Slashdot Mirror

Taste is subjective. Not only in champagne but in life.

For example, what do you call a blog whore who constantly promotes his own site with the deceptive phrase and link "This summary gives you more details"?

Since when does a summary give more details than the original article?

Simply say you've provided a link to your blog and be done with it. Or is the real problem that fewer people clickthrough when you inform them the link is to your blog?

How do champagne bubbles have anything to do with "How new technologies are modifying our way of life"? Answer: It doesn't. It's just another cheap way to drive traffic to his site.

From the many comments I've seen since Piquepaille has been posting here, I'm not alone in thinking that the deceptive way he writes his posts is in bad taste.

For more about this phenomenon, you should read this overview, based on a National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) news release. In addition, you'll see pictures of two atomic clocks used to officially measure time since 1971. The first one dates back from 1949, while the second one, based on cesium and built in 1999, is still in use.

Eric Sink
Software Craftsman, SourceGear

December 19, 2003

Summary: In an effort to encourage new entrepreneurs, Eric spills his guts about the mistakes he has made and the lessons he learned. (7 printed pages)

Robert Scoble, weblogger extraordinaire, recently said, "I want to see more software companies, not fewer." I heartily agree.

At the risk of being too obvious, let us observe that every ISV is started by an entrepreneur who somehow overcomes fear of failure. The genesis of a new company usually involves hundreds of hours of study, deliberation, and conversation, most of which is focused on a single question: "Can I make this business work?"

That process is healthy and necessary. It involves market research and number crunching and presentations and conjecture and coffee, all of which are critical elements of business success.

Invariably, the process also involves a great deal of self-examination. The core question isn't just "Can this business work at all?" but rather, "Can I make this business work?" This, too, is healthy and necessary. I've seen research studies that show that self-awareness is the number one factor in success. There is no substitute for knowing your own abilities and limitations.

But the self-examination stuff usually includes some basic worrying as well. Entrepreneurs tend to worry about the mistakes they might make. Unlike all the other research and study and deliberation that happens in the formation of a new company, this worrying actually isn't all that helpful.

Continuing to quote only from the giants of the technology industry, let me now cite a remark made by Thomas J. Watson, Sr., founder and former CEO of IBM:

Would you like me to give you a formula for success? It's quite simple, really. Double your rate of failure. You are thinking of failure as the enemy of success. But it isn't as all. You can be discouraged by failure or you can learn from it. So go ahead and make mistakes. Make all you can. Because, remember that's where you will find success.
Thomas J. Watson, Sr.

I don't think Watson advocated courage to the point of recklessness. After all, I'm sure IBM did plenty of prudent market research and planning during his tenure.

But Watson makes a very important point for new entrepreneurs: Mistakes just don't need to be all that scary.

Endless Decision-Making

Life in a small ISV feels like a never-ending stream of decisions, many of which you were never trained to make:

• Should we sign this five-year lease or negotiate for a shorter term?
• How should we incorporate?
• Should we seek outside funding?
• Should we write this code ourselves, or buy a component?
• Should we host our own site or find co-location space?
• When should we spend money on advertising?
• If we build this product, will anybody buy it?
• Should we do consulting work to help our cash flow?

None of my college classes taught me how to make these choices, so I had to learn by doing. Actually it would be more accurate to say that I learned this stuff by doing it badly. In the seven years since I started SourceGear, I have made lots and lots of mistakes. Although the memories of my failures sometimes sting, the lessons I have learned have been so valuable.

Through all these mistakes I have learned an important distinction. Whenever a decision yields bad results we call it a "mistake," but actually "clueless errors" are quite different from "bad bets."

Clueless Errors

In high school I once cost my math team a trophy by writing down "102/17" as my answer. I did all the calculations correctly, but I failed to realize that this fraction can be further reduced to "6". Leaving my answer in the incorrect form was not

Is the "@-spoof" really a spoof? According to RFC2396, section 3.2.2 "Server-based Naming Authority", this is a feature of the URI and not a bug or a spoof.

Certainly it can be made to fool even an enlightened user, but isn't it wrong to cripple a browser's ability to adhere to the "Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax" RFC -- and even more so with spyware ;)

Browsing the "test page" at Openwares with my Konqueror gives me the spoof page. Good. That just means that Konqueror is RFC2396-compliant (but should i patch anyway? ;).

