Good post, except the implication you make here: "So what if the internet is half as fast as it could be; that is an acceptable trade-off for a free and open internet." I even agree with the sentiment, but the study incorrectly implied or stated that doubling the peak capacity would double the costs. Even if that were true, not doubling the peak capacity would _not_ halve the "speed" of the internet. For what it's worth here's a selected quote from Ars quoting Isenberg, commenting on the study.
... doubling the peak volume of a network does not mean spending twice as much money as it cost to build the original network. "The failure of the authors to extend the conclusions from capacity to raw costs of capacity is deliberately misleading," Isenberg says, "especially when the researchers invoked 'economic viability' and 'cost of capacity' in their introduction to the work."... According to Isenberg, the cheapest and best alternative is simply to build out dumb capacity: to "overprovision" by as much as 100 percent.
When transferring files I sometimes don't want to use the command line. With Fedora/KDE I click;
KMenu/System/More Applications/File Manager--Super User Mode
Or to run a program I click;
KMenu/Run Command... and from the dialog click Options then check run as different user and fill in root/password
I agree with your post generally, excepting;
Sure, users who aren't familiar with the command line are doomed to be harassed by annoying dialogs. I don't think Linux or KDE should focus on banishing the command line or anything, but those tips should keep new users fom being tempted to run as root, and as they begin to understand computers better will see how in many cases the commandline can remove complications instead of adding them.
For instance I currently have 3 xorg.conf files that I rename depending on which monitor(s) or TV is/are on. For a while I thought gui/drag n drop made the operations easier. It turned out not to be true in my case.
I'm headed to assclownville myself, I keep posting messages that are Off Topic, and then pointing out that they're offtopic in the text. I keep thinking that I'm being ironic, but then forgetting that even if it's ironic and/or funny, it's still irrelevant. And I never learn.
Perhaps they figured that you were an RIAA astroturfer.
You were spreading FUD that humming in the shower is a public performance in a semi-professional acoustic environment and therefore a violation of copyright. But only because you're wife heard you and your showers have such high quality acoustics.
I just hope you didn't snap or clap out a rhythm at the same time. Then you would be a bad person.
Yeah, right. If the British were occupying the United States today, the American left wing would be a bunch of royalists arguing for accomodotion and decrying the insane and destabilizing acts of those radical merchants that want to stoke up anti-British sentiment in order to avoid paying taxes. If not the Brittish (and they're not) who IS occcupying the US today? I think it's pretty clear we' fighting for freedom here, even at the risk of a little bit of danger.
After Clinton spent the 8 years of his administration trying to blow every Islamist he could find, we get 9/11. Clinton blew islamists? I don't think _he_ was blowing anybody. Did you mean Islamists or terrorists? There are a lot of Islamists in the world. We keep trying to tell you that being a reactionary bigotted against every member of a religion as big as Islam serves no purpose. It's not even about you're comment as much as some people's conviction that racial profiling isn't stupid. If you want a "war on terror" how about cutting down on a few million false positives? Maybe not wiretapping at the drop of the hat.
What we really need is someone like Bush, but who actually knows how to win these sorts of wars. Which sort of war the one with Afganistan? Or the one with Iraq?
They're not even in the same league. And Iraq is more of a danger now, and produces more terrorists, and provides more training to them, than it ever was under Saddam. But if we were going to war with Iraq anyway, it's a shame Bush didn't listen to experts in the military and bring enough troops to do it.
I'll take an Off Topic please. (I'm sure you were modded flamebait before I was halfway through.)
I'm not gay, but I took a look through some of my apps--testing the theory--hmmm... Audacious Rosegarden LASH Panel, KSpread, Gparted (actually they're just kind of kinky) Ardour Twinkle Kandy Yum Extender --My office suite's Koffice Workspace Icon has a cute little rainbow next to it.--
Of course Qt(cutie? (used to for KDE)) is from Trolltech, which sounds pretty hetero; Thunderbird, Thunar file manager, Konqueror, etc. help balance too. In all seriousness Linux and OSS in general seem pretty inclusive of everyone, and are certainly gender and sexual preference neutral. And hey, Linux even has an unfair, irrational stigma attached to it.
