I'm a newbie by standards around the X community, but alot of past work is devoted to old nasty things.. I've been lightly studying it for a few years, and have provided alpha ports for voodoo chips in the past.
X was written from a frame buffer perspective, and had accelleration hacked in over time, until Mark Vojkovich developed a standard for it(XAA, iirc). Attempts to go towards a rendering pipeline are embodied in the excellent work in Xrender.
The drivers are all fairly minimal bits of code.. most of them rely on other modules to initiate standard display setting, etc.
Alot of the "cruft" in X is related to the I18N sctick that got hacked into R5 I think. More cruft comes from PEX (The long-dead competing standard to OpenGL), the horrible toolkit helper implementation known at Xt, the keyboard and colormaps (scarry). The seldom used XPrint and Xnest servers as well.
More cruft comes in with several implementations of frame buffering code implementations (fb, cfb, cfb16, cfb24, cfb32, mfb) XAA kinof added a layer below these original "drivers."
Also, there is a huge amount of interface code from X to toolkits such at gtk/qt. This code is mostly hidden in the X11 libs. Do a stack trace when drawing a button in GTK with X11 debugging on.. it is truly horrid (13 deep to draw a clipped line), and doesn't show the server side of the mess.
Also, X has a very syncronous rectangle management core. The server keeps a list of all viewable rectangles and updates the whole list after every rectangle update. (Slow window movement, anyone?)
The biggest problem with X is simply the fact that toolkits have been religated to client apps, instead of being loadable into the X server.
Often times core X developers argue that this is dangerous, and even say that client side apps are faster and are fixed in their minds that X is the only way to go. A huge chunk of code goes for all the abstraction(known as mutilation by code in my book) and platform independance.
By no means should we throw away all that knowledge, but it should be second tier to providing native interfaces IMHO. Larger processor caches and faster asyncronous graphics chips somewhat nullify this argument these days, but the fact remains that X would be alot faster without it.
In fact you're starting to see X as simple a pixmap display device in the end. All the toolkits are basically just blasting pixmaps into the server, because X can't handle much of the advanced graphics now anyhow.
Yet sitting down to a windows box is proof positive that X is slow. I'd say that a good rewrite would do X a world of good. Let applications communicate in terms of toolkit messages (add widget tree instead of get gc, 8 drawlines, 3 fills, and get font, set font, get colormap, set colormap, draw text).
Of course this could be *maybe* be done with an X extension, but there are a few limitations of what X extensions can perform without going and adding more hacks into the X server.
All in all, X11 is a fine piece of work. The work done in the past 2 years is fantastic to say the least. All the linux companies and the freetype, mesa, and DRI developers really deserve a major pat on the back. I really enjoy the engineering talent and ingenuity displayed by the XFree team.
Cleaning up X, or rewriting it would be a major step in the right direction.
A funny thing about windows, is that they have the opposite problem. Applications are often times tied _too_ closly to the GDI, and often break between versions. No doubt, a few graphics intensive applications from win31 would break on win2k.
(disclaimer, I worked for a few years on a fingerprint security project)
Actually, the problem is that you have to keep a copy of the fingerprint to match. Getting a copy of this fingerprint from disk or memory would be fairly simple.
Also, you can not hash a fingerprint. Each scan of the same fingerprint is different from the previous one. You can't protect the b' enrolled fingerprint.
The only way this would work is by:
(a) using a dual password/biometric. The password would unlock the b' biometric(enrolled) and the fingerprint would be used to extract it.
(b) using a hardware protection and matching system. Whereby the hardware is responsible for protecting itself. Simular to a smart card concept, the hardware would encrypt the data on disk, and also gather and match the fingerprints. Still, a bit of reverse engineering could defeat this. Also, a cheap fingerprint scanner could probably be fairly suseptable to rubber finger attacks.;-)
Just what we need is a bunch of people speeding around in a rain storm in their electric cars...
packed with lithium and sodium batteries.
I wonder how big a hole 50lbs of lithium makes...
pan
Re:Biometrics are here... have been here for 6 yrs
on
Biometrics in Airports
·
· Score: 2
I was the principle developer at Ethentica for a couple of years.
I can tell you that fingerprint verification is very very good if you're doing 1 person to 1 fingerprint matching. (In other words, you claim you are bob, and your fingerprint proves it.) The biggest problems are simply getting the print!
