LOL. Yes, as we all know in Canada, if you don't live in London, Toronto, Windsor or Ottawa (read *Ontario*), then you're living in the country. After all, the fact that Vancouver is second in size only to Toronto is irrelevant... poor BC folk need to keep living without DSL... and those unfortunate people in Calgary, Edmonton, Saskatoon, Winnipeg, Regina, Montreal, Hull, Halifax, etc. they have no high-speed access in sight.
A lot of Canada (outside of Ontario - self-proclaimed centre of the universe) has DSL, whether you're willing to admit it or not. Alberta is supposedly even installing thousands of kms of fibre through a government program to get all schools on high-speed, even the ones in the middle of nowhere. Especially the ones in the middle of nowhere.
Wind turbines produce a LOT of sound energy at subsonic frequencies - primarily number-of-blades times revolutions-per-second and harmonics of that.
Regarding the frequencies, I can't see those things running any faster than 100-200 rpm. With 3 to 5 fans that's about 1 kHz and less (with associated harmonics).
Can't see that being very comfortable... Imagine having to live in an apartment with one of those 'subwoofer' vests for PC games on all of the time. Ouch.
Aie. Sorry. Forgot to give the actual reason. Only gave the result. I apologize.
Smart move. Reason why? Campus-wide depression of students and staff began to rise, and the number of suicides went up. Not dramatically, but up, nonetheless.
The reason was because the tunnel and fans made this horrible moaning sound when the wind was blowing (i.e. all the time), and this led to there being an increased amount of people with depression. Continuous exposure to the sound seemed to drive people loopy.
Again, sorry for not including this in the main post. Bad posting technique, I know.
I have noticed a few posts so far mentioning how a lot of sound might be generated from the fans, and more posts dismissing the idea, although they have provided no corroboration.
I cannot provide any links as corroboration for what I am about to add to this discussion, other than I know that is true. You are free to accept it as you will.
Those fans are not going to run at any high speed. They will most likely be 300 rpm or lower. That means low frequency hums, growls and vibrations. Remember sound can also be transmitted through attached structures as vibration.
My point is that sound is going to be generated, regardless of how well they are designed. Case in point...
The town of Lethbridge is located in Alberta, Canada, just north of the U.S. border. It is an extremely windy city, and has a university - the University of Lethbridge. There is a spot on campus that had wind funneling through it all year round, so they decided to install some fans to generate power.
Smart move. Reason why?
Campus-wide depression of students and staff began to rise, and the number of suicides went up. Not dramatically, but up, nonetheless.
As one poster has mentioned already (re: the epileptic seizures) - you never know the full effects of implementing a technology until it goes in, no matter how you try to 'plan' for it.
If people in this wonderful land were allowed to defend themselves, she'd put a hole in his head when he came 'round and that would be the end of the useless sack-of-shit.
But she can't. So she won't. She won't even be allowed to buy a can of pepper spray to defend herself from him, because she has to sign a legal notice at purchase time saying she will never use it on a human being.
Canada
The country where you are trained to take it. Whether from your fellow man or from your government.
... because they are too concerned with making everyone responsible for crimes that they will never commit.
That is what the suspension of rights is all about. The U.S. has the right idea:
If someone breaks the law, they are punished.
This is the essence of the libertarian view of government. People should be allowed to do whatever they want as long as they do not harm others. They should not be attacked by privacy-intruding devices all of their life that verify they do not harm people.
They should be knocked if they step out of line. NOT for merely existing.
Alright, Canadians. It's time to make ourselves heard. I've seen post after post bemoaning the fact that most of the people concerned about the DMCA in the U.S. never said anything when they could have. And this is usually accompanied with a bunch of hand-wringing and 'if only I had...'.
Get your asses in gear. Now's the time to make sure that the uninformed bureaucrat receiving submissions has heard the whole story. And we'll have no one to blame but ourselves if they don't find out.
However, if they listen to what we all say and throw it out the window, that will just be our wonderful Canadian 'democratic' system in action. Hehe.
Velcome to fife more yearz of zee Reich! Thank goodness zee citizens haff a week-long memory!
Hi, Jamie. Hopefully I'm asking something that is up your alley and isn't too terribly off-topic...
Do you see the possibility of a large, unified force in technology activism in the current lobbyist environment?
