I'm sitting at a CRT which is perfectly fine at 2048x1536 (except that I can only get 16-bit color, due to lack of bandwidth). Sony Trinitron Multiscan E400; I got mine used from work, but I don't think it was over $500 or so new when they got it.
Of course, I run it at 1280x1024 normally, but that's just because I like my 75dpi bitmapped fonts, and they're a bit too small to read at higher resolution (even though, if I look really closely, they're perfectly reproduced). I doubt it could go much higher, though, because the thin vertical lines from the trinitron grid will start getting in the way.
On the other hand, 1920x1600 is unusually square, so I'd guess an error of some sort (1920x1440 is more normal).
Re:Some calculations...
on
Hacking Vodka
·
· Score: 1
Actually, they spent $15 for the filter, $11.09 for 1.75L of the cheap vodka, and $11.99 for.35L of the Ketel One. That's $14.09/L for filtered and $34.25/L for Ketel One. You do get a discount on large bottles, but not that much of one (although the 1.75L bottle of Ketel One I have doesn't have a price tag any more). Even at $30 for a filter, you're talking $23.48/L.
On the other hand, this isn't a cheap source of small quantities of vodka (assuming that you don't keep the filter around for next time).
Seems to be like a SQL query with a "group by" clause, except that it's been make user friendly, so you need a whole book about it, and it also tries to deal with the fact that it's a spreadsheet and the data has been mangled accidentally by the user.
It doesn't matter if it takes a couple of days to do recounts; all the suspense is over on election night with the first count, unless something went dreadfully wrong, which shouldn't be expected to happen. If the recount turns out different, that's a big story for the next week, and the voting machine makers get in trouble. But the checking doesn't have to be complete for a month after the election.
For that matter, it would make sense to check over even elections where the results were clear, just to verify that the machines are working correctly.
The most likely factor in causing glaucoma is near-sightedness, which is most likely caused by spending long periods of time with your eyes focused close. So it doesn't matter what kind of screen you have. The important thing is to focus your eyes at a distance periodically. I suppose you could get a huge plasma screen and put it across the room, but it's probably best to just get in the habit of looking across the room while you think.
The quality of the monitor primarily affects whether you get headaches or not, because the flicker actually abuses your brain (which is, after all, what deals with it), not your eyes.
Owning historical documents must be at least potentially lucretive. The public record has some information, but there's a lot of explanation and commentary that only news articles have. Of course, people tend not to cite sources more extensively than in covered by fair use, and they can go to the LoC to look things up, so they don't really have to buy back-issues (assuming that they even could for most 1923 newspapers at this point), but it's still a possibility.
The New York times has free registration (and non-registration versions of the URLs) for current articles, but their archives require paying money.
My guess is that this is the first time that a company is trying to do a large-scale rollout quickly in FL, so they're hitting all of the problems with the maps. It sounds like they don't have a separate organization like DigSafe to read the maps and mark things, though, so the contractors have to try to do it themselves. Either that, or this is too big a project for the DigSafe-equivalent to handle at the speeds they're working.
Always having your eyes focused close tends to lead to nearsightedness, too, so this makes sense as a connection. Wearing glasses which correct nearsightedness obviously means that your eyes will be focused close even when you're looking at things far away.
A 15 minute walk twice a day without your glasses (or with glasses that undercorrect but let you avoid getting yourself killed) will help your health a lot if you have a sedentary, close-work job.
("People of shape"? As opposed to shapeless people?)
It doesn't seem to be mediocrity it tends to so much as inconsistency. In software, this would be fixed by making some constants, such that there is only one place in which each date is defined, and the text you see comes from inserting each date from the constants in the appropriate place. So changing Hamilton's birth year would change his ages at the times of each event automatically, without requiring the editor to change each one at the same time.
Likewise, it needs comments; text which is not of interest to the general reader, but which is important to potential editors. There is no need to state the contraversy over his birth year right at the beginning of the article, when the years of his life are given, and it is of limited significance to history exactly when he was born, but anyone who is thinking of changing dates or ages in the article ought to know to check sources for their choice of date, so that their information may be correctly interpreted for the purposes of the Wikipedia article.
