Just so everyone is clear and your post isn't taken out of context
The official OpenBSD CD distribution is sold yes. The OpenBSD project does not put up ISO's.
However you can easily net install (floppies are available for this purpose) and even, easily even, roll your own CD's from an installled base. Once instaleld you can upgrade with cvsup, as with all the BSDs.
You buy the CD if you need a CD and/or want to support OpenBSD.
Not sure the article is factually right. Part of the reason for thE Sonny Bono act was to harmonize with the EU. I believe Germany and most of the other states are author's life + 70 years. + 50 years is the minimum allowed by the Berne convention.
Blame the convention, no the US--before Sonny Bono act, we were +50.
I'm honestly not sure about class action lawsuits for pollution.
A libertarian system would not be that different from what we have today, with the primary exception that the courts become the major arbiters rather than politicians. If you could show damages from pollution, you could sue.
Much like how tobacco companies are regularly sued and pay out millions today, theoretically similar suits could arise from pollution issues.
Like I said though--I don't agree 100% the libertarian tactics and the environment, but I can see how a compelling argument could be made for the position.
Now I'm not saying that I particularly favor libertarian approaches to the environment, BUT, consider this--what if our system of lwas and govt were really set up to deal with environmental issues in a libertarian laws?
How about the people in Manhattan (or wherever!) could get a big class action law suit going against the people who polluted upstream? What's wrong with that scenario?
yeah, I'm sure that ability has been around--as I said in another post I remember having to get some expensive card to do that back in the day. What I wasn't sure about was whether any two generic cards could be used in tandem thusly.
Thanks for the info--I really wasn't sure there. I remembered back in the day we had to get special hardware to support multimonitor for the guys doing layout and design--didn't know any two cards would work like so.
Memories not really an issue as when I timed startup of those apps I had around 150-200m free. I personally don't like leaving apps running if for no other reason than they take up space on the dock (I like my dock to be fairly small).
I'm really interested in how much the prefetching sped stuff up though, I'm going to see if I can find any tweaks for that.
Radical GUI changes? For Christ's sake, they put a stupid red & blue coloured skin on the thing, and we're all supposed to stare in jaw-dropping wonder? GUI changes argument denied.
Woa sorry buddy, that's not the change I was referring to--though the Luna theme was one *aspect* of the change. Total themability and skinning of the OS, changes in the way controls are drawn, reorganization of control panels, explorer windows, things like file / print dialogues and help throughout the OS. Sorry if I was unclear--Luna (what I guess you're referring to) was but a small part of this.
Fast-user switching? That's not a really big feature, and MS are playing catch-up with everyone else in this area anyway. You still have to basically log out - it's not like you can open up an app as a different identity or anything useful like that.
Sorry, wrong again. Didn't OSX only add fast-user switching in OSX 10.3 anyway? No, you do not have to log out, you can have multiple users logged on concurrently with apps running. Your final point is wrong too--you CAN run processes as another user ID. You're just plain wrong in your criticism here. SP2 allows you to have two concurrent active logons also.
Multi-monitor support? We're really reaching the bottom of the barrel now. Other OSs have also had that for yonks.
Yes, you could have it in 2000 with special cards with nicely written drivers etc. What changed in XP was that any cards, and any number of cards, AGP, PCI, etc can multimonitor. That was a new thing. I'm not 100% sure OSX has this today? I also believe OS9 didn't have it. Besides, your question wasn't what are new for any operating system features, it was what's new from 2k->xp.
'Various multimedia additions'. Cool. Got to love that 'various additions'.
ok, to expand on that--windows media player integrated in, and ability for it to work as an panel in explorer and ie, which is actually quite nice. I also included the better overall multimedia compatibility (vis a vis 2k) in my "various" category. I apologize for not listing all these originally, I didn't think you'd be so pedantic (or at least that you'd try looking them up if you really didn't know).
A picture viewer? Fuck me if that's not a feature to be raving about.
And yet it's a feature done 100x better than in OSX or in any nix/bsd program I've seen. I'm sorry if you're pissed off because I listed new features and now you're not interested, but...
Logon screen is much like the OSX one (or is the OSX one like the XP one). What's wrong with it?
