....my only concern would be the stability and durability of the 'hopper during Mars' famed dust storms. AFAIK the winds there get to be something ferocious, and can last a long, long time. Even at the rarified air pressure of Mars, I'd guess this thing would fly like tumbleweed.
These things go in cycles, kind of like the Darwinism that didn't work quickly enough on the germ plasm that somehow evolved into the amoral mockeries of humankind that write spyware/malware.
Adaware was widely used for a while, then I started noticing that it wasn't working so well. Then Spybot is/was hugely popular and extremely effective, so I've started to notice that it too is missing stuff now (or is unable to remove what it finds).
Virus...er...spyware writers are working against these programs, and it's only natural that they are evolving their code to defeat at least the most successful/widely used anti-spyware programs out there.
You wouldn't expect the flu inoculation from 5 years ago to protect you this year, would you? Spyware - and it's counteragents - are the same.
Kids are carrying ID cards with an RFID tag to track where they are.
Fact check: 1) kids are supposed to be in school during the day. 2) kids do NOT have the full set of rights allowed to adults.
And given the fact that these are portable cards, they have little big-brother value. (And frankly, little security vs. abduction value.) So really, we're talking tracing kids on an everyday basis - where are they? Anyone who's waited at a bus stop and realized in growing horror that their elementary schoolchild was somehow missing from their bus understands this. It's a feeling that the jaded onanists of/. are unlikely to be capable of empathizing, as it would require them to set aside their hip cynicism for a moment.
The most horrific thing a parent can imagine is the abduction of their child. In fact, most parents would PREFER their child die instantly instead of being the subject of a stranger abduction (with it's likelihood of only a much more horrible existence before death). It's not unreasonable at all that parents would want to do anything conceivable to prevent this. No matter how rarely it really happens (*most* abductions are custodial disputes and thus the child is rarely in real danger).
Who objects to tracking minors? Usually the older minors (who feel that they are "practically" adults anyway, and who (honestly) don't want to be tracked for all the wrong reasons...) and privacy activists. Tell you what: if the kids get RFID, so should the parents. Personally, I bet good, non-hypocrite parents would be PERFECTLY HAPPY with people knowing their whereabouts at all time, in exchange for knowing where their kids are too.
And please, don't reply with the "whoever is willing to give up liberty for security deserves none" shat. That's an entirely empty-headed statement, since we CONSTANTLY trade liberty for security every single day, it's called civilization.
I did find it amusing that the article reminds us this system is used to track livestock. LOL.
Personally, I think Ashcroft is a poster-boy for the drama-queenishness of the left.
I don't know of anyone more personally vilified, slandered, and pretty much being accused of being a latter-day Hitler than John Ashcroft.
Why? Don't give me your vague wishy-washy crap about "eroded civil liberties" - what specifically can't you do now that you could do before?
His job at Justice is/was to enforce the laws, if you have a beef with the law, don't complain to the cop.
His argument on protecting America from terror is a little more comprehensive than you dismissively paint: check the listing of terrorist attacks at http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/5902.htm. Ho w many, after 9/11, have been against civil American targets? How many were there before 9/11, to compare apples/apples, let's limit it just to the previous 4 years? To suggest that the terrorist threat is imagined as you imply, is ridiculous.
To point to a lack of 'terrorist' convictions is simply disingenuous or stupid. What was Al Capone put away for? Murder? Extortion? Racketeering? Hmm. I guess the FBI failed to prosecute him effectively too.
It probably will require you take off the tinfoil hat for a second, but READ THE PATRIOT ACT. There is very little in the entire act that grants the US Gov't any powers it didn't already have one way or another. Mainly, it's about streamlining procedures - hardly worth the "OMG teh gobbermint is teh debil!" response/. comments seem to suggest.
His shortcomings - he didn't like bare breasted statues, fundamentalist views, attacking Islam: 1) last time I checked, people were still allowed to hold personal preferences, or was that overturned by the political correctness polics and I missed it? Do I have to validate my personal aesthetics with you first? 2) I know the Liberal Elite in this country would like to consider anyone with religious views as some sort of benighted rube or Untouchable, but you know churchgoers ARE people too, right? Or aren't they included in the "open-minded" liberal worldview? 3) attacking Islam - how? I've only heard him make carefully worded statements pointing at Islamofacists, not Islam in general. Any specifics or is that just more vague bitching?
