added recent articles

20 files changed, 199 insertions, 49 deletions

diff --git a/invoices/scott_gilbertson_invoice_85.doc b/invoices/paid/scott_gilbertson_invoice_85.doc
index 52c0f8b..52c0f8b 100644
--- a/invoices/scott_gilbertson_invoice_85.doc
+++ b/invoices/paid/scott_gilbertson_invoice_85.doc
diff --git a/invoices/paid/scott_gilbertson_invoice_86.doc b/invoices/paid/scott_gilbertson_invoice_86.doc
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5061d61
--- /dev/null
+++ b/invoices/paid/scott_gilbertson_invoice_86.doc
diff --git a/invoices/scott_gilbertson_invoice_87.doc b/invoices/scott_gilbertson_invoice_87.doc
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0d29bf0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/invoices/scott_gilbertson_invoice_87.doc
diff --git a/invoices/scott_gilbertson_invoice_88.doc b/invoices/scott_gilbertson_invoice_88.doc
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9152d48
--- /dev/null
+++ b/invoices/scott_gilbertson_invoice_88.doc
diff --git a/microsoft-linux.txt b/microsoft-linux.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index 65e1699..0000000
--- a/microsoft-linux.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,45 +0,0 @@
-There has been a great disturbance in the force lately. Microsoft, once the second biggest enemy of Linux (SCO Group takes top honors there), has been positively giddy about not just supporting Linux but actually building tools to run Linux in Windows and Windows software in Linux. 
-
-You can run <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/04/07/windows_10_with_ubuntu_now_in_public_preview/">Ubuntu inside Windows 10</a>, install CoreOS and Docker containers inside Azure, even fire up SQL Server on <a href="https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/01/23/microsofts_linux_lovein_continues_with_suse_support_in_sql_server/">SUSE Enterprise Linux</a>.
-
-It's a veritable Linux love fest up in Redmond, which is a distinct about face for a company whose CEO once called Linux a "cancer" and maintained its anti-Linux "Get the Facts" website well past its expiration date (it was there until 2007 to be precise). 
-
-Why the Linux love and why now? What does Microsoft get out of it? 
-
-The company's PR department would like you to believe it's Microsoft finally coming around and embracing open source software. But that's not the real story. The real story is the same as it ever was: Microsoft wants to make more money. 
-
-And the company seems to finally be waking up to the fact that the enterprise world is poised to move forward without Windows.
-
-You don't have to be an expert at reading the tea leaves to know that even in enterprise software -- Microsoft's traditional stronghold -- the company is fast fading from relevancy. Microsoft does not have a bright future in a world where not only are there dozens of alternative operating systems, but, thanks to container based workflows, it really doesn't matter much which one you choose. 
-
-The only place Microsoft can fit in that world is making the software that manages those containers, hence the love for Docker in Azure and the ability to run SQL Server on SUSE Enterprise Linux. Azure and SQL Server need to be free to make money without the legacy Windows-only baggage pulling them down.
-
-All of Microsoft SQL Server's competitors are available on Linux, but until the recent announcement, SQL Server was not. That meant that if you wanted SQL Server you had to forgo Linux, which might mean losing all sorts of other tools you need. At the very least it meant that SQL Server had a cost above and beyond the financial. 
-
-SQL Server on Linux eliminates the tight coupling with Windows and will most likely end up making Microsoft more money since it provides an in-road for SQL Server in all-Linux enterprise deployments, a place it would previously have been off the table.
-
-Something similar is behind the move to get Linux and Microsoft Azure playing nicely together.
-
-There's a lot of hype around container-based computing, but believe it or not some of that hype is deserved. Containers make it possible to run just about anything anywhere. The underlying OS is irrelevant. Red Hat's <a href="http://www.projectatomic.io/">Project Atomic</a> provides the best linguistic clue about what this means: right now, containers are the atomic unit of computing. 
-
-Once you have everything you need in individual containers you can deploy them on any platform you want. The only thing that matters is which set of tools you want to use to manage your containers. Microsoft's Azure platform happens to support all the popular choices right now: DC/OS, Docker Swarm and Kubernetes, which makes Azure a compelling option for a very un-Microsoft reason: choice.
-
-It's tempting to proclaim that Windows itself is going away, but it's not. Certainly not in the consumer space anyway. Your basic Windows 10 workstation is going to be a staple of the enterprise world for some time to come. But if you want to attract top developers to your platform you need to give them the tools they want. And while Ballmer may be gone, it's clear that his "developers, developers, developers" chant still echos about in the halls of Redmond. Microsoft recognizes that it needs top developer tools to give to its top developers. And that's why you can now run Bash inside your Windows 10 install. That gets you a "native" experience in the shell with tools like awk, grep and all the other developer favorites.
-
-Technically speaking this is not Linux running in Windows, Linux is a kernel and there's no kernel here. In fact it's more like GNU running in Windows, which is actually slightly more outrageous from a historical point of view. Why not just run Ubuntu and put Windows in the virtual machine? Well, let's not get crazy, this is still Microsoft we're talking about.
-
-But it's clear that, while Microsoft probably isn't quite ready to hand out laptops running Linux to employees, it does need those tools available for developers and it also seems to grasp that improving the dev tools in Windows is not good enough.
-
-In fact, Windows itself may not be good enough anymore. When Windows first launched it was built on the idea that the operating system matters. And it did for many years. In some cases it still does, but increasingly in the enterprise space, where the majority of Microsoft's money is made, the operating system has become irrelevant.
-
-Let's face it, it's been a long time since anyone really cared about Windows. When was the last time you heard about a hot new technology for Windows that was developed by someone other than Microsoft? When was the last time you heard about a hot new startup building its infrastructure on Windows? Even if Windows soldiers on in the established enterprise market, it lost developer mind share and enthusiasm years, if not decades, ago.
-
-That's very bad news for a company built around selling an OS. In the broader context then Microsoft's extensive support and seeming love for Linux is all about shifting the perception of Microsoft from purveyor of an OS no one really likes to a cross-platform technology and service provider.
