I'm aware that Debian has two BSDs ports (NetBSD and FreeBSD), but they are far from maturity right now.
I'm not sure how you qualify a mature release. I have servers running FreeBSD getting millions of hits a day with uptime measured in YEARS. Yahoo has been running FreeBSD for years, as have many other promiment networks. I have 2.x and 5.x branches running and they both fly like the wind and are ultra stable.
However, it doesn't bother me when people question FreeBSD. It's kind of like visiting Seattle from California and asking a local about their city: "Oh, it's ok here, but you'd hate the rain - don't move up here... please, don't move here! You won't like it. Stay in L.A."
Along those lines, stick with Linux. This OS isn't for you. "These aren't the droids you're looking for." Leave us FreeBSD people alone and in peace and harmony. We like our sucky little OS and don't need for it to become the industry standard. It sucks anyway.. remember: "FreeBSD is DEAD."
The other day I got a call from my broker/investment banker. This is unfortunately not a joke. He tells me he got a strange call from some kid at the coffee shop around the corner telling him his wireless network was wide open as well as the hard drive on his machine. Apparently this guy's office is around the corner from a coffee shop and he just plugged in a wireless router and didn't do any configuration to it and everyone at the coffee house has been slurping down their drinks while slurping down his hard drive at the same time.
What pisses me off is that I'm not so stupid as to use wireless, but the integrity of my own personal information is often compromised because of stupid people who may have access to my information and aren't responsible with technology.
Well, I'm sorry but if I actually believed that any money I give would go to fight this and not all the other causes and parties who I know the ACLU supports that I'm sure to disagree with (especially in an election year) - then I would have opened up my checkbook in 5 seconds flat. One example that comes to mind... is the right to urinate on a crusifix on stage at the taxpayers expense - if anyone renembers that.
You obviously don't get it.
Do you think civil liberties are instantly taken away from the most upstanding citizens first? Civil liberties are chipped away in little fragments over time, and the first victims are often the fringe elements that nobody seems to care about protecting. But each transgression of any individuals' civil liberties takes away a little bit from all of us. While you don't seem to understand this, luckily the ACLU does, and wants to unconditionally protect the civil rights of everyone, and not just you and your little self-righteous sphere of self absorbsion.
Al Gore's speech last week touched on some of the issues here and I think he expressed them poignantly. Everyone should see this speech. video or audio.
"President Bush is claiming the unilateral right to do that to any American citizen he believes is an "enemy combatant." Those are the magic words. If the President alone decides that those two words accurately describe someone, then that person can be immediately locked up and held incommunicado for as long as the President wants, with no court having the right to determine whether the facts actually justify his imprisonment.
Now if the President makes a mistake, or is given faulty information by somebody working for him, and locks up the wrong person, then it's almost impossible for that person to prove his innocence - because he can't talk to a lawyer or his family or anyone else and he doesn't even have the right to know what specific crime he is accused of committing. So a constitutional right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness that we used to think of in an old-fashioned way as "inalienable" can now be instantly stripped from any American by the President with no meaningful review by any other branch of government.
How do we feel about that? Is that OK?
Here's another recent change in our civil liberties: Now, if it wants to, the federal government has the right to monitor every website you go to on the internet, keep a list of everyone you send email to or receive email from and everyone who you call on the telephone or who calls you - and they don't even have to show probable cause that you've done anything wrong. Nor do they ever have to report to any court on what they're doing with the information. Moreover, there are precious few safeguards to keep them from reading the content of all your email.
Everybody fine with that?
If so, what about this next change?
For America's first 212 years, it used to be that if the police wanted to search your house, they had to be able to convince an independent judge to give them a search warrant and then (with rare exceptions) they had to go bang on your door and yell, "Open up!" Then, if you didn't quickly open up, they could knock the door down. Also, if they seized anything, they had to leave a list explaining what they had taken. That way, if it was all a terrible mistake (as it sometimes is) you could go and get your stuff back.
