I wondered why Maryland did away with their lever machines, so I asked an election official. He said that too many people had keys to the machines and they caught a number of polling places changing the numbers. I asked about the paper tape that they all contained for verification. He said that is one of the ways they found out, however by the time that was done the election was long over and in the case he investigated, the candidate had been in office for over 3 months. Removing that guy from office ultimately went no where.
We have probably all read where ballots were pre-punched for a candidate. The most common stories said that either Bush or Gore had pre-punched cards, usually in Florida. In some jurisdictions I have been amazed that official ballots had no control numbers, nothing to verify that they were actually real. Maybe it just seemed that way.
Sounds like something has to be done that also includes something not known until the event occurs. Something that fraudulent votes can be found immediately. I also think we should purple-thumb people to prevent multiple votes by people. Again in the 2000 contest, one college student proudly proclaimed on TV that he had voted over 50 times, in Chicago. He may have been kidding, however I bet a lot of people got mad at that. I know some privacy advocates don't want that here because they say people may be intimidated if they vote. How about in places like Iraq and Afghanistan where they are purple thumbed and it is far more hostile there.
A catalyst "by definition" lowers the activation energy of a reaction, how you manage to translate that showing down a reaction I don't understand. The other part of the "definition" is that the catalyst is unchanged at the end of the reaction, but tetra-ethyl-lead is decomposed and the by-products help reduce knocking (but you linked to a description of that...) and is not reformed by the end of the reaction.
Looks like wikipedia strikes again with yet another incomplete/misleading entry. At least I hope I'm not unfairly accusing you of looking at the wiki. A catalyst is anything that speeds up or slows down a reaction. Increasing the reaction is how it is almost always used and a lot of people (myself in the past) don't know that it can also mean slowing down the reaction - a negative catalyst is also known as an inhibitor. TEL acts as an inhibitor in this case. To be fair the wiki does mention inhibitor, however I don't think they give it enough of an explanation.
You have me worried about the second part, it not being changed as a result of the reaction. Could I have been taught wrong? This question was actually one that I got wrong in college chemistry. I didn't think it was a catalyst and I got into an argument with my prof. over it for the same reasons you mention as I recall. The professor is long gone - old age. As I recall, she said that it is an additive and also a catalyst in the reaction to do with gasoline and oxygen. The fact that the TEL doesn't actually have something to do (chemically) with the gasoline reaction to being oxidized makes it a catalyst. That is, you will still get the normal reaction of gasoline with the oxygen though it is more controlled. The fact that the TEL is destroyed in the process didn't seem to concern him. She mentioned something about the heat and not a chemical reaction with the gasoline causing it to decompose and that is the key. If the gasoline somehow combined or reacted with the TEL then it would simply be an additive. You would have to be able to show the chemical reaction between the gasoline, TEL and oxygen and the subsequent energy released (or not released) and such. Wiki shows the reaction that TEL has with the head and decomposing as you mentioned, they also don't show a reaction with gasoline.
Don't take this as gospel, however. I'm not a chemist. If you have access to a professor it might be worth asking him about this if you are interested. Otherwise you may get more info on TEL than you ever cared to know about.
Actually, this has been a problem since the first launch. Maybe you are to young to remember, but there was a lot of tension for the first shuttle re-entry, because there were tiles missing, apparently lost/damaged during launch. It all worked out ok, so, the attitude became 'oh, lose a few is no big deal'. Eventually it became a big deal.
Actually loosing a tile or two doesn't matter. Actually when they switched, tile damage went up dramatically. Read about it here - http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4448.
Environmentalists have lied to us for years. Here is a link to the founder of Greenpeace exposing what he has put us through - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2006/04/14/AR2006041401209.html . I admire his courage for coming clean in such a public manner. Unfortunately there are still a lot of anti-nuke nuts out there. Looking at my electric bill, I wish they would go away.