I think that Wikipedia may be limited in its effectiveness by what amounts to flaws in the capabilities of the toolchain and (as other people have mentioned) flaws in the release process. If the content of articles all came from a minimal set of information, expanded at "compile-time" for presentation, and were the presentation adjusted to give weight to editorial approval in addition to recency, I suspect that Wikipedia could resolve these issues at least as successfully as paper encyclopedias (which are prohibited by space constraints from including the entire justification of the content).
Both editions of Applied Cryptography came out before AES. I remember reading the 2nd edition and then hearing about Twofish, and recognizing the name.
SCO did report that MS had bought a UNIX license (and withheld the name of the other company, which turned out to be Sun, which bought one). They claimed it as a success of their licensing program. So, while SCO has lied about practically everything else, this actually went their way (since MS actually wanted to fund them).
This whole thing has been based on a couple of grains of truth which, while they don't mean what SCO wants them to mean, can't be completely disregarded. If there weren't any truth to anything SCO says, the case would have been dismissed immediately. There's just not enough truth to what SCO says for them to get anywhere.
Now, when there's a cool, dry summer, that sets up the conditions for a stormy hurricane season. That also is bad for strawberry crops, which means that fresh strawberries are more expensive. Also, people spend the summer wanting to eat food that's a bit less dry. So towards the end of the summer, everybody wants to have some variety in their diet, and strawberry pop tarts are just the thing.
Bottled water, on the other hand, is popular at the same times for no reason other than that Wal-Mart puts it next to the strawberry pop tart display.
Now, frosted dutch apple pop tarts, on the other hand. I bet there's something you don't know about frosted dutch apple pop tarts...
On the other hand, this series of lawsuits will provide good income for Novell for a while. If Microsoft is going to keep settling all the time, we can fill in step 2:
2. Sue Microsoft and settle for 0.1% of their war chest.
It wasn't designed to be a book, either. It wasn't even designed to be a radio series. The first episode of it was designed to be an episode of a radio series about the world ending in different ways. Fortunately, Douglas Adams wasn't good at designing things; he was good at coming up with brilliant material. The thing about Douglas Adams is that he would turn out a lot of stuff that didn't fit together at all, and have a good editor make it into something that worked.
That's not to say that the movie will actually be done well. But HHGTTG is just about ideal for doing in different media, because it's really a set of characters and situations, not a story.
Some of us live next to the subways. Companies in suburban areas are a pain because you have to drive to them, which means you need a car, insurance, and somewhere to park it, or you have to deal with shuttle busses.
I agree that downtown isn't worth it, but edges of cities are far better than suburbs in some areas. It depends on where the good employees are likely to live in the area.
In the interview, he says that a lot of interesting mathematics is stuff that's been done by people already, but where the original discoverer didn't go far enough or didn't publish everything. He advocates looking at things that were worked on 150 years ago and then dropped.
Fractals are generally random. They show self-similarity, but the way in which they are not identical but similar is often unpredictable. (E.g., in a period of noise, there will be periods of signal with a certain distribution, but the particular points at which the periods occur and which samples from the distribution appear in a particular trial are unpredictable)
The Feigenbaum number is a bit like the normal distribution, in that is something about how statistics behave in the aggregate rather than depending on the system. The sum of a bunch of independant random variables from the same distribution converges to having a normal distribution as the number of variables goes to infinity, regardless of the original distribution. Similarly, a system with a single state variable and an output linearly proportional to a parameter will show period doublings and regions of chaos in a way governed by the Feigenbaum number. Of course, you've idealized the system to a constrained mathematical model before it behaves that way; it's a property of mathematical models, not a property of all systems.
Actually, he seems to say that no system ever works (of course, he just doesn't talk about any that do work, because they don't teach us as much). But his point is most frequently: you need to deal with every problem that is known to come up, so you have to look through the list of problems, and check on each one; having done everything that is strictly necessary, don't do anything else, because it probably won't work, and it might mess up the important stuff.
I don't think I've ever seen him say that retaining a phalanx of expensive security wonks s helpful. He's more likely to say, read the literature very carefully, find something that solves your problem exactly, and implement it precisely the way it's described. Also, don't trust any security wonk you can retain.
Counting is easy. But everything becomes extremely difficult when you have to do it once and do it right. Just getting a machine to work at all is tricky. It is set up correctly? Better put a ballot through to check. Okay, the numbers went up. But now it's not at zero. Have to reset it. Did it reset correctly? Better check with a real ballot. Oops, can't check the numbers after one real ballot, you shouldn't know how that person voted.
