts: The Pros and Cons of Windows 10’s “Fast Startup” Mode.

Following the advice of that tutorial solved the problem and Ubuntu once again boots successfully. Should you have the same problem, I hope that his helps.

Another approach is to mount the Windows 10 partition in read-only mode. /etc/fstab code sample below:

# /dev/sda1 - Windows Partition on /media/windows
# Mounting Read Only- because of Window Shutdown Issue (fast start)
UUID=0A8259B98259AA49 /media/windows ntfs-3g  ro,bg,nodev,defaults,noexec,nosuid                0     0

Tuesday, December 27, 2016

Casual Observations on Military Equipment/Deployment II

The recent election of Trump as the next US President has re-awakened the issue of military spending.  Back in December 2010, I wrote: Casual Observations on Military Equipment/Deployment. Since the issue is once again current, I will re-summarize my casual observations.

My casual thoughts concerning the design and deployment of military equipment:
  1. expendable
  2. rapidly reproduced
  3. easily maintained
  4. can be repaired in the field
  5. cheap

A Post Christmas Wish

Following the Christmas mayhem, I decided to take a quick look at my Amazon wish list. In doing so, Amazon provided me with a list of games that they believed I would like to buy. Surprising, as I did did not research any games on Amazon. Then I remembered that Amazon monitors your internet traffic to feed you desired results. (That was one of the prescient take-a-ways of the film: Minority Report. Anyway, I digress.)

The critical issue is that many of the Civilization games have been "bricked" and will no longer play on newer versions of MS Windows. TechDirt article: DRM Still Breaking Games Nearly A Decade After Purchase.  Another article: September 2015 Windows updates KB3086255 breaks many games. (I suspect, by now, that some dedicated fans have developed workarounds for this.)

My post Christmas wish is that retail companies such as Amazon and Target implement one or more of the  following retail policies.

  1. Inform the customers (in big bold print) on the companies retail website of the product deficiencies. For example that the product will no longer work with the current version of MS Windows.
  2. Allow customers to return products, no questions asked, for a full refund.
  3. Withdraw from sale products that no longer function.
  4. The underlying product manufacture should also provide a method for the customer to obtain a full refund in the event that the customer does not accept the odious "terms of service".  Retail companies should refuse to sell any products that do not provide such an refund option.

Monday, October 31, 2016

When will Democrats denounce Hillary?

I've been wondering why Democrats fail to speak out against Hillary's corruption and lying. The Republicans certainly don't have a problem attacking Trump and descending into a civil-war.

Good to observe that the Washington Times finally wrote an article on this concern. When will Democrats denounce Hillary? Other newspapers, such as the Washington Post, seem to dismiss Hillary's corruption, incompetence, and lying as a nonissue.

My perspective is that the Democrats won't denounce Hillary because their mindset is stuck in the feudal ages. They owe their uncompromising fealty to the Democratic party. Supporting the party takes a precedence over everything, such as being ethical or working in benefit of the national interest. In short, the means justify the end for the Democrats. Hillary is the current Democratic feudal "Queen". As such she deserves total devotion by the Democrats no matter what her character flaws are or how great her incompetence. 

This mindless devotion approaches unbelievable psychotic behavior by Democrats. I can just imagine all Democrats, like lemmings, gladly racing to jump off a cliff to their deaths in mindless impassioned devotion to Hillary.

Since posting there has been some breaking news. Longtime Clinton Ally Stuns Fox News Host, Withdraws Support of Hillary on Live Television. Doug Schoen, the long time supporter of Hillary withdrew his support of Hillary.  I have heard Doug speak many times, and he seemed like one of the few rationale Democrats. He was not a rabid partisan as most Democratic pundits seem to be. I heard it in passing and I was not sure that I heard it correctly. Guess I did. Maybe be Democratic "dam" is starting to develop cracks. Shoen's withdrawal of support for Hillary may be the first "drip" of many that will eventually develop into a "flood". Only time will tell.

Saturday, October 22, 2016

Hillary Clinton's US Supreme Court Will Obsolete the Rule-Of-law

Be afraid, very afraid of Hillary Clinton's possible justice appointments to the US Supreme Court. Hillary, based on her remarks, will propose to nominate justices who will not use the Constitution as the legal standard of review for making decisions. Note, in the video below, the absence any reference to the Constitution by Hillary. What she does (falsely) claim is that the Court is supposed to "stand on the side of the American" people whatever that means.  For a politician, such as Hillary, this is just disingenuous "smoke and mirrors".

The implication of Hillary's response is that she would nominate justices who would not make legal decisions based on the US Constitution. Instead, a Hillary Clinton Supreme Court would; on her subjective assertion that she desires a Court that represents "all Americans", that she will nominate justices who will simply issue decisions based on the political objectives of the Democratic party.