But that's all changed now. Starting two years ago, federal agents were given broad new statutory authority by the Patriot Act to "sneak and peak" in non-terrorism cases. They can secretly enter your home with no warning - whether you are there or not - and they can wait for months before telling you they were there. And it doesn't have to have any relationship to terrorism whatsoever. It applies to any garden-variety crime. And the new law makes it very easy to get around the need for a traditional warrant - simply by saying that searching your house might have some connection (even a remote one) to the investigation of some agent of a foreign power. Then they can go to another court, a secret court, that more or less has to give them a warrant whenever they ask.
Three weeks ago, in a speech at FBI Headquarters, President Bush went even further and formally proposed that the Attorney General be allowed to authorize subpoenas by administrative order, without the need for a warrant from any court.
What about the right to consult a lawyer if you're arrested? Is that important?
Attorney General Ashcroft has issued regulations authorizing the secret monitoring of attorney-client conversations on his say-so alone; bypassing procedures for obtaining prior judicial review for such monitoring in the rare instances when it was permitted in the past. Now, whoever is in custody has to assume that the government is always listening to c
I appreciate what you're saying but the problem isn't with technology. It's with politics. Most spammers are breaking numerous laws, not the least of which are felony computer tampering laws when they use ghost proxies, and the larger problem is that the authorities don't seem that interested in going after them.
Content-based filtering is a waste of time. The only exception to that would be to write a spam filter that sends a message to your local Attorney General trying to educate him on the illegal activities of spammers each time you receive a spam.
You people are so filled with hatred and denial that even the truth ceases to matter to you.
Yes, we are all the same. We were cloned in a lab and we have monthly meetings where we connect our brains together in order to synchronize our thoughts and opinions. Now you know our secret!
Again, thank you for illuminating the way things really are and how legitimate and objective your perspective actually is.
As a performing musician and someone who's worked in the business managing bands and promoting shows and running web sites for major label acts, I can't honestly say I feel the industry has fundamentally changed in the last 10-20 years. It has changed, but this industry has *always been based on exploitation*. The nature of that exploitation has traditionally revolved around institutions exploiting artists. The only thing that's different nowadays is that the labels and the media have merged into one and are working as a single unit, whereas in the past, they were more disparate.
What's wrong with the business can be summed up in three words:
Clear Channel
Ticketmaster These two entities have almost single-handedly tied up the lion's share of performance and marketing of music. There's not any more exploitation or screwing over of musicians than they're used to be, but now the companies wield so much power & influence they can shut down popular acts that don't jive with their operating plan, and now they're more actively in the business of actually manufacturing formulaic product to foist on consumers.
Some things have changed in the business. Artists tend to make even less money proportionally and they have a harder time trying to find venues to play and promote their music. Monsters like Clear Channel won't put any controversial art in rotation, opting for shallow, characterless "boy bands" and "cute chicks". It appears your average person seems to eat the gruel they're feeding 'em but this undoubtedly is having an effect on music sales. People aren't excited about the art like they used to because there's very little art to it any more.
But there are still a lot of great bands out there. The problem is nobody knows about them because they have no radio stations to play their music and no decent clubs to book them. Without any means to promote their music, it's very hard to get started.
One equalizer to this problem could be the Internet, but as of yet, it hasn't matured as a competitive medium to the traditional music outlets. I'm one of those who really thinks that iTunes is overrated and a sham. Why pay the same price for more restrictive, lower-quality music? This is the same old business model that's been dumped on consumers: we'll give you what we think you want, not what you really want.
One good thing that's come out of all this is that in the last decade artists have come to accept that it's a necessity for them to control their own marketing and product distribution. The more artists that bypass traditional outlets, the more likely there can be some alternative to the totally boring product that corporate America is trying to force feed consumers.
But what's going on is just a symptom of a much larger sociological issue of art and creativity being considered unimportant, or secondary to the financial value of practicing such art.