It's easy to make the machine count (not that it's easy to make a machine count to an unexpectedly high number, though). It's much harder to can the machine to count everything it should count, and not count anything it shouldn't count, and have any confidence that it can behave correctly if it shouldn't count anything other than a set of operations that only happen after you're done testing.
I'd bet that, in the precinct in Ohio that changed its tally after recounting the ballots, the error was that the machine contained test data and hadn't been reset. That's the value of having a journalling system, whether it's a database or a physical box of paper slips: if something is fishy (or even if you just want to be sure), you can replay the whole thing.
Hydrogen gas isn't generally produced from electricity. It's generally produced from crude oil. Then it's generally allowed to escape, because there's not yet enough demand to make it worth capturing. It's produced as a byproduct in the process of refining oil into gasoline.
(Actually, the hard part isn't producing hydrogen gas. It's separating the hydrogen sulfide which is produced along with hydrogen gas from sulfer-bearing impurities in the crude oil. Also dealing with the concentrated hydrogen sulfide you end up after removing it from the hydrogen gas mixture it was in.)
Perhaps the Hindenburg link isn't so inappropriate. Tanks of hydrogen gas are generally pretty safe. But it might not be such a good idea to store them near propellants. About the only major problem I could see with a hydrogen tank would be if there were a leak in it with a persistant fire outside the leak, which would probably cause a long jet of flame.
The hydrogen could be a hazard in that it is a pressurized gas, so it could form a jet and blowtorch the neighbor's house, rather than just turning the gas station into a raging inferno. Assuming, of course, you had something keeping the jet ignited.
Well, the LISP environment does have support for a few unusual things, like an X text widget and regular expressions. It's really a program that does nothing, with support for extensions, distributed with an extension for developing extensions. The IDE you think of as emacs is actually an extension written in elisp.
~1984 - Apple II+ ~1986 - XT (father's work was throwing it out) ~199? - 486 (CGA just wasn't sufficient any more) ~1995 - Pentium 90 (ditto VGA); this one is still running ~1997 - P166? (ex-girlfriend's moving sale) ~2000 - P233? (wife wanted us to have matching computers) ~2002 - P3 1GHz (ex-company's g-o-b sale)
Looking back on this, I've never upgraded to have a faster computer. I got a bunch of computers that were being discarded or sold by people I wanted to give some money to. I got new graphics cards and had them require new computers (back in the 90s).
The only time I actually had a new computer created for my personal use was the 486. My upgrades have been adding peripherals, replacing non-functioning peripherals, adding memory, and adding hard drives. I may buy myself a laptop one of these days, which will probably be new.
I still like the Cray-1 at the National Air and Space Museum, still in active use by visitors to the EE exhibit. Doesn't have much computing power by today's standards, but it has a much more comfortable interface than today's computers, especially after walking around museums all day...
Actually, emacs is a lean mean LISP interpreter. It just comes with a lot of extensions, which, between them, do everything. Of course, that doesn't matter too much if users can't tell.
I think Linux printing is ready, but just recently. That means that things don't come preconfigured to use CUPS yet, which means there's significant setup effort.
The way things go with Linux is that things start out unsupported. Then they get flawed support. After a bunch of development, the right solution is made, but it requires a lot of configuration to set everything up. Then it comes preconfigured and everything just works.
(When I started using Linux, in '96, in order to get X working, you had to write a mode line with the timings you wanted to get things just right. Then X started coming with mode lines for all the nice modes. Now you don't need mode lines at all; the server will come up with the right information itself. Imagine my surprised when my new X server, with nothing in the config file other than my monitor's capabilities (old monitor; new monitors report their own capabilities), instead of coming up in 1280x1024, came up in 2048x1536 because that's what it could do.)
Today you have to tell CUPS what your printer is. But tomorrow, you won't because the software will read/sys/bus/usb/drivers/usblp/*/../product, and look up the right info. Then it will look in/sys/class/printer.
The article is thinking in the microsoft way about getting drivers. Why should you have to click on an unsupported device in order to get a driver for it? Just try to use it and it should fetch (or build, or just load) a driver. If it doesn't know what the device is, it should use a cddb-like system to report the lack of support, and let users who get it working report what they did.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sitting at a CRT which is perfectly fine at 2048x1536 (except that I can only get 16-bit color, due to lack of bandwidth). Sony Trinitron Multiscan E400; I got mine used from work, but I don't think it was over $500 or so new when they got it.