Envoronmentalists have also helped us a great deal. For example eliminating Tetra-ethyl-lead ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetra-ethyl_lead )- a catalyst used to slow down the raction of gasoline burning (a catalyst either speeds up or slows down a reaction by definition). They have also done a lot of other good like taking CO (carbon monoxide) out of the atmosphere from gasoline engines. They said convert it into harmless CO2, a gas that plants need, a gas that promotes life. A "greenhouse" gas and that is a good thing. Plant trees too. Now they are telling us that CO2 causes global warming and it must be eliminated or we all die!
So the real trick is knowing if they are lying to us or they have something to what they are saying. Take a stand, ban di-hydrogen monoxide! See http://www.snopes.com/science/dhmo.asp
So the foam has been damaging tile for a long time. Would we have had better turn arounds with fewer tile repairs if we had fixed the foam a long time ago? And saved lots of $$$ in the mean time?
The foam has been damaging tiles since they switched away from CFCs to make it in an effort to appease the environmentalists that swore the ozone was being depleted as a result of CFCs. Clearly they compromised safty. Can read about it here - http://flyawaysimulation.com/article1564.html .
...What is now known as a special prosecutor, is someone appointed by the department of Justice or Congress. Here is another Wikipedia link. So you have to get Congress to have hearings - official hearings, which the Conyers "hearings" are not - organized by the majority party, in order to get a special prosecutor appointed. This has not happened, and the congressional Republican leadership continues to do nothing. Conyers cannot appoint one on his own.
I agree a little knowledge is dangerous. Here you point out that Starr's position was eliminated and I was worried you didn't know about the new one, then you point that out and even point to an article that mentions the investigation into Valerie Plame. Ignore the investigations on torture and so on. You then still maintain that no investigations are being done. HUH? Whatever, ignorance is bliss I suppose. I'd like to see you tell Conyers that he can't do anything. That would be very entertaining. I could sell tickets to that. I'd like to be there and bring a pad of paper so I can write down some of the stuff he says.
I don't have a legal background.....These guys do.... Once again, Congress has not conducted such an investigation.
This one is really hard to explain to most people and it comes up in most administrations that I have studied. Sometimes the government wants to do something new (hard to believe sometimes). So they get their help to see if there is a law that prevents it. Legal opinions are formed and eventually the US Attorney General will decide if it is ok or not (for what we are talking about). Maybe it is already legal or maybe they need a new law. In the case of the electronic survailance, there was a case decided by the Supreme court in 1972 (aka case law, where you hear about decisis). Can be read here - http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?c ourt=US&vol=407&invol=297 (not sure if you have to be a member or not). Since the government isn't actually listening in on the conversation it is maintained that this is ok. All they are getting is who is calling whom, not what was said. I have a feeling that eventually they will win the lawsuit the EFF has brought and EFF will lose. Regardless, it is being looked into. Why do you expect Congress to get involved at this point? Maybe it would be very educational for you to write to your congressman and ask them to look into the issue you consider the most important. See what they say to you. Be very respectful (even if you can't stand him), clear and concise. Be sure to include your name and address on the letter itself. I can tell you it is far more effective than writting to me. Eschelon goes back to Harry Truman BTW (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON also as seen on/.).
The reality was that Saddam was already scared to death, and had allowed the weapons inspectors the full access they had asked for in the past 12 years. From the UNMOVIC report in March 2003:
He had very good reason to be scared to death. Many of those reasons have nothing to do with anything outside of his own country. Regardless, just days before the war he turned over two scud missles to be destroyed - that up to then he swore he didn't have. He launched scud missles during the first hours of the war and to date over 500 other chemical shells have been found and recovered since the war began (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.htm l and many other web sites have this story). In short he did have WMDs. He did have nuclear scientists, Greenpeace of India showed pictures of the yellow cake sitting outside a refinery. Look here before it is gone - http://64.233.161.104/search?
Even if John Conyers had evedience he can't hold a hearing in Congress, and make it official.