Case in point: the other day CNN did a story on Madonna's new tour. The topic wasn't about her work. It was about how much money it's estimated she'll net from her tour and how powerful she is as a woman. The mainstream media seems to measure everything in dollars and this is undermining the basis of what art is really about. Even if you don't like Madonna, you have to cringe when you see the major media qualify artists exclusively in terms of their ability to make money.
Clear Channel currently owns over 722 radio stations and a few dozen tv stations. They're one of the biggest boosters of the Bush administration because of the monopoly-limiting regulatory rollbacks the republicans have perpetrated.
In my area, CC owns six radio stations. You won't hear any local music on any of them, and as a result, the whole local music industry is floundering because the main outlets for promoting music are dominated by a few big corporations.
One thing you can bet on. If Kerry gets in office, he's not going to let the media consolidation continue. That alone is reason enough to make sure Bush gets out, so that companies like Clear Channel can't end up owning a majority of the airwaves and then impose their will on everyone else.
One thing I've never looked into, is where the online qualifiers are for the WPT. Is this through some online casino? Which one? Do you have to play with real money or is it a fake game that the winners receive a WPT invite for?
Most people seem to think the ability to understand probability is why nerds excel at poker. If that were true, most nerds would recognize that probability-wise, they'd be better off not playing at all. This is one reason why many locals in Vegas don't like Comdex - many of the technical types don't gamble because they know better.
Technical people, especially programmers and mathematicians seem to be more adept at identifying patterns in otherwise chaotic sets of data. This works out well at the poker table in being able to spot when someone is on tilt or when they have a good hand.
I'm a big fan of the World Poker Tour. I think the show is extremely interesting and being able to see what cards the players have and how they play them really shows how inutitive and brilliant they are. Compare that with the Celebrity Poker show on Bravo where they act like idiots and make one stupid move after another and you can see there's a lot of skill involved in this game.
Not all water is the same. I can appreciate the frustration of seeing packaged water, but this stuff from Arkansas tastes better and is more "natural" IMO than most of the other "spring water" out there.
I recently decided to stop drinking soft drinks and go for water (Mountain Valley Spring Water), and I also noticed that I had much more concentration, my sleep schedule became more normalized and my attitude was generally more positive.
It's not just sugar. It's the myriad of chemicals that we put in our bodies in massive quantities that screw up our body chemistry. Dropping sugar may help with caloric intake, but it doesn't address the more serious problem that we're constantly poisoning our bodies with chemicals.
You don't have to be a vegan, but you can choose to shop where they sell meat and produce that isn't bathed in pesticides, antibiotics and other things.
...makes you wonder if during the discovery phase of such a trial, research might reveal even more underhandedness on the part of MS, so it was worth it for them to make it all go away.
The first alternative you can think about is to have separate IP ranges of filtered and unfiltered customers,
Absolutely right. And most ISPs with large IP space have been doing this for a long time. It's really quite easy to mass-block all the DUL IP space and then selectively whitelist people who might be caught in the RBL that are legitimate.
Comcast can rot in RBL hell until I get to ice skate across Satan's frozen backside.
Those of you who want to run your own legitimate SMTP server, do yourself a favor and dump Comcast and get a decent ISP. The same goes for Ameritech, TDE and SWB.
I blocked most of Comcast's DUL SMTP traffic a long time ago. I don't care what they do now. It's too late. Any good mail admin at this point, has a very decent list of IP blocks for DUL/Broadband that shouldn't be allowed to send port 25 traffic. Comcast can bite me.