From: slashdot.org to: (select one) A) FUD.org B) LiberalPropaganda.org C) [close site, simply forward traffic to the tinfoill hattery already present at www.democraticunderground.com]
For those still not getting it, Parties to the Treaty undertake not to place in orbit around the Earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction, install such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner. is applicable to precisely 0% of the Guardian article.
Shut up! You're interrupting the mournful cry of/.'ers realizing that yes, for another 4 more years, they're going to be bitching from the sidelines, instead of participating in government and making policies.
Personally, were I a liberal I'd be a little pissed off that my candidates insist on catering to the marginalia of politics instead of moderating their platform and ending up having SOME control of the process.
Well, we used to be allowed to say "hey, that dude's crazy, someone lock him up". Now that's impossible.
Granted, such a system is open for abuse and exploitation by the powerful against the powerless.
But now you have multiple serial rapists/murderers going to a couple of years of outpatient 'counseling' are declared 'cured' and *nobody* is allowed to keep an eye on them or treat them in any way differently in fear of violating their civil rights.
Needless to say that at this point, the pendulum has swung too far in favor of civil rights, but there are a lot of people who post on/. that would fight tooth&nail to prevent any sort of a swing back toward punishment, evaluation, or any sort of govt surveillance.
Basically, you can't have it both ways. "Freedom" and "Security" are at the extremes mutually exclusive (at least when you are talking about Homo Sapiens Sapiens as we know them). A society that is 100% based on "civil liberties uber alles" is little more than a State of Nature. Empty-headed slogans aside, the concept of 'society' is the needful trading of liberties for security on many levels.
Funny, I was going to blame Republicans, the DMCA, the RIAA, the MPAA or simply GW Bush. One of them MUST be to blame for any violation of privacy, aren't they?
You're comparing apples and oranges. Text MUDs running since 1990 have an inherent bias in their self-selecting audience: serious, long term computer users from the days when they were called hobbyists.
Current MMOGs have to attract people who are largely NON computer users or unfamiliar with MUDs to play, and frankly they demand a heckuva lot more graphically than MUDs typically offer.
Which is 'best'? A text MUD that's had 5,000-10,000 players for 15 years (*HUGE* for a MUD), or City of Heroes that has somewhere around 250,000 subscribers since it started in May?
Yes, the text MUD has been around longer, but the diehard players are a finite resource. Take those players away, and you will not be able to replace them. Take the 250,000 players away from CoH and it's arguable that they'd pretty quickly replace themselves, even with a pay-per-month subscription fee.
It's a truism among long time campaign operatives that liberal voters are far more likely to wear their vote on their sleeve, and thus respond to any polling, surveys, etc. Conservative voters have an inherent "MYOB" response.
We have enough asshats already, so your absence, while not at all noted, is appreciated.
If the Patriot Act (or, lacking actual evidence, the fear of what it *might* do) keeps paranoid leftists out of our country, then it's even better than advertised.
You know what? The cops could pull me over on my way home from work today for no reason, and I wouldn't immediately feel 'oppressed'. If they had a good reason (vis. the story above about accidentally driving down an access road and deciding to take pictures of a power plant), it wouldn't phase me a bit. If they didn't have a good reason, I'd prefer that they spend their limited time chasing real crooks, but it wouldn't be that big a deal.
It may sound like I'm joking, but I'm serious: there are far, far too many people in the world that look at the US as some lust/hate object. People that deplore the shallow, materialistic culture of the US and then come here to shop and are huge fans of American movies. People that decry capitalism, but are happy to go to school here. People that say that our social services are hopelessly farked, yet travel halfway across the world to use our hospitals. People that complain about the burgeoning U.S. police state when anyone who knows what it's like to LIVE in a police state knows that in a REAL police state (not just a limousine liberal's fantasy version) such people would have been stuffed into a Gulag or ended up dead in a nameless ditch long ago.
Well, if these people feel that somehow finally that they may pay some sort of price for their their hatred of the US (in comments, print, or blogged), then good riddance.
Yes, because for the majority of the country outside the coastal elites, the word "intellectual" is synonymous with "snobbish asswipe".