Don't kid yourself. I know exactly what I'm talking about by the way. Type in "conyers hearing" into google and see how he does in fact hold them. Regardless, you have the cart way out in front of the horse. In fact if you knew what you were talking about you would know about the special prosecutor and how that works. I remember when the Dem's put that in place so they could get Republicans. It was right after Nixon. Ironically they were upset when it was used against Clinton. Got bit by their own dog as it were. Anyhow you have a special prosecutor first, then if he finds stuff you would have hearings just like they did with Clinton... remember? It wasn't that long ago.
In short, let me reassure you that if he can make a case for impeachment then by God it will go forward. The Honorable Conyers has the political clout and the media connections to make it happen. He has even said as much. So do you have something? Do tell. So far I just get hot air when I ask this question to people like you. Of course this is probably a very unfair thing to ask you since I'm sure you don't have a legal background. Also be careful what you wish for. You may make it so a Democrat won't be able to do anything. In fact as it is it would seem that only a fool would want to be President.
If Republicans had any sense of decency, they at least would have done an investiation to determine if anything illegal is going on, based on the information in the press - like Harry Truman did during the Roosevelt administration, during WWII, and uncovered several cases of war profiteering.
I have to wonder if you have even bothered to read or listen to the news... for the past few years. Maybe you live in a cave or something? You know NOTHING about the investigations into Halliburton to name but just one investigation? Nothing about the fines? You know nothing about the many investigations into torture in Iraq? I'm... well flabbergasted! I thought the news had excellent penetration on those stories to the point that even Bin Laden would know about it half a world away. Maybe too good if people are tuning it all out. By the way, why do you bring this up the way you did? We are talking about Bush. Maybe you think Roosevelt or Truman had something to do with the profiteers of WW II? Maybe you have another point I totally missed? Regardless, they are looking into these things and you should know it. Maybe you didn't get the result you wanted from the investigations... yea, that is probably it.
...I would say these are some significant ills.
OK, so you do get some news, maybe from radical propaganda sites only? Be careful of those, they can make you look dumb fast. I can't believe I'm about to defend Bush... Don't tell my friends or I could lose my Dem card. Let's address a few things here. The national debt has a lot to do with 911 and the huge costs of that event (think of all the financial district in Atlanta Georgia gone, that is what happened. Then there is the airlines and so many other things that happened as a result). Then there is the response to the Islamo-fascism that must be done. We are simply joining the war on terrorism. In fact the Indian PM called the US - "Johnny come latelies" in the war on terrorism. They have been dealing with it for decades (read about Kashmir and so on). It is also not unprecented. This is why there was nearly unanimous support for going to war and why in the beginning there were more reporters to anti-war protests than protesters. They had to bring in professional protesters to get things going. That is the old Soviet model of propaganda that they have admitted to. He has also helped the environment a great deal. In fact he just reserved more area than all the other presidents combined off of Hawaii. His roll back of the idiot arsenic rule was badly needed. In fact I wouldn't have any water if that rule went into effect. The arsenic has be
If the Republicans had an ounce of integrity they'd impeach Bush and Cheney themeselves.
So just what would they impeach him on? Do you even know what is required to impeach someone? You can't do it just because you feel like it you know. He (or she as the case may be - same standard applies to judges) must have comitted "high crimes and misdemeanors," -- that remains undefined. When Clinton was President the Democrats said it has to "rise to the level" of a great offense, a hiiiigh crime. Simply lying in federal court - a felony isn't good enough (actually it is, however not in that case). By that standard it excludes nearly everything from impeachment, including what Nixon did. If Bush does something that really is illegal (not what propaganda says is illegal), he will be impeached. If you know of something, tell Representative John Conyers (D-Michigan). He would LOVE to hear about it and he can do something about it. Don't waste his time, a real crime and not the imagined ones (i.e. whatever you have in mind I'm sure he is aware of). He is a very busy man and he is always looking into a way to impeach Bush.