Start developing search lists, and then you get into pretty treacherous territory. But anyone who is in biometrics will tell you to avoid the crowd. Even if we can have a good enrollment identifier, this will prove useless in search lists of hundreds.
Ohh, and fingerprint recognition is atleast 10-20% better than face. Plus, it is a choice. You can choose not to drop your finger on the detector.
We used chain verified stong SSL connections to protect biometrics in movement, and split biometrics into 4 geographically separate servers for storage. All matching was done in isolated, shielded rooms, on servers with no persistant storage at all. (No HD's, etc..) Our system was designed for large scale world-wide use. I doubt many others have developed such precautions.
If you loose "who you are" (you're biometric identifiers) then there could be problems in the future.
I worry about the shabby and sloppy installations I've been hearing about.
The KH-11/KH-12 are basically hubble telescopes pointed at the earth.
As a student in HS, my teacher was involved in the spec'ing of the hubble telescope. We're talking about using mid/late-eighties technology up there. The CCD was equivalent to what you can purchase at Best Buy today on a decent digital camera.
The optics were pretty good, and chances are that the military bought the good optics instead of the lowest contract price (I seem to remember 2-3 companies that each produced optics).
Anyhow, needless to say, all the "hubble-like" telescopes received upgrades these past few 2-3 years. There's a good chance that the resolutions have gone from the 4/8 megapixel (best of the 80s) to the 268+ megapixels. (The optics will probably never get much better).
My arguments were meant to bring perspective to the western mind, not to mimic the current policies or thoughts of the US governemt.
I'm just trying to urge people to imagine what a difficult decision it is to let foreign forces launch an attack from your homeland.
I happen to agree with the President, in the current situation. I just wonder if it's going to be futile to build a coalition centered around an open-ended war in a region where we have been loosing backing for 25 years.
Also, having read a few histories of the USSR/Afghanistan conflict, I don't have much hope for our forces. I grew up in a mountanous region, and I bet I could hide in those mountains for a year without ever seeing a soul. Often times the villegers and the soldiers are one and the same. There are few bridges, no military bases. In other words, there's no traditional military targets other than people.
The taliban (IMHO) came into being because they had the backing of Islamic clerics, they rid the country of crime, and basically did all the basic governemt services that had been shattered for nearly 20 years of war and civil war.
Osama bin Laden was paid by us to wage a terrorist backlash against the USSR. He bombed market places and assasinated people. We bought him ammo and guns, and paid his men 200$ a day.
And you have to remember that we have a long history of installing or supporting madmen such as Noriega and Hussein. What have we brought against ourselves? What does the middle east see in our actions now? They're probably thinking bad karma!
Didn't IBM sell ID carding systems to the Nazis? It's one of the reasons the Nazi's were so effectuve at tracking down Jews, IIRC. I wonder how a National ID is any different.
There is no way that a National ID would have prevented 18 *foreigners* from boarding planes and whacking them into buildings. Sorry Larry.
Oohh yeah, can I have mine imprinted with 666 too? Maybe the end really is near?
CNN today re-confirms that this is unsubstantiated and in fact we are using the base now...
I can't find that on CNN, but it is clear that even if so, it is not a command post. We have been supporting the no-fly zone for years now. Support has crumbled under us there. Sure, we'll be able to use the airport, but I doubt we'll house B1 bombers on those bases.
I believe Mubarak (sp?) told us he was behind us with the same cavet that all the other arab countries are asking for...essentially we'll support you in removing the universally reviviled Taliban and their fanatical brethern that treaten the stability of Egypt (and every other ligitimate middle eastern government), but don't widen the conflict to say take out Iraq
"When asked about the impact of this terrorist attack on the whole world, the President [Mubarak] said it alerted the international community to the need to take transnational terrorism more seriously through actions not words. "But we must be very careful while going about such an enterprise. The current plans of the US administration to build an anti-terrorism alliance threatens to split the world as it will include some countries and seclude others," he warned. He reiterated that it was wiser and more feasible to call for an international anti-terror conference (an idea which the President championed for so many years) under the umbrella of the United Nations to endorse a global agreement to fight terrorism. He said the agreement must be carefully designed and must be equally binding to all countries without allowing for exceptions.
So you see, he said we arn't going to get anywhere without the UN.
You're just a troll lookin in all the wrong places..