You're right--XP isn't more stable than 2k because it doesn't need to be. 2k IS stable. Our XP and 2k boxes at work get into the 20 day mark of uptime all the time. The highest I've seen has been 87 days (and it went higher I'm sure--that was just the last time I used that particular computer) Sure, it's no year plus etc that our FreeBSD server is currently at, but it's not bad at all--quite good in fact. And it's not like those uptimes are stopped by BSODs either.
Security is definitely a bone with XP. Good thing SP2 patches that up nicely.
New features--sorry, I think I listed a dozen plus.
You might want to find something better to do with your time than rage against microsoft from your parents basement--or at least get better at it. You really give a bad name to the non-microsoft communities (and I'm posting this from a powerbook!)
time open/Applications/iTunes.app/ 0.090u 0.060s 0:00.29 51.7% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
time open/Applications/iCal.app/ 0.070u 0.070s 0:00.32 43.7% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
time open/Applications/Mail.app/ 0.110u 0.040s 0:00.24 62.5% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
HOWEVER. The process starts much faster than a window pops up.
It is interesting that the more times I start and quit an app dramatically increases the starting speed. The prefetching works pretty well. I assume it clear out the prefetching pretty fast though, as I haven't powered down my powerbook in days, and regularly use all those apps. Wonder if that can be optimized?
Radical GUI changes throughout the operating system. Built-in terminal server. Fast-user switching (very nice for home systems). Built in multi-monitor support (this was a big one for us at work). ClearType. Various multimedia additions and changes. The wonderful builtin picture viewer, slide show viewer, etc. MUCH faster boot time.
those are all pretty big, there are a number of smaller things as well. New logon screen. Grouping in the start menu of running processes together (multiple IM windows might group together for instance). Dos compatibility is also a lot better--very good in fact. I could play some old sierra games with full sound, without having to resort to dosbox or vdmsound etc. Let's see.. I think the tcpip stack is different too but I'm not sure about that.
I think all those things together do indeed make a big difference.
That's definitely true. I'm using a powerbook right now--the user experience is better imho, but that doesn't make it a better tool necessarily.
I advocated switching our shop from OS9 -> OSX, and upon meeting resistance started reading forums and the like about it. I'm completely amazed by how the graphics and publsihing community en masse seems to have stuck with OS9 and old versions of software because there simply aren't enough worthwhile gains in productivity.
I personally can't use os9--i find it completely unusable, but that's not a universally held opinion.
I've never noticed ZoneAlarm slowing my computer down, but I don't generally run it either. Builtin GOOD firewall for a change will be nice with SP2. OSX definitely kicks window ass for exploits and security!
That is definitely a good point, and I have been thinking about upgrading my hdd in this notebook--I'm almost too afraid to take it apart though! I didn't mind mucking artound with my Sony notebook, but this one is just so pretty;) I do think my point about osx in general not being as fast as os9 / windows stands though.
I have to say I'm a little pissed that my previous comment go modded down already, slashdot moderators suck ass.
It's an old Microsoft utility--just google for regclean and you'll find it almost immediately. It's been around since the early days of the registry, and has, in my experience, made a huge difference.
How little features each windows release comes with? I assume you mean how few new features. I have to disagree with this.
95-98-ME were all fairly incremental installs, though 98 was pretty signifigant over 95. The discussion for these dead operating systems is pretty much over though--unless you want to argue about 4 year old systems.
NT -> 2K -> XP on the otherhand have all been huge releases--much bigger than any of the OSX releases, though 10.0 -> 10.4 is pretty damn big.
And also, let's not forget while frequent OS updates are fun for hobbyists to play with, they're a pain for professionals and others who use their computers as a tool and at work. That's one of the biggest bitches about OSX--for the "old school" Mac users--artists, professionals, etc--OSX offers few performance or productivity advantanges. For home computers I think OSX is great, and I'm using a powerbook as I write this message, but let's not go nuts about it.
Slow directory listings are usually bad registory settings cauwed by the installation of some annoying program.
On one of the PCs at work, right clicking on a folder would sometimes take like 20 seconds ot show up--it was insane. I ran regclean, and now it's instantaneous. If XP has a problem, it's cruft in the registry.
OTOH, you might want to take a look at my other post in this article--among professionals, a signifigant number have stuck with OS9 because osx gui etc and overhead is so much heavier than in os9 that programs like photoshop, illustrator, quark, etc run a lot slower.