Back to this case, if they did something, they most likely simply recorded who is calling whom. Not what was said. This is a age old time tested police technique. If I know who you are talking to, I can often figure out your conduct or if you are up to something even though I don't know what you actually said. Then go for a wiretap warrant and see if you really are up to something. If you are, bust you before you hurt other people or destroy property.
As for the "ills" of the country, what are you talking about? Unemployment is at 4.6%, the lowest average in over 40 years. Terrorists aren't bombing places near you. Given the rest of the world if you live in the US, you have it really good. In fact if you listen to others in the world, they often consider the US spoiled or cushy. Even amoung other industrialized nations. Maybe you are talking about some other ills?
You don't have standing to sue to find out if you were wiretapped unless you can prove that some harm came to you as a result of a possible wiretap. Were they arrested? Was some government action taken? No. The fact that you called someone else is not your property. You don't have a right to keep that secret and nothing in the Constitution says that you do. They went on a fishing expedition thinking they could bag a bunch of money (without switching to Geico), they lost. Now they have to go back to the old way of making money - their activist activities. Hey, it beats working like the rest of us.
I work at a place that had a lot of SGI boxes. Fast, worked well and like SUN used to be - reliable. Then they started changing their #includes! Broke stuff. Even something as simple as ping had to be edited to compile at all. Perl would take weeks to get working, if it could be done at all. I met with their engineers and they told me that they had to do it for the other really cool stuff they were doing. I told them that if I can't get my stuff to work, I'm dumping them. They gave me the impression that they couldn't care less. Fine, adios! Now what to do with the rather large ALTIX super computer they sold us.
BTW, I'm wondering if some of them now work for SUN. Seems to be getting harder to get stuff to compile there too! Listening SUN? Hello SUN??? Looks like SUN is setting.
Sounds to me that he is trying to get interest in a new book. Lets not let him take us back a good 30 years, again. He has wasted enough of our time already. He had his chance. He should be happy with it. He can always work with GNU-Hurd. Something that is already out there. I'm sure he won't though, it isn't his.
While I'm sure you'll be interviewed as well, I think they're just trying to cull out some of the undesirable personality types in advance via this test, just as they cull out the unfit applicants in advance by examining resumes and applications.
Very good response, I have a thought though on the one point above. I think it is more like they are using a non subjective test to get rid of the bad applicants. That way the applicant can't say it is (age, race, gender, sexual orientation, or some other group that may or may not be legally protected) and sue for "discrimination." I used to work in HR when I was in college and just when I thought I had heard everything, someone came up with yet another way to try to sue. Worse, some juries buy this rather than look at how the applicant acts, even in court. Legalized theft of company funds and the lawyers laugh all the way to the bank. Not saying all lawyers are bad, however a few are clearly gold diggers and abuse the system.
This is not to say that discrimination doesn't happen, it does. Especially when it comes to age probably more than any other type. I'm talking actual discrimination, not imagined. My concern is that they may get the personality test to detect an older person and fail them for that reason. There is always the old "over qualified" excuse of the past.
I'd like to ask the linux community, is Red Hat still relevant?
IMHO This sounds like a silly question to me. RedHat is still THE linux distribution. Everyone still makes sure they run on it and more companies support it than any other distro. At least that is the case for servers. Financially I understand they are still the only ones that have actually made money. I still look and try other distros. The next best I think is Suse (Novell).
I welcome them coming back. There is such a thing as too many cooks in the kitchen. I can see that with FC-4 and more so with FC-5 that is happening.
Ever use one? They all require yet another username/password combination, it isn't what your already looking at (i.e. E-mail) and they are all a royal pain in the ass to use. Usually some idiot ends up "owning" the tool and he has rights to delete,restrict,revise what goes on. With E-mail, NOBODY controls it. Stuff you write goes to the people, quick and simply.
Even with the wiki tool I recently joined. I'm not the admin and therefore I can't see everything even though I should. The "owner" doesn't think I should have total access. Other users retaliated by making their own versions of the wiki, now we have like 5 for the same project with people belonging to some and not others. I told them to contact me via e-mail. I don't have time to look at all the other ones and that is just one project.
