Where I live, I have some of those; and not others. I do know what you mean:) What I do have here is some serious scenery and 5000 foot vertical hiking opportunity (and a small town full of very great people who aren't stuck in the 50s culturally:)
Have an option on a farmhouse about 12 miles out right now; hope I win the sale. It'll put a burden on my finances right now, and means I'll have to give up any fulltime internet, but I'm finding I'm caring less and less for that, so it's not much of a sacrifice, I guess.
My fridge is still full of last years venison...I can't eat it fast enough, especially since my SO went back to her hometown to find work. She says she's coming back this summer...she's not the kind to not scare the neighbors sunning, but she's my oldest and closest friend. That counts for me most.
Gardens - miss digging dirt out from under the fingernails. Seriously. Been here a year and no communal gardens; just clay in the backyard. Hope I win that year option on the 40 acre farm property. (that's a whole friccin 50kword short story on it's own right now) Doing the apartment living thing right now, tomorrow (Easter) going to rake, seed and spread 24-3-3 on the lawn for the landlord. Nice to find one who appreciates and compensates for what I consider fun - he also pays for the birdfeeders and flowerpots I build. Doing garden here would mean building and cultivating a 12"+ raised bed, and I don't want to put the money into something that would die after I left. *shrug*
Been back and forth on the tradeoffs in this and that living for twenty some years. What's got me now, tho, is being able to browse 60 million years of geology within a couple miles hike; that and being around people who are old-fashioned yet are not stuck in the 19th century moral wise, if you know what I mean:)
That, and more job offers than I can possibly deal with in a town of 10k and a state of 600k:) liking South Dakota. Very much. The acreage I'm lusting after is outside my budget, but it's at the foot at the third highest peak in the Black Hills!:) Woot! Trying to convince myself to go into debt again...it's hard. Meanwhile I'm getting paid well to essentially teach how to fix things. Been here a year May 15th; think I've found home again.
Gotta go check the beer perking in the closet before I crash tonite, too, come to think of it. Dangit, list of things to do is almost as long as my overtime hours.:) Fscking slashdot addiction.
Cheers, zogger
SB
PS Zogger, do you follow/post Backwoods Home / Countryside sites?
Provided the developer hasn't lost interest in maintaining that code anymore, provide he still has time to work on it, provided he hasn't changed his email, provided he's not too busy working on the latest bit of tech that caught his interest now.
If you're paying for this type of service then you have an SLA specifying what type of support and the supported life of the product. You don't have to worry about the product no longer being supported. The provider is required by the contract (SLA) to offer you the type of support for the specified length of the product. It's something you can count on more.
I'll counter that by pointing out how many companies have gone out of business or dropped support for products and left the users SOL (Microsoft in particular comes to mind, and there are some projects that the Fed should have spanked them for, but didn't).
Some of these open source projects have tons of people contributing code and it is one of the reason's that they have been able to progress so rapidly. It took 10's 100's 1000's of people to write the software, it'll take that many to review it in a timely manner.
Sorry, but I can't see how it takes anywhere near the same number of people to review already written code (and parse the history of such) as it does to develop it from scratch.
They know company XXX isn't going to screw them
Do they? Like you said, it's a matter of trust - and government projects haven't been screwed by corporations before? Whether or not there's a back door is irrelevant; lots of government institutions have been screwed over by vulnerabilities in windows software recently (not intentionally, I'll add, but just thru lazy stupidity and greed)
Background checks, even thorough ones, are not foolproof, either. That's relevant to your inside employees also.
With open source, it's not as easy to build trust since almost anyone can go in and change the code and you don't know who they really are.
In most serious open source projects, you can't submit to them unless you do verify, to some extent, who you are. The code also gets looked at very seriously, and if it's questionable, you can damned well bet you'll either get tracked back or blacklisted. Are you saying that mil/NSA/gov devs don't have the resources to do a more thorough job? I fail to see your argument there. I've never been a gov contractor, tho, so there might be something I'm missing.
WRT to your last sentence, I'm not arguing that, either. I'm just saying that open source software (code) is a lot easier to deal with when you want to use a outside source to build on - because you don't have to pay thru the nose for something you are going to have to audit internally anyway; and that you nearly always have the option of contacting a original writer who is more likely concerned about problem solving rather than IP rights and patents.