Really? I have a 1.4ghz athlonxp and a powerbook 1.25ghz g4 I am using at this exact second.
I just clicked ical. About 4.5 seconds before it opened.
About 7 seconds before iTunes shows up.
About 3 for Mail.app.
I would guess safari is about 5 seconds on average.
I can't think of ANYTHING in XP that takes that long. I love my powerbook and osx, but speed is not a reason for using it. It actually pisses me off--at work (publishing company) we still use OS9 because photoshop, illustrator, quark, etc run signifigantly slower in X. If you don't believe me, search for some forums, any forums, used by professionals--many/most of them still use OS9 for it's snappiness.
hat the man who is noted for his mangling of the English language so carefully phrased this so as not to be "technically" a lie tells me that it is a lie of the first order, deliberate and with full knowledge that it was a lie.
Thomas Jefferson was a terrible public speaker. It's said that nobody actually heard his inaugural address because he mumbled and stuttered. would you say that he's as stupid as bush is, since public speaking ability seems to be the sole marker you are using of intelligence.
That's very much true. There is a problem though when you get your false assumptions by ignoring evidence that goes against your predrawn conclusions, and consider unreliable evidence most important because it agrees with them. Most of the whitehouse's intelligence on iraq was taken from chalabi, and the iraqi defectors he brought in to tell them what they wanted to hear. The CIA at that point had documented chalabi as a fraud, with clear evidence of a long campaign of lying and evidence of him cooperating with iran, but the bush administration ignored this and instead chose to believe someone known to be a fraud. At the same time they dismissed what the weapons inspectors were saying as bogus. Ignorance of the law is not a defense in a criminal court, and I think being ignorant of the facts on purpose should not be a defense in the court of public opinion.
Don't forget there was British intelligence as well. I'm not so sure I agree with your assesment of the situation. Do you have links or anything about the CIA having doubts about Chalabi so early? I had not heard that, though I won't discount it offhand. And I will have no trouble saying that my biggest problem with the whole Iraq war has been intelligence from the get go.
But, hey, you want a clear lie from bush, here is one.
I've read that page about 5 times now, and I just don't see the lie. Quote 1 says that there was a relationship between al-Qaeda and Iraq. Quote 2 says that blah blah, war justification for any "international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."
Grammar! INCLUDING. Doesn't say ONLY those terrorist organizations which planned 9/11 etc. Secondly, I believe the administration would make the point that there WERE connections between Iraq and al-Qaeda, these were even verified by the Sept 11 commission. That can easily fall under the "aided the terrorist attacks"--people in relationship with al-Qaeda,etc.
Having said that (can't remember if I mentioned this already in this thread or not) I was not pro-Iraq war, I don't believe there was any aid from Saddam to OBL, and I don't think there were WMDs. HOWEVER, the argument can easily be made that those two things were true.
Ok, now see, now you're changing what you're saying. So it's not Bush that's the liar now it's Bush "and his administration. Also, I think you seem to have trouble differentiating between a lie and operating on false assumptions. Let me put it this way for you. WHY would bush lie about WMD's? So that in 6 months time when WMD's weren't found, the public would love him for it? No... that doesn't make sense. Damn logic. So you tell me--WHY would Bush lie about WMD's? I think you just told a lie--you have no evidence the administration (not the least of which--Bush) told a lie!
Falsely invaded two countries which had nothing to with terrorism? You're implying that AFghanistan had nothing to do with terrorism" Now, I wasn't pro-war in the case of Iraq, but absolutely was in AFghanistan. I think someone has a little problem telling lies on slashdot--quit trying to lie and say that Afghanistan wasn't part of the terrorist problem.
Of course Rush is op/ed. He's never claimed to be a reporter or to go digging up news. He comments on news, mentions articles, talks about what's going on. That's all he's ever done. Big surprise.
Slashdot Mirror
Just so everyone is clear and your post isn't taken out of context
The official OpenBSD CD distribution is sold yes. The OpenBSD project does not put up ISO's.
However you can easily net install (floppies are available for this purpose) and even, easily even, roll your own CD's from an installled base. Once instaleld you can upgrade with cvsup, as with all the BSDs.
