The only distros that are going to have trouble with secure boot and GPLv3 are those which distribute preinstalled OSes. How many distros even do that? Sure, the big commercial ones might, but 95% of the distros out there are installed from CDs, and as long as they don't conspire with hardware vendors to have their distros signed by some pre-trusted key then they're fine.
I just wish that the command set included the ability to print its config file. 95% of the time I struggle to remember what the full boot line was, and I don't mind guessing at devices when they somehow change if I didn't have to guess at everything else.
GPLv3 requires unlocked hardware, mandating that if the user is in not in charge, the user is not allowed to use the software.
The GPL places no restrictions at all on use. It places restrictions on distribution.
I can stick GPL software on whatever system I want to, even if I lack the ability to later modify it. However, if I sell that system to somebody else, then I've got a legal problem.
As long as GRUB isn't on the system when it is sold, there is no GPL issue. That means that Ubuntu can't sell PCs with GRUB pre-loaded on them if they use secure boot without disclosing the signing key, unless it is possible for the user to modify the secure boot keys (which, by the way, is possible on MS-compliant x86 hardware).
I've got no issues with Ubuntu from being blocked from distributing locked-down PCs that users can't modify. If only the kernel were GPL3 then maybe we wouldn't all be stuck having to root our phones...
Re:Tab syncing: first thing I'll disable
on
Google I/O Day Two
·
· Score: 1
The article mentioned pre-fetching and such. Unless the cache is transferred over https as well that means that your browser will be sending out random GETs to half the internet.
Granted that is already an issue even without this feature. It is just compounded when my home browsing habits are exported to my work computer.
I can completely respect that - and I'd be the first to say that you should have this freedom.
However, few actually have the integrity to follow-through when they're faced with death. Many will beg for mercy. Now the rest of us are forced to decide whether to make them lie in the bed they made for themselves, or offer them mercy. If we're going to do the latter, then we've essentially eliminated your freedom to choose.
It is much easier to choose to be a libertarian when you're in an above-average position than when you're not.
If it were up to me I'd let people opt-out, but with the condition that they can't opt back in unless they pack back their share of the social burden. If they get sick before they do that, then they're stuck with the choice they made. If they're not sure this is what they want, then pay the tax and then accept the handout if you need it.
However, many don't have the stomach to allow others to die, especially when they aren't able to render decisions for themselves.
The problem is, what if you really need all those functions? Suppose my typical record is to copy an existing record and modify it. That's an extra button. You can simplify by just making the user always type one from scratch, but you've eliminated the ability to not have to enter 47 fields.
You can argue that you don't need 47 fields, and that's nice in theory, but in practice sometimes you really need all 47 of them...
I haven't been to the doctor since my parents paid the bills (decades ago) and I don't plan on going again for anything that won't kill me within the week.
Great, and what happens when you do contract some disease that will kill you within the week? Do you want us to just let you die if you don't have the cash on hand?
The problem is that if you allow people to decline coverage, then you can't cover pre-existing conditions (or every insurance company will go bankrupt when anybody with half of a brain just signs up for insurance from the hospital bed). Insurance companies generally abuse pre-existing conditions. So, the law is basically the lesser of three evils (mandatory private insurance, mandatory public insurance, or discretionary insurance and no coverage for pre-existing conditions).
Re:Tab syncing: first thing I'll disable
on
Google I/O Day Two
·
· Score: 1
So, your browser won't actually display any not-safe-for-work links, but the folks monitoring all your communications will think that it did.:)
Since Chrome lacks the ability to distinguish between home/work anyway I have to use multiple accounts. I don't want one set of bookmarks shared across them...
Yup. I always see people calling MS dumb for having so much legacy code. However, it is largely the reason they are in business today.
If I could get my hands on the calc.exe from windows v2 there is a half-decent chance that if I double-clicked on it on Win7 that it would load. Ditto for some DOS executable. Sure, my system doesn't have an ISA bus, but I wouldn't be surprised if somebody has a driver for one somewhere. I'm pretty sure a floppy drive still works, even a 360k one. Plus, their server/client sides tend to be widely compatible, so you don't have to change everything at once.
The MS mantra so far has tended to be that business can keep whatever they have. That makes them the easy choice. Take that away, and now you suddenly are dealing with competitive bids on everything you do. Why would a company that wins hands-down invite competition?