I think the best collaberation tool that I use is Lotus Notes. For those that have used Notes, they know how bad even that sucks. Propriatary database, lots of steps, links... prone to errors. It is just marginally better than wiki, or perhaps wiki is better. Of course another problem is crap that is put in by the users. I wish there was a way to say for example anything (idiot) user X says, mod it down to zero. Whoever is running the project - mod them up. Top ideas get moved into a comprehensive list. People also have to learn how to ask the right question or ask questions so they are not biased. For example - "Should we buy Dell desktops." compared with "Which desktop systems should we buy." Then list potential desktop systems and the relevent data. Try to find lowest price, most features, best repair record. If that is Dell then good for them. Otherwise consider the best machine. Make decisions based on facts and not BS. Of course you may end up having to buy - Dell for example because the owner says so. Sometimes managers want people to think they have input into a decision even though they don't.
I think it is a good idea. However stick it back in, it isn't done yet. We need a better UI.
There you will learn that BSD did NOT come from SYS V, but from an earlier version of AT&T Unix.
If you read what I wrote you would see I mentioned that it is the earlier version plus the socket, semphore and other stuff that we know as SYS V today. My original statement is still true and you don't dispute it, OpenBSD is NOT Unix.
with Linux you might have a bigger sandbox, but what good is it when it's full of shit and kids that are constantly pissing in it? Also, what good is it to have 100 different sandboxes especially when it contains the same shitty, pissed on sand.;)
Like sounding like an idiot I see. Everyone knows there is only ONE linux, not 100. Controlled by one guy - Linus Torvolds. There are different distros however. The base is the same. You also confused BSD with Linux, BSD is the sand that is pissed on and shitty. Linux's sand has been cleaned and sifted through the efforts of people around the world. You know, once we got rid of the shitty pissed on BSD code. BSD's code is so bad that even Microsoft had to abandon it and re-write their TCP/IP stack that they ripped off. That was reported on/. years ago.
OpenBSD is well engineered.
Your the one on crack. As I mentioned, Linux exploits have been ported to BSD and work just fine. There is NOTHING superior to BSD. I find it comical that you even try to explain the security problems away as human error, then say it is superior engineering. Make up your mind first.
I loaded OpenBSD's latest version about 2 months ago just to see if it had come forward any. I had a tough time getting it in the first place and then I saw no reason to keep it. It still sucks. It is like your trying to say horse and buggy is better than a car. Go ahead, keep your horse and buggy.
You may not have much of a choice soon. Unless you want to be like the people still trying to keep BeOS going.
The linux sandbox is full of crap and has a crowd that is incompatible with OpenBSDs.
Why do you say this? What make you think it is full of crap? Linux runs the biggest machines in the world, some of the most important networks and business systems. I have coded for both and I can tell you OpenBSD is NOT that far from Linux. Indeed, look at the little differences between the BSD version of openssh and the portable version.
The ONLY reason I switched from BSD to Linux all of those years ago was that Linux was leaving BSD behind. That is true today.
I can think of a number of politicians that need this device. Just think of the time it could save us all. Stupid idiot in a meeting boaring us all... vibrate. Wonder if they have a clue device - a device that can radio to the boared device and let it know your already boared. Of course with some people it may simply make them mad.
No, BSD is a Unix hybrid much like Linux is. BSD started life out as SYS V and then many people feel they messed it up. Some say they greatly improved it. The point is, it has moved far enough I don't consider it to be Unix anymore. Certainly Open BSD, that isn't Unix by definition. That is the FREE things Berkeley did and they rewrote all the stuff that USL owned. I remember it, 43 3.5" disks as I recall. Linux took SYSV standards, BSD, merged them intellegently. That is why it is very popular. I remember the 1980s when we had the SYS V - BSD wars. It was sort of like getting avid war demonstrators and avid anti-war demonstrators in the same room. The BSD project brought us a lot of good things - like Sockets, IPC and other things. It is just the base OS, where they put things were.... well different. People didn't want to look all over tim-buk-too to find a freaking config or binary file. Used to drive me crazy. People picked one - SYS V and called it a day. The unfortunate thing is I see this BS starting up all over again with Linux. Stuff in different places. Wars over distros - Suse/RedHat/(other).