You buy the CD if you need a CD and/or want to support OpenBSD.
Not sure the article is factually right. Part of the reason for thE Sonny Bono act was to harmonize with the EU. I believe Germany and most of the other states are author's life + 70 years. + 50 years is the minimum allowed by the Berne convention.
Blame the convention, no the US--before Sonny Bono act, we were +50.
Well.. maybe a few new vegetables down here!
I'm honestly not sure about class action lawsuits for pollution.
A libertarian system would not be that different from what we have today, with the primary exception that the courts become the major arbiters rather than politicians. If you could show damages from pollution, you could sue.
Much like how tobacco companies are regularly sued and pay out millions today, theoretically similar suits could arise from pollution issues.
Like I said though--I don't agree 100% the libertarian tactics and the environment, but I can see how a compelling argument could be made for the position.
That's a ridiculous comparison--how many power plants right now run on oil?
Cars, trucks, etc are the big users of oil for energy!
Now I'm not saying that I particularly favor libertarian approaches to the environment, BUT, consider this--what if our system of lwas and govt were really set up to deal with environmental issues in a libertarian laws?
How about the people in Manhattan (or wherever!) could get a big class action law suit going against the people who polluted upstream? What's wrong with that scenario?
yeah, I'm sure that ability has been around--as I said in another post I remember having to get some expensive card to do that back in the day. What I wasn't sure about was whether any two generic cards could be used in tandem thusly.
Thanks for the info--I really wasn't sure there. I remembered back in the day we had to get special hardware to support multimonitor for the guys doing layout and design--didn't know any two cards would work like so.
Memories not really an issue as when I timed startup of those apps I had around 150-200m free. I personally don't like leaving apps running if for no other reason than they take up space on the dock (I like my dock to be fairly small).
I'm really interested in how much the prefetching sped stuff up though, I'm going to see if I can find any tweaks for that.
Radical GUI changes? For Christ's sake, they put a stupid red & blue coloured skin on the thing, and we're all supposed to stare in jaw-dropping wonder? GUI changes argument denied.
Woa sorry buddy, that's not the change I was referring to--though the Luna theme was one *aspect* of the change. Total themability and skinning of the OS, changes in the way controls are drawn, reorganization of control panels, explorer windows, things like file / print dialogues and help throughout the OS. Sorry if I was unclear--Luna (what I guess you're referring to) was but a small part of this.
Fast-user switching? That's not a really big feature, and MS are playing catch-up with everyone else in this area anyway. You still have to basically log out - it's not like you can open up an app as a different identity or anything useful like that.
Sorry, wrong again. Didn't OSX only add fast-user switching in OSX 10.3 anyway? No, you do not have to log out, you can have multiple users logged on concurrently with apps running. Your final point is wrong too--you CAN run processes as another user ID. You're just plain wrong in your criticism here. SP2 allows you to have two concurrent active logons also.
Multi-monitor support? We're really reaching the bottom of the barrel now. Other OSs have also had that for yonks.
Yes, you could have it in 2000 with special cards with nicely written drivers etc. What changed in XP was that any cards, and any number of cards, AGP, PCI, etc can multimonitor. That was a new thing. I'm not 100% sure OSX has this today? I also believe OS9 didn't have it. Besides, your question wasn't what are new for any operating system features, it was what's new from 2k->xp.
'Various multimedia additions'. Cool. Got to love that 'various additions'.
ok, to expand on that--windows media player integrated in, and ability for it to work as an panel in explorer and ie, which is actually quite nice. I also included the better overall multimedia compatibility (vis a vis 2k) in my "various" category. I apologize for not listing all these originally, I didn't think you'd be so pedantic (or at least that you'd try looking them up if you really didn't know).
A picture viewer? Fuck me if that's not a feature to be raving about.
And yet it's a feature done 100x better than in OSX or in any nix/bsd program I've seen. I'm sorry if you're pissed off because I listed new features and now you're not interested, but...
Logon screen is much like the OSX one (or is the OSX one like the XP one). What's wrong with it?
You're right--XP isn't more stable than 2k because it doesn't need to be. 2k IS stable. Our XP and 2k boxes at work get into the 20 day mark of uptime all the time. The highest I've seen has been 87 days (and it went higher I'm sure--that was just the last time I used that particular computer) Sure, it's no year plus etc that our FreeBSD server is currently at, but it's not bad at all--quite good in fact. And it's not like those uptimes are stopped by BSODs either.