Now personally I think advocating for Linux is more like telling my friends that I want the US to have socialized medicine...but that discussion might be OffTopic
But not publishing the code does preclude other good technologies (ie:opensource). I'd meant to explain that that is where I'm coming from but forgot that part. But it probably doesn't need to be said that you can't have something both open and closed source. You can't have both sets of benefits, they're exclusive. And this has all stemmed from the FCC saying opensource is inherently insecure. Your post that I was replying to used the word 'wrong'. I think that the now great-great grandparent wasn't necessarily saying obscurity is always bad. But your inference of that doesn't seem as extreme as at first read.
You did make it clear that you weren't attacking opensource and I certainly don't mean that all closed source schemes are flawed. Some do go that far, I know.
IANAL I assume that the loss on appeal essentially erases the Michigan courts finding of the progral to be illegal, but at least it was overturned on the grounds of the ACLU not being harmed. I figure that's better than saying it is actually ok. or am I missing something?
Gee, the general consensus among people who put in their two cents here on slashdot is that security through obscurity is ultimately flawed. Minus two posters, give or take.
Granted some almost seem to say it accomplishes nothing, but that is an oversimplification. Really the problem is; who are the good guys and who are the bad guys?
Who could identify vulnerabilities you weren't even aware of? Who should you obscure the code from? Who on the inside might be planting trojan easter eggs in the system(couldn't resist the verbal image--sorry)?
Please keep this all in perspective. If you see the pros and cons in both systems you can decide on an opinion for yourself. However, flatly claiming that Open Source is by its nature insecure is foolish.
SELinux("Security Enhanced" patches for Linux and Unix systems) were primarily developed by the NSA and relased into the community. The DOD seems to think that the Open Source web browser FireFox is secure, but the proprietary Internet Explorer web browser is unsafe to use. I realize that these examples aren't encryption, but it seems to me that if Open Source is this broken then the FCC should really sit down with the Department of Defense, the National Security Agency, and many other branches of US gov't and explain that people can actually SEE the actual CODE all over the interweb, and sometimes FOREIGNERS actually apply PATCHES that only taxandspendcommunistfrenchhippymusicfilestealers even see! oh noes...
You realize I'm talking about a 486? Not even a Pentium. Of course it's not going to run Win 98. The OP said that MS and Linux are both bloatware. I disagree on both counts, but if you use a very lightweight Windows Manager like Fluxbox then the full, current version of the Linux kernel can run on ridiculously old stuff.
from microsoft.com:
The following list describes the minimum hardware requirements for Windows 98:
A personal computer with a 486DX 66 megahertz (MHz) or faster processor (Pentium central processing unit recommended).
16 megabytes (MB) of memory (24 MB recommended). The computer barely makes the spec. Should I really give it a shot? With 16MB of ram? I almost want to just so I can send Firefox the bug report.
BTW, I realize I deserved Offtopic; I was resopnding to a troll after all.
I had Firefox running on a 486dx66 earlier this year thanks to Fluxbox on Linux. The kernel, desktop, and apps were all current versions. Once it finally booted it was pleasantly responsive. No version of Windows could run a current browser usably on this machine.
It's not apples to apples (excuse the pun) but my 700MHz ibook runs Fedora Core 6 w/ KDE much better than my 1.2 GHz IBM thinkpad does w/ Windows XP. XP Service Pack 2 is much older than Fedora Core 6. They run many of the same apps; Fire Fox, The GIMP, etc. I'll admit that PPC processors were faster than AMD and Intel, but not that much.
MS named theirs "Office Open XML". As far as the XML goes it is by its nature not eXtensible and lacks Language to explain what the application is supposed to Markup.
From TFA:
Mr Frazer said Microsoft had shifted its position on file formats.
"Historically within the IT industry, the prevailing trend was for proprietary file formats. We have worked very hard to embrace open standards, specifically in the area of file formats." Embracing Open Standards, when they were/are part of Oasis (standards group that proposed odf and had it accepted by ISO) then rejecting full support of odf, spreading FUD about odf, and deliberately causing consumer confusion regarding the name belies that claim. And besides;
She was speaking at the launch of a partnership with Microsoft to ensure the Archives could read old formats. Disengenious at best. Screw them. Nice astroturf article; congratulations to the National Archives on their well-informed partnership with such a philanthropistic company for their launch.
I look forward to rewriting UK history in 5 years when no one "remembers" how Word-like spacing and WordPerfect whatever formating apply to extensible markup languages.
I didn't do that then because I didn't know. I was trying to walk through my experience incase it resonated with his. I stated that and it should also be clear from the way I spelled out each step, I hope.
