> Maybe I'm being more cynical, but I firmly believe that if the US government has to choose between letting the union splinter and dropping a nuke into New York, then pop goes the apple.
Of course, if that's what it takes to "keep the union together", then its already a failure by any reasonable measure. The way we dealt with secession in Canada was two-pronged
On the legal side:
recognize that it is a right
make it clear that it would have to be done in a legal and fair manner
On the political/social side:
get the groups most pressuring for secession deeply involved in the political process, so they can't stand outside the door and throw rocks
devolve more power to all the provinces
We're stronger because we were able to face the boogey-man of secession, and adapt (Canada is good at coming up with compromises) rather than try to use force. Its like a marriage - using force to keep someone with you who doesn't want to stay is a bad idea, whereas recognizing that they have the right to leave might just encourage them to stay, since its a show of fairness and equal treatment between partners.
Seriously, do you really believe that the US can just go in and "occupy" Alaska? Or Canada, for that matter? When they can't even get enough boots on the ground to control a country that's been bombed into the prehistoric age?
Lets look at one scenario... Alaska joins Canada in some sort of union, and claims all the northwest passage, etc.
The 48 lower states make grumbling noises...
... then... what?
Nukes? Most of the Canadian population lives within 100 km of the border - too much danger of contaminating your own people. So, scratch the nukes. Fuel-air explosives? Kind of risky, unless you first round up all the canucks living amongst the general population... and all the other immigrants, since Mexico would definitely join in since they would see themselves as the next step...
Close the border to trade? There's one Katrina's worth of oil immediately unavailable. If Mexico (looking at Texas?) and Venezuela (payback time?) join in, that's 3 Katrinas worth of production gone... and you can be sure that the electricity stops flowing as well, so 50 to 150 million people sleep in the dark. Don't do it in the winter, or they'll also freeze to death.
Armed invasion? Can't be done - not enough troops.
Economic sanctions? Its a two-way street, and with the US dollar declining against ALL world currencies, any economic sanctions will trigger massive dumping of the greenback, resulting in even higher costs for imports of essentials.
Nope - if Alaska ever decides to leave the US, they can just walk away with impunity. Its not like a couple of hundred years ago. The consequences of any sort of "civil war action" now would be immediate and massive.
Quebec didn't separate for one reason - economics. Heck, Quebec secretly amassed a war chest of $100 billion dollars to help prop up the Canadian dollar in the event of a Oui/Yes vote - (for a population of 6 million quebecers, that would be the equivalent of the US buying up, on a per capita basis, 5 trillion dollars). This would have allowed Quebec to state that it was going to continue using the canadian dollar as its de facto currency, and with the threat of being able to dump that much back into the market, they would have been able to negociate an economic union.
It will be the same with the US - economics will drive those who want to secede. The first to go will be Alaska - its a no-brainer. Once the feds can no longer pork-barrel Alaska, its gone. Alaska's entry into Canada would strengthen Canada's claim (and Alaska's, as part of Canada) to all the north-west passage. Watch for it by 2025 - 2030.
">We'll trade you Quebec for Alaska and Washington state."
Let's do one better - in return for not making them take Quebec, they also give us, in addition to Alaska.... how about Hawaii and throw in a few border states, as a "buffer zone".
Oh, and we'll take the UN off their hands, since they hate it so much.
Civil war nowadays is unwinnable by the federal government, if only because everything is so interconnected. If a state was determined to secede, repeatedly destabilizing the power grid would get results, as would other tactics.
The Euro and other currencies can safely appreciate against the US dollar without too much fear from US manufacturing.
You seem to forget, the US gutted many of its' industries over the last few decades because they weren't profitable enough. Look at basic industries like steelmaking - whole plants sold, dismantled, and shipped overseas.
Is the US going to start manufacturing TVs again? DVD players? Can't be done. the infrastructure to supply those plants is all overseas as well. To build new. competitive plants, would require new investment, at a time when lenders would be looking at the US as being not credit-worthy.
This is what happens when you overspend - you can no longer borrow to "bootstrap" yourself back into competitiveness.
Heck, look at the auto industry. The US has the "home field" advantage, and even then, Toyota is mopping up the floor. Ironically, Toyota conducts tours where they show off to the competition all their processes. Why? Because they know that even if the competition knows how they do it, they can't match it.
The US population is slated to double... check out the figures yourself. Going to start issuing bicycles to all the surplus population since there won't be enough energy to go around?
"> So we will decrease benifits and possibly increase taxes, Your point on how this effects the overall economy?"