I'd say it's higher ranked for me, but still not the primary concern. A president is a figurehead; he has coterie of advisors, cabinet members, party flak(E)s, and assorted hangers-on to advise him of the details on any particular issue.
I'd far rather have a person as president of average intelligence but highly ethical and with a strong sense of personal morality, than a 'genius' sociopath with no sense of morality beyond his own self-interest. Hypothetically speaking on both counts, of course.
Since the US is the world's only superpower remaining, it should 'play fair' and only deploy technologies that are easily countered by it's second-tier potential adversaries.
And heaven forfend that it might try to anticipate and counter future technologies....why, that's like CHEATING!*/sarcasm
Oh yeah, by the way, I'm not sure slashdot noticed, but it ISN'T A FUCKING GAME. There IS no cheating in geopolitics, only winners and losers. If terrorists smuggle a 20kt nuke into a city in an ocean container, what are you going to do, cry that it was a hack and beg to start over?
In real life you can't kick the enemy from your server if he uses an aimbot, you simply lose and he gets to write the history.
Apparently only the U.S. is allowed to decide who can use and deploy basic technology. As long as we can control it, we will. Anything otherwise is stupid. And in that same vein, I don't blame any other state for trying to break our monopoly on strategic power. I'm not rooting for you to succeed, but I certainly don't blame you for trying.
The moment another power presents a credible threat to the US that we cannot eliminate relatively safely, American hegemony ends, and we go back to a multipolar world. But for the US defense system to do anything BUT try to shortcut/eliminate/erase such possibilities would be a failure in their primary responsibilities.
(Apologies if I misquote this), but whenever he is baffled by the bumbling fools put forth as 'leaders' in our political system, he just remembers high school:
- the social people were out having fun - the talented were playing sports, or doing debate, or drama, or whatever - the go-getters were out working to save money for college - the intelligent were reading or working on experiments - the burnouts were off doing drugs - and it's only the complete asswipes that were left to run for student government.
We respectfully submit that there are a lot of very talented people in our country that find the idea of running someone ELSE's life uninteresting, if not downright abhorrent, and a significant fraction of the remainder just find politicians to be one step removed from tapeworms.
Combine that with the ridiculous shallowness and excruciatingly personal examination made by the media of every candidate, and this weeds out the few actual altruists who would be willing to suffer through a government job to perform useful service for their country. No, thanks.
If you are a free marketeer, this shouldn't bother you because it's simply a widening of the competitive market for labor to international levels. If US employees and laws cannot be competitive, maybe it behooves us to help bring the rest of the world up closer to our standard of living so that they won't so easily undercut us.
On the other hand, if you're a bleeding-heart internationalist, what's wrong with people from India or whatever country doing these jobs? If they can (in Dell's case) learn english to a degree that they are indistinguishable from cust svc people in the US, what's the problem? They can use the US$ far more than we can here.
Or, it could be just to pre-empt the general asshattery and shenanigans that we've all come to expect from the unwashed good-for-nothing leftists across the world.
Let's look: how did the "I don't have a job so I'm going to throw bricks instead" demographic behave at the last few WTO conferences?
Since/.er's and John Kerry like to point out how much everyone around the world hates GWB, then how unreasonable is it for the Bush campaign to block their ability to even access his site?
People who support GWB will understand, and people who oppose him are unwelcome there anyway. For the 0.0001% of true 'undecideds' out there, I hope they're bright enough to get their political information from some other sources than the candidates' websites.
In any case, I still have my login to the vastrightwingconsipracy.org, so I can still get my marching orders and think in lockstep with all the other Right Wing nutjobs, can't I?
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone know if they've announced a supermega pack of DVD's - meaning all the extended editions in one couch-potato special version?
....my only concern would be the stability and durability of the 'hopper during Mars' famed dust storms. AFAIK the winds there get to be something ferocious, and can last a long, long time. Even at the rarified air pressure of Mars, I'd guess this thing would fly like tumbleweed.
1. Take one of the greatest stories ever told in graphic novel format.
2. Have it done by the director that hideously butchered possibly one of the best spy novels ever written.
3. ??
4. Profit!
I'm not surprised Spybot did badly.
These things go in cycles, kind of like the Darwinism that didn't work quickly enough on the germ plasm that somehow evolved into the amoral mockeries of humankind that write spyware/malware.