Maybe, but if you're going to do all the work server-side and just use the client to do presentation, why not do it in html5 or something which at least works just about everywhere? Why lock into yet another platform-dependent toolkit, when the company making the toolkit tends to move on and has near-zero market share on any platform other than the dekstop? You might as well stick with win32...
Write once run anywhere? Don't we already have that with Java (ducks)?
And it will go over about as well with Metro. For starters, your runs on any Win8 phone feature is meaningless when nobody runs Windows on their phone. There is no dominant OS on phones, and iOS is the dominant tablet OS right now (though it remains to be seen if the tablet market becomes a repeat of the phone market - early mover advantage followed by diversification).
If you want your app to run on everything better use tools that work across OSes made by more than one manufacturer. That either means html+javascript, or an app written in some kind of toolkit like QT/etc.
Win XP was really a win/win. If you were on the 95 code base you got an OS that no longer crashed twice a day. If you were on the NT code base you got an OS that was supported by anything you could buy in a store.
The business case just hasn't been there with much of anything since. I do like some of the UI improvements in Win7, but it is a huge cost to upgrade for any large business. There are many applications at my workplace being moved to Citrix or in less-used cases XP-based virtual desktops, simply because they don't work on Win7. No doubt there is a reason for that, but pointing fingers doesn't fix the problem, and we're stuck paying for it no matter whose fault it is. Companies like to avoid disruption - while I could lose my job if I botched the Win7 upgrade, there is no way I will get a promotion out of it going well. There is just no benefit from upgrading an OS beyond cost avoidance.
This is not unlike replacing roofs on your buildings. Sure, everybody knows it will be done, and will pay for it as a result. However, nobody says "I REALLY want a new roof" unless it leaks.
Can't vouch for numbers, but in my LUG it seems like most of the Ubuntu users are bending over backwards to avoid Unity. I saw a demo by a fairly senior (non-Canonical) person in the Ubuntu world and they were basically apologetic in introducing it. Some run older versions, and many are openly trying out other distros looking for something better.
Now, where I have seen it liked is on things like netbooks - which makes sense. A tablet UI makes far more sense on a netbook than a conventional laptop or desktop.
As for me - I have different priorities and never really adopted Ubuntu. I tend to prefer DE-neutral distros - I'm on KDE without nepomuk right now, and mainly because I can configure it to be fairly minimal and they finally have it working again.
Just wait until Gnome turns into the next Ubuntu. You'll really hear the gnashing of teeth - it will be like trinity all over again but with a bigger userbase...
I seriously hope you were joking there... Why do you think that most large business don't roll out Apple on the desktop.
Sure, they tolerate managers bringing them in as long as they pay for their own gear. That doesn't really cost much (at least, it won't cost much until targeted viruses start hitting them and they're suddenly having to create standard images and manage them).
The reason that most employers take so long to upgrade OSes isn't because they can't afford the licenses (most have a subscription deal so they've paid for versions they never deploy). The reason is simply that it costs a fortune. Most IT departments can barely keep track of the software THEY deployed, let alone every little thing somebody bought on a CD and installed. When you upgrade the OS all that stuff needs to be tested, and often it needs to be upgraded. This is death by a million paper cuts. You still miss the odd thing used by 3 people, but in a big company half the employees might use an odd thing used by 3 people, so everybody is upset.
Plus, the consumer experience doesn't really hit everything. The consumer experience is great for verifying that your web browser will work with amazon or hulu. It isn't so great for verifying that the browser works with your SAP system that is held together by duct tape and displays on-screen reports that have simulated green-bar paper in their background and a courier font that screams dot-matrix (I kid you not - I've seen implementations like this). The experience is great for making sure the app store works, but generally lousy for making sure that your packaged software repository and auto-update system works. Maybe some consumer users check the box for full-disk encryption, but I doubt they use the key escrow feature.
Needs in the enterprise just tend to be different.
The problem with that kind of logic is that it results in things like screens that are no longer information-dense. When I want to look at my list of emails I want to see 50 messages on it, with a list of 50 folders, and a half-screen preview as well. No big deal if you assume a mouse, since you can make each message about 3mm high which is still readable and easy to hit with a mouse.
When you design something for a touch-screen you inevitably end up making everything big. So, now my list has 10 items on it, so I'm constantly scrolling. Usually touch-screen interfaces end up with flinging scrolls at that which means that it is hard to scan stuff as I scroll - if I'm just jumping by discrete pages I can watch one spot and see where I'm at.