-
-It's very clear that Satya Nadella's Microsoft is not your father's Microsoft. While the interest in Linux and various practical strategies and initiatives show Microsoft changing its Linux tune, what might be more significant is that Microsoft is willing to do an about face on what used to be its core values. 
-
-Microsoft's previous strategy of "embrace, extend and extinguish" quite simply didn't work. Linux was never extinguished. Worse, that strategy meant that a ton of energy was focused on extinguishing Linux when the better move would have been improving Windows. While we're used to seeing small startups pivot and change strategies on a dime it's another thing entirely to try to turn a ship as massive and tangled as Microsoft. That does, however, appear to be what Nadella is doing. 
-
-Not only has Microsoft embraced Linux, it's turned its back on the fundamental principles that guided it under Ballmer's tenure. The company has been breaking down the very walls it built around its products, decoupling products that were originally designed to be insperable to insure that, for instance, selling SQL Server also meant selling Windows. Regardless of how it pans out the strategic shift is huge.
-
-And it remains to be seen whether this new strategy will work. Azure already has a significant share of the so-called Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) market, though as of 2016 it still trails significantly behind Amazon's AWS offering. It does have one big feather to put in its cap though: Azure is well ahead of Google Cloud Platform and Microsoft is clearly hoping that the Linux-backed announcements over the past year will propel it even closer to Amazon's heels.
diff --git a/open-source-insider-1704.txt b/open-source-insider-1704.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..69b9165
--- /dev/null
+++ b/open-source-insider-1704.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+The last two columns here have been concerned with the future of Firefox, which has generated the usual slew of critics who want to know, why does it matter? Who cares if Firefox continues to exist? Alongside this often comes another argument: Chrome is better; Chrome is all we need.
+
+Clearly a lot of people do think Chrome is better. Statscounter, which offers reasonably reliable numbers on browser market share, puts Chrome at <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share">just over 50 percent</a> of all web browsers as of February 2017.
+
+That's an impressive market share, one that leaves the remainder of the browser world as a fight among minor fiefdoms, with Mozilla holding about 14 percent and Microsoft (combining Edge and IE) about the same. Safari and Opera are hardly worth mentioning on the desktop (though you should see Opera's worldwide mobile stats, nothing to sneeze at there).
+
+All this lead to the following question: does Firefox matter, and, more broadly is it important to have a diversity of rendering engines on the web?
+
+Let's start with Firefox. Firefox has slid from its position of bright light out of the IE darkness into pretty near irrelevancy in terms of pure numbers. Chrome dominates on both the desktop and mobile, you can even see that decline in <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/desktop/worldwide/#monthly-200901-201702">this handy chart</a> from Statscounter. 
+
+If you're a web developer looking at that chart what you see is: man wouldn't it be nice if Chrome would just finally finish off these other bits of nonsense and be the one true browser. 
+
+Or even, what if there were only the Blink rendering engine? There'd still be lots of browsers perhaps, but they'd all use the same rendering engine. It's every web developer's utopian fantasy. And this time it's different, because Chrome is different, Chrome is pretty good. And WebKit/Blink is open source and doesn't have some of the problems that made IE 6 such a web-threatening nightmare.
+
+Would it be different though? Monocultures are brittle, vulnerable, difficult to change. Certainly this is true in crops, and it has been true in the past on the web with IE 6. 
+
+As it happens this doesn't have to be a theoretical thought exercise. A browser monoculture already exists in fact, though fortunately in a contained form thus far. Just go buy any Apple device and the only browser engine you'll have will be WebKit. You can download Chrome, you can download some weird browser only 15 people have ever downloaded and both of them will behave exactly the same when it comes to rendering pages. That's the predictable sort of world that web designers would love to have.
+
+Fortunately web designers don't run things on the web because that world, the WebKit only world of iOS, sucks. It doesn't just suck because it's perpetually lagging behind on the innovation curve, vulnerable to the capricious whims of a single corporate entity, and just plain boring, though all those things are true, but what really sucks is that it has no competition and without competition it has no reason to evolve. This is why it's perpetually lagging behind its peers in features and standards support, it's why it's boring and it's why the web needs Firefox and yes, Internet Explorer.
+
+The problem with thinking that the web would be better with only one browser is that it's begging the question -- better for whom? Better for web designers? Maybe, but that's a statically insignificant portion of the people on the web. Better for users? How?
+
+The usual answer is that things will look the same on every device. 
+
+The meteoric globe-spanning unprecedented adoption of the internet clearly shows that the billions of people already using the web clearly don't care that it has bugs and sometimes looks different on different devices. When developers say a monoculture is better for users what they mean is that if there were a monoculture the users would always see exactly what developers want them to see. 
+
+The web would not, in other words, be so messy. Messy is a thing that web designers and programmers seem to dislike. But the web has always been messy, is still messy and likely will always be messy. The web is never going to look the same everywhere, it's always going to have bugs and it's always going to fail sometimes. 
+
+It is the most imperfect large scale programming task ever undertaken. It is also the most human piece of software ever devised precisely because of these things. It is arguably the only even remotely humane software ever devised because of these things. More people participate in the web than any other programming related thing in the world. People don't dislike the web because it's messy they embrace it because it's messy and mistakes will be overlooked.
+
+If you attempted to recreate the web in some really clean, precise code (you should totally use Haskell when you do this) you'd have something that would impress the heck out of your programming peers and no one would ever use it, not even your programming peers. Ask the people who specced out XHTML 2 how that worked out for them.