Security is definitely a bone with XP. Good thing SP2 patches that up nicely.
New features--sorry, I think I listed a dozen plus.
You might want to find something better to do with your time than rage against microsoft from your parents basement--or at least get better at it. You really give a bad name to the non-microsoft communities (and I'm posting this from a powerbook!)
Actually no...
/Applications/iTunes.app/
/Applications/iCal.app/
/Applications/Mail.app/
time open
0.090u 0.060s 0:00.29 51.7% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
time open
0.070u 0.070s 0:00.32 43.7% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
time open
0.110u 0.040s 0:00.24 62.5% 0+0k 0+0io 0pf+0w
HOWEVER. The process starts much faster than a window pops up.
It is interesting that the more times I start and quit an app dramatically increases the starting speed. The prefetching works pretty well. I assume it clear out the prefetching pretty fast though, as I haven't powered down my powerbook in days, and regularly use all those apps. Wonder if that can be optimized?
Radical GUI changes throughout the operating system. Built-in terminal server. Fast-user switching (very nice for home systems). Built in multi-monitor support (this was a big one for us at work). ClearType. Various multimedia additions and changes. The wonderful builtin picture viewer, slide show viewer, etc. MUCH faster boot time.
those are all pretty big, there are a number of smaller things as well. New logon screen. Grouping in the start menu of running processes together (multiple IM windows might group together for instance). Dos compatibility is also a lot better--very good in fact. I could play some old sierra games with full sound, without having to resort to dosbox or vdmsound etc. Let's see.. I think the tcpip stack is different too but I'm not sure about that.
I think all those things together do indeed make a big difference.
That's definitely true. I'm using a powerbook right now--the user experience is better imho, but that doesn't make it a better tool necessarily.
I advocated switching our shop from OS9 -> OSX, and upon meeting resistance started reading forums and the like about it. I'm completely amazed by how the graphics and publsihing community en masse seems to have stuck with OS9 and old versions of software because there simply aren't enough worthwhile gains in productivity.
I personally can't use os9--i find it completely unusable, but that's not a universally held opinion.
I've never noticed ZoneAlarm slowing my computer down, but I don't generally run it either. Builtin GOOD firewall for a change will be nice with SP2. OSX definitely kicks window ass for exploits and security!
That is definitely a good point, and I have been thinking about upgrading my hdd in this notebook--I'm almost too afraid to take it apart though! I didn't mind mucking artound with my Sony notebook, but this one is just so pretty ;) I do think my point about osx in general not being as fast as os9 / windows stands though.
I have to say I'm a little pissed that my previous comment go modded down already, slashdot moderators suck ass.
here's a line from top (assuming its reliable)
PhysMem: 69.5M wired, 277M active, 134M inactive, 481M used, 30.8M free
It's an old Microsoft utility--just google for regclean and you'll find it almost immediately. It's been around since the early days of the registry, and has, in my experience, made a huge difference.
I don't get the distinction you are trying to make
App loading is slow in OSX, I don't think anyone would disagree.
CPU intensive apps like Photoshop, illustrator, quark, run slower in OSX than in OS9. I doubt anyone disagrees either.
GUI responsiveness IS one of the biggest factors in how people feel their computers speed is--and app loading speed is a responsiveness issue.
95-98-ME were all fairly incremental installs, though 98 was pretty signifigant over 95. The discussion for these dead operating systems is pretty much over though--unless you want to argue about 4 year old systems.
NT -> 2K -> XP on the otherhand have all been huge releases--much bigger than any of the OSX releases, though 10.0 -> 10.4 is pretty damn big.
And also, let's not forget while frequent OS updates are fun for hobbyists to play with, they're a pain for professionals and others who use their computers as a tool and at work. That's one of the biggest bitches about OSX--for the "old school" Mac users--artists, professionals, etc--OSX offers few performance or productivity advantanges. For home computers I think OSX is great, and I'm using a powerbook as I write this message, but let's not go nuts about it.
Slow directory listings are usually bad registory settings cauwed by the installation of some annoying program.