I guess I'm not the target audience, but I just don't see how I'd get work done on a tablet-like OS. I can see how they're great for blasting through an inbox, or viewing content. However, for the other 90% of people who have an income and have to actually create stuff, I don't see how it helps. Most of the people I see gawking over tablets are either managers at work (who don't actually create stuff), teenagers (who don't create stuff), or ordinary people for home / entertainment use (they do create stuff, but that isn't what they're using their tablets for). I've got no problems with the fact that a TV or XBox isn't great for word processing or spreadsheets, since that isn't their purpose.
I know that executives like growth, and tablets are a growth market. However, there are still FAR more PCs than tablets, and those bottom lines won't be looking so good if they gut their PC market to gain tablets, unless they can control prices enough to charge MUCH more.
I'd think that unless you were playing a very large number of rounds such that you could infer the opponent's PRNG function and seed, or unless the opponent PRNG was REALLY bad, this would not work.
Maybe if the seed were the time to the nearest hour you might be OK. However, if it used time to a millisecond then you'd have almost no chance of success. Any decent PRNG will show what would appear to be completely different behavior with even a slightly different seed.
Now, if the PRNG were really lousy maybe you'd have a shot. It just seems unlikely that such a function would exist in any well-used library since the 60s. Sure, lots of functions are inadequate for cryptography, but even defeating these poor algorithms usually requires lots of data collection and a huge search. A PRNG that takes 5 years of supercomputer time would be considered broken, since a brute force keysearch might require the age of the universe. That doesn't mean that you're going to defeat it with a few rounds of RPS to figure out what it is doing.
Yup, I've never seen a country that truly had socialized medicine when it comes to stuff like this.
The only difference is that in some countries preferential treatment has a clearly advertised price, and in others it involves some kind of side deal.
Either way, I've yet to see a head of state wait in line for an organ anywhere. Actually, I've yet to see one wait in any kind of line for anything anywhere, unless it was for a planned PR photo.
The value of various currencies does vary from place to place. In some places cash isn't worth as much as reputation with the power brokers, and celebrity has substantial value in some places. However, stuff like this rarely comes down to pure merit or true random selection.
At my employer I was walking through the office area that was doing much of the SAP work. There was a sign for change management pointing to a big cube farm. They needed an army of people just to juggle bug statuses.
Well, you can file a counter claim whether I have no evidence or not. The issue is that to prevail on your counter-claim YOU need evidence to back it up (the burden of proof shifts).
You can defeat by claims by pointing out a lack of evidence. However, that same lack of evidence is not sufficient on its own to prevail on a counterclaim of vexatious litigation. You need to demonstrate that my suit was somehow frivolous.
From what I've seen in the legal system judges are very reluctant to award costs to defendants - the case needs to be VERY obviously one of malice to get anything.
When the kernel changes any mainline drivers are updated along with it. That's the carrot in the contribute-your-source problem. Nouveau isn't suffering from kernel changes as a result.
Nvidia is paying the price every time the kernel changes already.
True, and I'm not sure how much profit there is in $250M worth of purchases compared to the up-front costs/etc.
I was talking to a guy in a defense contractor, and they were looking to develop some kind of smartphone for the US armed forces. They went to some phone vendor and told them that they could guarantee them a few million phones worth of business. The phone vendor explained to them that they sold a few million phones every day.
Gotta keep perspective. That said, would be nice if the nvidia folks mainstreamed their drivers...
Yup, I was walking around in a building I usually don't frequent at work and saw a sign that could be translated as "SAP Change Control" - it pointed to a cube farm, now nearly vacant as the SAP implementation is mostly done. I have no doubts that at one point of time they had 40 people doing nothing but keeping track of bug statuses.
I'd argue that Obama had a chance when he first took office, but there was no way he'd make any traction on that and healthcare. Politically not tackling healthcare would have been suicide - not that many are happy with the results.
The problems in the US are far bigger than who is in the White House. Heck - there was an avalanche of calls from constituents opposing the bailouts and it was basically ignored. And only a huge emergency seems to motivate any action at all on these issues. I'm not convinced that we'll ever fix the problem until we're faced with an emergency so large that we're beyond being able to fix it.