I first came across this "bug" about two years ago when i was forwarded an "authentic" page from Microsoft Support: Q209354 - HOWTO (mirror). It took me a while to realize that nobody at M$ was going to be fired for this type of creativity.

See The Reg for an article for some coverage -- although the host hwnd.net is off the net, so you can't really try to get spoofed.

• ~llauren

I was thinking more of a website being able to track things such as search requests. Here is one website dedicated to strange, funny or just downright disturbing searches people have found in their referer logs.

Access has the most overhead according to this.

Here's a link to a discussion where the poster states that Access is not good for large installations...

You might check with IBM (DB2), Oracle, MySQL, or Postgres for help as well...I'm sure they'ld be more than happy to help.

Cross platform compatability. Students with Windoze, Linux, or Macs can run most SQL servers...not so with Access...

And then there's the corporate settings...most companies are using DB2, Oracle, MySql, or something that is ANSI-SQL compatible...not M$ SQL...

You also have more utilities and help available for SQL than Access...

There's GUI tools, schema browsers, etc all available for SQL...

If your school runs its website on a *NIX server, you could up-play the compatibility angle...you know, senior projects and such...

One major advantage of SQL is that all of the companies/organizations that I mentioned are free or have a free educational version...I doubt M$ does...

Paul Graham's ideas have undergone a lot of improvements. Some of the best improvements and tweaks have been implemented by the SpamBayes project. Their Outlook plugin makes Outlook the best spam solution that I have seen (better than SpamAssasin).

I don't know if it will help, but you can vote for the bug to improve Mozilla's spam algorithm.

In addition to the Linux Devices guide, Paul Baron spent some time shooting 61 pictures during the 2003 International Robot Exposition in Tokyo about two weeks ago. (Warning: navigation is somewhat difficult; the screen is getting refresh when you just want to scroll). Here is a link to a shorter selection. And for more information about Linux-based robots, you can take a peek at a former overview, "Real-Time Linux Robots Are Coming."

In addition to the Linux Devices guide, Paul Baron spent some time shooting 61 pictures during the 2003 International Robot Exposition in Tokyo about two weeks ago. (Warning: navigation is somewhat difficult; the screen is getting refresh when you just want to scroll). Here is a link to a shorter selection. And for more information about Linux-based robots, you can take a peek at a former overview, "Real-Time Linux Robots Are Coming."

I think our country getting active in space exploration again is a great idea. HOWEVER -- Is it just my paranoia, or does this seem like one of many diversionary tactics of the current administration, designed solely to pull public attention away from the fact(s) that:

(1) bin Laden ('Old Salami BinBox' to me and some of my friends) is still at large.

(2) No matter how much spin has been put on it, the Iraqi war never had any solid justification that I can see. And Hussein ('Saddened HoseHead') is still at large as well.

(3) Our economy is still a shambles.

(4) The 'YOU-CAN-SPAM' bill is all but signed into law, thus (very possibly) bringing about the end of viable E-mail as we know it.

(5) The RIAA and MPAA continue to run roughshod over fair use rights.

I could go on, but I think we all get the idea. This is an election year coming up. The Shrub will pull out anything he or his advisors can think of to try and get himself reelected, and I really think that this is just one example.

Mod this down if you want. Heck, label it "Flamebait" if you want. I don't pretend to have even a hint of one answer, let alone all of them, but it certainly seems to me like there are other more pressing problems that need dealing with than making another trip to one very dead and airless rock.

You're probably right on that, but that doesn't mean Apple can't sue the pants off of these morons. It's called trade libel and happens when you make false statements that are interpreted as fact about a company or its products. The laws in the each state differ, but that is the general idea.

These were obviously false statements because many (if not most) iPod batteries last longer than 18 months. These guys are screwed. When they finish paying money damages to Apple they'll wish they had just bought another frickin' iPod instead.

Here's a couple of links on recent developments in understanding this rare and curious disorder called. It got me...

You'll find additional references to the FPX on my blog, in "Stopping Computer Viruses Before They Reach You." And because some comments mentioned speed as an advantage of such a solution, here is a quick excerpt: "The FPX can scan each and every byte of every data packet transmitted through a network at a rate of 2.4 billion bits per second. In other words, the FPX could scan every word in the entire works of Shakespeare in about 1/60th of a second." My summary also contains a photograph of an FPX module.