Of course, I run it at 1280x1024 normally, but that's just because I like my 75dpi bitmapped fonts, and they're a bit too small to read at higher resolution (even though, if I look really closely, they're perfectly reproduced). I doubt it could go much higher, though, because the thin vertical lines from the trinitron grid will start getting in the way.
On the other hand, 1920x1600 is unusually square, so I'd guess an error of some sort (1920x1440 is more normal).
Actually, they spent $15 for the filter, $11.09 for 1.75L of the cheap vodka, and $11.99 for .35L of the Ketel One. That's $14.09/L for filtered and $34.25/L for Ketel One. You do get a discount on large bottles, but not that much of one (although the 1.75L bottle of Ketel One I have doesn't have a price tag any more). Even at $30 for a filter, you're talking $23.48/L.
On the other hand, this isn't a cheap source of small quantities of vodka (assuming that you don't keep the filter around for next time).
Seems to be like a SQL query with a "group by" clause, except that it's been make user friendly, so you need a whole book about it, and it also tries to deal with the fact that it's a spreadsheet and the data has been mangled accidentally by the user.
It doesn't matter if it takes a couple of days to do recounts; all the suspense is over on election night with the first count, unless something went dreadfully wrong, which shouldn't be expected to happen. If the recount turns out different, that's a big story for the next week, and the voting machine makers get in trouble. But the checking doesn't have to be complete for a month after the election.
For that matter, it would make sense to check over even elections where the results were clear, just to verify that the machines are working correctly.
The most likely factor in causing glaucoma is near-sightedness, which is most likely caused by spending long periods of time with your eyes focused close. So it doesn't matter what kind of screen you have. The important thing is to focus your eyes at a distance periodically. I suppose you could get a huge plasma screen and put it across the room, but it's probably best to just get in the habit of looking across the room while you think.
The quality of the monitor primarily affects whether you get headaches or not, because the flicker actually abuses your brain (which is, after all, what deals with it), not your eyes.
Owning historical documents must be at least potentially lucretive. The public record has some information, but there's a lot of explanation and commentary that only news articles have. Of course, people tend not to cite sources more extensively than in covered by fair use, and they can go to the LoC to look things up, so they don't really have to buy back-issues (assuming that they even could for most 1923 newspapers at this point), but it's still a possibility.
The New York times has free registration (and non-registration versions of the URLs) for current articles, but their archives require paying money.
My guess is that this is the first time that a company is trying to do a large-scale rollout quickly in FL, so they're hitting all of the problems with the maps. It sounds like they don't have a separate organization like DigSafe to read the maps and mark things, though, so the contractors have to try to do it themselves. Either that, or this is too big a project for the DigSafe-equivalent to handle at the speeds they're working.
And if there are any problems with adoption, they could call in the president of ISO, who knows a thing or two about units of measurement.
Always having your eyes focused close tends to lead to nearsightedness, too, so this makes sense as a connection. Wearing glasses which correct nearsightedness obviously means that your eyes will be focused close even when you're looking at things far away.
A 15 minute walk twice a day without your glasses (or with glasses that undercorrect but let you avoid getting yourself killed) will help your health a lot if you have a sedentary, close-work job.
("People of shape"? As opposed to shapeless people?)
It doesn't seem to be mediocrity it tends to so much as inconsistency. In software, this would be fixed by making some constants, such that there is only one place in which each date is defined, and the text you see comes from inserting each date from the constants in the appropriate place. So changing Hamilton's birth year would change his ages at the times of each event automatically, without requiring the editor to change each one at the same time.
Likewise, it needs comments; text which is not of interest to the general reader, but which is important to potential editors. There is no need to state the contraversy over his birth year right at the beginning of the article, when the years of his life are given, and it is of limited significance to history exactly when he was born, but anyone who is thinking of changing dates or ages in the article ought to know to check sources for their choice of date, so that their information may be correctly interpreted for the purposes of the Wikipedia article.