I know it's bad etiquette to reply to your own post, but I wanted to have a better comparison of the middle east situation.
Suppose that the Mexican government sponsered suicide bombers to blow up a University in Saudi Arabia. Do you think America would allow 50,000 Saudi troops to land here and invade Mexico? Would we allow heavy bombers, helicopters, and a fleet of other planes and tanks? What would change our perception of Mexico so that we would allow Saudis here?
If your neighbors friend comes over and kicks your ass, will you still like your neighbor?
Do you think ANY country would allow foreign troops on it's soil to attack a neighbor? Unless the neighboring country gets huge incentives (30B debt relief in Pakistan, plus santions lifted for India and Pakistan), or percieves the nation as war mongrels (The way Saudie Arabia supposedly agreed to help against Iraq) then there's little to no reason for a country to house them.
Now, countries _do_ house troops in peacetime, it is true. But we provide training, cash, and other supports in those countries so as not to wear out our welcome. We also don't attack their neighbors!
Let's face it - does Afghanistan pose a threat to it's neighbors? No. Any other major countries in the area owe us money? Hahah.. we probably owe them money! There's always the former Soviet republics I guess.
Bush can't be rash, because there is no way to jump in there anyway! I believe that they intended to start a limited bomb run yesterday.
I think it's because the Saudies kicked our ass out on Sep 19("You have no command post here")? Story goes that we landed, expecting full support.
But we forgot that King Fahd is sick, and his son is running the country. Anyhow, his son didn't want to rock the middle eastern boat. Kind Fahd has left the country for Switzerland supposedly.
Or maybe it's also because we don't have the support from ANY major Arab states in the region? The combination of the santions against Iraq, our support of Israel, and our extra long stay in Saudie Arabi have made America very unpopular. Turkey, Uzbek, and Tajikistan may be it. Egypt told us to go cry to the UN.
We may have the support of the governments, but no country at this point can really afford to be seen as helping America. The sentiment is so anti-american that there is a possibility of civil war in places that do assist us.
Let's face it.. we have never been successful in the ME. Clinton pulled most of our support channels in tha Caucus out of the region last year when they realized they could just drop an oil pipeline from Iran, to Russia, to Europe.
Personally, a full scale mulitary attack is useless. The people that are living there now might as well be Islam saints. As one clinton administration member said "When we bombed them last year, we bombed them UP to the stone age."
And one last thing.. lets say (for arguments sake) that the World Trade Center attack was an Irish suicide plot. Would we really hold the people of Ireland as responsible as we're holding the people of Afghanistan. Would France help us attack Ireland? Do you think the Germans would be harboring our men for an Attack like that? No, put it in our own perspective - and you can begin to understand the current perspective.
No government in their RIGHT MIND would be a launching base for the kind of open ended war we're talking about. If we're serious, then we should go carve out a little chunk of Afghanistan ourselves and do it from there.
While a religous service in a Mosque would have been seen as a forgiving statement, and Temple would have been seen as a political statement - I don't see why networks should be banned from broadcasting what the President does in public. I think the ceremony was very balanced in religios views.
You may feel that religion is pervasive in and around this country. And it is, even more so today I suppose.
But is broadcasting government people engaging in religous ceremonies a constitutional problem? People are clamoring to see the President. If he wants to call a bunch of friends and co-workers to go to church, that's his business. It's not like you can't tear yourself away from the TV.
And even the President enjoys First Amendment protections to exercise his personal faith, right?
(He's not writing laws to make people pray the Divine Mercy everyday at 3, or face Mecca at sundown).
It's not about resources, dude. It's about fanatacism. People with a deep conviction in voilence are extremly dangerous. It only took a few guys to take out the OK building.
And there is no political or civil remedy. Sorry congress.. adding fire alarms to the titanic won't work this time.
How can it be racist if both sides are hateful of the other. More like mutual hate.
1. I find it hard to live next to anybody that would publically tell children on freaking SESAME STREET to go and kill me.
2. If I were palistenian, I would refuse to work for jews that looked upon me as inferior and shuffled my family about like cattle.
In other words, I find no one in the middle east has any brains at all.
We all know various histories of the areas. There is no excuse for any of it. Both peoples have a fervent hate that is based on intolerance.