They post lots of papers related to computer languages here.

As mentioned on LtU, Hoare's Turing lecture is quite a good engineering paper.

Address from resume:

89, rue de l'Eglise
75015 Paris - France
Phone: +33 1 45 57 49 61
Mobile: +33 6 78 88 71 28
Email: pique@noos.fr

Judging from his resume, he's in his 50's. So he's just some old fart with nothing better to do than use /. to boost his image in the "consulting business" he's been trying for the past year.

By the way, why is his resume online if his business is doing well?

It also seems he's got a a weblog.

Thanks to CowboyNealfor mentioning this story. But he cut my original message, which ended by some questions to Slashdot readers. Here is what is missing. "After reading this overview, could you please answer these two questions: would you use such a service? and do you think the company can be successful?"

This isn't a troll, it's an honest question.

I'm looking at switching to Linux because Windows SUCKS. But Linux can't really be very good; I mean, almost all of the Slashdot editors (Slashdot being owned, of course by "the sinister OSDN keiretsu") admit that they use Mac OS X. If OSDN themselves don't use it, why should I? Why should I go out of my way to use something that even these guys don't think is worth the trouble? Why help code/debug/improve/write docs for/ my own operating system when I can have someone else do all the work for me, all I lose is a little freedom?

I noticed that Doc Searls, editor of Linux Magazine, uses a Mac running OS X, and he raves about it daily in his blog. The EDITOR of Linux Magazine doesn't use it! Why should I?

No, Linux may be TECHNICALLY ready for the desktop, but if even Linux' biggest supporters (save RMS, of course) use alternate (proprietary, prebuilt, corporate-made, 'Cathedral') systems, it really can't be that good. You don't see Steve Jobs running WindowsXP or Bill Gates toting a PowerBook. Why do the Linux gurus alone refuse to "eat their own dogfood"?

I just don't get it.

I commented on this University of Florida news release a week ago on my blog. Not only you'll see more references and details than on the news release, but you'll also read comments by Michael Frank, the UF assistant professor behind this research effort.

I commented a preview of the New Scientist article several days ago. And just in case Chandra's camera filters cannot be cleaned, my overview included a a picture of a composite Chandra X-ray and optical image of the massive star HD 192163.

• The Red Storm nodes are 2GHz Opterons - these CPUs have SPEC Int and FP scores in the 1200 range (both).
  
  
• The G5s used in the VT Cluster are 2Ghz too - their SPEC Int and FP scores are both in the 800 range.
  
  
• The Red Storm Opteron cluster has 10,000 CPUs. The VT G5 cluster has 2,200 CPUs.
  
  
• The Red Storm cluster gets a LINPACK score of: 20 TFlops (fair bit more expected)/40 TFlops max
  
• The VT G5 cluster gets a LINPACK score of: 11 TFlops (expected)/17 TFlops max
  
  
• So the Red Storm cluster gets around twice the performance of the VT cluster, with 5 times the number of CPUs. This is quite interesting given the SPEC scores of the Opterons are higher, and Red Storm's number of nodes are higher too. (Network/topology issues?)
  
  
• The Red Storm cluster uses around 2 MW for "total power and cooling", the VT cluster needs about 1.5 MW.
  
  
• If you read the PDF on Red Storm that the parent post points to, it turns out they considered the Power4 CPU the G5 uses, but at the time (24 months ago?) it ran at 1.3 GHz.
  
  

What is amazing is that Prof. Cramer used only a 16 line Mathematica notebook to produce his simulation of the "sound of the Big Bang. This summary gives you more details on his work and his writings. You also can read his column, "BOOMERanG and the Sound of the Big Bang," It has been published in January 2001 and amended in September 2003.

They are old white men who care about appeasing each other's financial interests and don't mind if all the geeks in the world want to rip their throats out. Plus, you have to remember that there's a good chance any random judge will have SCO or one of it's alliances somewhere in their investment portfolio.

So, at the risk of being redunant, here's the text of a message I posted a couple times, several MONTHS ago. This is not new information. Yet still, even now, most people have no idea about judge Kimball who is hearing the case. So here goes (again)....