I have noted that, for the most part, those attempting to promote innovation and free exchange of ideas throughout all research and industry seem to have their own agenda. They often have many of the same viewpoints and would pull together if they would allow some of their views to take a backseat to a concerted, unified effort.
There are a lot of people that have been able to organize themselves into groups, but still grasp divisive issues as defining who they are. Instead they should 'gang up' and try seeing how their numbers can make an impact...
A good example of this divisiveness is Slashdot. Most of the people that browse and are coherently active on this site believe that greater competition in the marketplace is a very good thing. Yet they continue to split themselves up into 'factions' (i.e. Mac, Linux, Unix, BSD, etc.) without seeing that any choice but the one that they oppose (Microsoft, for instance) should be a step in the right direction.
Most of the root posts I'm reading here essentially say the following:
People are too smart for AMD to have to dumb down their processor ratings. Consumers
already know the difference. AMD should not be: a) treating their customers like idiots, and b) trying such a stupid marketing tactic to get more sales or exposure than Intel.
I guess my subject line is a really nice way of saying you guys don't get out much. Who the hell are you kidding?
The reason that there are marketing departments is because people are sheep. Every huge corporation in the world depends on it. If people weren't sheep, they wouldn't pull all of the shit that they do. Why do you think Intel has been trumpeting their '2 GHz' speed capability so loud, despite the fact that core clock is becoming extremely distant from the actual throughput of a processor?
Answer: people are dumb.
Be happy that you're actually sitting there thinking about the issue, regardless of which 'side' you are on, because most everyone else isn't.
I like the way he claims a 90% success rate. Either the researcher is a moron or else the person writing the article has already beaten him there.
What if there were three encrypted messages in each image he processed? Finding one is useless, because the sender could put an easy message in and two extra that won't get caught.
Better yet: his algorithm could be giving him garbage hits and not be finding anything real. The pictures could be just pictures. Novel concept.
... in your list of 'snot-nosed kids' that supposedly do not believe in God. You're probably trolling *grin* so I'm not really taking your post seriously. I will only mention a few errors:
Charles Robert Darwin
Darwin took part in the voyage to the Galapogos Islands in his (very) early years. Toward the latter part of his life, however, after all of the detailed experimentation that he had done, he publicly refuted his own results. He became a Christian during his middle age, published critical analyses of those carrying on his early work on evolution and attempted to inform the public of the errors in his early conclusions. Predicably, there was no publicity given to the release of his newest papers.
Charles Schultz
Anyone who considers Charles Schultz an atheist is mistaken. Schultz was unabashedly Christian. He made Christian references throughout the entire time he was creating Peanuts. He included his viewpoint when others thought he would totally destroy his readership due to a lack of popular support.
Next time, you might want to try and look into the history underlying your assumptions, instead of just picking a bunch of names from M$ Encarta.
I guess it's probably who you talk to (at Shaw) and what mood they're in at the time.
I think that it's pretty tricky conducting your dealings with any utility in this fashion. You can talk to anyone from the company at any time and they will tell you a lot of interesting things - but they will never admit to any of them later. They will not send you an affirmation of the same in writing and will flatly deny informing you that your actions were allowable by company policy.
The rule for ISP online support (as far as I have seen to this point) seems to be 'play it by the book' if you haven't been involved with a particular client before. And if the client gets a different person for support the next time they phone, then they will get nailed by someone using the 'number one rule' by default.
Wingate is not a supported product, since our staff are not certified by the manufacturer. If we discover you are using Wingate on our network, your connection will be temporarily disconnected.
This is also taken from the ToS - in the next paragraph, if you had cared to continue reading. Do you honestly think that they are going to prohibit one proxy program and allow Winproxy/NAT/etc.? That means they are all prohibited.
And when they say
You are also responsible for maintaining your network.
it means that you are responsible for taking care of the network implied by buying extra IPs from them. You are allowed to hook 3 PCs up to one cablemodem, but only if you have purchased 2 additional IPs.
IP masquerading is still not prohibited, meaning that you can run an Internet gateway using Linux or some other system and have an internal network use it as a gateway to the Internet. @Home only allows two extra IPs, as far as I know, and I think they would prefer to use those IPs on more customers, though I could be wrong.
Actually, in Calgary (Alberta, Canada) Shaw@Home has already killed this. IP masq, proxies, etc is prohibited in their ToS. They have also disallowed all servers on their client machines. And they will come after you - it has already started happening.