Tolerance is the core of freedom. The middle east will never be free until people learn to accept each other.. NO POLITICAL SOLUTION IS POSSIBLE. I do not mean that palestinians need to go to temple, and vice versa. I mean that people are free to practice their religion next door. Whether you like them or not.
Who wins the spiritual battle? Certainly not Allah or God.
Panaflex
Re:Ravages of the new economy
on
HP Buys Compaq
·
· Score: 2
Yeah, the stock setup kinda sucks. But some big points:
* Resizing disks is a breeze.
* The compiler and debuger is the BEST in the world. The errors are not as clear as gnu's.. but it catches more errors.
* Very responsive. HP-UX feels like molasis. (I used to run a bunch of K & D class machines.. I'd take a cheap alpha with raid anyday.)
But you're right.. the stock configuration does suck.
While you may feel one way or the other on the issue, calling the roughly 45-55% of the people in the USA known as conservatives in this country "a few" is a lie. (Big suprise, though)
I guess those "a few" get around..
Pan
Re:HTML/CSS - actual *standards* - for WP
on
Linux Office Suites
·
· Score: 2
Of course, if people weren't so much in love with pointless `futzing' to get the layout `right,'....
Alot of people use Word Processors to make up brochures, newsletters, etc.. It is absolutly necessary.
Sometimes it's not necessary to crank up quark, you know..
Yeah, having Alanis Morissette as God was actually respectful. Picking two dumbasses as "prophets" was just like God.. yep.
I'm not saying that God didn't use murders, taxmen, and womenizers as tools.. but when they came to do God's work they worked in faith and respect.Kevin turns that on it's head..
It's really funny.. witty.. but it is not respectful.
Lets hope they get the compiler tools right this time... 7.0 couldn't even compile it's own darn kernel. Linus said you were a fool if you were using Redhat.
Well, I guess I'm a fool.. but I still use it quite a bit. (Mostly because it supports my laptop out of the box. and all it's associated pc cards).
Slashdot Mirror
OK, let's take a slashdot poll... I bet more people use vnc.
Pan
I'm a newbie by standards around the X community, but alot of past work is devoted to old nasty things.. I've been lightly studying it for a few years, and have provided alpha ports for voodoo chips in the past.
X was written from a frame buffer perspective, and had accelleration hacked in over time, until Mark Vojkovich developed a standard for it(XAA, iirc). Attempts to go towards a rendering pipeline are embodied in the excellent work in Xrender.
The drivers are all fairly minimal bits of code.. most of them rely on other modules to initiate standard display setting, etc.
Alot of the "cruft" in X is related to the I18N sctick that got hacked into R5 I think. More cruft comes from PEX (The long-dead competing standard to OpenGL), the horrible toolkit helper implementation known at Xt, the keyboard and colormaps (scarry). The seldom used XPrint and Xnest servers as well.
More cruft comes in with several implementations of frame buffering code implementations (fb, cfb, cfb16, cfb24, cfb32, mfb) XAA kinof added a layer below these original "drivers."
Also, there is a huge amount of interface code from X to toolkits such at gtk/qt. This code is mostly hidden in the X11 libs. Do a stack trace when drawing a button in GTK with X11 debugging on.. it is truly horrid (13 deep to draw a clipped line), and doesn't show the server side of the mess.
Also, X has a very syncronous rectangle management core. The server keeps a list of all viewable rectangles and updates the whole list after every rectangle update. (Slow window movement, anyone?)
The biggest problem with X is simply the fact that toolkits have been religated to client apps, instead of being loadable into the X server.
Often times core X developers argue that this is dangerous, and even say that client side apps are faster and are fixed in their minds that X is the only way to go. A huge chunk of code goes for all the abstraction(known as mutilation by code in my book) and platform independance.
By no means should we throw away all that knowledge, but it should be second tier to providing native interfaces IMHO. Larger processor caches and faster asyncronous graphics chips somewhat nullify this argument these days, but the fact remains that X would be alot faster without it.
In fact you're starting to see X as simple a pixmap display device in the end. All the toolkits are basically just blasting pixmaps into the server, because X can't handle much of the advanced graphics now anyhow.
Yet sitting down to a windows box is proof positive that X is slow. I'd say that a good rewrite would do X a world of good. Let applications communicate in terms of toolkit messages (add widget tree instead of get gc, 8 drawlines, 3 fills, and get font, set font, get colormap, set colormap, draw text).