After all 'somepackage.fc7.i686.rpm' is explicitly accurate. 'someprogram.exe' sometimes does not work so the essence of what he said showed he was confused about Windows and Linux.
I don't double click rpm's now because yum is a better, more efficient package manager than rpm.
At some point I installed Fedora Core 2 (now on 7), and the install was very smooth. I installed KDE and already knew how to use that from using the Knoppix Live CD.
Upon First Boot I immediately allowed Fedora to AutoUpdate, but then had trouble. Without a tutorial, I searched for and found software I wanted to install but I thought I had to compile from 'somepackage.tar.gz'. Oops. Seems silly to me now, but I didn't have anyone helping me. I knew I could go to forums, but didn't. I then found out about rpm's and how to install from the command line. Then I found out that 'yum' was better to use than 'rpm' for installing 'somepackage.rpm'. Weird, at first anyway. Eventually '#yum install yumex' got me a graphical software finder and installer. KMenu(like Start)---System---Yum Extender
But occasionally I want to install software from a CD or download 'somepackage.rpm'.
Instead of 'someprogram.exe' it's 'somepackage.rpm'. The one thing I had to learn wasn't so much how to do it, but what the commands meant.
For the same reason I decided to stop using Windows, I wasn't going to type su into a terminal without knowing why. But you can run Konsole from the "start" menu. Type $su; enter root's password; navigate to your Desktop folder or wherever 'somepackage.rpm' is; type #yum localinstall somepackage.rpm; type y for ok!
Not blazingly simple after all, but there's very little to understand.
Remember that intermediate, advanced, or experts on any OS(windows, mac or linux/unix) should all be telling you _not_ to download an exe and run it in order to fix an internet connection.
Look, everyone knows that whether you're talking about video, sound, spreadsheets, text documents, or whatever; MS wants to compete and then dominate. As a Linux user I am still ok with this as I believe in competition.
There comes a point, however, when you have to take notice. When MS faced off with java for instance they tried to break it with their own, broken, implementation as well as competing directly with it with.net.
You may be ok with them lobbying MA to (unfortunately successfully) weaken their resolve as to open formats. I won't debate that now. This, though, is obviously is an example of their gaining of ground in their secondary battle. It's not wma battling aac, mp3, ogg and flac. It's not msn battling yahoo. It's not zune battling ipod.
MS is a proprietary company that is subverting use of open standards by implementing, and lobbying for, their pseudo-open "Office Open XML" because their irrationally afraid of OpenOffice.org, which is the leading implementation of "Open Document Format", an existing ISO standard.
MS users can still support them generally, but want their gov't to use a different, long-lived storage format that centuries later can be implemented because of its accurately documented specifications.
Some of this may seem dubious to you if you haven't read much. RTFAs. (I didn't...)
I agree on both counts. However, acoustic modeling does not need to use such high frequencies to work well.
I used the example of harmonics, but flutes don't generally have them and they can be localized. But a violin can be more easily localized than a flute.
It would have to be sampling rate or bitrate that detracted from the imaging. I don't understand 15k/s, unless you mean 15bps. That can't be right. Did you mean you're limiting the mp3 to 15kHz? The errors I referred to were generally in that region and above. I wasn't claiming that you need 15kHz and up to localize, only that there were existing cues that were scrambled nonsense by the time they were played.
If a flute plays 'A', say at 1760 Hz, and it is recorded on CD it will be very faithfully reproduced, and easily localized by human beings capable of doing so. Maybe even after being compressed to 64bps, but I would use 320--because hard drive space is cheap or flac instead of mp3!
I object to the gov't's datamining and wiretaps without legal oversight, but sacrifice my personal anonyminity intentionally in many situations. But you'll notice that whenever I claim to love France, or socialized medicine, I post as AC.
BTW, I have a valid driver's license and social security card. And I'm registered to vote, so they know who I am.
I have seen people guilty of what you refer to, and it can be kind of pathetic at times, but has nothing to do with my position, unless you noticed I was joking. (mostly)
I believe his quote was regarding the whitehouse.org and whitehouse.com websites, at any rate it wasn't an argument for just limits to certain non-freedoms. For instance, the concept of freedom to me doesn't include harming others. I'm not an anarchist.
You do not love america, you want to change it.