On every SCO story, invariably someone posts a paranoid concern that perhaps a clueless judge will be assigned to the case, and rule in favor of SCO. These are often moderated to +5, which is quite silly since Judge Dale A. Kimball has already be assigned to the case, and we can see that he's got a reputation for being fair and capable of understanding cases involving technology.

Groklaw has very extensive research on Kimball's history, which is nicely summarized and easy to read. Every case has links to much more detail. The overall appearance is that Kimball will probably do the right thing.

Probably most important is the Jacobsen vs Hughes copyright case. Apart from considering much of the material uncopyrightable historical facts, Judge Kimball was quite unimpressed by the plaintif's failure to act in a timely manner to mitigate damages. Quoting from that article:

"Had Jacobsen voiced his disapproval in 1996, Hughes would have had the opportunity to take the offending material out of the books," Kimball wrote. "For Jacobsen to wait until three volumes of the series had been published before voicing his disapproval, when it is clear he had ample opportunity to let Hughes know of his disapproval as early as 1996, results in extreme prejudice to Hughes."

Obviously this bodes quite well for IBM and all Linux users. SCO of course will claim they stopped distribution of linux, but this ruling at least shows that Judge Kimball isn't likely to be be charmed with the deplorable way SCO has conducted itself. Kimball's willingness to consider the writing a separate work, even though a part of it was loosely based on Jacobsen's also casts quite a shadow over SCO's chances (assuming the unlikely worst case scenario that SCO has an ace up its sleeve, rather than the bogus examples we've seen so far). It's certainly a good sign that Kimball is unlikely to buy SCO expansive theories about what constitutes a derivitive work.

While nothing is 100% certain going into the courtroom, it is a fact that the Judge Kimball has been selected to hear this case. His history shows he's competent, fair, and at least in Jacobsen vs Hughes, he doesn't tollerate the sort of shenanigans SCO has been pulling!

"It is vital to understand the importance of doing nothing. Slacking is a necessity; it is Yin to activity's Yang"

So said the comedian Simon Pegg in endorsement of last month's England's National Slacker Day (August 23rd). This current week (September 1-5) is Work-Life Balance week for Britons, centered around pretty much the same idea. It is no wonder that these ideas are popular in the UK, since British get the fewest vacations of any European nation.

While some view leisurely time off as a right, does slacking really mean happiness? Some lament that the slacker lifestyle isn't what it used to be. Simon Pegg himself broke the first and only rule in the Slacker Day handbook, by working: "there, perhaps, is the problem with slacking in a world which does not owe any of us a living"

More to the point, Professor Michael Rose at University of Bath (he seems to do a lot of research in the field of work) found that working long hours does not lower one's quality of life - and indeed improves it. Not only are workaholics making more money and getting promotions - they are happier as well.

Contrary to what most of us believe, the workaholics are not especially stressed, nor are they particularly unhappy -- at least no more than the rest of us.

Why is that? Because they like working.

A significant point is being made here. The work-life propagandists constantly see the office as the enemy and emphasize that more time has to be allowed for family and other interests.

But work is a life as well. We live in a hedonistic age, but our grandfathers, many of whom grew up among stern Victorian moralists, would have understood that work is what gives shape and purpose to our lives.

Most of us work because we have to make a living. But we also work because it gives us a role, status, a sense of achievement, and just occasionally the respect of our peers. And those are things we crave just as much as material goods.

So fess up. Are you a slacker or a workaholic? How do you achieve a healthy balance between success in the office and a happy life outside of it?

You'll find some more details on my blog today, including a diagram showing how the eSTAR network operates. And you can find additional information in "Smart software watches the skies," also published today by BBC News Online.

Pardon me, miss, but I can see your panties through your "smell bubble". [See the Picture]

I came across a post on a blog in whichthis guy admitted that he was paid by MS to surf weblogs and post stuff in favor of MS. So there are probably some on /. too.

In " Femtosecond Lasers for Nanosurgery," Roland Piquepaille writes "In "Lasers operate inside single cells," Nature writes that nanosurgery...

I wrote about the Fortune's interview of Bill Joy a couple of days ago here. But I focused my summary on his comments about the article he wrote for Wired in April 2000, "Why the future doesn't need us," in which he said that rapid advances in genetic engineering, nanotechnology and robotics (collectively known as GNR) could endanger our lives. And in this long text published by CIO Magazine, Ray Kurzweil also writes about the dangers introduced by new technologies. More specifically, he also gives his views about GNR. In his conclusion, he says that "we need to understand that these technologies are advancing on hundreds of fronts, rendering relinquishment completely ineffectual as a strategy. As uncomfortable as it may be, we have no choice but to prepare the defenses."