Adaware was widely used for a while, then I started noticing that it wasn't working so well.
Then Spybot is/was hugely popular and extremely effective, so I've started to notice that it too is missing stuff now (or is unable to remove what it finds).
Virus...er...spyware writers are working against these programs, and it's only natural that they are evolving their code to defeat at least the most successful/widely used anti-spyware programs out there.
You wouldn't expect the flu inoculation from 5 years ago to protect you this year, would you? Spyware - and it's counteragents - are the same.
Let me see if I understand this.
/. are unlikely to be capable of empathizing, as it would require them to set aside their hip cynicism for a moment.
Kids are carrying ID cards with an RFID tag to track where they are.
Fact check:
1) kids are supposed to be in school during the day.
2) kids do NOT have the full set of rights allowed to adults.
And given the fact that these are portable cards, they have little big-brother value. (And frankly, little security vs. abduction value.) So really, we're talking tracing kids on an everyday basis - where are they? Anyone who's waited at a bus stop and realized in growing horror that their elementary schoolchild was somehow missing from their bus understands this. It's a feeling that the jaded onanists of
The most horrific thing a parent can imagine is the abduction of their child. In fact, most parents would PREFER their child die instantly instead of being the subject of a stranger abduction (with it's likelihood of only a much more horrible existence before death). It's not unreasonable at all that parents would want to do anything conceivable to prevent this. No matter how rarely it really happens (*most* abductions are custodial disputes and thus the child is rarely in real danger).
Who objects to tracking minors? Usually the older minors (who feel that they are "practically" adults anyway, and who (honestly) don't want to be tracked for all the wrong reasons...) and privacy activists. Tell you what: if the kids get RFID, so should the parents.
Personally, I bet good, non-hypocrite parents would be PERFECTLY HAPPY with people knowing their whereabouts at all time, in exchange for knowing where their kids are too.
And please, don't reply with the "whoever is willing to give up liberty for security deserves none" shat. That's an entirely empty-headed statement, since we CONSTANTLY trade liberty for security every single day, it's called civilization.
I did find it amusing that the article reminds us this system is used to track livestock. LOL.
I spent hours reverse-engineering Metroid's password system...
/.
It's nice to see that the unrepentant ubergeeks haven't left
OTOH, he/she DID post AC, maybe that means some shame....
Personally, I think Ashcroft is a poster-boy for the drama-queenishness of the left.
o w many, after 9/11, have been against civil American targets?
/. comments seem to suggest.
I don't know of anyone more personally vilified, slandered, and pretty much being accused of being a latter-day Hitler than John Ashcroft.
Why? Don't give me your vague wishy-washy crap about "eroded civil liberties" - what specifically can't you do now that you could do before?
His job at Justice is/was to enforce the laws, if you have a beef with the law, don't complain to the cop.
His argument on protecting America from terror is a little more comprehensive than you dismissively paint: check the listing of terrorist attacks at http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/5902.htm.
H
How many were there before 9/11, to compare apples/apples, let's limit it just to the previous 4 years?
To suggest that the terrorist threat is imagined as you imply, is ridiculous.
To point to a lack of 'terrorist' convictions is simply disingenuous or stupid. What was Al Capone put away for? Murder? Extortion? Racketeering? Hmm. I guess the FBI failed to prosecute him effectively too.
It probably will require you take off the tinfoil hat for a second, but READ THE PATRIOT ACT. There is very little in the entire act that grants the US Gov't any powers it didn't already have one way or another. Mainly, it's about streamlining procedures - hardly worth the "OMG teh gobbermint is teh debil!" response
His shortcomings - he didn't like bare breasted statues, fundamentalist views, attacking Islam:
1) last time I checked, people were still allowed to hold personal preferences, or was that overturned by the political correctness polics and I missed it? Do I have to validate my personal aesthetics with you first?
2) I know the Liberal Elite in this country would like to consider anyone with religious views as some sort of benighted rube or Untouchable, but you know churchgoers ARE people too, right? Or aren't they included in the "open-minded" liberal worldview?
3) attacking Islam - how? I've only heard him make carefully worded statements pointing at Islamofacists, not Islam in general. Any specifics or is that just more vague bitching?
Proposal:
To change the title of this site.