Slashdot Mirror
The only distros that are going to have trouble with secure boot and GPLv3 are those which distribute preinstalled OSes. How many distros even do that? Sure, the big commercial ones might, but 95% of the distros out there are installed from CDs, and as long as they don't conspire with hardware vendors to have their distros signed by some pre-trusted key then they're fine.
I just wish that the command set included the ability to print its config file. 95% of the time I struggle to remember what the full boot line was, and I don't mind guessing at devices when they somehow change if I didn't have to guess at everything else.
GPLv3 requires unlocked hardware, mandating that if the user is in not in charge, the user is not allowed to use the software.
The GPL places no restrictions at all on use. It places restrictions on distribution.
I can stick GPL software on whatever system I want to, even if I lack the ability to later modify it. However, if I sell that system to somebody else, then I've got a legal problem.
As long as GRUB isn't on the system when it is sold, there is no GPL issue. That means that Ubuntu can't sell PCs with GRUB pre-loaded on them if they use secure boot without disclosing the signing key, unless it is possible for the user to modify the secure boot keys (which, by the way, is possible on MS-compliant x86 hardware).
I've got no issues with Ubuntu from being blocked from distributing locked-down PCs that users can't modify. If only the kernel were GPL3 then maybe we wouldn't all be stuck having to root our phones...
The article mentioned pre-fetching and such. Unless the cache is transferred over https as well that means that your browser will be sending out random GETs to half the internet.
Granted that is already an issue even without this feature. It is just compounded when my home browsing habits are exported to my work computer.
I can completely respect that - and I'd be the first to say that you should have this freedom.
However, few actually have the integrity to follow-through when they're faced with death. Many will beg for mercy. Now the rest of us are forced to decide whether to make them lie in the bed they made for themselves, or offer them mercy. If we're going to do the latter, then we've essentially eliminated your freedom to choose.
It is much easier to choose to be a libertarian when you're in an above-average position than when you're not.
If it were up to me I'd let people opt-out, but with the condition that they can't opt back in unless they pack back their share of the social burden. If they get sick before they do that, then they're stuck with the choice they made. If they're not sure this is what they want, then pay the tax and then accept the handout if you need it.
However, many don't have the stomach to allow others to die, especially when they aren't able to render decisions for themselves.
The problem is, what if you really need all those functions? Suppose my typical record is to copy an existing record and modify it. That's an extra button. You can simplify by just making the user always type one from scratch, but you've eliminated the ability to not have to enter 47 fields.
You can argue that you don't need 47 fields, and that's nice in theory, but in practice sometimes you really need all 47 of them...
I haven't been to the doctor since my parents paid the bills (decades ago) and I don't plan on going again for anything that won't kill me within the week.
Great, and what happens when you do contract some disease that will kill you within the week? Do you want us to just let you die if you don't have the cash on hand?
The problem is that if you allow people to decline coverage, then you can't cover pre-existing conditions (or every insurance company will go bankrupt when anybody with half of a brain just signs up for insurance from the hospital bed). Insurance companies generally abuse pre-existing conditions. So, the law is basically the lesser of three evils (mandatory private insurance, mandatory public insurance, or discretionary insurance and no coverage for pre-existing conditions).
So, your browser won't actually display any not-safe-for-work links, but the folks monitoring all your communications will think that it did. :)
Since Chrome lacks the ability to distinguish between home/work anyway I have to use multiple accounts. I don't want one set of bookmarks shared across them...
They're allowed, but they're not used for much more than reading email and such. It isn't like they can run the 40 bazillion IE-only apps in use.
Yup. I always see people calling MS dumb for having so much legacy code. However, it is largely the reason they are in business today.
If I could get my hands on the calc.exe from windows v2 there is a half-decent chance that if I double-clicked on it on Win7 that it would load. Ditto for some DOS executable. Sure, my system doesn't have an ISA bus, but I wouldn't be surprised if somebody has a driver for one somewhere. I'm pretty sure a floppy drive still works, even a 360k one. Plus, their server/client sides tend to be widely compatible, so you don't have to change everything at once.
The MS mantra so far has tended to be that business can keep whatever they have. That makes them the easy choice. Take that away, and now you suddenly are dealing with competitive bids on everything you do. Why would a company that wins hands-down invite competition?