Of course this could be *maybe* be done with an X extension, but there are a few limitations of what X extensions can perform without going and adding more hacks into the X server.
All in all, X11 is a fine piece of work. The work done in the past 2 years is fantastic to say the least. All the linux companies and the freetype, mesa, and DRI developers really deserve a major pat on the back. I really enjoy the engineering talent and ingenuity displayed by the XFree team.
Cleaning up X, or rewriting it would be a major step in the right direction.
A funny thing about windows, is that they have the opposite problem. Applications are often times tied _too_ closly to the GDI, and often break between versions. No doubt, a few graphics intensive applications from win31 would break on win2k.
Pan
(disclaimer, I worked for a few years on a fingerprint security project)
;-)
Actually, the problem is that you have to keep a copy of the fingerprint to match. Getting a copy of this fingerprint from disk or memory would be fairly simple.
Also, you can not hash a fingerprint. Each scan of the same fingerprint is different from the previous one. You can't protect the b' enrolled fingerprint.
The only way this would work is by:
(a) using a dual password/biometric. The password would unlock the b' biometric(enrolled) and the fingerprint would be used to extract it.
(b) using a hardware protection and matching system. Whereby the hardware is responsible for protecting itself. Simular to a smart card concept, the hardware would encrypt the data on disk, and also gather and match the fingerprints. Still, a bit of reverse engineering could defeat this. Also, a cheap fingerprint scanner could probably be fairly suseptable to rubber finger attacks.
Pan
Some of the electric cars I had seen used Li or Na because of their ability to hold large charges.
Ofcourse, electric cars with 30 gallons of lead-acid could be pretty dangerous too. I guess there's be no need for the victum cleaup squad.
Pan
Just what we need is a bunch of people speeding around in a rain storm in their electric cars...
packed with lithium and sodium batteries.
I wonder how big a hole 50lbs of lithium makes...
pan
I was the principle developer at Ethentica for a couple of years.
I can tell you that fingerprint verification is very very good if you're doing 1 person to 1 fingerprint matching. (In other words, you claim you are bob, and your fingerprint proves it.) The biggest problems are simply getting the print!
Start developing search lists, and then you get into pretty treacherous territory. But anyone who is in biometrics will tell you to avoid the crowd. Even if we can have a good enrollment identifier, this will prove useless in search lists of hundreds.
Ohh, and fingerprint recognition is atleast 10-20% better than face. Plus, it is a choice. You can choose not to drop your finger on the detector.
We used chain verified stong SSL connections to protect biometrics in movement, and split biometrics into 4 geographically separate servers for storage. All matching was done in isolated, shielded rooms, on servers with no persistant storage at all. (No HD's, etc..) Our system was designed for large scale world-wide use. I doubt many others have developed such precautions.
If you loose "who you are" (you're biometric identifiers) then there could be problems in the future.
I worry about the shabby and sloppy installations I've been hearing about.
Pan
The KH-11/KH-12 are basically hubble telescopes pointed at the earth.
As a student in HS, my teacher was involved in the spec'ing of the hubble telescope. We're talking about using mid/late-eighties technology up there. The CCD was equivalent to what you can purchase at Best Buy today on a decent digital camera.
The optics were pretty good, and chances are that the military bought the good optics instead of the lowest contract price (I seem to remember 2-3 companies that each produced optics).
Anyhow, needless to say, all the "hubble-like" telescopes received upgrades these past few 2-3 years. There's a good chance that the resolutions have gone from the 4/8 megapixel (best of the 80s) to the 268+ megapixels. (The optics will probably never get much better).
Pan
My arguments were meant to bring perspective to the western mind, not to mimic the current policies or thoughts of the US governemt.
I'm just trying to urge people to imagine what a difficult decision it is to let foreign forces launch an attack from your homeland.
I happen to agree with the President, in the current situation. I just wonder if it's going to be futile to build a coalition centered around an open-ended war in a region where we have been loosing backing for 25 years.
Also, having read a few histories of the USSR/Afghanistan conflict, I don't have much hope for our forces. I grew up in a mountanous region, and I bet I could hide in those mountains for a year without ever seeing a soul. Often times the villegers and the soldiers are one and the same. There are few bridges, no military bases. In other words, there's no traditional military targets other than people.