Actually, Shaw@Home expressly prohibits running any servers on their network. See this link to their Service Agreement for more info.
Personally, I have already had trouble with Shaw, but I was able to get around their bungling. I did drop running my servers, but I'm not very impressed with their new ToS. Thankfully Calgary has 4+ high-speed ISP alternatives.
Fortunately, though, Debian (which is the only true Linux out there) still costs $0 to install/use from the 'net. And the CDs, from www.cheapbytes.com for instance, are little more than what blanks would cost ($7 US for two CDs).
Since Debian has its roots in the GNU project, and is the only GNU distribution of Linux (and therefore entirely open-source/free), it would lead me to consider it the best choice out of all the Linux distros.
...simply too complicated to use and maintain for an average home user and that`s why we need Windows...
I think we need a translation of what you're really trying to say:
...simply too complicated for me to use and maintain, and that's why I need Windows to make a post to a/. thread that has more spelling mistakes than discrete words...
Windows and Linux both 'target' the same market, insofar as Linux can target anything, considering it's give-away-ware. Anything that you do in Windows with your chicken-peck typing can be done better in Linux.
While the Religion of Science continues to mask its tracks behind the rhetoric, the whole Kansas issue underscores something blatant and simple about the whole argument: That the Origins of the Universe are a philosophical, not scientific issue.
Thank you for making a post that states this distinction. The first step in maintaining a discussion on this issue is the realization of this point being the basis of the conflict. I'm not saying that there should be a conflict - there is one already. And so the philosophical basis of the argument needs to be emphasized, rather then a factual 'Tag, you're it!' approach.
Actually, the Coppermines have the cache right on the die, and they produce far less heat than the Slot-1 solutions. If Intel was only worried about the amount of heat, they would have automatically gone to PGA. They must be having a problem with yields or else they must not have the technical acumen to produce any super-high-clock-speed chips anymore.
You must be a Delta or something. And that's a compliment.
Brave New World has everything to do with this issue. I have read it several times and the idea, not the method, is what makes it a very important window into the potential future.
In the novel, society has changed to a point that humans are grown for a certain purpose, and there is no responsibility inherent in choosing to bring a child into the world with another person. In fact, the lifestyle and culture is entirely based upon this one fact:
You, as a member of society, are not responsible for anything and never will be.
This is the essence of the similarity between the present time and that book. As a matter of fact, right now (not in the near future when pre-pregnancy gene testing has begun) people can see what the entire genetic makeup of their child is before they have to call it a child. And that is why they do not have any responsibility, as in the novel. They can change their mind and there is no physical record of their choice. If someone on the 'human assembly line' in BNW decided to empty one of the tubes, there would be no record of that choice.
When someone gets a genetic readout of what their offspring will be like, and uses this as a basis for whether they will have children, then he or she is performing the same action as those that performed the alterations to the testtubes in BNW.
The only thing that annoys me more than Americans who spout off incorrect garbage about Canada are Canadians who spout off incorrect garbage about Canada.
Such as yourself? I am Canadian and I take umbrage to the inflammatory claims that you make in your post.
The following comment describes what actually happened when Trudeau decided he wanted to 'repatriate' a constitution for Canada:
The Canadian constitition has no protection for individual or property rights. That is why Trudeau made such a big fuss about repatriating the constitition from the BNA, which was bound to British common law. He wanted a collective and group oriented, deliberately vague document that would require judicial interpretation by an appointed Supreme Court.
And the fact that all courts in Canada are appointed effectively removed the power from the people and placed it in the hands of the bureaucracy. Consider, for a moment, what this would entail when legislation is passed that the courts consider 'wrong'. They now have a full veto - and they are never accountable to the people.
This is why many in the United States point to Canada when they are concerned about eroding freedoms and the suspension of rights in America. We are a perfect example of what will happen to the U.S. if the citizens do not continue to watch their governing powers like a hawk. Fortunately, the government in the U.S. has far more checks and balances.
As far as I am concerned, the fact that the American Constitution makes it extremely hard to remove free speech (in that it was written from the opposite perspective as the Canadian Constitution) is the reason that the U.S. has the most truly democratic Constitution in the world.
And this statement of yours also conveys the sad truth about the condition of Canada in general:
...our rights were granted to us in a more enlightened manner...