Maybe, but if you're going to do all the work server-side and just use the client to do presentation, why not do it in html5 or something which at least works just about everywhere? Why lock into yet another platform-dependent toolkit, when the company making the toolkit tends to move on and has near-zero market share on any platform other than the dekstop? You might as well stick with win32...
Write once run anywhere? Don't we already have that with Java (ducks)?
And it will go over about as well with Metro. For starters, your runs on any Win8 phone feature is meaningless when nobody runs Windows on their phone. There is no dominant OS on phones, and iOS is the dominant tablet OS right now (though it remains to be seen if the tablet market becomes a repeat of the phone market - early mover advantage followed by diversification).
If you want your app to run on everything better use tools that work across OSes made by more than one manufacturer. That either means html+javascript, or an app written in some kind of toolkit like QT/etc.
Many businesses were also running on NT.
Win XP was really a win/win. If you were on the 95 code base you got an OS that no longer crashed twice a day. If you were on the NT code base you got an OS that was supported by anything you could buy in a store.
The business case just hasn't been there with much of anything since. I do like some of the UI improvements in Win7, but it is a huge cost to upgrade for any large business. There are many applications at my workplace being moved to Citrix or in less-used cases XP-based virtual desktops, simply because they don't work on Win7. No doubt there is a reason for that, but pointing fingers doesn't fix the problem, and we're stuck paying for it no matter whose fault it is. Companies like to avoid disruption - while I could lose my job if I botched the Win7 upgrade, there is no way I will get a promotion out of it going well. There is just no benefit from upgrading an OS beyond cost avoidance.
This is not unlike replacing roofs on your buildings. Sure, everybody knows it will be done, and will pay for it as a result. However, nobody says "I REALLY want a new roof" unless it leaks.
Can't vouch for numbers, but in my LUG it seems like most of the Ubuntu users are bending over backwards to avoid Unity. I saw a demo by a fairly senior (non-Canonical) person in the Ubuntu world and they were basically apologetic in introducing it. Some run older versions, and many are openly trying out other distros looking for something better.
Now, where I have seen it liked is on things like netbooks - which makes sense. A tablet UI makes far more sense on a netbook than a conventional laptop or desktop.
As for me - I have different priorities and never really adopted Ubuntu. I tend to prefer DE-neutral distros - I'm on KDE without nepomuk right now, and mainly because I can configure it to be fairly minimal and they finally have it working again.
Just wait until Gnome turns into the next Ubuntu. You'll really hear the gnashing of teeth - it will be like trinity all over again but with a bigger userbase...
I seriously hope you were joking there... Why do you think that most large business don't roll out Apple on the desktop.
Sure, they tolerate managers bringing them in as long as they pay for their own gear. That doesn't really cost much (at least, it won't cost much until targeted viruses start hitting them and they're suddenly having to create standard images and manage them).
The reason that most employers take so long to upgrade OSes isn't because they can't afford the licenses (most have a subscription deal so they've paid for versions they never deploy). The reason is simply that it costs a fortune. Most IT departments can barely keep track of the software THEY deployed, let alone every little thing somebody bought on a CD and installed. When you upgrade the OS all that stuff needs to be tested, and often it needs to be upgraded. This is death by a million paper cuts. You still miss the odd thing used by 3 people, but in a big company half the employees might use an odd thing used by 3 people, so everybody is upset.
Plus, the consumer experience doesn't really hit everything. The consumer experience is great for verifying that your web browser will work with amazon or hulu. It isn't so great for verifying that the browser works with your SAP system that is held together by duct tape and displays on-screen reports that have simulated green-bar paper in their background and a courier font that screams dot-matrix (I kid you not - I've seen implementations like this). The experience is great for making sure the app store works, but generally lousy for making sure that your packaged software repository and auto-update system works. Maybe some consumer users check the box for full-disk encryption, but I doubt they use the key escrow feature.
Needs in the enterprise just tend to be different.
The problem with that kind of logic is that it results in things like screens that are no longer information-dense. When I want to look at my list of emails I want to see 50 messages on it, with a list of 50 folders, and a half-screen preview as well. No big deal if you assume a mouse, since you can make each message about 3mm high which is still readable and easy to hit with a mouse.
When you design something for a touch-screen you inevitably end up making everything big. So, now my list has 10 items on it, so I'm constantly scrolling. Usually touch-screen interfaces end up with flinging scrolls at that which means that it is hard to scan stuff as I scroll - if I'm just jumping by discrete pages I can watch one spot and see where I'm at.