From: slashdot.org
to: (select one)
A) FUD.org
B) LiberalPropaganda.org
C) [close site, simply forward traffic to the tinfoill hattery already present at www.democraticunderground.com]
For those still not getting it, Parties to the Treaty undertake not to place in orbit around the Earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction, install such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner. is applicable to precisely 0% of the Guardian article.
Shut up! /.'ers realizing that yes, for another 4 more years, they're going to be bitching from the sidelines, instead of participating in government and making policies.
You're interrupting the mournful cry of
Personally, were I a liberal I'd be a little pissed off that my candidates insist on catering to the marginalia of politics instead of moderating their platform and ending up having SOME control of the process.
Stop it with your right wing apologia!
Logic has no place in the real of tinfoil hats!
In Russia, you recognize hardware!
Oh wait, that's not funny at all.
Well, we used to be allowed to say "hey, that dude's crazy, someone lock him up". Now that's impossible.
/. that would fight tooth&nail to prevent any sort of a swing back toward punishment, evaluation, or any sort of govt surveillance.
Granted, such a system is open for abuse and exploitation by the powerful against the powerless.
But now you have multiple serial rapists/murderers going to a couple of years of outpatient 'counseling' are declared 'cured' and *nobody* is allowed to keep an eye on them or treat them in any way differently in fear of violating their civil rights.
Needless to say that at this point, the pendulum has swung too far in favor of civil rights, but there are a lot of people who post on
Basically, you can't have it both ways. "Freedom" and "Security" are at the extremes mutually exclusive (at least when you are talking about Homo Sapiens Sapiens as we know them). A society that is 100% based on "civil liberties uber alles" is little more than a State of Nature. Empty-headed slogans aside, the concept of 'society' is the needful trading of liberties for security on many levels.
Funny, I was going to blame Republicans, the DMCA, the RIAA, the MPAA or simply GW Bush. One of them MUST be to blame for any violation of privacy, aren't they?
expectations and interest level.
You're comparing apples and oranges. Text MUDs running since 1990 have an inherent bias in their self-selecting audience: serious, long term computer users from the days when they were called hobbyists.
Current MMOGs have to attract people who are largely NON computer users or unfamiliar with MUDs to play, and frankly they demand a heckuva lot more graphically than MUDs typically offer.
Which is 'best'? A text MUD that's had 5,000-10,000 players for 15 years (*HUGE* for a MUD), or City of Heroes that has somewhere around 250,000 subscribers since it started in May?
Yes, the text MUD has been around longer, but the diehard players are a finite resource. Take those players away, and you will not be able to replace them. Take the 250,000 players away from CoH and it's arguable that they'd pretty quickly replace themselves, even with a pay-per-month subscription fee.
Exit polls typically favor democratic candidates.
It's a truism among long time campaign operatives that liberal voters are far more likely to wear their vote on their sleeve, and thus respond to any polling, surveys, etc.
Conservative voters have an inherent "MYOB" response.
As an American, I thank you.
We have enough asshats already, so your absence, while not at all noted, is appreciated.
If the Patriot Act (or, lacking actual evidence, the fear of what it *might* do) keeps paranoid leftists out of our country, then it's even better than advertised.
You know what? The cops could pull me over on my way home from work today for no reason, and I wouldn't immediately feel 'oppressed'. If they had a good reason (vis. the story above about accidentally driving down an access road and deciding to take pictures of a power plant), it wouldn't phase me a bit. If they didn't have a good reason, I'd prefer that they spend their limited time chasing real crooks, but it wouldn't be that big a deal.
It may sound like I'm joking, but I'm serious: there are far, far too many people in the world that look at the US as some lust/hate object. People that deplore the shallow, materialistic culture of the US and then come here to shop and are huge fans of American movies. People that decry capitalism, but are happy to go to school here. People that say that our social services are hopelessly farked, yet travel halfway across the world to use our hospitals. People that complain about the burgeoning U.S. police state when anyone who knows what it's like to LIVE in a police state knows that in a REAL police state (not just a limousine liberal's fantasy version) such people would have been stuffed into a Gulag or ended up dead in a nameless ditch long ago.
Well, if these people feel that somehow finally that they may pay some sort of price for their their hatred of the US (in comments, print, or blogged), then good riddance.
Yes, because for the majority of the country outside the coastal elites, the word "intellectual" is synonymous with "snobbish asswipe".