Decreased benefits means people go without. They also have less to spend, so the local economy contracts. Multiply by 50 to 100 million. As for taxes, if the government couldn't reduce the deficit during boom times, all it did was delay necessary tax increases, so that they will come when it really hurts.
Of course, once a body secedes, its no longer, by definition, governed by the US Constitution. If you look at a map, Alaska is a natural fit to join Canada, impossible for the US to prevent/take back by military force, and there's enough discontent with the lower 48 that, once the pork stops because the US is beyond broke,..
"Washington is not separated from the rest of the country by an ocean and 1700s ships. There would be nothing stopping the federal government from simply retaking the segregated states by force."
Alaska would be imossible to keep by force. And once Alaska goes, other parts will jump ship too. And last I looked, Hawaii was an ocean away.
Harper's finding out the hard way that Canada will NOT follow his natural instinct to shove his head up Bush's arse so far that he can see the guy's tonsils.
Canadians like Americans. We don't like Bush's politics, and those of us who think about it see the meltdown of the US as pretty inevitable over the next generation or so. The doubling of the US population in defiance of malthusian resource limits will turn it into another Bangladesh. Canada has the resources to double its population - the US doesn't even have the resources to support its current population. No complicated math there, even Miss South Carolina should be able to figure that one out without a map.
Its really because the US wants the domain for after the next "elections"... for Soviet USA (.su)
After all, no habeus corpus, no posse comitas, the constitution is "just a damn piece of paper", the US economy on a death spiral, people being sent off to fight wars of imperialism,... you'd think that the Soviet Union *won* the cold war.
And what are they going to do when Tuvalu goes under water? Will they discontinue.tv? All its going to take is a foot or so rise in sea level and tuvalu goes glug glug glug...
Actually, secession is becoming more and more likely. Economic unrest usually leads to political instability, and the US is in for one heck of a lot of economic bad news.
GM and Ford bankruptcies;
The continued shrinking value of the greenback - probably to 2 to the Euro within 10 years;
The "made in the USA" recession/borderline depression;
The baby boomer bust and the inability of SocSec to meet expectations because the fund has been pretty much raided;
The monetizing of the real inflation rate over the last decade, putting further downward pressure on both the dollar and the economy;
The desire of international lenders not to hold on to dollar reserves that decline in value;
Significant portions of the US population disaffected because they feel disenfranchised and/or that the current retrograde policies of the federal government have become more or less institutional and systemic;
Jobs continuing to leave the US as the US federal government no longer is able to borrow to invest in infrastructure, and US business is no longer able to borrow to finance investments that enhance competitiveness;
Population pressure as the US becomes the ONLY economy unable to cap their population growth, and runs into Malthusian limits;
Environmental pressure from vast tracts of the south become uninhabitable, unproductive desert, with summer daytime temperatures routinely passing 120F - 130F, resulting in years of crop and cattle failures
The dystopian future predicted in SF in years past, with a government that plays the fundy religion card, limits on freedom and the suspension of constitutional rights (like habeus corpus), and continued surveillance, is looking more and more accurate. Who'd want to live or invest in the US in 20 years, at this rate?
Look for the same political solution that happened in the 1700s, when the US declared independence from England... only this time, it will be various states declaring their independence from a funancially and politically bankrupt US government.
Googling for Miss Carolina returns 16 million hits. the only "state" Miss Carolina is in is the state of confusion. Don't ask her if its north or south carolina - she won't be able to tell you even WITH a map.
Now, as the US recedes in economic importance, and the "brain drain" between the US and Kanuckistan reverses, expect to see the US map redrawn in the next 2 decades, with several states seceding.
> You seem to think you'll have a choice. No, the EU won't be able to save you if we decide you belong to us.
From the US? Most of you can't even find Canada on a map... just ask Miss Carolina.
The last Canadian political party to suggest union with the US died a while back... it ain't gonna happen. More likely is that one or more US States will secede from the union and either petition to join Canada or be independent rather than stay in JebusLand.
Sure, it might be illegal under the US constitution, but so was the suspension of habeus corpus and posse comitas. The precedent has been set, so look forward to at least someof the US splintering off as it continues its economic decline and people vote to bail out of (as opposed to bailing out) the sinking ship.
> Although like most US policy of the last 6 years, instead of fixing the issue they plan to take over others. Soon Canada, the U.S. and Mexico will share the "Amero" as currency within the North American Union."