I guess I'm not the target audience, but I just don't see how I'd get work done on a tablet-like OS. I can see how they're great for blasting through an inbox, or viewing content. However, for the other 90% of people who have an income and have to actually create stuff, I don't see how it helps. Most of the people I see gawking over tablets are either managers at work (who don't actually create stuff), teenagers (who don't create stuff), or ordinary people for home / entertainment use (they do create stuff, but that isn't what they're using their tablets for). I've got no problems with the fact that a TV or XBox isn't great for word processing or spreadsheets, since that isn't their purpose.
I know that executives like growth, and tablets are a growth market. However, there are still FAR more PCs than tablets, and those bottom lines won't be looking so good if they gut their PC market to gain tablets, unless they can control prices enough to charge MUCH more.
I'd think that unless you were playing a very large number of rounds such that you could infer the opponent's PRNG function and seed, or unless the opponent PRNG was REALLY bad, this would not work.
Maybe if the seed were the time to the nearest hour you might be OK. However, if it used time to a millisecond then you'd have almost no chance of success. Any decent PRNG will show what would appear to be completely different behavior with even a slightly different seed.
Now, if the PRNG were really lousy maybe you'd have a shot. It just seems unlikely that such a function would exist in any well-used library since the 60s. Sure, lots of functions are inadequate for cryptography, but even defeating these poor algorithms usually requires lots of data collection and a huge search. A PRNG that takes 5 years of supercomputer time would be considered broken, since a brute force keysearch might require the age of the universe. That doesn't mean that you're going to defeat it with a few rounds of RPS to figure out what it is doing.
Yup, I've never seen a country that truly had socialized medicine when it comes to stuff like this.
The only difference is that in some countries preferential treatment has a clearly advertised price, and in others it involves some kind of side deal.
Either way, I've yet to see a head of state wait in line for an organ anywhere. Actually, I've yet to see one wait in any kind of line for anything anywhere, unless it was for a planned PR photo.
The value of various currencies does vary from place to place. In some places cash isn't worth as much as reputation with the power brokers, and celebrity has substantial value in some places. However, stuff like this rarely comes down to pure merit or true random selection.
At my employer I was walking through the office area that was doing much of the SAP work. There was a sign for change management pointing to a big cube farm. They needed an army of people just to juggle bug statuses.
Well, you can file a counter claim whether I have no evidence or not. The issue is that to prevail on your counter-claim YOU need evidence to back it up (the burden of proof shifts).
You can defeat by claims by pointing out a lack of evidence. However, that same lack of evidence is not sufficient on its own to prevail on a counterclaim of vexatious litigation. You need to demonstrate that my suit was somehow frivolous.
From what I've seen in the legal system judges are very reluctant to award costs to defendants - the case needs to be VERY obviously one of malice to get anything.
When the kernel changes any mainline drivers are updated along with it. That's the carrot in the contribute-your-source problem. Nouveau isn't suffering from kernel changes as a result.
Nvidia is paying the price every time the kernel changes already.
The burden of proof would be on him to prove that my intent is malicious.
I never said I'd sue him for being ugly. I just need to make a claim that is plausible, if not provable.
True, and I'm not sure how much profit there is in $250M worth of purchases compared to the up-front costs/etc.
I was talking to a guy in a defense contractor, and they were looking to develop some kind of smartphone for the US armed forces. They went to some phone vendor and told them that they could guarantee them a few million phones worth of business. The phone vendor explained to them that they sold a few million phones every day.
Gotta keep perspective. That said, would be nice if the nvidia folks mainstreamed their drivers...
Yup, I was walking around in a building I usually don't frequent at work and saw a sign that could be translated as "SAP Change Control" - it pointed to a cube farm, now nearly vacant as the SAP implementation is mostly done. I have no doubts that at one point of time they had 40 people doing nothing but keeping track of bug statuses.
I'd argue that Obama had a chance when he first took office, but there was no way he'd make any traction on that and healthcare. Politically not tackling healthcare would have been suicide - not that many are happy with the results.
The problems in the US are far bigger than who is in the White House. Heck - there was an avalanche of calls from constituents opposing the bailouts and it was basically ignored. And only a huge emergency seems to motivate any action at all on these issues. I'm not convinced that we'll ever fix the problem until we're faced with an emergency so large that we're beyond being able to fix it.