I think that says it all. The American Constitution was formed by a group of Revolutionaries with a violent declaration of what they believed that they were worth. They knew what living underneath an oppressive government meant, and they constructed the nation with all of its checks and balances because they did not want America to turn out that way.
Therefore, if America began with that bang, then Canada began with a whimper. For we timidly said 'Um, we would like to start a country' and then "our rights were granted to us".
Unfortunately, our "enlightened" view of the world includes having a huge bureaucracy legislate every detail of society, because we didn't start the country by breaking free from an oppressive regime. We brought it with us. And it granted us whatever rights that it saw fit.
Take notice, citizens of the United States. Watch the U.K., Canada and Australia if you would like to see 'democratic' ineptitude in action. And make sure that it doesn't happen to you...
Slashdot Mirror
LOL. Yes, as we all know in Canada, if you don't live in London, Toronto, Windsor or Ottawa (read *Ontario*), then you're living in the country. After all, the fact that Vancouver is second in size only to Toronto is irrelevant
A lot of Canada (outside of Ontario - self-proclaimed centre of the universe) has DSL, whether you're willing to admit it or not. Alberta is supposedly even installing thousands of kms of fibre through a government program to get all schools on high-speed, even the ones in the middle of nowhere. Especially the ones in the middle of nowhere.
Rock
Regarding the frequencies, I can't see those things running any faster than 100-200 rpm. With 3 to 5 fans that's about 1 kHz and less (with associated harmonics).
Can't see that being very comfortable... Imagine having to live in an apartment with one of those 'subwoofer' vests for PC games on all of the time. Ouch.
Rock
Aie. Sorry. Forgot to give the actual reason. Only gave the result. I apologize. The reason was because the tunnel and fans made this horrible moaning sound when the wind was blowing (i.e. all the time), and this led to there being an increased amount of people with depression. Continuous exposure to the sound seemed to drive people loopy.
Again, sorry for not including this in the main post. Bad posting technique, I know.
Rock
I have noticed a few posts so far mentioning how a lot of sound might be generated from the fans, and more posts dismissing the idea, although they have provided no corroboration.
I cannot provide any links as corroboration for what I am about to add to this discussion, other than I know that is true. You are free to accept it as you will.
Those fans are not going to run at any high speed. They will most likely be 300 rpm or lower. That means low frequency hums, growls and vibrations. Remember sound can also be transmitted through attached structures as vibration.
My point is that sound is going to be generated, regardless of how well they are designed. Case in point
The town of Lethbridge is located in Alberta, Canada, just north of the U.S. border. It is an extremely windy city, and has a university - the University of Lethbridge. There is a spot on campus that had wind funneling through it all year round, so they decided to install some fans to generate power.
Smart move. Reason why?
Campus-wide depression of students and staff began to rise, and the number of suicides went up. Not dramatically, but up, nonetheless.
As one poster has mentioned already (re: the epileptic seizures) - you never know the full effects of implementing a technology until it goes in, no matter how you try to 'plan' for it.
Rock
If people in this wonderful land were allowed to defend themselves, she'd put a hole in his head when he came 'round and that would be the end of the useless sack-of-shit.
But she can't. So she won't. She won't even be allowed to buy a can of pepper spray to defend herself from him, because she has to sign a legal notice at purchase time saying she will never use it on a human being.
Rock
That is what the suspension of rights is all about. The U.S. has the right idea: This is the essence of the libertarian view of government. People should be allowed to do whatever they want as long as they do not harm others. They should not be attacked by privacy-intruding devices all of their life that verify they do not harm people.
They should be knocked if they step out of line. NOT for merely existing.
Rock
Alright, Canadians. It's time to make ourselves heard. I've seen post after post bemoaning the fact that most of the people concerned about the DMCA in the U.S. never said anything when they could have. And this is usually accompanied with a bunch of hand-wringing and 'if only I had...'.
Get your asses in gear. Now's the time to make sure that the uninformed bureaucrat receiving submissions has heard the whole story. And we'll have no one to blame but ourselves if they don't find out.
However, if they listen to what we all say and throw it out the window, that will just be our wonderful Canadian 'democratic' system in action. Hehe.
Rock
Hi, Jamie. Hopefully I'm asking something that is up your alley and isn't too terribly off-topic
Do you see the possibility of a large, unified force in technology activism in the current lobbyist environment?