RBLs like Sorbs have been great at shutting down the Comcast zombie army. And now a year later they finally want to do something about it? Screw 'em. If you are using Comcast for business internet, you're still going to be screwed because nobody wants to deal with the crap traffic that Comcast can't control, and I'm certainly not un blacklisting their IP space.
you're right, we shouldn't address his work based on his girth. moore's crockumentary* has no merit because it's a lying piece of shit. his words become meaningless the minute he decides to defend them by asking why you need to find fact in "comedy." his poor man's savior facade is killed when you look at how much he charges to speak, the planes he demands he fly on, the hotels he requires he stay in and when he charges the parents of children kill in columbine to prescreen his film he makes about them. moore is a piece of shit and nothing more.
And then again, maybe we'd be in an even bigger mess. Maybe we'd have invaded China by now. Maybe Mexico would be an American Territory. Be careful what you wish for, and try not to be so elitist, it's beneath you.
Maybe aliens might invade earth and turn us all into cabbages too. That is no excuse to condone apathy IMO.
Considering how successful Mel Gibson's pro-Catholic epic torturefest, "The Passion" did in theatres, it will be interesting to see if this is a new trend: people using the theater as a means of subsidizing the political agendas they support.
Can we expect the box receipts for F911 to reflect the public's support of domestic regime change?
If you think about it, Moore's movie may have the capacity to outsell The Passion in box office receipts. This would be a very strong signal politically and socially. As a result, it seems there would be some substantive incentive to keep his movie out of theaters in the United States.
It also brings up another interesting paradox, money vs politics. There is undoubtedly a ton of money involved in this film's potential. Will money or political ideology win out in corporate America relating to the distribution and press coverage?
F911 is just a movie. And its content may be thought-provoking and controversial, but I think even more telling will be the treatment this film receives in the press, and the reaction of the populace should the film be made available domestically.
Slashdot Mirror
FreeBSD is dead. It's all dead. These aren't the droids you're looking for.
I'm aware that Debian has two BSDs ports (NetBSD and FreeBSD), but they are far from maturity right now.
I'm not sure how you qualify a mature release. I have servers running FreeBSD getting millions of hits a day with uptime measured in YEARS. Yahoo has been running FreeBSD for years, as have many other promiment networks. I have 2.x and 5.x branches running and they both fly like the wind and are ultra stable.
However, it doesn't bother me when people question FreeBSD. It's kind of like visiting Seattle from California and asking a local about their city: "Oh, it's ok here, but you'd hate the rain - don't move up here... please, don't move here! You won't like it. Stay in L.A."
Along those lines, stick with Linux. This OS isn't for you. "These aren't the droids you're looking for." Leave us FreeBSD people alone and in peace and harmony. We like our sucky little OS and don't need for it to become the industry standard. It sucks anyway.. remember: "FreeBSD is DEAD."
Unless someone has their own antenna.
Or likes Pringles.
The other day I got a call from my broker/investment banker. This is unfortunately not a joke. He tells me he got a strange call from some kid at the coffee shop around the corner telling him his wireless network was wide open as well as the hard drive on his machine. Apparently this guy's office is around the corner from a coffee shop and he just plugged in a wireless router and didn't do any configuration to it and everyone at the coffee house has been slurping down their drinks while slurping down his hard drive at the same time.
What pisses me off is that I'm not so stupid as to use wireless, but the integrity of my own personal information is often compromised because of stupid people who may have access to my information and aren't responsible with technology.
Well, I'm sorry but if I actually believed that any money I give would go to fight this and not all the other causes and parties who I know the ACLU supports that I'm sure to disagree with (especially in an election year) - then I would have opened up my checkbook in 5 seconds flat. One example that comes to mind ... is the right to urinate on a crusifix on stage at the taxpayers expense - if anyone renembers that.
You obviously don't get it.
Do you think civil liberties are instantly taken away from the most upstanding citizens first? Civil liberties are chipped away in little fragments over time, and the first victims are often the fringe elements that nobody seems to care about protecting. But each transgression of any individuals' civil liberties takes away a little bit from all of us. While you don't seem to understand this, luckily the ACLU does, and wants to unconditionally protect the civil rights of everyone, and not just you and your little self-righteous sphere of self absorbsion.