The taliban (IMHO) came into being because they had the backing of Islamic clerics, they rid the country of crime, and basically did all the basic governemt services that had been shattered for nearly 20 years of war and civil war.
Osama bin Laden was paid by us to wage a terrorist backlash against the USSR. He bombed market places and assasinated people. We bought him ammo and guns, and paid his men 200$ a day.
And you have to remember that we have a long history of installing or supporting madmen such as Noriega and Hussein. What have we brought against ourselves? What does the middle east see in our actions now? They're probably thinking bad karma!
Thanks,
Pan
What is there was a certain ungodly rich drug lord in Mexico, who was their "guest" who was doing this then?
Pan
Didn't IBM sell ID carding systems to the Nazis? It's one of the reasons the Nazi's were so effectuve at tracking down Jews, IIRC. I wonder how a National ID is any different.
There is no way that a National ID would have prevented 18 *foreigners* from boarding planes and whacking them into buildings. Sorry Larry.
Oohh yeah, can I have mine imprinted with 666 too? Maybe the end really is near?
pan
CNN today re-confirms that this is unsubstantiated and in fact we are using the base now...
I can't find that on CNN, but it is clear that even if so, it is not a command post. We have been supporting the no-fly zone for years now. Support has crumbled under us there. Sure, we'll be able to use the airport, but I doubt we'll house B1 bombers on those bases.
Also, AP just came out with this story retaliating yours. (Where is your proof, troll!)
I believe Mubarak (sp?) told us he was behind us with the same cavet that all the other arab countries are asking for ...essentially we'll support you in removing the universally reviviled Taliban and their fanatical brethern that treaten the stability of Egypt (and every other ligitimate middle eastern government), but don't widen the conflict to say take out Iraq
Here's what he actually said (from a UPI/ArabicNews story recently):
"When asked about the impact of this terrorist attack on the whole world, the President [Mubarak] said it alerted the international community to the need to take transnational terrorism more seriously through actions not words. "But we must be very careful while going about such an enterprise. The current plans of the US administration to build an anti-terrorism alliance threatens to split the world as it will include some countries and seclude others," he warned. He reiterated that it was wiser and more feasible to call for an international anti-terror conference (an idea which the President championed for so many years) under the umbrella of the United Nations to endorse a global agreement to fight terrorism. He said the agreement must be carefully designed and must be equally binding to all countries without allowing for exceptions.
So you see, he said we arn't going to get anywhere without the UN.
You're just a troll lookin in all the wrong places..
Pan
I know it's bad etiquette to reply to your own post, but I wanted to have a better comparison of the middle east situation.
Suppose that the Mexican government sponsered suicide bombers to blow up a University in Saudi Arabia. Do you think America would allow 50,000 Saudi troops to land here and invade Mexico? Would we allow heavy bombers, helicopters, and a fleet of other planes and tanks? What would change our perception of Mexico so that we would allow Saudis here?
If your neighbors friend comes over and kicks your ass, will you still like your neighbor?
Do you think ANY country would allow foreign troops on it's soil to attack a neighbor? Unless the neighboring country gets huge incentives (30B debt relief in Pakistan, plus santions lifted for India and Pakistan), or percieves the nation as war mongrels (The way Saudie Arabia supposedly agreed to help against Iraq) then there's little to no reason for a country to house them.
Now, countries _do_ house troops in peacetime, it is true. But we provide training, cash, and other supports in those countries so as not to wear out our welcome. We also don't attack their neighbors!
Let's face it - does Afghanistan pose a threat to it's neighbors? No. Any other major countries in the area owe us money? Hahah.. we probably owe them money! There's always the former Soviet republics I guess.
Pan
But we forgot that King Fahd is sick, and his son is running the country. Anyhow, his son didn't want to rock the middle eastern boat. Kind Fahd has left the country for Switzerland supposedly.
Or maybe it's also because we don't have the support from ANY major Arab states in the region? The combination of the santions against Iraq, our support of Israel, and our extra long stay in Saudie Arabi have made America very unpopular. Turkey, Uzbek, and Tajikistan may be it. Egypt told us to go cry to the UN.
We may have the support of the governments, but no country at this point can really afford to be seen as helping America. The sentiment is so anti-american that there is a possibility of civil war in places that do assist us.
Let's face it.. we have never been successful in the ME. Clinton pulled most of our support channels in tha Caucus out of the region last year when they realized they could just drop an oil pipeline from Iran, to Russia, to Europe.