I have noted that, for the most part, those attempting to promote innovation and free exchange of ideas throughout all research and industry seem to have their own agenda. They often have many of the same viewpoints and would pull together if they would allow some of their views to take a backseat to a concerted, unified effort.
There are a lot of people that have been able to organize themselves into groups, but still grasp divisive issues as defining who they are. Instead they should 'gang up' and try seeing how their numbers can make an impact
A good example of this divisiveness is Slashdot. Most of the people that browse and are coherently active on this site believe that greater competition in the marketplace is a very good thing. Yet they continue to split themselves up into 'factions' (i.e. Mac, Linux, Unix, BSD, etc.) without seeing that any choice but the one that they oppose (Microsoft, for instance) should be a step in the right direction.
Rock
Most of the root posts I'm reading here essentially say the following:
I guess my subject line is a really nice way of saying you guys don't get out much. Who the hell are you kidding?
The reason that there are marketing departments is because people are sheep. Every huge corporation in the world depends on it. If people weren't sheep, they wouldn't pull all of the shit that they do. Why do you think Intel has been trumpeting their '2 GHz' speed capability so loud, despite the fact that core clock is becoming extremely distant from the actual throughput of a processor?
Answer: people are dumb.
Be happy that you're actually sitting there thinking about the issue, regardless of which 'side' you are on, because most everyone else isn't.
Rock
I like the way he claims a 90% success rate. Either the researcher is a moron or else the person writing the article has already beaten him there.
What if there were three encrypted messages in each image he processed? Finding one is useless, because the sender could put an easy message in and two extra that won't get caught.
Better yet: his algorithm could be giving him garbage hits and not be finding anything real. The pictures could be just pictures. Novel concept.
*whew* Moron alert - eleventy three o'clock.
Darwin took part in the voyage to the Galapogos Islands in his (very) early years. Toward the latter part of his life, however, after all of the detailed experimentation that he had done, he publicly refuted his own results. He became a Christian during his middle age, published critical analyses of those carrying on his early work on evolution and attempted to inform the public of the errors in his early conclusions. Predicably, there was no publicity given to the release of his newest papers.
Anyone who considers Charles Schultz an atheist is mistaken. Schultz was unabashedly Christian. He made Christian references throughout the entire time he was creating Peanuts. He included his viewpoint when others thought he would totally destroy his readership due to a lack of popular support.
Next time, you might want to try and look into the history underlying your assumptions, instead of just picking a bunch of names from M$ Encarta.
Sarge
That sounds pretty dumb to me. Either you are saying that he only downloads Debian (or anything) at work, or else you must work 18+ hours a day.
Opportunity cost means nothing if you aren't working when you would normally download the software.
Sarge
Apparently most outgoing activity through a NAT server is done above port 60000. That's how they can detect it.
Sarge
I think that it's pretty tricky conducting your dealings with any utility in this fashion. You can talk to anyone from the company at any time and they will tell you a lot of interesting things - but they will never admit to any of them later. They will not send you an affirmation of the same in writing and will flatly deny informing you that your actions were allowable by company policy.
The rule for ISP online support (as far as I have seen to this point) seems to be 'play it by the book' if you haven't been involved with a particular client before. And if the client gets a different person for support the next time they phone, then they will get nailed by someone using the 'number one rule' by default.
Sarge
This is also taken from the ToS - in the next paragraph, if you had cared to continue reading. Do you honestly think that they are going to prohibit one proxy program and allow Winproxy/NAT/etc.? That means they are all prohibited.
And when they say
it means that you are responsible for taking care of the network implied by buying extra IPs from them. You are allowed to hook 3 PCs up to one cablemodem, but only if you have purchased 2 additional IPs.
Sarge
Actually, in Calgary (Alberta, Canada) Shaw@Home has already killed this. IP masq, proxies, etc is prohibited in their ToS. They have also disallowed all servers on their client machines. And they will come after you - it has already started happening.
Sarge
Actually, Shaw@Home expressly prohibits running any servers on their network. See this link to their Service Agreement for more info.
Personally, I have already had trouble with Shaw, but I was able to get around their bungling. I did drop running my servers, but I'm not very impressed with their new ToS. Thankfully Calgary has 4+ high-speed ISP alternatives.