+
+The dream of a single rendering engine is the dream of someone who fails to understand the most fundamental thing about the web -- it's a mess, but it's a beautiful, flexible, powerful mess.
+
+The web thrives on diversity. It's the diversity of the web that sustains it and it's the thing that will mean it's still around long after all the monocultures, whether they be browsers or Facebooks or Googles, have long since vanished from the online ecosystem.
diff --git a/published/amazonmx-apache.txt b/published/amazonmx-apache.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..40615cb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/published/amazonmx-apache.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+The MXNet Machine Learning project was recently accepted to the Apache Software Foundation's incubator for open source projects. What's surprising about the announcement isn't that the ASF is accepting yet another machine learning tool -- it's hard to turn around the in software world these days without tripping over a couple of ML tools -- it's that MXNet developers, most of whom come from Amazon, still think the ASF is relevant.
+
+MXNet is an open-source "deep learning" framework that allows you to define, train, and deploy so-called neural networks on a wide array of devices. It also happens to be the machine learning tool of choice at Amazon.com and is available today via ready-to-deploy EC2 instances.
+
+Deep learning is the currently very popular subset of machine learning that focuses on hierarchical algorithms with non-linearities, which help find patterns and learn representations within data sets. That's a fancy way of saying it learns as it finds. Deep learning tools are currently popular thanks to their success in applications like speech recognition, natural language understanding and recommendation systems (think Siri, Alexa, et al). Every time you sit on your couch yelling at Alexa you're using a deep learning system.
+
+What makes MXNet interesting at this stage is Amazon claims it's the most scalable tool the company has and Amazon is a company that knows a thing or two about what scales and what doesn't.
+
+MXNet is far from the only kid on the deep learning block. In fact it's a bit late to the game. Other popular tools in the deep learning world include Torch -- used at Facebook, Google and NYU -- and Microsoft's "Adam", but perhaps the biggest direct competitor is Google's TensorFlow. TensorFlow is open source, using the Apache License as well.
+
+If you're new to the open source world -- and machine learning tools and developers often are -- you'd be forgiven for having no real idea what the Apache Software Foundation is. Even if you're very familiar with the ASF you might still wonder why a multibillion dollar company like Amazon would be so excited to have its pet project adopted by an all volunteer group that somehow manage to run the ASF on barely $500k a year?
+
+In a word, community.
+
+The purpose of the ASF incubator is to help external projects improve the quality of their code and participate in the larger community. It is in other words, a kind of seal of approval for an open source project that it is truly open source and uses the ASF voting procedures and all the rest of the quasi-democratic governance system the ASF has developed, known among the anointed as "The Apache Way".
+
+Given a choice between that sort of community and the TensorFlow community, which, while open source is very heavily managed by Google, MXNet starts to look more appealing. And the more appeal it has the more developers that get involved and the better the code gets. If you want to think of it in terms of machine learning, the ASF is a learning network for developers.
+
+It's worth noting that not every project that enters the ASF incubator manages to escape its parents. But officially projects don't get to move past the incubation stage until they demonstrate independence from any one contributor or sponsoring or entity.
+
+Incubation is the first step for a project that wants to become an official ASF project. It is in sort, no guarantee that a project will either succeed or end up in the auspices of the ASF. Among the incubator's successes are SpamAssassin and of course the Apache web server, which despite being bested by half a dozen newer, lighter weight, faster web servers, somehow still manages to power about half of the web. Then there's OpenOffice, another incubator graduate, but one that has largely been eclipsed by LibreOffice.
+
+Now Amazon is hoping that MXNet can learn a few tricks from the ASF and maybe build a community that can help it catch up to competitors. 
+
+As Amazon's Dr. Matt Wood writes on the AWS blog, the reason the project wants to be part of the Apache Incubator is to "take advantage of the Apache Software Foundation’s process, stewardship, outreach, and community events". In short it wants to use the ASF's clout to attract more developers.
+
+It's tempting to see Amazon's move as entirely self-serving, and indeed it is, but that's just the beginning of the story. The ASF may not be the household name it once was, but it still has considerable clout and its governance and so-called "Apache Way" really do turn out some impressive, well-developed community projects. With that behind MXNet its odds of besting TensorFlow and others does go up considerably.
+
+And of course the ASF gets what's probably its best ML project to date. MXNet is certainly one of the easiest to deploy, given that there's already a AWS Deep Learning AMI available, complete with MXNet, and plenty of example code pre-compiled and ready to use. That that server instance you just spun up happens to be closely tied into other AWS services, which you might want to invest in as well, is just coincidence I'm sure.
diff --git a/fedora25review.txt b/published/fedora25review.txt
index 3f3978f..3f3978f 100644
--- a/fedora25review.txt
+++ b/published/fedora25review.txt
diff --git a/published/microsoft-linux.txt b/published/microsoft-linux.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9f17519
--- /dev/null
+++ b/published/microsoft-linux.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+There has been a great disturbance in the force lately. Microsoft, once the second biggest enemy of Linux (SCO Group takes top honors there), has been positively giddy about not just supporting Linux but actually building tools to run Linux in Windows and Windows software in Linux. 
+
+You can run <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/04/07/windows_10_with_ubuntu_now_in_public_preview/">Ubuntu inside Windows 10</a>, install CoreOS and Docker containers inside Azure, even fire up SQL Server on <a href="https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/01/23/microsofts_linux_lovein_continues_with_suse_support_in_sql_server/">SUSE Enterprise Linux</a>.
+
+It's a veritable Linux love fest up in Redmond, which is a distinct about face for a company whose CEO once called Linux a "cancer".
+