You also want to change discussions to set up straw man attacks. Go get a job as a whitehouse press correspondent. They'll love you
I know this will ruin your argument and spoil your chance of miraculously inciting a national rebellion by posting partisan, spun-out-of-context quotes Any quotation, by it's very nature is "-out-of-context". You probably meant to accuse me of misrepresenting the full statements and then you were going to provide everyone with the key elements that I had craftily edited out.
I am looking forward to checking out the googlecalendar integration. I used to use Sunbird and still use googlecalendar so I'm happy to see this. I'm not sure why nerds don't consider this news, but either way I learned something new...
Slashdot Mirror
I even agree with the sentiment, but the study incorrectly implied or stated that doubling the peak capacity would double the costs. Even if that were true, not doubling the peak capacity would _not_ halve the "speed" of the internet. For what it's worth here's a selected quote from Ars quoting Isenberg, commenting on the study.
...doubling the peak volume of a network does not mean spending twice as much money as it cost to build the original network. "The failure of the authors to extend the conclusions from capacity to raw costs of capacity is deliberately misleading," Isenberg says, "especially when the researchers invoked 'economic viability' and 'cost of capacity' in their introduction to the work."
According to Isenberg, the cheapest and best alternative is simply to build out dumb capacity: to "overprovision" by as much as 100 percent.
KMenu/System/More Applications/File Manager--Super User Mode
Or to run a program I click;
KMenu/Run Command... and from the dialog click Options then check run as different user and fill in root/password
I agree with your post generally, excepting; Sure, users who aren't familiar with the command line are doomed to be harassed by annoying dialogs. I don't think Linux or KDE should focus on banishing the command line or anything, but those tips should keep new users fom being tempted to run as root, and as they begin to understand computers better will see how in many cases the commandline can remove complications instead of adding them.
For instance I currently have 3 xorg.conf files that I rename depending on which monitor(s) or TV is/are on. For a while I thought gui/drag n drop made the operations easier. It turned out not to be true in my case.
I'm headed to assclownville myself, I keep posting messages that are Off Topic, and then pointing out that they're offtopic in the text. I keep thinking that I'm being ironic, but then forgetting that even if it's ironic and/or funny, it's still irrelevant. And I never learn.
Perhaps they figured that you were an RIAA astroturfer.
You were spreading FUD that humming in the shower is a public performance in a semi-professional acoustic environment and therefore a violation of copyright. But only because you're wife heard you and your showers have such high quality acoustics.
I just hope you didn't snap or clap out a rhythm at the same time. Then you would be a bad person.
Now this should start a flamewar!
They're not even in the same league. And Iraq is more of a danger now, and produces more terrorists, and provides more training to them, than it ever was under Saddam. But if we were going to war with Iraq anyway, it's a shame Bush didn't listen to experts in the military and bring enough troops to do it.
I'll take an Off Topic please. (I'm sure you were modded flamebait before I was halfway through.)
Sarcastic IS funny.
Is apt a pun?
I'm not gay, but I took a look through some of my apps--testing the theory--hmmm...
Audacious
Rosegarden
LASH Panel, KSpread, Gparted (actually they're just kind of kinky)
Ardour
Twinkle
Kandy
Yum Extender
--My office suite's Koffice Workspace Icon has a cute little rainbow next to it.--
Of course Qt(cutie? (used to for KDE)) is from Trolltech, which sounds pretty hetero; Thunderbird, Thunar file manager, Konqueror, etc. help balance too.
In all seriousness Linux and OSS in general seem pretty inclusive of everyone, and are certainly gender and sexual preference neutral.
And hey, Linux even has an unfair, irrational stigma attached to it.
Now personally I think advocating for Linux is more like telling my friends that I want the US to have socialized medicine...but that discussion might be OffTopic
The post might be scathing, but it's not trollish. If I had points it would be "informative" because "sarcastic yet accurate" isn't available.
They seem to be nostalgic for the good old days because my Pentium D runs awful hot, even with an oversized Zalman CPU cooler running full speed.
But not publishing the code does preclude other good technologies (ie:opensource). I'd meant to explain that that is where I'm coming from but forgot that part. But it probably doesn't need to be said that you can't have something both open and closed source. You can't have both sets of benefits, they're exclusive.
And this has all stemmed from the FCC saying opensource is inherently insecure. Your post that I was replying to used the word 'wrong'. I think that the now great-great grandparent wasn't necessarily saying obscurity is always bad. But your inference of that doesn't seem as extreme as at first read.