Al Gore's speech last week touched on some of the issues here and I think he expressed them poignantly. Everyone should see this speech. video or audio.
"President Bush is claiming the unilateral right to do that to any American citizen he believes is an "enemy combatant." Those are the magic words. If the President alone decides that those two words accurately describe someone, then that person can be immediately locked up and held incommunicado for as long as the President wants, with no court having the right to determine whether the facts actually justify his imprisonment.
Now if the President makes a mistake, or is given faulty information by somebody working for him, and locks up the wrong person, then it's almost impossible for that person to prove his innocence - because he can't talk to a lawyer or his family or anyone else and he doesn't even have the right to know what specific crime he is accused of committing. So a constitutional right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness that we used to think of in an old-fashioned way as "inalienable" can now be instantly stripped from any American by the President with no meaningful review by any other branch of government.
How do we feel about that? Is that OK?
Here's another recent change in our civil liberties: Now, if it wants to, the federal government has the right to monitor every website you go to on the internet, keep a list of everyone you send email to or receive email from and everyone who you call on the telephone or who calls you - and they don't even have to show probable cause that you've done anything wrong. Nor do they ever have to report to any court on what they're doing with the information. Moreover, there are precious few safeguards to keep them from reading the content of all your email.
Everybody fine with that?
If so, what about this next change?
For America's first 212 years, it used to be that if the police wanted to search your house, they had to be able to convince an independent judge to give them a search warrant and then (with rare exceptions) they had to go bang on your door and yell, "Open up!" Then, if you didn't quickly open up, they could knock the door down. Also, if they seized anything, they had to leave a list explaining what they had taken. That way, if it was all a terrible mistake (as it sometimes is) you could go and get your stuff back.
But that's all changed now. Starting two years ago, federal agents were given broad new statutory authority by the Patriot Act to "sneak and peak" in non-terrorism cases. They can secretly enter your home with no warning - whether you are there or not - and they can wait for months before telling you they were there. And it doesn't have to have any relationship to terrorism whatsoever. It applies to any garden-variety crime. And the new law makes it very easy to get around the need for a traditional warrant - simply by saying that searching your house might have some connection (even a remote one) to the investigation of some agent of a foreign power. Then they can go to another court, a secret court, that more or less has to give them a warrant whenever they ask.
Three weeks ago, in a speech at FBI Headquarters, President Bush went even further and formally proposed that the Attorney General be allowed to authorize subpoenas by administrative order, without the need for a warrant from any court.
What about the right to consult a lawyer if you're arrested? Is that important?
Attorney General Ashcroft has issued regulations authorizing the secret monitoring of attorney-client conversations on his say-so alone; bypassing procedures for obtaining prior judicial review for such monitoring in the rare instances when it was permitted in the past. Now, whoever is in custody has to assume that the government is always listening to c
I appreciate what you're saying but the problem isn't with technology. It's with politics. Most spammers are breaking numerous laws, not the least of which are felony computer tampering laws when they use ghost proxies, and the larger problem is that the authorities don't seem that interested in going after them.
Content-based filtering is a waste of time. The only exception to that would be to write a spam filter that sends a message to your local Attorney General trying to educate him on the illegal activities of spammers each time you receive a spam.
You people are so filled with hatred and denial that even the truth ceases to matter to you.
Yes, we are all the same. We were cloned in a lab and we have monthly meetings where we connect our brains together in order to synchronize our thoughts and opinions. Now you know our secret!
Again, thank you for illuminating the way things really are and how legitimate and objective your perspective actually is.
Now if only ICANN had an evil lair in the middle of the Pacific ocean they'd rock!