+But one thing I haven't heard a lot about is what it's like to actually use these new tools and more importantly is anyone using them? It's impossible to objectively answer the latter question, but one thing's for sure, Linux distros are betting that people will.
+
+Red Hat and Ubuntu were involved right out of the gate, but since then the SUSE project has rushed to bring support for Microsoft's SQL Server to openSUSE. When it launched SQL Server for Linux supported Ubuntu and was coming to Red Hat. That SUSE quickly picked it up as well says that at least some aspects of the enterprise are itching to get their hands on SQL Server without giving up their Linux infrastructure.
+
+All of Microsoft SQL Server's competitors are available on Linux, but until the recent announcement, SQL Server was not. That meant that if you wanted SQL Server you had to forgo Linux, which might mean losing all sorts of other tools you need. At the very least it meant that SQL Server had a cost above and beyond the financial. 
+
+Now that SQL Server is on the major enterprise distros that non-financial cost is gone. And while open source supporters might be loath to admit it, SQL Server actually does have some advantages over competing open source projects. Perhaps the best things about SQL Server is the plethora of tools that exist around it, particularly tools that allow those with little to no SQL knowledge to build powerful databases and run queries without learning how to do table joins. The level of abstraction that SQL server offers makes it more accessible than many similar tools.
+
+SQL Server on Linux eliminates the tight coupling with Windows and will most likely end up making Microsoft more money since it provides an in-road for SQL Server in all-Linux enterprise deployments, a place it would previously have been off the table. It also makes it easier to get SQL Server into the largely Linux based world of container computing.
+
+There's a lot of hype around container-based computing, but believe it or not some of that hype is deserved. Containers make it possible to run just about anything anywhere. The underlying OS becomes largely irrelevant. Red Hat's <a href="http://www.projectatomic.io/">Project Atomic</a> provides the best linguistic clue about what this means: right now, containers are the atomic unit of computing. 
+
+Once you have everything you need in individual containers you can deploy them on any platform you want. The only thing that matters is which set of tools you want to use to manage your containers. Microsoft's Azure platform happens to support all the popular choices right now: DC/OS, Docker Swarm and Kubernetes, which makes Azure a compelling option for a very un-Microsoft reason: choice.
+
+And believe it or not, Azure is actually pretty nice. My experience is limited to a single client, but Azure has been stable, has a wealth of management tools that don't require years of sysadmin experience to use and it supports just about every container management system you want to use. It's every bit as good as AWS and, frankly, it's the only real alternative out there. While AWS is a fantastic system it has a virtual monopoly on "cloud" based development and if you don't think that's bad (because AWS is good) you haven't been working in this field long enough. Azure may well turn out to be the best thing that's happened to the devops/sysadmin world if for no other reason than providing meaningful competition for AWS. 
+
+It should be no surprise that Azure has been the object of Microsoft's obsession lately, after all current CEO Satya Nadella previously ran the Azure group. While Steve Ballmer may be gone, it's clear that his "developers, developers, developers" chant still echos about in the halls of Redmond. Microsoft recognizes that it needs top developer tools to give to its top developers. And that's why you can now run Bash inside your Windows 10 install. That gets you a "native" experience in the shell with tools like awk, grep and all the other developer favorites.
+
+Technically speaking this is not Linux running in Windows, Linux is a kernel and there's no kernel here. Intrepid hackers have, however, managed to get <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows10/comments/4rsmzp/bash_on_windows_getting_dbus_and_x_server_working/">the bulk of Ubuntu running in Windows</a>. That's not officially supported yet, but clearly the underlying tools make it possible to really run Ubuntu in Windows. The official Bash plus Ubuntu under the hood make it more like GNU running in Windows, which is actually slightly more outrageous from a historical point of view.
+
+Whatever the case, while I'm not about to suffer Windows 10 on a regular basis, at least now I can use the basic set of Bash tools I'm used to without running a virtual machine, which means everything is faster and there's less frustration. 
+
+Still, every time I use it I can't help wondering, why not just run Ubuntu and put Windows in the virtual machine? Part of me thinks this move was -- in addition to a PR play -- mostly aimed at Microsoft's own developers. The company probably isn't quite ready to hand out laptops running Linux to employees, but it does need those tools available for developers and it also seems to grasp that improving the dev tools in Windows is not good enough. Bring Linux into Windows and your problems are solved.
+
+There's also the developer mind share to consider. Let's face it, it's been a long time since anyone really cared about Windows. When was the last time you heard about a hot new technology for Windows that was developed by someone other than Microsoft? When was the last time you heard about a hot new startup building its infrastructure on Windows? 
+
+Even if Windows soldiers on in the established enterprise market, it lost developer mind share and enthusiasm years, if not decades, ago. Azure though, it does have some of that new hotness around it. That's part of why it already has a significant share of the so-called Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) market. With SQL Server available on Linux and all the basic shell utilities running in Windows 10, many a sysadmin's life just got a whole lot more bearable.
+
+It does have one big feather to put in its cap though: Azure is well ahead of Google Cloud Platform and Microsoft is clearly hoping that the Linux-backed announcements over the past year will propel it even closer to Amazon's heels.
diff --git a/mint181review.txt b/published/mint181review.txt
index f7a03c5..f7a03c5 100644
--- a/mint181review.txt
+++ b/published/mint181review.txt
diff --git a/open-source-insider.txt b/published/open-source-insider-1701.txt
index 1beb5b7..1beb5b7 100644
--- a/open-source-insider.txt
+++ b/published/open-source-insider-1701.txt
diff --git a/open-source-insider-1702.txt b/published/open-source-insider-1702.txt
index a16a4fb..eb93faf 100644
--- a/open-source-insider-1702.txt
+++ b/published/open-source-insider-1702.txt
@@ -1,6 +1,10 @@
 The Mozilla Foundation recently announced it will refocus its development efforts on Firefox. Again.
 