Dream on. Canada hasn't had a federal budget deficit in more than a decade, and social security is fully funded on an actuarial for the next 75 years (that's right - 75 years, its not a typo). Contrast that to the US deficit, and the unfunded mess that is known as social security, with off-the-book intra-government "lending" totalling 75 trillion.
You can have our loonies when you pry them from our cold dead hands! Actually, not even then! There's more of a chance of switching to the Euro as the greenback slowly does its imitation of SCO stock.
> We sell *you* you're oil... and beef... and lumber...
Canada does oil swaps with the US. Rather than the US moving oil from the east coast to the west coast, and Canada moving oil from Alberta to the east coase, Canada sends some oil to the US west and central states, and "swaps" it with oil the us imports from the middle east and venezuela that is sent up to estern Canada.
However, the net balance i petroleum products is definitely in our (Canada's) favour, and there is not enough tanker capacity to make up for it if almost any country stops shipping, or unilaterally raises the price. Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela could form NorAmPEC, charge a $100/bbl "environmental tax", and there isn't enough capacity to replace it. Even with the resulting lower demand, NorAmPEC would still come out ahead, money-wise, especially since OPEC would probably jump in.
I know what you mean... every once in a while, I encounter a problem like that and tell the person to make a symlink from directory A to directory B. It works, but its an ugly solution.
The whole idea behind xmlhttprequests is that you don't have to hard-code anything, not the request parameters, the start offset, or the number or requests to make. Handy if you have another script that you use to generate randomish requests, which you store in a 10,000 line file. Load one of those data files, select the start line, the number of requests, and let it rip. Repeatability is essential in any test harness.
I don't give a darn about performance - this is a test script. Repeatablity and controlability are the only things I want.
And yes, sometimes its important to be able to automagically search through all 10,000 results to make sure there are no gotchas.
The server (actually 3 servers that fulfill different functions and communicate with users and each other) is capable of handling 1,000 - 10,000 requests per second (commodity single-core cpu, 1/2 gig ram, bsd or linux are the constraints). Each request can generate 20 or more database queries, with various combinations of reading and writing. One test harness hits it with 400 simultaneous requests at a time continuously over the weekend, to check for memory leaks (we don't destroy a thread after x iterations because that takes time. If there's a leak, we'll know it after a few hours). This is not your average 'web development project' - its all custom c code, both the server itself and the modules that it loads at startup.
the xmlhttprequest stuff is purely for internal testing. Generate a test file with lots of parameters, including edge conditions, load it into the browser via xmlhttprequest, and select which part of that file to run (starting line, line count). Get the results, and look for any "oops". Fix the "oops". Recompile, restart the servers, repeat.
This allows me to narrow down the search to, say, test lines 2000 to 2010. This way, I can repeat each run with the same parameters between compiles, without reloading the web page, and see any differences. Or I can have the code automatically flag any errors. Or run 10,000 different requests and have the page keep a running tally of errors.
> Yep, and Canadian products will become more "expensive" to Americans (therefore, less goods are sold). Additionally, US products will become cheaper for Canadians (therefore, more of our goods get sold to you)....
You seem to forget, we're your #1 supplier of petroleum products. You really don't have a choice if we raise prices to match domestic prices, since we supply the equivalent of 1 Katrina of oil, and there isn't enough slack in the world, never mind enough oil tankers, to make up the difference.
You *could* stop using up so much of it, which is what will probably happen as people stop over-spending and are unable to borrow against their home's declining values.
> Can you please tell me how your database requests have much to do with the UI?
Gladly. As I get the responses back from the database server via xmlhttprequests (going through my quick-and-dirty 1-line proxy server), I parse and insert the output into the doc via javascript as a new row. Firefox does a crap job of appending as the page gets longer. After 1,500 requests, it sucks totally, and is deep into cache AND cpu. Opera, on the other hand, does the whole 10,000 without problem.
If you're going to do the whole web 2.0 thing, you really need to be able to robustly modify the contents of a page over and over without memory or thread problems. Firefox can't do it. It also behaves like a single-threaded app, where if one tab freezes, I have to kill the whole process. Something's not right "under the hood".
Opera isn't without its bugs - it doesn't like styling individual dropdown list (select) options, for example. I wrote a nice X11-name color picker that looks really good under firefox, and plain as all heck under Opera. Same with font-names, font-styles, font-weights, and border-styles. I guess we can't have everything...:-(
> > Firefox isn't exactly doing much as far as UI goes.
> Some could successfully argue that Firefox contains a HUGE amount of UI work. The entire app is one large UI system.