My advice to the BSD crowd was to simply admit they are beating a dead horse and migrate to Linux like the rest of us did over a decade ago. There is no shame in it. We have a bigger sandbox, more toys and more people to play with. Their sandbox is old, has scat in it and nobody wants to play over there any more. Bring their toys over and enjoy. Otherwise they face having their sandbox taken away from them entirely. Bankruptcy.
The security issue is funny too. I remember them saying in 1999 that they were so secure, couldn't be broken into because of their code reviews and such. I said they were delusional. They said I was crazy. The next three months the exploits for Linux were ported to BSD. So much for code review and "security".
The unfortunate part is I think it will get ugly from here. Some very good researchers and coders may decide to simply stop coding all together.
Hey, RTFP man, that comment was made by my hypothetical crackpot, not me.
Yea.. it was a hypothetical crackpot response to the hypothetical crackpot comment. I didn't mean you to take it seriously. With a screen name like dildo, I didn't think you took too much seriously.
How long before some crackpot on the threads says: "Well, if you just spin the disk backward, logically it should follow that the artificial gravity will turn into anti-gravity!
Don't be silly. You have to flip it end over end to do that. Have to have a stable catastrophic converter too. Of course messing around with gravity is dangerous. Could lead to real life versions of bad Sci-Fi TV shows.
One theory held that the universe is a lot like a spider's web. If you mess with gravity, you can feel it thoughout the whole universe in a matter of seconds. Someone way out there can also tell where it came from. Others say it moves at the speed of light.
The capacity of (road a + road b) is smaller than the capacity of (road a). Put it in a different way: If road b was there, you could increase the overall capacity by blocking it.
I wondered about that. I can think of cases where that would happen. However the solution is to make road B much larger and close A, or make A obnoxious to use for anyone but those that are residents to use. Otherwise give A more capacity even though that may be painful for a while.
I have heard this argument here in the States. Don't build it or they will come. They didn't build, they came anyway making the bad situation impossible and wasting a lot more fuel. That is probably why they ignored the report. It isn't realistic. That is, you will have more traffic on the roads regardless. Over here they are building that highway now after admitting it was a big mistake not to.
If you upgrade from a previous version, it seems to do away with your Inbox. Simply pull up Folder-> Subscriptions and check Inbox on all of your servers. Someone with Evolution or Fedora should say 'Doh!
Slashdot Mirror
We have probably all read where ballots were pre-punched for a candidate. The most common stories said that either Bush or Gore had pre-punched cards, usually in Florida. In some jurisdictions I have been amazed that official ballots had no control numbers, nothing to verify that they were actually real. Maybe it just seemed that way.
Sounds like something has to be done that also includes something not known until the event occurs. Something that fraudulent votes can be found immediately. I also think we should purple-thumb people to prevent multiple votes by people. Again in the 2000 contest, one college student proudly proclaimed on TV that he had voted over 50 times, in Chicago. He may have been kidding, however I bet a lot of people got mad at that. I know some privacy advocates don't want that here because they say people may be intimidated if they vote. How about in places like Iraq and Afghanistan where they are purple thumbed and it is far more hostile there.
Looks like wikipedia strikes again with yet another incomplete/misleading entry. At least I hope I'm not unfairly accusing you of looking at the wiki. A catalyst is anything that speeds up or slows down a reaction. Increasing the reaction is how it is almost always used and a lot of people (myself in the past) don't know that it can also mean slowing down the reaction - a negative catalyst is also known as an inhibitor. TEL acts as an inhibitor in this case. To be fair the wiki does mention inhibitor, however I don't think they give it enough of an explanation.