-I know what you're thinking, what the heck else does Mozilla have to focus on? Firefox is and likely will be the only viable product the company has, and that it lost focus of it's only viable product tells you a lot about the leadership of Mozilla in recent years, or lack thereof.
+I know what you're thinking, what the heck else does Mozilla have to focus on? Well, you'd be hard pressed to find any evidence of it, but the company has been focused on building Firefox OS which was supposed to be a mobile OS and then maybe a television and devices platform. Honestly it's hard to say, the, ahem, focus was always a bit lacking.
+
+Mozilla recently axed the last 50 employees working on that effort though it claims its still working on an open source Alexa of some kind and couple of other bad ideas that most likely no one wants. Apparently, press statements not withstanding, focus may still be a little lacking.
+
+Here's the thing Mozilla: Firefox is and likely will be the only viable product you're going to have.That you've lost focus of your only viable product tells us a lot about the leadership of Mozilla in recent years, or lack thereof.
 
 Before I completely eviscerate Mozilla though, let me be clear about something: I like Firefox. I use it everyday. I find it to be not quite as fast as Chrome, but easier on the RAM. 
 
@@ -12,7 +16,7 @@ But in the last three years Mozilla has gone from a company at the top of its ga
 
 Even Brendan Eich, creator of JavaScript and one of Mozilla's founders -- who was later forced out of the company after it came out that he had donated money to support anti-gay rights legislation in California -- has gone on to create a new web browser dubbed Brave. Guess what codebase Brave is based on? Hint, not Firefox. 
 
-Brave will fizzle before the year's over -- it's value proposition is that is swaps out ads your favorite websites are earning good money with and replaces them with ads your favorite sites will earn little to no money from... uh, okay -- but it's telling that even Mozilla's founder have lost faith in the Firefox codebase.
+Brave will fizzle before the year's over -- its value proposition is that it swaps out ads your favorite websites are earning good money with and replaces them with ads your favorite sites will earn little to no money from... uh, okay -- but it's telling that even Mozilla's founder have lost faith in the Firefox codebase.
 
 Given this state of affairs, you'd think that Mozilla's announcement, which amounts to the company saying, "hey, sorry, we screwed up and we're going to try fixing this", would make me happy, but honestly, it makes me more nervous than happy. 
 
@@ -22,11 +26,11 @@ Last month I wrote about Vim and the value of software that doesn't update unles
 
 I'd like to see Mozilla embrace that sort of thinking. I'd like to see Mozilla continue to forget about the Firefox UI and focus their attention lower down in the stack. The Firefox UI isn't broken, it works quite well, it's stable, don't go messing with it. Don't go "innovating", don't add something stupid like rounded tabs just because you hired some new designer who needs something to do.
 
-Some people objected to last month's column comparing Vim and Firefox, saying that Firefox has to update because the web is a moving target while text files really have changed since Bram Moolenaar released Vim in 1991. That's a valid argument and I never suggested that Firefox shouldn't update, rather that it shouldn't go changing it's base feature set and user interface all the time. It shouldn't add Pocket support for no discernible reason; it shouldn't round tabs for no discernible reason.
+Some people objected to last month's column comparing Vim and Firefox, saying that Firefox has to update because the web is a moving target while text files really haven't changed since Bram Moolenaar released Vim in 1991. That's a valid argument and I never suggested that Firefox shouldn't update, rather that it shouldn't go changing its base feature set and user interface all the time. It shouldn't add Pocket support for no discernible reason; it shouldn't round tabs for no discernible reason.
 
 It should update to get separate processes for each tab, which took an embarrassingly long time to be released. It should also start developing a rendering engine that's faster than Gecko since it seems plain at this point that Gecko isn't getting any faster than it is now. The good news is that appears to be happening with <a href="https://medium.com/mozilla-tech/a-quantum-leap-for-the-web-a3b7174b3c12#.sas419jjm">Quantum</a>.
 