Seriously, if you have to build an operating system for something, is it not easier to build off of others work, and is it not easier to do so if you don't have to include proprietary costs (licensing, support fees, and upgrade fees, ad nauseum) in your budget?
*shrug* We agree, I think, just taking different approaches at it:)
Anyway, it's late and I'm becoming braindead. Feel free to reply - this is interesting - but I may not reply until tomorrow is somewhat advanced (Happy Easter, I'm sleeping in:)
Info from the NSA certainly filters down to the military, tho, so one could argue that they are part of the chain. But I may just be blowing smoke there:)
I take it that tactical (?battlefield CCC?) is essentially written from scratch "inhouse" then? If so, that's a very good thing IMO. Gotta be damned difficult tho.
WRT to spyware (and windows 98) the dot.net shit was always my worst enemy. Half the time the "uninstaller" would fuck up and trash the network stack. Fixable, as I eventually figured out, but a major PITA.
I swore eternal opposition to spyware bastards about that time...what do you do? You can block it as much as possible but then some other clicky comes along and you're faced with a new problem (or educate your users, like wrt to Gator, then they change their name:)
Why can't these assholes contribute to doing something useful for the users for once rather than something that is primarily aimed at the companies' bottom line? Degenerate assholes.
(Sorry for the rant, but I'm sure you understand my frustration:)
Talking about the openess of the linux code, there's another question I always wonder nobody asks. Sure Linux is open source and that's what helps it get better but I don't see the argument in terms of cost and security. Saying "you have the source you can see how secure it is" doesn't work for me. People buy an OS because it's cheaper to spend a few hundred or a few grand per PC than it is to hire the staff to build their own OS. Having to have the staff that can review, maintain and patch their own linux kernel alone isn't easy. It's something like 1.5 million lines of code right now. People want an OS that just works and is cheaper than building one themselves.
I think you're missing a couple points here.
One is that he's not aiming his comments at the average consumer, he's aiming them at, unless I miss my guess, government contractors and corporate CEOs.
Second is that the whole point of open source is that you have the entire source code, without having to pay licensing fees, sign an NDA or any other crap that makes the bean-counting department crap their shorts. You can also modify it for in-house use however you want to without having to worry about incurring additional fees or violating corporate patents.
Third is that if there's a problem with a particular piece of code (say, the SSL libraries) generally with open source you can contact the dev and get some cooperation without having a service contract or having to go thru lengthy procedures in dealing with a(nother) corporation.
I'm not in the biz anymore, so I may be off the mark; anyone else care to comment?
Let's not forget, also, that what he's selling is not as capable across multiple architectures as Linux is, nor is it going to have the diverse hardware support.
Sure, a kernel designed for a specific hardware config and for specific applications is going to be more secure than one designed as I pointed out above.
I fail to see what point he is making, if any. Apples, Oranges, and FUD.
If you can afford to ship the stuff to "some rock" you might as well just dump it into the sun. Best incinerator in local space, and you don't even have to staff it:)
Oh, people; google for Gregory Nemitz sometime, and you'll see the kind of things he's doing. I'm not sure whether he's a nut, a visionary, or just a failed dot-commer - you decide.
My biggest beef with this ridiculous idea is that they are wasting a launch that could be used to do useful things; now, if they were using the launch to test a new lunar-capable booster and this was a way of raising funds, ok. But they're not. These guys are going to buy a booster launch from someone else for an idea that, on the face of it, is just plain stupid.
This is intentional destruction for the amusement of some sorry buffoon who doesn't have anything better to do with his or her time.
s/time/money.
What a waste. I hope their auction fails because people with $6M are too intelligent to waste it in this way. (Unfortunately, someone just may take them up on it - reminds me of the old axiom of fools and money). What the hell, it probably won't go anyway - and if it does, they'll end up spending more to pull it off than they get (or get sued by the auction winner when they go bust). Stupid, stupid, stupid.
Representatives of Monsanto Canada received reports from nearby farmers in 1998 that they believed Schmeiser was using Roundup Ready canola without an agreement.
More fools, they. Those farmers will probably be next in the Lawsuit Lineup... and something that surprises me; technically those PI's (or whomever) doing Monsanto's work were engaging in trespassing and theft of crops - but they weren't charged.
Ok, guess it doesn't really surprise me, just disgusts me.
What makes you think that everyone who posts to slashdot is a computer programmer? You don't need to know how to program to post to an online forum - and many scientists are computer savvy enough to do so.