As we may remember from a recent interview with James Gosling, he made the statement,
"There's no way that I could pay nearly $4,000 for a freaking word processor at home. It just isn't going to happen."
If the home user cannot justify purchasing an expensive office suite, it is no surprise that the small business will try to avoid it as well. Initiatives such as OpenOffice really help to push these boundaries, making Open Source software appealing to business, and to the end user.
I personally use Abiword and OpenOffice in my day to day word processing, and I prefer it much to the expensive Microsoft Office suite.

I believe you're looking for this post on Groklaw.

I'm posting in a snip of my comment I posted in relation to said post linked above... hopefully my math is right :-)

In the best case, he won't be fully vested for approximately another 3 years! By then SCO will probably be in ruins and the stock worthless. Although he does have some stock options available to him, they are nowhere near the bulk of what he was awarded that hasn't vested yet.
Here's my math, assuming he was hired in June 2002 (as somebody posted above):

Total stock options: 600,000 It doesn't specify when he was awarded these 600,000 shares but let's assume it was Q4 2002 (salary for fiscal year 2003). Options vested Q4 2003: 100,000 The remaining 300,000 options of his 400,000 "performance" options will be vested 8333.33(repeating) per month for the next 3 years.

Now, let's assume that somehow they remain profitable until the end of the year, making it 4 quarters in a row. First profitable quarter: Q1 2003 Options vested Q1 2004: 50,000 Options vested Q4 2004: 150,000

So based on my lame math, in December of this year he'll have 100,000 shares vested, with another approximately 75,000 by end of Q1 2004. Do we really have to listen to his mouth spew crap for another 3 years (assuming best case scenario for their finances) until he can sell off all his stock? Or do we really think they can keep the FUD machine running for another year so he can get the rest of his stock options.

I highly doubt it. Once this goes to trial the stock will probably bomb as they are forced to reveal their evidence and IBM lays the smackdown.

Let's hope my math is right... :-)

And you may be right on this indemnification crap. IMNSHO it's a bunch of bull. Does it matter if you indemnify your customers? Protect them from SCO lawsuits that are illegal anyways? SCO doesn't even with its Linux license. I wish somebody in a high position would step up and tell them to cut the indemnification crap because they don't even offer it in their illegal (oops, did I say that out loud?) Linux license.

Funny to find out that the last question in SCO's teleconference (August 5, 2003) came from the same Herbert Jackson at Renaissance Ventures who had fabricated that "Strong Buy" investment thesis in March 2003 and that "Handicapping SCO - vs. - IBM Lawsuit" paper where they allotted the fur of the IBM bear in advance (April 2003) as Groklaw had published some days ago.

The laughter of those two pals might now be seen in a special light.

-----

"Sontag: OK, the last question.

"UF: Thank you. And that will come from Herbert Jackson at Renaissance Ventures.

"Jackson: Hi, guys, you've been busy.

"McB: (laughs) Yes, it's been a busy few months.

"Jackson: (laughs) Can you comment on any discussions with other software vendors that might produce a (inaudible) legal version of Linux going forward?

"McB: We have a variety of discussions going on and I'm not at libertyto go into detail of all the various discussions that are out there. I can say there are companies we're dealing with that have seen the code, have seen the problem, they're stepping up There are others that are taking the approach to really come after us, and to try and take our legal rights that we have and just squash these rights.

-----

For a transcript of the teleconference see here and here.

Funny to find out that the last question in SCO's teleconference (August 5, 2003) came from the same Herbert Jackson at Renaissance Ventures who had fabricated that "Strong Buy" investment thesis in March 2003 and that "Handicapping SCO - vs. - IBM Lawsuit" paper where they allotted the fur of the IBM bear in advance (April 2003) as Groklaw had published some days ago.

The laughter of those two pals might now be seen in a special light.

-----

"Sontag: OK, the last question.

"UF: Thank you. And that will come from Herbert Jackson at Renaissance Ventures.

"Jackson: Hi, guys, you've been busy.

"McB: (laughs) Yes, it's been a busy few months.