-But here's why I'm nervous about Mozilla "refocusing" on Firefox, developers are already <a href="https://medium.com/@osunick/context-graph-its-time-to-bring-context-back-to-the-web-a7542fe45cf3#.f2ssglw9o">talking about messing with the Firefox UI again</a>. This is exactly the sort of thinking that got Mozilla where it is: "What if there was a better forward button?". Wait, isn't that the button no one users so Firefox made it tiny? Right, problem solved. Next.
+But here's why I'm nervous about Mozilla "refocusing" on Firefox, developers are already <a href="https://medium.com/@osunick/context-graph-its-time-to-bring-context-back-to-the-web-a7542fe45cf3#.f2ssglw9o">talking about messing with the Firefox UI again</a>. This is exactly the sort of thinking that got Mozilla where it is: "What if there was a better forward button?". Wait, isn't that the button no one uses so Firefox made it tiny? Right, problem solved. Next.
 
 Even more alarming is this thinking later on in that piece: "What if web browsers were immediately useful instead of demanding input when you launched them?"
 
diff --git a/published/open-source-insider-1703.txt b/published/open-source-insider-1703.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1712bc3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/published/open-source-insider-1703.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+Mozilla has been slowly rolling out a major change for Firefox over the last year, the results of what the company calls its <a href="https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis">Electrolysis project</a>. Electrolysis gives Firefox something Chrome has had for years now -- multiple processes (in the best case scenario that's per-tab). The change is a boon for speed -- some place Firefox has been lagging lately -- and it improves stability and security.
+
+The problem with per-tab processes in Firefox is that it's not exactly ground breaking. In fact this is a case of Firefox just now catching up to where Chrome was when it launched in 2008 -- welcome to the future Mozilla.
+
+Still, while it's easy to make fun of Firefox for playing catch up, Electrolysis was no small feat. Chrome had the advantage of being designed for process-isolation from the ground up while Firefox had to work it in to its existing code base.
+
+The good news for Firefox users is that Electrolysis isn't the only major change coming to Firefox this year. Despite these seemingly tumultuous times at Mozilla, Firefox engineers have outlined a plan to re-write the engine behind Firefox.
+
+The company calls this effort <a href="https://wiki.mozilla.org/Quantum">Project Quantum</a> and, despite the name, it looks to be a major change for Firefox. Indeed perhaps the biggest change since Firefox first launched.
+
+The major goal is to create a new rendering engine that's able to exploit the full power of today's hardware, which is a kind of marketing-speak for "we're going to isolate every process and offload more rendering tasks to the GPU".
+
+A large portion of Quantum will be pulled from the existing <a href="https://servo.org/">Servo project</a> which is a low-level re-write of Firefox's Gecko rendering engine. Servo remains an independent project and covers a lot more ground (for example it provides an API for using Servo inside other projects and it's been ported to Android by Samsung). Quantum takes what's good about Servo -- independent processes for all the things, the Rust programming language -- and brings it to Firefox.
+
+But that's not all Quantum plans to do. Mozilla's David Bryant, Head of Platform Engineering, <a href="https://medium.com/mozilla-tech/a-quantum-leap-for-the-web-a3b7174b3c12#.l322x8dk5">writes</a> that Quantum will also see Mozilla going back to the drawing board to "rethink many fundamental aspects of how a browser engine works". That means potentially "re-engineering foundational building blocks, like how we apply CSS styles, how we execute DOM operations, and how we render graphics to your screen".
+
+Right now, for example, any CSS file in the head of an HTML document must be downloaded and rendered before a page can be displayed. That slows down the rendering of pages, especially on sites that use poorly-coded blogging tools that pile in stylesheets like they're delicious candy -- I'm looking at you WordPress plugin developers. They're not candy, they're a rendering nightmare.
+
+But since it seems there's just no way to stop the web-slowing world of crappy blogging tools, perhaps the browser can figure out a way around this by re-thinking the rendering process. Perhaps not stopping for every stylesheet, but instead spinning off a new process for each stylesheet would help mitigate the problem (or we could all rediscover lynx and w3m, problem solved).
+
+In fact, this is already part of Servo and by extension Quantum. It's one of the <a href="https://wiki.mozilla.org/Quantum">four core components</a> of Quantum which are Quantum CSS, Quantum Render, Quantum Compositor, and Quantum Flow. Quantum Render is where Servo's process isolation and GPU offloading come in and Quantum Compositor builds on Gecko's existing compositor, but moves it to its own process (notice a running theme here?). The last bit is the least developed right now, but it will encompass other things like UI speed improvements.
+
+If all this sounds like an overly large project that may never actually ship code, well, I share your concern. Bryant's article is from late 2016 and claims that Mozilla is "going to ship major improvements next year", though there is no specific date. In a recent post about Firefox's new Web Assembly feature Bryant <a href="https://medium.com/mozilla-tech/why-webassembly-is-a-game-changer-for-the-web-and-a-source-of-pride-for-mozilla-and-firefox-dda80e4c43cb#.d6nrwt5du">says</a> that "Project Quantum is well underway". 
+
+In light of recent changes and, frankly, what feels like disarray at Mozilla, it's tough to get too excited about anything. Still Quantum looks promising and may be the thing Mozilla needs to get it back on track and provide a bit a focus in the midst of its current disarray. 
diff --git a/published/ubuntu1704-desktop.jpg b/published/ubuntu1704-desktop.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6f25daa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/published/ubuntu1704-desktop.jpg
diff --git a/published/ubuntu1704beta.txt b/published/ubuntu1704beta.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c40afed
--- /dev/null
