But, I strongly support their freedom to distribute those packages if they so please. Now, thanks to the oft-criticized but well-worded GPL, Red Hat is obligated to release the source for any modifications to open-source software that they create. This is what allows a project like CentOS to exist. But it turns out that the folks at Red Hat are not happy about someone else making no money off of the money that they made off the people who made no money. So they were kind enough to send their legal attack-dogs after these folks.

But, as GrokLaw has taught us, the snarling and slobbering of legal attack-dogs makes for great entertainment. Among the choice morsels contained within the letter, we have this gem:

Moreover, our client does not allow others to provide links to our client’s web site without permission. Your use of the RED HAT marks while linking to redhat.com suggests that Red Hat somehow sponsors or endorses your company which is false and misleading.

Now, you may have noticed that in a very uncharacteristic move, I’ve linked to every instance of the words Red Hat and RHEL within this article, sometimes gratuitously. This is because I consider this statement, and Red Hat’s position on this matter to be an affront to free speech.

It may not be legal for someone to claim to represent Red Hat. However, if they have something to say about Red Hat, whether that something is positive or negative, they have the right to say it and they have the right to make clear who it is that they’re talking about by providing a relevant reference, such as a link.

So, to you, Red Hat, I say fsck you! Seriously… you seem to have some errant bits floating around spewing out garbage which is tarnishing an otherwise pristine corporate whore reputation filesystem. How do you expect to get clients for your trade if you’ve got these creepy little critters crawling around your nether-regions? So, please, do us all a favor and get yourself checked out before straddling any more servers. Mmm-kay? Great.

For the record, I have no connection to Red Hat. I do not work for Red Hat, I am not supported by Red Hat, and I have never purchased a Red Hat product in my life. Nor do I intend to, at any point in the future, seek or accept employment with Red Hat nor purchase any Red Hat products, including, but not limited to, RHEL (Red Hat Enterprise Linux).

But, either way, it’s quite annoying. I really don’t understand why people are so uncomfortable with saying the word “demon” when talking about computers. They look at “daemon” and think, oh that can’t possibly be the same word as “demon” because that’s bad, so I’ll just pretend it’s something different. Well, sorry, it’s not.

Or, perhaps, they’re thrown off by that letter “a” in there. Now, the fact that the proper historical spelling is dæmon (note the letter æ) should be a slight hint. The “ae” in “daemon” is a digraph meant to represent “æ” since most computer keyboards don’t have a convenient way of typing the letter. So what other words use that letter?

How about: cæsar, æthereal, encyclopædia and hæmoglobin? There are certainly quite a few more, but I don’t feel like turning this into a book. So, let’s look at these words:

Cæsar (Caesar or Cesar)
You wouldn’t order a cAser salad, would you?

Æthereal (aethereal or ethereal)
This one should be particularly noticeable for IT folks. I don’t typically use Athereal to sniff network traffic.

Encyclopædia (encyclopaedia or encyclopedia)
If you look on the side of that big thick book on your shelf, you’ll notice that it is written “Encyclopædia Britannica”. Yet most of us know how to pronounce that word. And, while you’re at it, look up daemon in there.

Hæmoglobin (haemoglobin or hemoglobin)
This is one of those great examples of a word that has been simplified in American English to more accurately reflect the pronunciation. The “a” was removed entirely to simplify the word. Much like removing the “a” from “daemon” to give us “demon” in American English. Imagine that…

I had been tracking it online and noticed that as of 6:58 PM on Thursday, March 22nd, that package had arrived in Portland. I was quite happy that I would then be receiving the package today. Unfortunately, I won’t be receiving the package today. It’s going to sit at a loading dock until Monday morning.

You see, the shipper paid for 3-day select shipping. And even though the package is already here, today is only the 2nd day. Well, we can’t very well deliver a 3-day select package on the 2nd day, now can we? So, instead, I have to wait an extra day, so that it’ll be the 3rd day. But tomorrow is Saturday, and UPS won’t deliver on Saturday unless the shipper specifically pays for Saturday delivery. Since they didn’t pay for it, it’s going to sit in Portland until Monday, at which point it will finally be delivered to me… in Portland!

So UPS had the choice of delivering a 3-day select package on the 2nd day, or on the 5th day after shipping. They’ve chosen the 5th (3rd business day). I must say I’m not impressed. One thing that I do rather like about the US Postal Service is that they deliver mail as quickly as possible, no matter what. If someone sends a package via regular mail today, and it happens to be in Portland before my mail carrier leaves the post office tomorrow morning, I will have that package tomorrow. Sure, they didn’t pay to have it here tomorrow, but that’s the earliest it was available so that’s when I get it.

That, in my opinion, is the way deliveries should be handled.