I think your generalisation is incredibly silly. There are plenty of people here who have deep knowledge of subjects other than programming.
Geek builds heavyweight tripod for camera. Learns that weight makes tripod stable (The vertical shaking is pretty much dampened by the weight, unquoth.) Well, duh (O'K)
O'K. Does it with hand drill. Yay.
O'K. Stops selling them. "I have stopped selling these until Summer of 2004 at the earliest."
Gets posted on slashdot. Server burns/bandwidth bill causes heartattack.
O'K.
News for Nerds? Eh? Would you like to buy one? now that I've described how to make it?
Think of the moderated efficiency of communication provided by slashcode coupled with the decentralisation of a P2P network. With an open framework such that anyone may post on any topic without prior editor checking
No offense, but that sounds an awful lot like marketing BS.
Slashdot is a special case, tho. It's filterable because it runs thru a central set of servers and has a finite amount of data to persue (and even then, the most rapid mods/posters have concentration points limited to one or two particular topics, sometimes three)
P2P (in some of it's various forms) is not. I doubt it's even theoretically possible to build a system that could monitor all that traffic (and never mind parsing and interpreting it for censors:). Consider IRC...or even Usenet; in it's modern form Usenet hasn't been attacked by the RIAA for music distribution (even tho there's a helluva lot that goes on there) because they simply can't figure out how to do so. IRC is, as an entity, for all intents and purposes immune to attack by centrally organized searches (not to universal blockage, alas)
Back to the OP: I doubt very much that if news was distributed via P2P that it could be tracked at all without some ubuiquitous form of a very smart AI. There's simply too much data to parse, too few resources wrt to processing capability, and a huge glut of channels that cannot be parsed (ex. deep encryption or one-time ciphers over *any* channel).
Apply that to encryption/P2P news/email what have you, and you have... the internet. So far it's not practical - and it probably won't ever be, within human resources - to try to censor the internet. We do have a lot of ignorant morons trying to do so, however (Orrin Hatch comes to mind).
Human resources are limited. There is no conceivable amount of employees who could 'police' the internet, even today (hell, even five years ago). But - big, big but - given an AI with the capability of intuitive deduction of data - it could become possible for large enough systems to process the data and give good results. The middle sticker is the AI:) and sometimes I hope they won't ever become viable...
Skynet?:)
In any case, I think that if the technology became available - and the government granted use of it - to monitor even 50% of everything going on, that brilliant people all over would find ways around it.
"Andy's Law": What can be thought up, can be reverse engineered by someone else who is smarter; and there is *always* someone smarter.
As a overworked doctor in the third world, who's going to care about what operating system you're using to access knowledge databases to try to find info that will help you save some kid - except when it gets owned by a vulnerability/bug that Microsoft is not going to fix - and you don't have the resources to fix it either, and can't afford a MS support contract? But maybe...just maybe... there might be someone you can call who will help you fix it for free, because he/she puts in volunteer time to do so and has access to the deepest levels of the system, if necessary.
Open source - the greatest equalizer mankind has ever seen, because it doesn't require the support of an organization whose sole goal is making more money.
If you think this is flamebait, then so be it. But think about it.
Being a Geek of All Trades often results in in confusion among other people trying to deal with you:) does it not?
But hey;
Shadowbearer:#3247, Level 12, Docking Bay Arm, Asimov Solar Transfer Station (L5)
SB PS: Seriously, I do remember you for your writing style. I also know that you've had a lot to say, and it's not bullshitting, just direct brain dumps. Nothing wrong with that...I do the same thing, I just have a grammar asshole between my brain and my fingers:)
Slashdot Mirror
Amen, Bog brother :)
:) What I do have here is some serious scenery and 5000 foot vertical hiking opportunity (and a small town full of very great people who aren't stuck in the 50s culturally :)
:)
:) liking South Dakota. Very much. The acreage I'm lusting after is outside my budget, but it's at the foot at the third highest peak in the Black Hills! :) Woot! Trying to convince myself to go into debt again...it's hard. Meanwhile I'm getting paid well to essentially teach how to fix things. Been here a year May 15th; think I've found home again.
:) Fscking slashdot addiction.