+++ b/published/ubuntu1704beta.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+Canonical has turned out its beta preview of the coming Ubuntu 17.04, nicknamed Zesty Zapus. 
+
+If you're anxious to kick the tires you can grab the beta from Canonical's site, but be forewarned there's not much difference from 16.10, visually speaking. Unity is almost entirely the same with some minor updates for a few core apps. Most of what's new comes from the move to GNOME 3.24 for a few apps and core components.
+
+Under the hood though there's a good bit of new stuff that will make the final version well worth the update.
+
+With 17.04 Ubuntu's Software Center gains some new powers, thanks to the underlying GNOME Software apps' new support for Snap URLs. The URL support means that if you'd like to tell someone to install a Snap application you can simply give them a URL. That makes sharing Snap applications considerably easier.
+
+When you click a new Snap URL the Ubuntu Software app will open and offer to install the application, mirroring what happens if you link to a regular Ubuntu repo app. The only real difference is the protocol in use -- for Ubuntu repos you'll still use the <code>apt:</code> prefix. For Snap packages there's a new <code>snap:</code> protocol.
+
+It's a small change -- and one that comes from upstream GNOME -- but it helps bring Snap packages to near complete feature parity with the installation process Ubuntu users are accustomed to. With 17.04 there will be no discernible difference between Snap and traditional application installs, though of course the tightly sandboxed nature of Snap apps does mean there are other limitations in some cases. At the moment Snaps seem best suited for smaller apps that don't need a lot of outside libraries (which can cause sandboxing issues), while the repos remain the best way to get bigger, more complex apps. 
+
+For example if you want the latest version of Firefox Developer Edition -- which is updated every night -- the Snap package is the best bet. If you need LibreOffice, stick with the version in the Ubuntu repos.
+
+As noted above, the perennially not-quite-ready Unity 8 is still, well, not quite ready. That doesn't mean you can't install and try it out though and in fact, once it's installed Unity 8 in 17.04 is the most stable version I've tested. That's still not saying much -- application crashes are still frequent and known issues abound -- but it does seem to show that Canonical is still hard at work on Unity 8.
+
+While Unity 7 gets mostly bug fixes and security updates in this release, there are some noteworthy updates from upstream. Most of the underlying GNOME apps have been updated to the GNOME 3.24 version. The exceptions to that are Files (Nautilus) and Terminal, which are still stuck at GNOME 3.20. No <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06/27/gnome_finds_its_footing/">faster file searches</a> or advanced filtering option for you Ubuntu. Ubuntu will, however, get some of the updates that came along for Calendar and Maps (though the latter is not installed by default in Ubuntu). 
+
+Another change worth noting that's coming in Ubuntu 17.04 is the disappearance of the swap partition from default installs. Yes, Ubuntu is dropping swap partitions in favor of swap files which generally use far less disk space and depending somewhat on the use case, may be faster. If you opt to encrypt via LVM, you'll still need a swap partition, but if you stick with the installer defaults you'll get a swap file. In most cases this will probably be completely transparent, though there's a <a href="http://blog.surgut.co.uk/2016/12/swapfiles-by-default-in-ubuntu.html">detailed explanation</a> of the change from one of the developers working on it if you'd like to learn more.
+
+
+Other changes include the removal of gconf. Once the go-to means of customizing your Ubuntu/Unity experience, it's long since been surpassed by gsettings, though until now it has been hanging around by default.
+
+Under the hood the stars have aligned to get Ubuntu 17.04 the shiny new Linux kernel 4.10. This release has the usual slew of updated hardware support and compatibility, but it also has some impressive improvements to power consumption in laptops. I've been using 4.10 for some time (in Arch) and have found that I get at least about 5 percent more out of my battery than I did with 4.9. Whether or not that translates directly to a default Ubuntu install is nearly impossible to say -- I've only tested the beta in a virtual machine -- but one can hope.
+
+Part of the reason I've only tested 17.04 in a virtual machine is that I've found this beta release to be a bit unstable in the virtual machine. Sometimes that can be due to installing in a VM, but this one has been unstable enough to stop me from going further. For that reason, unless you have a really good reason to install it, I'd suggest waiting a for the bugs to get fixed and the final version polished up a bit more before taking the leap to 17.04. The final release will be along April 13.
+
diff --git a/ubuntu1704-desktop.jpg b/ubuntu1704-desktop.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6b1654e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ubuntu1704-desktop.jpg
diff --git a/ubuntu1704-final-review.txt b/ubuntu1704-final-review.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..45bd7d4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ubuntu1704-final-review.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+Canonical has turned out Ubuntu 17.04, but its arrival has been completely overshadowed by the news that Ubuntu will be <a href="https://plus.google.com/+MarkShuttleworthCanonical/posts/7LYubpaHUHH">abandoning the Unity desktop</a> in favor of a stock GNOME Shell interface. 
+
+Before you panic, Unity 7 will continue to be available via the Ubuntu universe repos. From the chatter on forums and blogs around the Ubuntu ecosystem it sounds like a healthy number of volunteers plan to continue Unity 7 at least in its present form. Whether or not that enthusiasm will last long is another story, but in the short term it looks like Unity 7 will live on.
+
+The future of Ubuntu though is GNOME. More specifically the Ubuntu GNOME "flavor". While I was working on this review the Ubuntu GNOME developers <a href="http://ubuntugnome.org/ubuntu-gnome-17-04-released/">announced</a> via their blog that the project would be shutting down, the Ubuntu GNOME flavor will be going away and all development effort will merge with the mainline Ubuntu effort. In effect Ubuntu GNOME is now Ubuntu.