... and yet, Opera does it WAY better. I only started the switch from firefox a couple of weeks ago, and I'm hooked. As an example, I have test query that does 10,000 database requests via a local proxy and xmlhttprequest. Firefox can't complete the query... after the first thousand or so, it gets so bogged down updating the display. Opera, on the other hand, completes the query in half-decent time (in less time than firefox takes to do the first 1500).
And yes, the GIMP UI is horrendous (but you can get used to it if you're determined).
Slashdot Mirror
They can always have the cable come ashore in either Mexico or Canada. Or they can fill any unused capacity with crap, and then encrypt it all.
> Maybe I'm being more cynical, but I firmly believe that if the US government has to choose between letting the union splinter and dropping a nuke into New York, then pop goes the apple.
Of course, if that's what it takes to "keep the union together", then its already a failure by any reasonable measure. The way we dealt with secession in Canada was two-pronged
On the legal side:
On the political/social side:
- get the groups most pressuring for secession deeply involved in the political process, so they can't stand outside the door and throw rocks
- devolve more power to all the provinces
We're stronger because we were able to face the boogey-man of secession, and adapt (Canada is good at coming up with compromises) rather than try to use force. Its like a marriage - using force to keep someone with you who doesn't want to stay is a bad idea, whereas recognizing that they have the right to leave might just encourage them to stay, since its a show of fairness and equal treatment between partners.Seriously, do you really believe that the US can just go in and "occupy" Alaska? Or Canada, for that matter? When they can't even get enough boots on the ground to control a country that's been bombed into the prehistoric age?
Lets look at one scenario ... Alaska joins Canada in some sort of union, and claims all the northwest passage, etc.
The 48 lower states make grumbling noises ...
Nukes? Most of the Canadian population lives within 100 km of the border - too much danger of contaminating your own people. So, scratch the nukes. Fuel-air explosives? Kind of risky, unless you first round up all the canucks living amongst the general population ... and all the other immigrants, since Mexico would definitely join in since they would see themselves as the next step ...
Close the border to trade? There's one Katrina's worth of oil immediately unavailable. If Mexico (looking at Texas?) and Venezuela (payback time?) join in, that's 3 Katrinas worth of production gone ... and you can be sure that the electricity stops flowing as well, so 50 to 150 million people sleep in the dark. Don't do it in the winter, or they'll also freeze to death.
Armed invasion? Can't be done - not enough troops.
Economic sanctions? Its a two-way street, and with the US dollar declining against ALL world currencies, any economic sanctions will trigger massive dumping of the greenback, resulting in even higher costs for imports of essentials.
Nope - if Alaska ever decides to leave the US, they can just walk away with impunity. Its not like a couple of hundred years ago. The consequences of any sort of "civil war action" now would be immediate and massive.
Quebec didn't separate for one reason - economics. Heck, Quebec secretly amassed a war chest of $100 billion dollars to help prop up the Canadian dollar in the event of a Oui/Yes vote - (for a population of 6 million quebecers, that would be the equivalent of the US buying up, on a per capita basis, 5 trillion dollars). This would have allowed Quebec to state that it was going to continue using the canadian dollar as its de facto currency, and with the threat of being able to dump that much back into the market, they would have been able to negociate an economic union.
It will be the same with the US - economics will drive those who want to secede. The first to go will be Alaska - its a no-brainer. Once the feds can no longer pork-barrel Alaska, its gone. Alaska's entry into Canada would strengthen Canada's claim (and Alaska's, as part of Canada) to all the north-west passage. Watch for it by 2025 - 2030.
Let's do one better - in return for not making them take Quebec, they also give us, in addition to Alaska .... how about Hawaii and throw in a few border states, as a "buffer zone".
Oh, and we'll take the UN off their hands, since they hate it so much.
Civil war nowadays is unwinnable by the federal government, if only because everything is so interconnected. If a state was determined to secede, repeatedly destabilizing the power grid would get results, as would other tactics.
The Euro and other currencies can safely appreciate against the US dollar without too much fear from US manufacturing.
You seem to forget, the US gutted many of its' industries over the last few decades because they weren't profitable enough. Look at basic industries like steelmaking - whole plants sold, dismantled, and shipped overseas.
Is the US going to start manufacturing TVs again? DVD players? Can't be done. the infrastructure to supply those plants is all overseas as well. To build new. competitive plants, would require new investment, at a time when lenders would be looking at the US as being not credit-worthy.