Where I live, I have some of those; and not others. I do know what you mean
Have an option on a farmhouse about 12 miles out right now; hope I win the sale. It'll put a burden on my finances right now, and means I'll have to give up any fulltime internet, but I'm finding I'm caring less and less for that, so it's not much of a sacrifice, I guess.
My fridge is still full of last years venison...I can't eat it fast enough, especially since my SO went back to her hometown to find work. She says she's coming back this summer...she's not the kind to not scare the neighbors sunning, but she's my oldest and closest friend. That counts for me most.
Gardens - miss digging dirt out from under the fingernails. Seriously. Been here a year and no communal gardens; just clay in the backyard. Hope I win that year option on the 40 acre farm property. (that's a whole friccin 50kword short story on it's own right now) Doing the apartment living thing right now, tomorrow (Easter) going to rake, seed and spread 24-3-3 on the lawn for the landlord. Nice to find one who appreciates and compensates for what I consider fun - he also pays for the birdfeeders and flowerpots I build. Doing garden here would mean building and cultivating a 12"+ raised bed, and I don't want to put the money into something that would die after I left. *shrug*
Been back and forth on the tradeoffs in this and that living for twenty some years. What's got me now, tho, is being able to browse 60 million years of geology within a couple miles hike; that and being around people who are old-fashioned yet are not stuck in the 19th century moral wise, if you know what I mean
That, and more job offers than I can possibly deal with in a town of 10k and a state of 600k
Gotta go check the beer perking in the closet before I crash tonite, too, come to think of it. Dangit, list of things to do is almost as long as my overtime hours.
Cheers, zogger
SB
PS Zogger, do you follow/post Backwoods Home / Countryside sites?
Provided the developer hasn't lost interest in maintaining that code anymore, provide he still has time to work on it, provided he hasn't changed his email, provided he's not too busy working on the latest bit of tech that caught his interest now.
:)
:)
If you're paying for this type of service then you have an SLA specifying what type of support and the supported life of the product. You don't have to worry about the product no longer being supported. The provider is required by the contract (SLA) to offer you the type of support for the specified length of the product. It's something you can count on more.
I'll counter that by pointing out how many companies have gone out of business or dropped support for products and left the users SOL (Microsoft in particular comes to mind, and there are some projects that the Fed should have spanked them for, but didn't).
Some of these open source projects have tons of people contributing code and it is one of the reason's that they have been able to progress so rapidly. It took 10's 100's 1000's of people to write the software, it'll take that many to review it in a timely manner.
Sorry, but I can't see how it takes anywhere near the same number of people to review already written code (and parse the history of such) as it does to develop it from scratch.
They know company XXX isn't going to screw them
Do they? Like you said, it's a matter of trust - and government projects haven't been screwed by corporations before? Whether or not there's a back door is irrelevant; lots of government institutions have been screwed over by vulnerabilities in windows software recently (not intentionally, I'll add, but just thru lazy stupidity and greed)
Background checks, even thorough ones, are not foolproof, either. That's relevant to your inside employees also.
With open source, it's not as easy to build trust since almost anyone can go in and change the code and you don't know who they really are.
In most serious open source projects, you can't submit to them unless you do verify, to some extent, who you are. The code also gets looked at very seriously, and if it's questionable, you can damned well bet you'll either get tracked back or blacklisted. Are you saying that mil/NSA/gov devs don't have the resources to do a more thorough job? I fail to see your argument there. I've never been a gov contractor, tho, so there might be something I'm missing.
WRT to your last sentence, I'm not arguing that, either. I'm just saying that open source software (code) is a lot easier to deal with when you want to use a outside source to build on - because you don't have to pay thru the nose for something you are going to have to audit internally anyway; and that you nearly always have the option of contacting a original writer who is more likely concerned about problem solving rather than IP rights and patents.
Seriously, if you have to build an operating system for something, is it not easier to build off of others work, and is it not easier to do so if you don't have to include proprietary costs (licensing, support fees, and upgrade fees, ad nauseum) in your budget?
*shrug* We agree, I think, just taking different approaches at it
Anyway, it's late and I'm becoming braindead. Feel free to reply - this is interesting - but I may not reply until tomorrow is somewhat advanced (Happy Easter, I'm sleeping in
SB
Info from the NSA certainly filters down to the military, tho, so one could argue that they are part of the chain. But I may just be blowing smoke there
I take it that tactical (?battlefield CCC?) is essentially written from scratch "inhouse" then? If so, that's a very good thing IMO. Gotta be damned difficult tho.