+
+Will there be an Ubuntu theme for GNOME? For now it doesn't sound like it. Ubuntu founder Mark Shuttleworth's posts on Google+ have consistently used the word "stock" and, given that Ubuntu GNOME is a fairly stock version of GNOME, it seems very likely that, at least for the initial release in next year's Ubuntu 18.04, Ubuntu will look just like Fedora or any other GNOME-based distro.
+
+Mark Shuttleworth writes that Canonical will "invest in Ubuntu GNOME with the intent of delivering a fantastic all-GNOME desktop... I think we should respect the GNOME design leadership by delivering GNOME the way GNOME wants it delivered."
+
+Ubuntu is going to look like Fedora, perhaps with an abstract orange desktop background.
+
+But what about the users who love Unity? Well, as mentioned above it'll be around for the short term at least. But if you want to use Ubuntu over the long term, I'd suggest checking out GNOME now and getting comfortable before it's the default (or adopting another flavor if GNOME isn't to your liking). With that in mind I took Ubuntu GNOME for a spin this time around, rather than the Unity 7 based release. And I've mostly focused on what the experience will be like for someone coming from Unity 7.
+
+While it's probably too early to bet on just how "stock" Ubuntu's definition of stock GNOME will be, one thing I can guarantee won't be there is the HUD and all the UI keyboard shortcuts in Unity. GNOME does have decent keyboard-driven UI options, but nowhere near what Unity offered. 
+
+The other main loss in moving from Unity to GNOME is Unity 7's "lenses", which integrated music players, photos and online services in a way that GNOME does not. In Unity you could play music, watch videos, browse photos and even do things online without ever needing to open another application. 
+
+There are GNOME add-ons that can get you some of those features back, but not all of them and not with the nice, tightly integrated UI that Unity offered.
+
+Other noticeable changes include a somewhat different file browser -- Canonical heavily patched the GNOME Files app to get it to behave the way they wanted. And there's no way to sugar coat it, GNOME Files is probably the worst file browser out there. Worse, it consistently regresses with features being removed, UI changes adding extra clicks to your workflow and so on. I highly recommend checking out Nemo as a replacement file browser. It'll take a little command line tweaking to get GNOME to always use Nemo (basically you need to set some default file handlers with xdg-mime) and some GNOME themes may not work, but overall it's a far superior experience to Files. Alternately you might check out my personal favorite, ranger. It's entirely console based, but very powerful. And seriously, even just using mv, cp and other basic Unix tools is a step up from Files.
+
+Once you get past the loss of Lenses, the missing/different keyboard shortcuts and the crap file manager, GNOME is actually very nice. I happen to prefer it to Unity for one simple reason -- it's faster. There are some caveats to that statement -- for example I primarily use a Lenovo x240, if you have some high end graphics card you may not notice a difference -- but overall I find GNOME to be just a hair faster to respond to keyboard shortcuts, a bit quicker to draw its animation, and the search UI never hesitates the way it sometimes does in Unity. It's a small difference, but day in and day out it adds up to a big one.
+
+GNOME also has some nice apps that, while available in Ubuntu's repos, were not defaults and did not look very good when installed in Unity. Apps like Maps, Calendar and Photos have come a long way and will cover most users' needs quite well. 
+
+If you choose to make the leap to Ubuntu GNOME in 17.04 you'll be using GNOME 3.24, which has a couple of nice new features, including a new "Night Light" app that changes the tint of your screen to a warmer spectrum when the sun goes down. It's basically a built-in version of what apps like Redshift offer, with the added bonus of working under Wayland, which Redshift does not without quite a bit of workaround hacking.
+
+Other changes in GNOME 3.24 include a brand new GNOME Control Center, which has redesigned quite a few panels -- Unity users, brace yourselves, in the GNOME world an update almost always means rather large UI changes, some for the better, some not. If that bothers you, check out KDE or Xfce -- including the Users, Keyboard & Mouse, Online Accounts, and Printer panels. In this case I'd call most of the UI changes a step up, particularly Online Accounts, which has added support for NextCloud.
+
+GNOME also continues to expand its set of default applications, the latest edition being Recipes. It's not installed by default, but if you're looking to move beyond Mountain Dew and Cap'n Crunch, GNOME can help. Maybe. Recipes is still in the very early stage and lacks content, but eventually it will allow you to add, edit, share and track recipes of your own.
+
+A new recipes app is probably not much consolation for fans of the Unity desktop, and, while I'll admit I never particularly liked Unity, I am sorry to see it go. Unity and I never saw eye to eye, but it did a good job of pushing the Linux desktop in new directions and it emphasized something that, particularly at the time it arrived, was otherwise lacking -- innovation in design. Unity might have borrowed a few elements from OS X, but it quickly outgrew those initial imitations and forged its own path and its own aesthetic, something that's all too rare in open source software.
+
+Screenshots:
+
+ubuntu1704-desktop.jpg. The stock GNOME desktop in Ubuntu GNOME.
+ubuntu1704-nightlight.jpg GNOME's new monitor color shifting tool, Night Light.
+ubuntu1704-photos.jpg GNOME's default photo browser, Photos has some new adjustment tools, including Exposure and Blacks.
+ubuntu1704-recipes.jpg GNOME's new recipes app.
diff --git a/ubuntu1704-nightlight.jpg b/ubuntu1704-nightlight.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6ec07cf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ubuntu1704-nightlight.jpg
diff --git a/ubuntu1704-photos.jpg b/ubuntu1704-photos.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4dbf94e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ubuntu1704-photos.jpg
diff --git a/ubuntu1704-recipes.jpg b/ubuntu1704-recipes.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d130d16
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ubuntu1704-recipes.jpg