I think that Wikipedia may be limited in its effectiveness by what amounts to flaws in the capabilities of the toolchain and (as other people have mentioned) flaws in the release process. If the content of articles all came from a minimal set of information, expanded at "compile-time" for presentation, and were the presentation adjusted to give weight to editorial approval in addition to recency, I suspect that Wikipedia could resolve these issues at least as successfully as paper encyclopedias (which are prohibited by space constraints from including the entire justification of the content).
Both editions of Applied Cryptography came out before AES. I remember reading the 2nd edition and then hearing about Twofish, and recognizing the name.
SCO did report that MS had bought a UNIX license (and withheld the name of the other company, which turned out to be Sun, which bought one). They claimed it as a success of their licensing program. So, while SCO has lied about practically everything else, this actually went their way (since MS actually wanted to fund them).
This whole thing has been based on a couple of grains of truth which, while they don't mean what SCO wants them to mean, can't be completely disregarded. If there weren't any truth to anything SCO says, the case would have been dismissed immediately. There's just not enough truth to what SCO says for them to get anywhere.
Now, when there's a cool, dry summer, that sets up the conditions for a stormy hurricane season. That also is bad for strawberry crops, which means that fresh strawberries are more expensive. Also, people spend the summer wanting to eat food that's a bit less dry. So towards the end of the summer, everybody wants to have some variety in their diet, and strawberry pop tarts are just the thing.
Bottled water, on the other hand, is popular at the same times for no reason other than that Wal-Mart puts it next to the strawberry pop tart display.
Now, frosted dutch apple pop tarts, on the other hand. I bet there's something you don't know about frosted dutch apple pop tarts...
On the other hand, this series of lawsuits will provide good income for Novell for a while. If Microsoft is going to keep settling all the time, we can fill in step 2:
2. Sue Microsoft and settle for 0.1% of their war chest.
It wasn't designed to be a book, either. It wasn't even designed to be a radio series. The first episode of it was designed to be an episode of a radio series about the world ending in different ways. Fortunately, Douglas Adams wasn't good at designing things; he was good at coming up with brilliant material. The thing about Douglas Adams is that he would turn out a lot of stuff that didn't fit together at all, and have a good editor make it into something that worked.
That's not to say that the movie will actually be done well. But HHGTTG is just about ideal for doing in different media, because it's really a set of characters and situations, not a story.
(Oh, and it's already a TV miniseries)
Some of us live next to the subways. Companies in suburban areas are a pain because you have to drive to them, which means you need a car, insurance, and somewhere to park it, or you have to deal with shuttle busses.
I agree that downtown isn't worth it, but edges of cities are far better than suburbs in some areas. It depends on where the good employees are likely to live in the area.
In the interview, he says that a lot of interesting mathematics is stuff that's been done by people already, but where the original discoverer didn't go far enough or didn't publish everything. He advocates looking at things that were worked on 150 years ago and then dropped.
Fractals are generally random. They show self-similarity, but the way in which they are not identical but similar is often unpredictable. (E.g., in a period of noise, there will be periods of signal with a certain distribution, but the particular points at which the periods occur and which samples from the distribution appear in a particular trial are unpredictable)
The Feigenbaum number is a bit like the normal distribution, in that is something about how statistics behave in the aggregate rather than depending on the system. The sum of a bunch of independant random variables from the same distribution converges to having a normal distribution as the number of variables goes to infinity, regardless of the original distribution. Similarly, a system with a single state variable and an output linearly proportional to a parameter will show period doublings and regions of chaos in a way governed by the Feigenbaum number. Of course, you've idealized the system to a constrained mathematical model before it behaves that way; it's a property of mathematical models, not a property of all systems.
Actually, he seems to say that no system ever works (of course, he just doesn't talk about any that do work, because they don't teach us as much). But his point is most frequently: you need to deal with every problem that is known to come up, so you have to look through the list of problems, and check on each one; having done everything that is strictly necessary, don't do anything else, because it probably won't work, and it might mess up the important stuff.
I don't think I've ever seen him say that retaining a phalanx of expensive security wonks s helpful. He's more likely to say, read the literature very carefully, find something that solves your problem exactly, and implement it precisely the way it's described. Also, don't trust any security wonk you can retain.
Counting is easy. But everything becomes extremely difficult when you have to do it once and do it right. Just getting a machine to work at all is tricky. It is set up correctly? Better put a ballot through to check. Okay, the numbers went up. But now it's not at zero. Have to reset it. Did it reset correctly? Better check with a real ballot. Oops, can't check the numbers after one real ballot, you shouldn't know how that person voted.