You did make it clear that you weren't attacking opensource and I certainly don't mean that all closed source schemes are flawed. Some do go that far, I know.
It's been said before...
If they hate us for our freedoms, then there's nothing safer for us than to just go ahead and give them up.
And it's working because I haven't been killed by any terrorists in the past 6 years! Proof!
Something tells me that anyone who was affected received a National Security Letter. I don't know if that would keep them from suing though.
IANAL I assume that the loss on appeal essentially erases the Michigan courts finding of the progral to be illegal, but at least it was overturned on the grounds of the ACLU not being harmed. I figure that's better than saying it is actually ok. or am I missing something?
Gee, the general consensus among people who put in their two cents here on slashdot is that security through obscurity is ultimately flawed. Minus two posters, give or take.
Granted some almost seem to say it accomplishes nothing, but that is an oversimplification. Really the problem is; who are the good guys and who are the bad guys?
Who could identify vulnerabilities you weren't even aware of? Who should you obscure the code from? Who on the inside might be planting trojan easter eggs in the system(couldn't resist the verbal image--sorry)?
Please keep this all in perspective. If you see the pros and cons in both systems you can decide on an opinion for yourself. However, flatly claiming that Open Source is by its nature insecure is foolish.
SELinux("Security Enhanced" patches for Linux and Unix systems) were primarily developed by the NSA and relased into the community. The DOD seems to think that the Open Source web browser FireFox is secure, but the proprietary Internet Explorer web browser is unsafe to use. I realize that these examples aren't encryption, but it seems to me that if Open Source is this broken then the FCC should really sit down with the Department of Defense, the National Security Agency, and many other branches of US gov't and explain that people can actually SEE the actual CODE all over the interweb, and sometimes FOREIGNERS actually apply PATCHES that only taxandspendcommunistfrenchhippymusicfilestealers even see! oh noes...
from microsoft.com: The following list describes the minimum hardware requirements for Windows 98:
A personal computer with a 486DX 66 megahertz (MHz) or faster processor (Pentium central processing unit recommended).
16 megabytes (MB) of memory (24 MB recommended). The computer barely makes the spec. Should I really give it a shot? With 16MB of ram? I almost want to just so I can send Firefox the bug report.
BTW, I realize I deserved Offtopic; I was resopnding to a troll after all.
If by work you mean "usably" then no, definitely not.
I had Firefox running on a 486dx66 earlier this year thanks to Fluxbox on Linux. The kernel, desktop, and apps were all current versions. Once it finally booted it was pleasantly responsive. No version of Windows could run a current browser usably on this machine.
It's not apples to apples (excuse the pun) but my 700MHz ibook runs Fedora Core 6 w/ KDE much better than my 1.2 GHz IBM thinkpad does w/ Windows XP. XP Service Pack 2 is much older than Fedora Core 6. They run many of the same apps; Fire Fox, The GIMP, etc. I'll admit that PPC processors were faster than AMD and Intel, but not that much.
MS named theirs "Office Open XML". As far as the XML goes it is by its nature not eXtensible and lacks Language to explain what the application is supposed to Markup.
From TFA: Mr Frazer said Microsoft had shifted its position on file formats.
"Historically within the IT industry, the prevailing trend was for proprietary file formats. We have worked very hard to embrace open standards, specifically in the area of file formats." Embracing Open Standards, when they were/are part of Oasis (standards group that proposed odf and had it accepted by ISO) then rejecting full support of odf, spreading FUD about odf, and deliberately causing consumer confusion regarding the name belies that claim. And besides; She was speaking at the launch of a partnership with Microsoft to ensure the Archives could read old formats. Disengenious at best. Screw them. Nice astroturf article; congratulations to the National Archives on their well-informed partnership with such a philanthropistic company for their launch.
I look forward to rewriting UK history in 5 years when no one "remembers" how Word-like spacing and WordPerfect whatever formating apply to extensible markup languages.
I didn't do that then because I didn't know. I was trying to walk through my experience incase it resonated with his. I stated that and it should also be clear from the way I spelled out each step, I hope.
After all 'somepackage.fc7.i686.rpm' is explicitly accurate. 'someprogram.exe' sometimes does not work so the essence of what he said showed he was confused about Windows and Linux.
I don't double click rpm's now because yum is a better, more efficient package manager than rpm.