Thank goodness we now have Java. Before Java nobody could write any portable applications. /cheer Sun
political propaganda... if you're going reference Kerry, reference his voting record, not some polarized editorial
As a performing musician and someone who's worked in the business managing bands and promoting shows and running web sites for major label acts, I can't honestly say I feel the industry has fundamentally changed in the last 10-20 years. It has changed, but this industry has *always been based on exploitation*. The nature of that exploitation has traditionally revolved around institutions exploiting artists. The only thing that's different nowadays is that the labels and the media have merged into one and are working as a single unit, whereas in the past, they were more disparate.
What's wrong with the business can be summed up in three words:
Clear Channel
Ticketmaster
These two entities have almost single-handedly tied up the lion's share of performance and marketing of music. There's not any more exploitation or screwing over of musicians than they're used to be, but now the companies wield so much power & influence they can shut down popular acts that don't jive with their operating plan, and now they're more actively in the business of actually manufacturing formulaic product to foist on consumers.
Some things have changed in the business. Artists tend to make even less money proportionally and they have a harder time trying to find venues to play and promote their music. Monsters like Clear Channel won't put any controversial art in rotation, opting for shallow, characterless "boy bands" and "cute chicks". It appears your average person seems to eat the gruel they're feeding 'em but this undoubtedly is having an effect on music sales. People aren't excited about the art like they used to because there's very little art to it any more.
But there are still a lot of great bands out there. The problem is nobody knows about them because they have no radio stations to play their music and no decent clubs to book them. Without any means to promote their music, it's very hard to get started.
One equalizer to this problem could be the Internet, but as of yet, it hasn't matured as a competitive medium to the traditional music outlets. I'm one of those who really thinks that iTunes is overrated and a sham. Why pay the same price for more restrictive, lower-quality music? This is the same old business model that's been dumped on consumers: we'll give you what we think you want, not what you really want.
One good thing that's come out of all this is that in the last decade artists have come to accept that it's a necessity for them to control their own marketing and product distribution. The more artists that bypass traditional outlets, the more likely there can be some alternative to the totally boring product that corporate America is trying to force feed consumers.
But what's going on is just a symptom of a much larger sociological issue of art and creativity being considered unimportant, or secondary to the financial value of practicing such art.
Case in point: the other day CNN did a story on Madonna's new tour. The topic wasn't about her work. It was about how much money it's estimated she'll net from her tour and how powerful she is as a woman. The mainstream media seems to measure everything in dollars and this is undermining the basis of what art is really about. Even if you don't like Madonna, you have to cringe when you see the major media qualify artists exclusively in terms of their ability to make money.
Clear Channel currently owns over 722 radio stations and a few dozen tv stations. They're one of the biggest boosters of the Bush administration because of the monopoly-limiting regulatory rollbacks the republicans have perpetrated.
In my area, CC owns six radio stations. You won't hear any local music on any of them, and as a result, the whole local music industry is floundering because the main outlets for promoting music are dominated by a few big corporations.
One thing you can bet on. If Kerry gets in office, he's not going to let the media consolidation continue. That alone is reason enough to make sure Bush gets out, so that companies like Clear Channel can't end up owning a majority of the airwaves and then impose their will on everyone else.
One thing I've never looked into, is where the online qualifiers are for the WPT. Is this through some online casino? Which one? Do you have to play with real money or is it a fake game that the winners receive a WPT invite for?
Most people seem to think the ability to understand probability is why nerds excel at poker. If that were true, most nerds would recognize that probability-wise, they'd be better off not playing at all. This is one reason why many locals in Vegas don't like Comdex - many of the technical types don't gamble because they know better.
Technical people, especially programmers and mathematicians seem to be more adept at identifying patterns in otherwise chaotic sets of data. This works out well at the poker table in being able to spot when someone is on tilt or when they have a good hand.
I'm a big fan of the World Poker Tour. I think the show is extremely interesting and being able to see what cards the players have and how they play them really shows how inutitive and brilliant they are. Compare that with the Celebrity Poker show on Bravo where they act like idiots and make one stupid move after another and you can see there's a lot of skill involved in this game.