It's easy to make the machine count (not that it's easy to make a machine count to an unexpectedly high number, though). It's much harder to can the machine to count everything it should count, and not count anything it shouldn't count, and have any confidence that it can behave correctly if it shouldn't count anything other than a set of operations that only happen after you're done testing.
I'd bet that, in the precinct in Ohio that changed its tally after recounting the ballots, the error was that the machine contained test data and hadn't been reset. That's the value of having a journalling system, whether it's a database or a physical box of paper slips: if something is fishy (or even if you just want to be sure), you can replay the whole thing.
Hydrogen gas isn't generally produced from electricity. It's generally produced from crude oil. Then it's generally allowed to escape, because there's not yet enough demand to make it worth capturing. It's produced as a byproduct in the process of refining oil into gasoline.
(Actually, the hard part isn't producing hydrogen gas. It's separating the hydrogen sulfide which is produced along with hydrogen gas from sulfer-bearing impurities in the crude oil. Also dealing with the concentrated hydrogen sulfide you end up after removing it from the hydrogen gas mixture it was in.)
Perhaps the Hindenburg link isn't so inappropriate. Tanks of hydrogen gas are generally pretty safe. But it might not be such a good idea to store them near propellants. About the only major problem I could see with a hydrogen tank would be if there were a leak in it with a persistant fire outside the leak, which would probably cause a long jet of flame.
The hydrogen could be a hazard in that it is a pressurized gas, so it could form a jet and blowtorch the neighbor's house, rather than just turning the gas station into a raging inferno. Assuming, of course, you had something keeping the jet ignited.
Well, the LISP environment does have support for a few unusual things, like an X text widget and regular expressions. It's really a program that does nothing, with support for extensions, distributed with an extension for developing extensions. The IDE you think of as emacs is actually an extension written in elisp.
~1984 - Apple II+
~1986 - XT (father's work was throwing it out)
~199? - 486 (CGA just wasn't sufficient any more)
~1995 - Pentium 90 (ditto VGA); this one is still running
~1997 - P166? (ex-girlfriend's moving sale)
~2000 - P233? (wife wanted us to have matching computers)
~2002 - P3 1GHz (ex-company's g-o-b sale)
Looking back on this, I've never upgraded to have a faster computer. I got a bunch of computers that were being discarded or sold by people I wanted to give some money to. I got new graphics cards and had them require new computers (back in the 90s).
The only time I actually had a new computer created for my personal use was the 486. My upgrades have been adding peripherals, replacing non-functioning peripherals, adding memory, and adding hard drives. I may buy myself a laptop one of these days, which will probably be new.
I still like the Cray-1 at the National Air and Space Museum, still in active use by visitors to the EE exhibit. Doesn't have much computing power by today's standards, but it has a much more comfortable interface than today's computers, especially after walking around museums all day...
Actually, emacs is a lean mean LISP interpreter. It just comes with a lot of extensions, which, between them, do everything. Of course, that doesn't matter too much if users can't tell.
I think Linux printing is ready, but just recently. That means that things don't come preconfigured to use CUPS yet, which means there's significant setup effort.
/sys/bus/usb/drivers/usblp/*/../product, and look up the right info. Then it will look in /sys/class/printer.
The way things go with Linux is that things start out unsupported. Then they get flawed support. After a bunch of development, the right solution is made, but it requires a lot of configuration to set everything up. Then it comes preconfigured and everything just works.
(When I started using Linux, in '96, in order to get X working, you had to write a mode line with the timings you wanted to get things just right. Then X started coming with mode lines for all the nice modes. Now you don't need mode lines at all; the server will come up with the right information itself. Imagine my surprised when my new X server, with nothing in the config file other than my monitor's capabilities (old monitor; new monitors report their own capabilities), instead of coming up in 1280x1024, came up in 2048x1536 because that's what it could do.)
Today you have to tell CUPS what your printer is. But tomorrow, you won't because the software will read
The article is thinking in the microsoft way about getting drivers. Why should you have to click on an unsupported device in order to get a driver for it? Just try to use it and it should fetch (or build, or just load) a driver. If it doesn't know what the device is, it should use a cddb-like system to report the lack of support, and let users who get it working report what they did.