On one of the PCs at work, right clicking on a folder would sometimes take like 20 seconds ot show up--it was insane. I ran regclean, and now it's instantaneous. If XP has a problem, it's cruft in the registry.
OTOH, you might want to take a look at my other post in this article--among professionals, a signifigant number have stuck with OS9 because osx gui etc and overhead is so much heavier than in os9 that programs like photoshop, illustrator, quark, etc run a lot slower.
Really? I have a 1.4ghz athlonxp and a powerbook 1.25ghz g4 I am using at this exact second.
I just clicked ical. About 4.5 seconds before it opened.
About 7 seconds before iTunes shows up.
About 3 for Mail.app.
I would guess safari is about 5 seconds on average.
I can't think of ANYTHING in XP that takes that long. I love my powerbook and osx, but speed is not a reason for using it. It actually pisses me off--at work (publishing company) we still use OS9 because photoshop, illustrator, quark, etc run signifigantly slower in X. If you don't believe me, search for some forums, any forums, used by professionals--many/most of them still use OS9 for it's snappiness.
Just like it paid off with Valenti--a democrat--under all the democratically controlled congresses and presidencies he was around for?
hat the man who is noted for his mangling of the English language so carefully phrased this so as not to be "technically" a lie tells me that it is a lie of the first order, deliberate and with full knowledge that it was a lie.
Thomas Jefferson was a terrible public speaker. It's said that nobody actually heard his inaugural address because he mumbled and stuttered. would you say that he's as stupid as bush is, since public speaking ability seems to be the sole marker you are using of intelligence.
That's very much true. There is a problem though when you get your false assumptions by ignoring evidence that goes against your predrawn conclusions, and consider unreliable evidence most important because it agrees with them. Most of the whitehouse's intelligence on iraq was taken from chalabi, and the iraqi defectors he brought in to tell them what they wanted to hear. The CIA at that point had documented chalabi as a fraud, with clear evidence of a long campaign of lying and evidence of him cooperating with iran, but the bush administration ignored this and instead chose to believe someone known to be a fraud. At the same time they dismissed what the weapons inspectors were saying as bogus. Ignorance of the law is not a defense in a criminal court, and I think being ignorant of the facts on purpose should not be a defense in the court of public opinion.
Don't forget there was British intelligence as well. I'm not so sure I agree with your assesment of the situation. Do you have links or anything about the CIA having doubts about Chalabi so early? I had not heard that, though I won't discount it offhand. And I will have no trouble saying that my biggest problem with the whole Iraq war has been intelligence from the get go.
But, hey, you want a clear lie from bush, here is one.
I've read that page about 5 times now, and I just don't see the lie. Quote 1 says that there was a relationship between al-Qaeda and Iraq. Quote 2 says that blah blah, war justification for any "international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."
Grammar! INCLUDING. Doesn't say ONLY those terrorist organizations which planned 9/11 etc. Secondly, I believe the administration would make the point that there WERE connections between Iraq and al-Qaeda, these were even verified by the Sept 11 commission. That can easily fall under the "aided the terrorist attacks"--people in relationship with al-Qaeda,etc.
Having said that (can't remember if I mentioned this already in this thread or not) I was not pro-Iraq war, I don't believe there was any aid from Saddam to OBL, and I don't think there were WMDs. HOWEVER, the argument can easily be made that those two things were true.
Ok, now see, now you're changing what you're saying. So it's not Bush that's the liar now it's Bush "and his administration. Also, I think you seem to have trouble differentiating between a lie and operating on false assumptions. Let me put it this way for you. WHY would bush lie about WMD's? So that in 6 months time when WMD's weren't found, the public would love him for it? No... that doesn't make sense. Damn logic. So you tell me--WHY would Bush lie about WMD's? I think you just told a lie--you have no evidence the administration (not the least of which--Bush) told a lie!
Falsely invaded two countries which had nothing to with terrorism? You're implying that AFghanistan had nothing to do with terrorism" Now, I wasn't pro-war in the case of Iraq, but absolutely was in AFghanistan. I think someone has a little problem telling lies on slashdot--quit trying to lie and say that Afghanistan wasn't part of the terrorist problem.
Of course Rush is op/ed. He's never claimed to be a reporter or to go digging up news. He comments on news, mentions articles, talks about what's going on. That's all he's ever done. Big surprise.