Hats off to those devs.
SB
Fellow Americans, I present to you: our economy.
Best. Use. Of. Sarcasm.
Ever.
(Don't believe me? Put it in context.)
Kudos, sir.
SB
Must be entertaining to track them thru the sewers...
SB
WRT to spyware (and windows 98) the dot.net shit was always my worst enemy. Half the time the "uninstaller" would fuck up and trash the network stack. Fixable, as I eventually figured out, but a major PITA.
I swore eternal opposition to spyware bastards about that time...what do you do? You can block it as much as possible but then some other clicky comes along and you're faced with a new problem (or educate your users, like wrt to Gator, then they change their name
Why can't these assholes contribute to doing something useful for the users for once rather than something that is primarily aimed at the companies' bottom line? Degenerate assholes.
(Sorry for the rant, but I'm sure you understand my frustration
SB
Just curious - what about the NSA version of linux? Isn't that exactly what you are talking about?
(Yeah, I'm aware that what the NSA makes public and their in-house versions are probably very different. Still curious - and no, I'm not a terrorist
SB
They're taking their example from someone we know quite well, aren't they
(Sorry, just finished reading Kaplan's "StartUp" again...)
SB
Talking about the openess of the linux code, there's another question I always wonder nobody asks. Sure Linux is open source and that's what helps it get better but I don't see the argument in terms of cost and security. Saying "you have the source you can see how secure it is" doesn't work for me. People buy an OS because it's cheaper to spend a few hundred or a few grand per PC than it is to hire the staff to build their own OS. Having to have the staff that can review, maintain and patch their own linux kernel alone isn't easy. It's something like 1.5 million lines of code right now. People want an OS that just works and is cheaper than building one themselves.
I think you're missing a couple points here.
One is that he's not aiming his comments at the average consumer, he's aiming them at, unless I miss my guess, government contractors and corporate CEOs.
Second is that the whole point of open source is that you have the entire source code, without having to pay licensing fees, sign an NDA or any other crap that makes the bean-counting department crap their shorts. You can also modify it for in-house use however you want to without having to worry about incurring additional fees or violating corporate patents.
Third is that if there's a problem with a particular piece of code (say, the SSL libraries) generally with open source you can contact the dev and get some cooperation without having a service contract or having to go thru lengthy procedures in dealing with a(nother) corporation.
I'm not in the biz anymore, so I may be off the mark; anyone else care to comment?
SB
Let's not forget, also, that what he's selling is not as capable across multiple architectures as Linux is, nor is it going to have the diverse hardware support.
Sure, a kernel designed for a specific hardware config and for specific applications is going to be more secure than one designed as I pointed out above.
I fail to see what point he is making, if any. Apples, Oranges, and FUD.
SB
If you can afford to ship the stuff to "some rock" you might as well just dump it into the sun. Best incinerator in local space, and you don't even have to staff it
SB
Neat idea. Brings a whole new wrinkle to the name Skynet
SB
Well, you also need Darl's head. You might have ask IBM for that soon (*VERY* nicely).
But seriously, your calculations are off. Darl's head has no more mass than a balloon.
SB
Like "Coca-Cola", "Viagra"
or perhaps "Microsoft"
SB
So, fine, they could do some science.
Are they? No.
Oh, people; google for Gregory Nemitz sometime, and you'll see the kind of things he's doing. I'm not sure whether he's a nut, a visionary, or just a failed dot-commer - you decide.
SB
Great post, and I agree with you.
My biggest beef with this ridiculous idea is that they are wasting a launch that could be used to do useful things; now, if they were using the launch to test a new lunar-capable booster and this was a way of raising funds, ok. But they're not. These guys are going to buy a booster launch from someone else for an idea that, on the face of it, is just plain stupid.
This is intentional destruction for the amusement of some sorry buffoon who doesn't have anything better to do with his or her time.
s/time/money.
What a waste. I hope their auction fails because people with $6M are too intelligent to waste it in this way. (Unfortunately, someone just may take them up on it - reminds me of the old axiom of fools and money). What the hell, it probably won't go anyway - and if it does, they'll end up spending more to pull it off than they get (or get sued by the auction winner when they go bust). Stupid, stupid, stupid.
SB
From the article:
Representatives of Monsanto Canada received reports from nearby farmers in 1998 that they believed Schmeiser was using Roundup Ready canola without an agreement.