Sarge
I apologize. I was overlooking the connection charge. I have been hardwired for so long I tend to lose sight of that.
As far as the modem/CD choice goes, I would go with the modem right away, due to the possibility of using 'free ISPs'.
Sarge
Fortunately, though, Debian (which is the only true Linux out there) still costs $0 to install/use from the 'net. And the CDs, from www.cheapbytes.com for instance, are little more than what blanks would cost ($7 US for two CDs).
Since Debian has its roots in the GNU project, and is the only GNU distribution of Linux (and therefore entirely open-source/free), it would lead me to consider it the best choice out of all the Linux distros.
Sarge
I think we need a translation of what you're really trying to say:
Windows and Linux both 'target' the same market, insofar as Linux can target anything, considering it's give-away-ware. Anything that you do in Windows with your chicken-peck typing can be done better in Linux.
Sarge
Thank you for making a post that states this distinction. The first step in maintaining a discussion on this issue is the realization of this point being the basis of the conflict. I'm not saying that there should be a conflict - there is one already. And so the philosophical basis of the argument needs to be emphasized, rather then a factual 'Tag, you're it!' approach.
Sarge
Actually, the Coppermines have the cache right on the die, and they produce far less heat than the Slot-1 solutions. If Intel was only worried about the amount of heat, they would have automatically gone to PGA. They must be having a problem with yields or else they must not have the technical acumen to produce any super-high-clock-speed chips anymore.
I'm betting it's the latter. Go AMD!
Sarge
While pedophiles who fool around with their stepdaughters should be considered normal, well-adjusted members of society?
Bullshit. Glad I don't know him personally.
Sarge
You must be a Delta or something. And that's a compliment.
Brave New World has everything to do with this issue. I have read it several times and the idea, not the method, is what makes it a very important window into the potential future.
In the novel, society has changed to a point that humans are grown for a certain purpose, and there is no responsibility inherent in choosing to bring a child into the world with another person. In fact, the lifestyle and culture is entirely based upon this one fact:
This is the essence of the similarity between the present time and that book. As a matter of fact, right now (not in the near future when pre-pregnancy gene testing has begun) people can see what the entire genetic makeup of their child is before they have to call it a child. And that is why they do not have any responsibility, as in the novel. They can change their mind and there is no physical record of their choice. If someone on the 'human assembly line' in BNW decided to empty one of the tubes, there would be no record of that choice.
When someone gets a genetic readout of what their offspring will be like, and uses this as a basis for whether they will have children, then he or she is performing the same action as those that performed the alterations to the testtubes in BNW.
Sarge
Such as yourself? I am Canadian and I take umbrage to the inflammatory claims that you make in your post.
The following comment describes what actually happened when Trudeau decided he wanted to 'repatriate' a constitution for Canada:
And the fact that all courts in Canada are appointed effectively removed the power from the people and placed it in the hands of the bureaucracy. Consider, for a moment, what this would entail when legislation is passed that the courts consider 'wrong'. They now have a full veto - and they are never accountable to the people.
This is why many in the United States point to Canada when they are concerned about eroding freedoms and the suspension of rights in America. We are a perfect example of what will happen to the U.S. if the citizens do not continue to watch their governing powers like a hawk. Fortunately, the government in the U.S. has far more checks and balances.
As far as I am concerned, the fact that the American Constitution makes it extremely hard to remove free speech (in that it was written from the opposite perspective as the Canadian Constitution) is the reason that the U.S. has the most truly democratic Constitution in the world.
And this statement of yours also conveys the sad truth about the condition of Canada in general:
I think that says it all. The American Constitution was formed by a group of Revolutionaries with a violent declaration of what they believed that they were worth. They knew what living underneath an oppressive government meant, and they constructed the nation with all of its checks and balances because they did not want America to turn out that way.
Therefore, if America began with that bang, then Canada began with a whimper. For we timidly said 'Um, we would like to start a country' and then "our rights were granted to us".
Unfortunately, our "enlightened" view of the world includes having a huge bureaucracy legislate every detail of society, because we didn't start the country by breaking free from an oppressive regime. We brought it with us. And it granted us whatever rights that it saw fit.
Take notice, citizens of the United States. Watch the U.K., Canada and Australia if you would like to see 'democratic' ineptitude in action. And make sure that it doesn't happen to you...
Sarge