At some point I installed Fedora Core 2 (now on 7), and the install was very smooth. I installed KDE and already knew how to use that from using the Knoppix Live CD.
Upon First Boot I immediately allowed Fedora to AutoUpdate, but then had trouble. Without a tutorial, I searched for and found software I wanted to install but I thought I had to compile from 'somepackage.tar.gz'. Oops. Seems silly to me now, but I didn't have anyone helping me. I knew I could go to forums, but didn't. I then found out about rpm's and how to install from the command line. Then I found out that 'yum' was better to use than 'rpm' for installing 'somepackage.rpm'. Weird, at first anyway. Eventually '#yum install yumex' got me a graphical software finder and installer. KMenu(like Start)---System---Yum Extender
But occasionally I want to install software from a CD or download 'somepackage.rpm'.
Instead of 'someprogram.exe' it's 'somepackage.rpm'. The one thing I had to learn wasn't so much how to do it, but what the commands meant.
For the same reason I decided to stop using Windows, I wasn't going to type su into a terminal without knowing why. But you can run Konsole from the "start" menu. Type $su; enter root's password; navigate to your Desktop folder or wherever 'somepackage.rpm' is; type #yum localinstall somepackage.rpm; type y for ok!
Not blazingly simple after all, but there's very little to understand.
Remember that intermediate, advanced, or experts on any OS(windows, mac or linux/unix) should all be telling you _not_ to download an exe and run it in order to fix an internet connection.
Look, everyone knows that whether you're talking about video, sound, spreadsheets, text documents, or whatever; MS wants to compete and then dominate. As a Linux user I am still ok with this as I believe in competition.
.net.
There comes a point, however, when you have to take notice. When MS faced off with java for instance they tried to break it with their own, broken, implementation as well as competing directly with it with
You may be ok with them lobbying MA to (unfortunately successfully) weaken their resolve as to open formats. I won't debate that now. This, though, is obviously is an example of their gaining of ground in their secondary battle. It's not wma battling aac, mp3, ogg and flac. It's not msn battling yahoo. It's not zune battling ipod.
MS is a proprietary company that is subverting use of open standards by implementing, and lobbying for, their pseudo-open "Office Open XML" because their irrationally afraid of OpenOffice.org, which is the leading implementation of "Open Document Format", an existing ISO standard.
MS users can still support them generally, but want their gov't to use a different, long-lived storage format that centuries later can be implemented because of its accurately documented specifications.
Some of this may seem dubious to you if you haven't read much. RTFAs. (I didn't...)
Banks can loan many times their actual capital as I undertand it.
I agree on both counts. However, acoustic modeling does not need to use such high frequencies to work well.
I used the example of harmonics, but flutes don't generally have them and they can be localized. But a violin can be more easily localized than a flute.
It would have to be sampling rate or bitrate that detracted from the imaging. I don't understand 15k/s, unless you mean 15bps. That can't be right. Did you mean you're limiting the mp3 to 15kHz? The errors I referred to were generally in that region and above. I wasn't claiming that you need 15kHz and up to localize, only that there were existing cues that were scrambled nonsense by the time they were played.
If a flute plays 'A', say at 1760 Hz, and it is recorded on CD it will be very faithfully reproduced, and easily localized by human beings capable of doing so. Maybe even after being compressed to 64bps, but I would use 320--because hard drive space is cheap or flac instead of mp3!
I object to the gov't's datamining and wiretaps without legal oversight, but sacrifice my personal anonyminity intentionally in many situations. But you'll notice that whenever I claim to love France, or socialized medicine, I post as AC.
BTW, I have a valid driver's license and social security card. And I'm registered to vote, so they know who I am.
I have seen people guilty of what you refer to, and it can be kind of pathetic at times, but has nothing to do with my position, unless you noticed I was joking. (mostly)
You do not love america, you want to change it.
You also want to change discussions to set up straw man attacks. Go get a job as a whitehouse press correspondent. They'll love you I know this will ruin your argument and spoil your chance of miraculously inciting a national rebellion by posting partisan, spun-out-of-context quotes Any quotation, by it's very nature is "-out-of-context". You probably meant to accuse me of misrepresenting the full statements and then you were going to provide everyone with the key elements that I had craftily edited out.
I am looking forward to checking out the googlecalendar integration. I used to use Sunbird and still use googlecalendar so I'm happy to see this. I'm not sure why nerds don't consider this news, but either way I learned something new...