"Jackson: (laughs) Can you comment on any discussions with other software vendors that might produce a (inaudible) legal version of Linux going forward?

"McB: We have a variety of discussions going on and I'm not at libertyto go into detail of all the various discussions that are out there. I can say there are companies we're dealing with that have seen the code, have seen the problem, they're stepping up There are others that are taking the approach to really come after us, and to try and take our legal rights that we have and just squash these rights.

-----

For a transcript of the teleconference see here and here.

Groklaw's new page appears to currently be slashdotted. The text of the article in question has already been posted, but I figured someone might want Groklaw's old URL. The mentioned article isn't there (they haven't updated the old page in a few days), but if anyone wants to go through Groklaw's excellent archives, they're still there.

How do you get rid of nasty infections? Autoclave! Heat things up enough to smoke out all those nasty hoomins and things can get back to normal around here.

As for volcanos, it looks like the production of CO/CO2 in eruptions can have an effect on global warming. It turns out, however, that the ash/SO2 released into the atmosphere has a cooling effect. It also helps scatter sunlight, allowing for more robust tree growth which leads to more carbon being taken out of the atmosphere.

So, all we need to happen is for the Yellowstone (NetBSD) volcano to erupt (supposed to be violent enough to wipe out hoomanity) and fill the skys with enough ash and SO2 to bring on Fimbulwinter to slow down global warming. Or have a big rock smack into the Indian Ocean.

It is a much more powerful language than Java (first order functions and eval), but I sincerely doubt that any web services would need that extra power.

Ivan E. Sutherland has always been a great thinker. An article about asynchronous computers fascinated me last year. You can find more details here. And you can count on him for real products to come.

This strikes me as absurd, unless you're talking about cross-DB abstraction layers, in which case it strikes me as only moderately silly

I have to support the abstract database layer comment - the best out there is ADOdb - get it here. We use it for all our products/platforms/websites.

Alexandru

Try Turck MMCache instead.

GPL'ed and is very, very fast. It's been doing very well compared to even the commercial accelerators. In fact the only accelerator that *edges* Turck MMCache in performance is the Zend accelerator. Check at http://php.weblogs.com/php_debugger_cache for a few numbers and links.

Our North American cities' public libraries have been censoring respective city archives from cities' public libraries users, personnel and cities' public libraries unions collective bargaining labor relations advocates. Even public archives of cities' libraries themselves such as departmental curators' reports, library consultants' studies and consultants' reports have been censored. Our Boston Public Library is a model of a bad example in this regard where BPL President Bernie Margolis and his delegated so called freedom of information officer R. Kowal have used tactics of denial, delay and punitive additional fees.

See also
http://GuideToProblematicalLibraryUse.blog-city.co m
http://GuideToProblematicalLibraryUse.WebLogs.com/ faq

Look here this guy have the answer to your questions.

I put it in another thread but your comment fall just in the point.
It looks that M$ is using their money not only directly in fiaSCO contracts. You can see what is happening with SCOX stock too here

They've got SCO covered.

See Who is buying:fiaSCO

Hey, Microsoft says we Linux people don't believe in Intellectual Property rights anyway.

See this.

regional director of Microsoft Middle East: "Linux people don't believe in Intellectual Property Rights. This is the biggest problem in the Linux world.

I wouldn't necessarily say that. If you look at this. You will see a plausable connection between M$ and SCO.
I think these purchases would be chump change for the Gates familly. They wouldn't be investing to make money, they just want the bad press to keep rolling.
Read the article and draw your own conclusions.

Metafilter
Les Jones
Bruce Landon - landonline
City Comforts Blog
Marginal Revolution
Long story; short pier
Tom Maszerowski on Livejournal
bbCity.co.uk

Um, what's in it for Darl?

The Guardian says: "The biggest technical obstacle is finding a material strong but light enough to make the cable; this is where the carbon nanotubes come in." But what about selecting the appropriate carbon nanotubes among the 56 known varieties? Two teams of chemists from Rice University and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) have found a way to separate and manipulate these varieties of carbon nanotubes. Obviously, it will help to build the Space Elevator. More details are available on my blog.

Boston Public Library's President Bernard Margolis delegated BPL Director R. Kowal to censor public city archives
http://GuideToProblematicalLibraryUse.blog-city.co m
http://GuideToProblematicalLibraryUse.WebLogs.com/ faq