This is what happens when you overspend - you can no longer borrow to "bootstrap" yourself back into competitiveness.
Heck, look at the auto industry. The US has the "home field" advantage, and even then, Toyota is mopping up the floor. Ironically, Toyota conducts tours where they show off to the competition all their processes. Why? Because they know that even if the competition knows how they do it, they can't match it.
The US population is slated to double ... check out the figures yourself. Going to start issuing bicycles to all the surplus population since there won't be enough energy to go around?
"> So we will decrease benifits and possibly increase taxes, Your point on how this effects the overall economy?"
Decreased benefits means people go without. They also have less to spend, so the local economy contracts. Multiply by 50 to 100 million. As for taxes, if the government couldn't reduce the deficit during boom times, all it did was delay necessary tax increases, so that they will come when it really hurts.
The US is bankrupt. Morally and financially.
Of course, once a body secedes, its no longer, by definition, governed by the US Constitution. If you look at a map, Alaska is a natural fit to join Canada, impossible for the US to prevent/take back by military force, and there's enough discontent with the lower 48 that, once the pork stops because the US is beyond broke, ..
"Washington is not separated from the rest of the country by an ocean and 1700s ships. There would be nothing stopping the federal government from simply retaking the segregated states by force."
Alaska would be imossible to keep by force. And once Alaska goes, other parts will jump ship too. And last I looked, Hawaii was an ocean away.
Harper's finding out the hard way that Canada will NOT follow his natural instinct to shove his head up Bush's arse so far that he can see the guy's tonsils.
Canadians like Americans. We don't like Bush's politics, and those of us who think about it see the meltdown of the US as pretty inevitable over the next generation or so. The doubling of the US population in defiance of malthusian resource limits will turn it into another Bangladesh. Canada has the resources to double its population - the US doesn't even have the resources to support its current population. No complicated math there, even Miss South Carolina should be able to figure that one out without a map.
I can see Alaska coming back home to Canada :-)
The first page of results is ALL Miss South Carolina "maps ... for the children ... in Iraq". That's all I need to know ...
Its really because the US wants the domain for after the next "elections" ... for Soviet USA (.su)
After all, no habeus corpus, no posse comitas, the constitution is "just a damn piece of paper", the US economy on a death spiral, people being sent off to fight wars of imperialism, ... you'd think that the Soviet Union *won* the cold war.
And what are they going to do when Tuvalu goes under water? Will they discontinue .tv? All its going to take is a foot or so rise in sea level and tuvalu goes glug glug glug ...
The dystopian future predicted in SF in years past, with a government that plays the fundy religion card, limits on freedom and the suspension of constitutional rights (like habeus corpus), and continued surveillance, is looking more and more accurate. Who'd want to live or invest in the US in 20 years, at this rate?
Look for the same political solution that happened in the 1700s, when the US declared independence from England ... only this time, it will be various states declaring their independence from a funancially and politically bankrupt US government.
Googling for Miss Carolina returns 16 million hits. the only "state" Miss Carolina is in is the state of confusion. Don't ask her if its north or south carolina - she won't be able to tell you even WITH a map.
Now, as the US recedes in economic importance, and the "brain drain" between the US and Kanuckistan reverses, expect to see the US map redrawn in the next 2 decades, with several states seceding.
> You seem to think you'll have a choice. No, the EU won't be able to save you if we decide you belong to us.
From the US? Most of you can't even find Canada on a map ... just ask Miss Carolina.
The last Canadian political party to suggest union with the US died a while back ... it ain't gonna happen. More likely is that one or more US States will secede from the union and either petition to join Canada or be independent rather than stay in JebusLand.
Sure, it might be illegal under the US constitution, but so was the suspension of habeus corpus and posse comitas. The precedent has been set, so look forward to at least someof the US splintering off as it continues its economic decline and people vote to bail out of (as opposed to bailing out) the sinking ship.
Q. Why did Canada get Quebec and the US get Bush?
A. Because Canada got first pick.
I think Canada got the better part of the deal ...
I hear China's in the market to buy oil ...
There are 7 economies that are set to surpass the US in terms of size over the next 50 years ... including China.
> Although like most US policy of the last 6 years, instead of fixing the issue they plan to take over others. Soon Canada, the U.S. and Mexico will share the "Amero" as currency within the North American Union."
Dream on. Canada hasn't had a federal budget deficit in more than a decade, and social security is fully funded on an actuarial for the next 75 years (that's right - 75 years, its not a typo). Contrast that to the US deficit, and the unfunded mess that is known as social security, with off-the-book intra-government "lending" totalling 75 trillion.