You have me worried about the second part, it not being changed as a result of the reaction. Could I have been taught wrong? This question was actually one that I got wrong in college chemistry. I didn't think it was a catalyst and I got into an argument with my prof. over it for the same reasons you mention as I recall. The professor is long gone - old age. As I recall, she said that it is an additive and also a catalyst in the reaction to do with gasoline and oxygen. The fact that the TEL doesn't actually have something to do (chemically) with the gasoline reaction to being oxidized makes it a catalyst. That is, you will still get the normal reaction of gasoline with the oxygen though it is more controlled. The fact that the TEL is destroyed in the process didn't seem to concern him. She mentioned something about the heat and not a chemical reaction with the gasoline causing it to decompose and that is the key. If the gasoline somehow combined or reacted with the TEL then it would simply be an additive. You would have to be able to show the chemical reaction between the gasoline, TEL and oxygen and the subsequent energy released (or not released) and such. Wiki shows the reaction that TEL has with the head and decomposing as you mentioned, they also don't show a reaction with gasoline.
Don't take this as gospel, however. I'm not a chemist. If you have access to a professor it might be worth asking him about this if you are interested. Otherwise you may get more info on TEL than you ever cared to know about.
Actually loosing a tile or two doesn't matter. Actually when they switched, tile damage went up dramatically. Read about it here - http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4448 .
Environmentalists have lied to us for years. Here is a link to the founder of Greenpeace exposing what he has put us through - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2006/04/14/AR2006041401209.html . I admire his courage for coming clean in such a public manner. Unfortunately there are still a lot of anti-nuke nuts out there. Looking at my electric bill, I wish they would go away.
Envoronmentalists have also helped us a great deal. For example eliminating Tetra-ethyl-lead ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetra-ethyl_lead )- a catalyst used to slow down the raction of gasoline burning (a catalyst either speeds up or slows down a reaction by definition). They have also done a lot of other good like taking CO (carbon monoxide) out of the atmosphere from gasoline engines. They said convert it into harmless CO2, a gas that plants need, a gas that promotes life. A "greenhouse" gas and that is a good thing. Plant trees too. Now they are telling us that CO2 causes global warming and it must be eliminated or we all die!
So the real trick is knowing if they are lying to us or they have something to what they are saying. Take a stand, ban di-hydrogen monoxide! See http://www.snopes.com/science/dhmo.asp
The foam has been damaging tiles since they switched away from CFCs to make it in an effort to appease the environmentalists that swore the ozone was being depleted as a result of CFCs. Clearly they compromised safty. Can read about it here - http://flyawaysimulation.com/article1564.html .
I agree a little knowledge is dangerous. Here you point out that Starr's position was eliminated and I was worried you didn't know about the new one, then you point that out and even point to an article that mentions the investigation into Valerie Plame. Ignore the investigations on torture and so on. You then still maintain that no investigations are being done. HUH? Whatever, ignorance is bliss I suppose. I'd like to see you tell Conyers that he can't do anything. That would be very entertaining. I could sell tickets to that. I'd like to be there and bring a pad of paper so I can write down some of the stuff he says.
I don't have a legal background.....These guys do.... Once again, Congress has not conducted such an investigation.
This one is really hard to explain to most people and it comes up in most administrations that I have studied. Sometimes the government wants to do something new (hard to believe sometimes). So they get their help to see if there is a law that prevents it. Legal opinions are formed and eventually the US Attorney General will decide if it is ok or not (for what we are talking about). Maybe it is already legal or maybe they need a new law. In the case of the electronic survailance, there was a case decided by the Supreme court in 1972 (aka case law, where you hear about decisis). Can be read here - http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?c ourt=US&vol=407&invol=297 (not sure if you have to be a member or not). Since the government isn't actually listening in on the conversation it is maintained that this is ok. All they are getting is who is calling whom, not what was said. I have a feeling that eventually they will win the lawsuit the EFF has brought and EFF will lose. Regardless, it is being looked into. Why do you expect Congress to get involved at this point? Maybe it would be very educational for you to write to your congressman and ask them to look into the issue you consider the most important. See what they say to you. Be very respectful (even if you can't stand him), clear and concise. Be sure to include your name and address on the letter itself. I can tell you it is far more effective than writting to me. Eschelon goes back to Harry Truman BTW (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON also as seen on /.).