Not all water is the same. I can appreciate the frustration of seeing packaged water, but this stuff from Arkansas tastes better and is more "natural" IMO than most of the other "spring water" out there.
I agree with you but why stop there?
I recently decided to stop drinking soft drinks and go for water (Mountain Valley Spring Water), and I also noticed that I had much more concentration, my sleep schedule became more normalized and my attitude was generally more positive.
It's not just sugar. It's the myriad of chemicals that we put in our bodies in massive quantities that screw up our body chemistry. Dropping sugar may help with caloric intake, but it doesn't address the more serious problem that we're constantly poisoning our bodies with chemicals.
You don't have to be a vegan, but you can choose to shop where they sell meat and produce that isn't bathed in pesticides, antibiotics and other things.
...makes you wonder if during the discovery phase of such a trial, research might reveal even more underhandedness on the part of MS, so it was worth it for them to make it all go away.
The first alternative you can think about is to have separate IP ranges of filtered and unfiltered customers,
Absolutely right. And most ISPs with large IP space have been doing this for a long time. It's really quite easy to mass-block all the DUL IP space and then selectively whitelist people who might be caught in the RBL that are legitimate.
This is also very effective in the /etc/access:
n nect:24.1. 4
connect:68.40 550 Comcast sucks
connect:68.41 "
connect:68.42
connect:68.43
connect:24.0
co
connect:24.2
connect:24.3
connect:24
connect:24.13
connect:24.18
My thoughts exactly!
Comcast can rot in RBL hell until I get to ice skate across Satan's frozen backside.
Those of you who want to run your own legitimate SMTP server, do yourself a favor and dump Comcast and get a decent ISP. The same goes for Ameritech, TDE and SWB.
I blocked most of Comcast's DUL SMTP traffic a long time ago. I don't care what they do now. It's too late. Any good mail admin at this point, has a very decent list of IP blocks for DUL/Broadband that shouldn't be allowed to send port 25 traffic. Comcast can bite me.
RBLs like Sorbs have been great at shutting down the Comcast zombie army. And now a year later they finally want to do something about it? Screw 'em. If you are using Comcast for business internet, you're still going to be screwed because nobody wants to deal with the crap traffic that Comcast can't control, and I'm certainly not un blacklisting their IP space.
you're right, we shouldn't address his work based on his girth. moore's crockumentary* has no merit because it's a lying piece of shit. his words become meaningless the minute he decides to defend them by asking why you need to find fact in "comedy." his poor man's savior facade is killed when you look at how much he charges to speak, the planes he demands he fly on, the hotels he requires he stay in and when he charges the parents of children kill in columbine to prescreen his film he makes about them. moore is a piece of shit and nothing more.
perl -e 's/fat/rich/gi' *
LAME
And then again, maybe we'd be in an even bigger mess. Maybe we'd have invaded China by now. Maybe Mexico would be an American Territory. Be careful what you wish for, and try not to be so elitist, it's beneath you.
Maybe aliens might invade earth and turn us all into cabbages too. That is no excuse to condone apathy IMO.
This brings up a very provacative scenario.
Considering how successful Mel Gibson's pro-Catholic epic torturefest, "The Passion" did in theatres, it will be interesting to see if this is a new trend: people using the theater as a means of subsidizing the political agendas they support.
Can we expect the box receipts for F911 to reflect the public's support of domestic regime change?
If you think about it, Moore's movie may have the capacity to outsell The Passion in box office receipts. This would be a very strong signal politically and socially. As a result, it seems there would be some substantive incentive to keep his movie out of theaters in the United States.
It also brings up another interesting paradox, money vs politics. There is undoubtedly a ton of money involved in this film's potential. Will money or political ideology win out in corporate America relating to the distribution and press coverage?
F911 is just a movie. And its content may be thought-provoking and controversial, but I think even more telling will be the treatment this film receives in the press, and the reaction of the populace should the film be made available domestically.