You can have our loonies when you pry them from our cold dead hands! Actually, not even then! There's more of a chance of switching to the Euro as the greenback slowly does its imitation of SCO stock.
"> You sell us oil? You're joking right?
> We sell *you* you're oil ... and beef ... and lumber ...
Canada does oil swaps with the US. Rather than the US moving oil from the east coast to the west coast, and Canada moving oil from Alberta to the east coase, Canada sends some oil to the US west and central states, and "swaps" it with oil the us imports from the middle east and venezuela that is sent up to estern Canada.
However, the net balance i petroleum products is definitely in our (Canada's) favour, and there is not enough tanker capacity to make up for it if almost any country stops shipping, or unilaterally raises the price. Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela could form NorAmPEC, charge a $100/bbl "environmental tax", and there isn't enough capacity to replace it. Even with the resulting lower demand, NorAmPEC would still come out ahead, money-wise, especially since OPEC would probably jump in.
They can always statically link their programs :-)
I know what you mean ... every once in a while, I encounter a problem like that and tell the person to make a symlink from directory A to directory B. It works, but its an ugly solution.
The whole idea behind xmlhttprequests is that you don't have to hard-code anything, not the request parameters, the start offset, or the number or requests to make. Handy if you have another script that you use to generate randomish requests, which you store in a 10,000 line file. Load one of those data files, select the start line, the number of requests, and let it rip. Repeatability is essential in any test harness.
I don't give a darn about performance - this is a test script. Repeatablity and controlability are the only things I want.
And yes, sometimes its important to be able to automagically search through all 10,000 results to make sure there are no gotchas.
The server (actually 3 servers that fulfill different functions and communicate with users and each other) is capable of handling 1,000 - 10,000 requests per second (commodity single-core cpu, 1/2 gig ram, bsd or linux are the constraints). Each request can generate 20 or more database queries, with various combinations of reading and writing. One test harness hits it with 400 simultaneous requests at a time continuously over the weekend, to check for memory leaks (we don't destroy a thread after x iterations because that takes time. If there's a leak, we'll know it after a few hours). This is not your average 'web development project' - its all custom c code, both the server itself and the modules that it loads at startup.
the xmlhttprequest stuff is purely for internal testing. Generate a test file with lots of parameters, including edge conditions, load it into the browser via xmlhttprequest, and select which part of that file to run (starting line, line count). Get the results, and look for any "oops". Fix the "oops". Recompile, restart the servers, repeat.
This allows me to narrow down the search to, say, test lines 2000 to 2010. This way, I can repeat each run with the same parameters between compiles, without reloading the web page, and see any differences. Or I can have the code automatically flag any errors. Or run 10,000 different requests and have the page keep a running tally of errors.
> Yep, and Canadian products will become more "expensive" to Americans (therefore, less goods are sold). Additionally, US products will become cheaper for Canadians (therefore, more of our goods get sold to you)....
You seem to forget, we're your #1 supplier of petroleum products. You really don't have a choice if we raise prices to match domestic prices, since we supply the equivalent of 1 Katrina of oil, and there isn't enough slack in the world, never mind enough oil tankers, to make up the difference.
You *could* stop using up so much of it, which is what will probably happen as people stop over-spending and are unable to borrow against their home's declining values.
> Can you please tell me how your database requests have much to do with the UI?
Gladly. As I get the responses back from the database server via xmlhttprequests (going through my quick-and-dirty 1-line proxy server), I parse and insert the output into the doc via javascript as a new row. Firefox does a crap job of appending as the page gets longer. After 1,500 requests, it sucks totally, and is deep into cache AND cpu. Opera, on the other hand, does the whole 10,000 without problem.
If you're going to do the whole web 2.0 thing, you really need to be able to robustly modify the contents of a page over and over without memory or thread problems. Firefox can't do it. It also behaves like a single-threaded app, where if one tab freezes, I have to kill the whole process. Something's not right "under the hood".
Opera isn't without its bugs - it doesn't like styling individual dropdown list (select) options, for example. I wrote a nice X11-name color picker that looks really good under firefox, and plain as all heck under Opera. Same with font-names, font-styles, font-weights, and border-styles. I guess we can't have everything ... :-(
> > Firefox isn't exactly doing much as far as UI goes.
> Some could successfully argue that Firefox contains a HUGE amount of UI work. The entire app is one large UI system.
And yes, the GIMP UI is horrendous (but you can get used to it if you're determined).