Personally, a full scale mulitary attack is useless. The people that are living there now might as well be Islam saints. As one clinton administration member said "When we bombed them last year, we bombed them UP to the stone age."
And one last thing.. lets say (for arguments sake) that the World Trade Center attack was an Irish suicide plot. Would we really hold the people of Ireland as responsible as we're holding the people of Afghanistan. Would France help us attack Ireland? Do you think the Germans would be harboring our men for an Attack like that? No, put it in our own perspective - and you can begin to understand the current perspective.
No government in their RIGHT MIND would be a launching base for the kind of open ended war we're talking about. If we're serious, then we should go carve out a little chunk of Afghanistan ourselves and do it from there.
Pan
At least in the federal courts, the judge can only hold you in court for as long as the grand jury is in session. (During indictment)
During a criminal case it is a couple of years, but I'm not sure.. Susan McDougle was in prison for a few years.
Pan
I guess you couldn't go get an FCC license, an FM exciter, and stick an antennae on a tower and play your song?
Yes there is a LOT of private censorship going on in the taste department. Not even "That'll be the day" survived.
But your rights have not been trampled. Switch stations. Do your own thing if you believe in it!
Pan
You may feel that religion is pervasive in and around this country. And it is, even more so today I suppose.
But is broadcasting government people engaging in religous ceremonies a constitutional problem? People are clamoring to see the President. If he wants to call a bunch of friends and co-workers to go to church, that's his business. It's not like you can't tear yourself away from the TV.
And even the President enjoys First Amendment protections to exercise his personal faith, right? (He's not writing laws to make people pray the Divine Mercy everyday at 3, or face Mecca at sundown).
Pan
8 plane tickets, 4 cell phones, and a few guns.
It's not about resources, dude. It's about fanatacism. People with a deep conviction in voilence are extremly dangerous. It only took a few guys to take out the OK building.
And there is no political or civil remedy. Sorry congress.. adding fire alarms to the titanic won't work this time.
pan
no nyuck nyuck today..
You've already missed it bub.
Pan
How can it be racist if both sides are hateful of the other. More like mutual hate.
1. I find it hard to live next to anybody that would publically tell children on freaking SESAME STREET to go and kill me.
2. If I were palistenian, I would refuse to work for jews that looked upon me as inferior and shuffled my family about like cattle.
In other words, I find no one in the middle east has any brains at all.
We all know various histories of the areas. There is no excuse for any of it. Both peoples have a fervent hate that is based on intolerance.
Tolerance is the core of freedom. The middle east will never be free until people learn to accept each other.. NO POLITICAL SOLUTION IS POSSIBLE. I do not mean that palestinians need to go to temple, and vice versa. I mean that people are free to practice their religion next door. Whether you like them or not.
Who wins the spiritual battle? Certainly not Allah or God.
Panaflex
Yeah, the stock setup kinda sucks. But some big points:
* Resizing disks is a breeze.
* The compiler and debuger is the BEST in the world. The errors are not as clear as gnu's.. but it catches more errors.
* Very responsive. HP-UX feels like molasis. (I used to run a bunch of K & D class machines.. I'd take a cheap alpha with raid anyday.)
But you're right.. the stock configuration does suck.
Pan
While you may feel one way or the other on the issue, calling the roughly 45-55% of the people in the USA known as conservatives in this country "a few" is a lie. (Big suprise, though)
I guess those "a few" get around..
Pan
Alot of people use Word Processors to make up brochures, newsletters, etc.. It is absolutly necessary.
Sometimes it's not necessary to crank up quark, you know..
Pan
But hey, if even daring to come up with an alternative image for God is insulting to you personally...
Waa waa waaa.. get off yer horse. If you wanna get personal, I wouldn't be nearly so nice.
Pan
I'm not saying that God didn't use murders, taxmen, and womenizers as tools.. but when they came to do God's work they worked in faith and respect. Kevin turns that on it's head..
It's really funny.. witty.. but it is not respectful.
Pan
Lets hope they get the compiler tools right this time... 7.0 couldn't even compile it's own darn kernel. Linus said you were a fool if you were using Redhat.
Well, I guess I'm a fool.. but I still use it quite a bit. (Mostly because it supports my laptop out of the box. and all it's associated pc cards).
Pan