OMG

September 13, 2004 8:58 AM

Alas, the new iMac cannot bow before the cross. "At best, it can only give a downward nod or an upward look, and that would just communicate half-hearted politeness rather than an attitude of worship." So says the editor of the Christian Macintosh Users Group. Love Jesus, but not Jobs? No problem - this list of Christian computer users groups has you covered. And hey - Neo/Luddites? Even if you've left the web behind, the web hasn't left you behind.

MeFites, when you're not bowing before the blue, what's your favorite site that melds the sacred with the techno-profane?
posted by stonerose (16 comments total)

Before anybody gets their panties in a twist, the comment about the new Mac not bowing is a joke. Just to stave off the cries that this is an example of how religious folk take things far too seriously.

In regards to luddism. I think that one of the major misconceptions of luddism is that it was an anti-technology movement inspired by a dislike of technology rather than a labor movement inspired by a realization that automation and mechanization were used to eliminate jobs held by skilled labor. As a result, luddism is very relevant to debates about globalization and the labor market today.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 9:19 AM on September 13, 2004

MeFites, when you're not bowing before the blue, what's your favorite site that melds the sacred with the techno-profane?

um... white ninja comics?
posted by mcsweetie at 9:19 AM on September 13, 2004

This is some funny shit. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to paint a glowing red 666 on the shiny aluminum cover of my new laptop.

Should it read 666 open or 666 closed? Because, ya know, 999 isn't a scary number at all.
posted by fenriq at 10:43 AM on September 13, 2004

999 is what we Brits use where you guys would use 911. So not scary but (occasionally) useful in an emergency...
posted by i_cola at 11:07 AM on September 13, 2004

Huh. Must be confusing if you're trying to dial it while submerged upside-down in a telephone booth.
posted by stonerose at 11:14 AM on September 13, 2004

This reminds me of the WIRED issue that featured the Apple logo, or a Macintosh, I can't remember which, wearing a crown of thorns. (A co-worker of mine who was a seminarian at the time thought it was a bit much to compare Apple's largely self-inflicted problems with Jesus' martyrdom.)


Oh, and every time I come into my office my laptop seems to have oriented itself toward Mecca.
posted by alumshubby at 1:56 PM on September 13, 2004

Alumshubby, I think there's a market out there for a GPS device that automatically orients a user's laptop toward Mecca.

I actually thought the "bowing" comment--and the site's logo--were cute jokes. I wasn't surprised by the explicitly Christian content in a Christian Mac users' group, after all.
posted by Sidhedevil at 2:57 PM on September 13, 2004

the bowing also came in handy for the iFellate extension.
posted by condour75 at 3:24 PM on September 13, 2004

I'm surprised there wasn't a Japanese-market G4 iMac that knows how deep to bow to show the proper degree of respect to its user.
posted by stonerose at 3:58 PM on September 13, 2004

skallas: Also, don't half-ass correct people on the usage of the word Luddite. It does have more than one meaning. Glad to hear the word a day calendar is paying off.

I would say in response don't half-assed get into an argument about the definition of terms armed with only a Mirriam-Webster's dictionary. One of the problems with dictionaries is that they frequently end up documenting popular misunderstandings of minority ideologies or beliefs. One of the better examples is Miriam-Webster's description of bisexual, which seems to have more to do with hermaphrodism than the label coined by Kraft-Ebling. Atheism is another term with enshrined definitions that many atheists find incomplete, annoying or imprecise. If your quixotic and misguided defense of stonerose is to wade into discussion on an electronic copy of Miriam Webster's Dictionary pretending that it is a warhorse, I suggest that you reconsider your position.

It is doubly misguided in that I was not correcting stonerose. I was, in fact, praising him or her for posting a good link to what I consider to be an index of resources that offer a nice intelligent discussion of luddism from its start as an early manifestation of the labor movement to its contemporary incarnations. I thought that, "And hey - Neo/Luddites? Even if you've left the web behind, the web hasn't left you behind," was a nice bit of off-the-cuff satire.

Thanks for the quick status quo defense and assuming no one understands humor, but you.

Oh, again you misread me. I certainly think that quite a few people are quite capable of getting the joke. Obviously stonerose did. However, past experience has shown that it only takes one person to accept the quote at face value to make a discussion go downhill pretty quick. If my feeble attempts at spoiling the joke forestalled at least one ranting post by one of my fellow atheists who unfortunately have a tendency to go about anti-Christian advocacy with a shortage of both wit and information, then I feel I have done my job.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 4:06 PM on September 13, 2004

Are we talking about "Merriam-Webster's" dictionaries here?

Because if we're not, and you're actually using a "Mirriam-Webster's" dictionary, I can imagine that there are some significant errors and lacunae. Note to self: Indonesian street market is not the best place to obtain dictionary of the English language.

Yes, folks, it's the Immutable Law of the Internet--any posts flaming the spelling and/or grammar of others will invariably contain hilarious spelling and/or grammatical errors themselves.
posted by Sidhedevil at 4:41 PM on September 13, 2004

Sidhedevil: Yes, folks, it's the Immutable Law of the Internet--any posts flaming the spelling and/or grammar of others will invariably contain hilarious spelling and/or grammatical errors themselves.

Heh. So, what is your excuse given that my post had nothing to do with spelling or grammar? ;-) My post abounds with spelling and grammatical goofs, but that is a horse of a different color. Now that the rhetorican pissing match is out of the way, some competent conversation about luddism would be nice.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 5:37 PM on September 13, 2004

Damn, still can't type. But even on a different keyboard can't tell how I managed to replace l with n.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 5:48 PM on September 13, 2004

You were hectoring Skallas about dictionary definitions and what-not, so I felt like the door was open.

Also, I thought the idea of a knock-off "Mirriam-Webster's" dictionary full of bad definitions was hysterically funny.
posted by Sidhedevil at 6:57 PM on September 13, 2004

jinns - (noun)

pants made of blue cotton, heavily stitched, worn by elemental spirits of fire on Casual Fridays...
posted by Samizdata at 10:22 PM on September 13, 2004

Lovely, skillfully done thread-derail, skallas. I congratulate you.
posted by brownpau at 6:13 AM on September 14, 2004