More fools, they. Those farmers will probably be next in the Lawsuit Lineup... and something that surprises me; technically those PI's (or whomever) doing Monsanto's work were engaging in trespassing and theft of crops - but they weren't charged.
Ok, guess it doesn't really surprise me, just disgusts me.
SB
What makes you think that everyone who posts to slashdot is a computer programmer? You don't need to know how to program to post to an online forum - and many scientists are computer savvy enough to do so.
I think your generalisation is incredibly silly. There are plenty of people here who have deep knowledge of subjects other than programming.
SB
Bill, is that you?
SB
Geek builds heavyweight tripod for camera. Learns that weight makes tripod stable (The vertical shaking is pretty much dampened by the weight, unquoth.) Well, duh (O'K)
O'K. Does it with hand drill. Yay.
O'K. Stops selling them. "I have stopped selling these until Summer of 2004 at the earliest."
Gets posted on slashdot. Server burns/bandwidth bill causes heartattack.
O'K.
News for Nerds? Eh? Would you like to buy one? now that I've described how to make it?
SB
Think of the moderated efficiency of communication provided by slashcode coupled with the decentralisation of a P2P network. With an open framework such that anyone may post on any topic without prior editor checking
No offense, but that sounds an awful lot like marketing BS.
SB
Slashdot is a special case, tho. It's filterable because it runs thru a central set of servers and has a finite amount of data to persue (and even then, the most rapid mods/posters have concentration points limited to one or two particular topics, sometimes three)
:). Consider IRC...or even Usenet; in it's modern form Usenet hasn't been attacked by the RIAA for music distribution (even tho there's a helluva lot that goes on there) because they simply can't figure out how to do so. IRC is, as an entity, for all intents and purposes immune to attack by centrally organized searches (not to universal blockage, alas)
:) and sometimes I hope they won't ever become viable...
:)
P2P (in some of it's various forms) is not. I doubt it's even theoretically possible to build a system that could monitor all that traffic (and never mind parsing and interpreting it for censors
Back to the OP: I doubt very much that if news was distributed via P2P that it could be tracked at all without some ubuiquitous form of a very smart AI. There's simply too much data to parse, too few resources wrt to processing capability, and a huge glut of channels that cannot be parsed (ex. deep encryption or one-time ciphers over *any* channel).
Apply that to encryption/P2P news/email what have you, and you have... the internet. So far it's not practical - and it probably won't ever be, within human resources - to try to censor the internet. We do have a lot of ignorant morons trying to do so, however (Orrin Hatch comes to mind).
Human resources are limited. There is no conceivable amount of employees who could 'police' the internet, even today (hell, even five years ago). But - big, big but - given an AI with the capability of intuitive deduction of data - it could become possible for large enough systems to process the data and give good results. The middle sticker is the AI
Skynet?
In any case, I think that if the technology became available - and the government granted use of it - to monitor even 50% of everything going on, that brilliant people all over would find ways around it.
"Andy's Law": What can be thought up, can be reverse engineered by someone else who is smarter; and there is *always* someone smarter.
Of course, this is all wild speculation...
SB
Let's rephrase this a bit :) (apologies)
As a overworked doctor in the third world, who's going to care about what operating system you're using to access knowledge databases to try to find info that will help you save some kid - except when it gets owned by a vulnerability/bug that Microsoft is not going to fix - and you don't have the resources to fix it either, and can't afford a MS support contract? But maybe...just maybe... there might be someone you can call who will help you fix it for free, because he/she puts in volunteer time to do so and has access to the deepest levels of the system, if necessary.
Open source - the greatest equalizer mankind has ever seen, because it doesn't require the support of an organization whose sole goal is making more money.
If you think this is flamebait, then so be it. But think about it.
SB
Being a Geek of All Trades often results in in confusion among other people trying to deal with you
But hey;
Shadowbearer:#3247, Level 12, Docking Bay Arm, Asimov Solar Transfer Station (L5)
SB
PS: Seriously, I do remember you for your writing style. I also know that you've had a lot to say, and it's not bullshitting, just direct brain dumps. Nothing wrong with that...I do the same thing, I just have a grammar asshole between my brain and my fingers
It's the Perpetual Payment loop condition; a common bug in business plans. A fix is comin^H^H^H^H^H^H not likely.
SB