I'd say it's higher ranked for me, but still not the primary concern. A president is a figurehead; he has coterie of advisors, cabinet members, party flak(E)s, and assorted hangers-on to advise him of the details on any particular issue.
I'd far rather have a person as president of average intelligence but highly ethical and with a strong sense of personal morality, than a 'genius' sociopath with no sense of morality beyond his own self-interest. Hypothetically speaking on both counts, of course.
Aside from all the subsequently blinded pilots and geese, it's a great idea!
You're right.
/sarcasm
Since the US is the world's only superpower remaining, it should 'play fair' and only deploy technologies that are easily countered by it's second-tier potential adversaries.
And heaven forfend that it might try to anticipate and counter future technologies....why, that's like CHEATING!*
Oh yeah, by the way, I'm not sure slashdot noticed, but it ISN'T A FUCKING GAME. There IS no cheating in geopolitics, only winners and losers. If terrorists smuggle a 20kt nuke into a city in an ocean container, what are you going to do, cry that it was a hack and beg to start over?
In real life you can't kick the enemy from your server if he uses an aimbot, you simply lose and he gets to write the history.
Apparently only the U.S. is allowed to decide who can use and deploy basic technology.
As long as we can control it, we will. Anything otherwise is stupid. And in that same vein, I don't blame any other state for trying to break our monopoly on strategic power. I'm not rooting for you to succeed, but I certainly don't blame you for trying.
The moment another power presents a credible threat to the US that we cannot eliminate relatively safely, American hegemony ends, and we go back to a multipolar world. But for the US defense system to do anything BUT try to shortcut/eliminate/erase such possibilities would be a failure in their primary responsibilities.
Personally, I would suggest God read PJ O'Rourke.
(Apologies if I misquote this), but whenever he is baffled by the bumbling fools put forth as 'leaders' in our political system, he just remembers high school:
- the social people were out having fun
- the talented were playing sports, or doing debate, or drama, or whatever
- the go-getters were out working to save money for college
- the intelligent were reading or working on experiments
- the burnouts were off doing drugs
- and it's only the complete asswipes that were left to run for student government.
We respectfully submit that there are a lot of very talented people in our country that find the idea of running someone ELSE's life uninteresting, if not downright abhorrent, and a significant fraction of the remainder just find politicians to be one step removed from tapeworms.
Combine that with the ridiculous shallowness and excruciatingly personal examination made by the media of every candidate, and this weeds out the few actual altruists who would be willing to suffer through a government job to perform useful service for their country. No, thanks.
Channel One, the media channel for High School kids, had their mock election last week also.
Annihilating win for Bush. Electoral votes 393 to 145, popular vote was 55/45 Bush.
Interestingly (but not surprising), the TEACHERS in the same schools also voted, 85/15 for Kerry.
The GOP doesnt like to lose
/. would this be considered "informative" and not "troll". :(
Only on
If you are a free marketeer, this shouldn't bother you because it's simply a widening of the competitive market for labor to international levels. If US employees and laws cannot be competitive, maybe it behooves us to help bring the rest of the world up closer to our standard of living so that they won't so easily undercut us.
On the other hand, if you're a bleeding-heart internationalist, what's wrong with people from India or whatever country doing these jobs? If they can (in Dell's case) learn english to a degree that they are indistinguishable from cust svc people in the US, what's the problem? They can use the US$ far more than we can here.
Oooh CENSORSHIP....oooh... Bush hates the world!
/.er's and John Kerry like to point out how much everyone around the world hates GWB, then how unreasonable is it for the Bush campaign to block their ability to even access his site?
Or, it could be just to pre-empt the general asshattery and shenanigans that we've all come to expect from the unwashed good-for-nothing leftists across the world.
Let's look: how did the "I don't have a job so I'm going to throw bricks instead" demographic behave at the last few WTO conferences?
Since
People who support GWB will understand, and people who oppose him are unwelcome there anyway. For the 0.0001% of true 'undecideds' out there, I hope they're bright enough to get their political information from some other sources than the candidates' websites.
In any case, I still have my login to the vastrightwingconsipracy.org, so I can still get my marching orders and think in lockstep with all the other Right Wing nutjobs, can't I?
Graphite Ablation problem?
Um...... try an eraser?