The reality was that Saddam was already scared to death, and had allowed the weapons inspectors the full access they had asked for in the past 12 years. From the UNMOVIC report in March 2003:
He had very good reason to be scared to death. Many of those reasons have nothing to do with anything outside of his own country. Regardless, just days before the war he turned over two scud missles to be destroyed - that up to then he swore he didn't have. He launched scud missles during the first hours of the war and to date over 500 other chemical shells have been found and recovered since the war began (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.htm l and many other web sites have this story). In short he did have WMDs. He did have nuclear scientists, Greenpeace of India showed pictures of the yellow cake sitting outside a refinery. Look here before it is gone - http://64.233.161.104/search?
Don't kid yourself. I know exactly what I'm talking about by the way. Type in "conyers hearing" into google and see how he does in fact hold them. Regardless, you have the cart way out in front of the horse. In fact if you knew what you were talking about you would know about the special prosecutor and how that works. I remember when the Dem's put that in place so they could get Republicans. It was right after Nixon. Ironically they were upset when it was used against Clinton. Got bit by their own dog as it were. Anyhow you have a special prosecutor first, then if he finds stuff you would have hearings just like they did with Clinton... remember? It wasn't that long ago.
In short, let me reassure you that if he can make a case for impeachment then by God it will go forward. The Honorable Conyers has the political clout and the media connections to make it happen. He has even said as much. So do you have something? Do tell. So far I just get hot air when I ask this question to people like you. Of course this is probably a very unfair thing to ask you since I'm sure you don't have a legal background. Also be careful what you wish for. You may make it so a Democrat won't be able to do anything. In fact as it is it would seem that only a fool would want to be President.
If Republicans had any sense of decency, they at least would have done an investiation to determine if anything illegal is going on, based on the information in the press - like Harry Truman did during the Roosevelt administration, during WWII, and uncovered several cases of war profiteering.
I have to wonder if you have even bothered to read or listen to the news... for the past few years. Maybe you live in a cave or something? You know NOTHING about the investigations into Halliburton to name but just one investigation? Nothing about the fines? You know nothing about the many investigations into torture in Iraq? I'm... well flabbergasted! I thought the news had excellent penetration on those stories to the point that even Bin Laden would know about it half a world away. Maybe too good if people are tuning it all out. By the way, why do you bring this up the way you did? We are talking about Bush. Maybe you think Roosevelt or Truman had something to do with the profiteers of WW II? Maybe you have another point I totally missed? Regardless, they are looking into these things and you should know it. Maybe you didn't get the result you wanted from the investigations... yea, that is probably it.
OK, so you do get some news, maybe from radical propaganda sites only? Be careful of those, they can make you look dumb fast. I can't believe I'm about to defend Bush... Don't tell my friends or I could lose my Dem card. Let's address a few things here. The national debt has a lot to do with 911 and the huge costs of that event (think of all the financial district in Atlanta Georgia gone, that is what happened. Then there is the airlines and so many other things that happened as a result). Then there is the response to the Islamo-fascism that must be done. We are simply joining the war on terrorism. In fact the Indian PM called the US - "Johnny come latelies" in the war on terrorism. They have been dealing with it for decades (read about Kashmir and so on). It is also not unprecented. This is why there was nearly unanimous support for going to war and why in the beginning there were more reporters to anti-war protests than protesters. They had to bring in professional protesters to get things going. That is the old Soviet model of propaganda that they have admitted to. He has also helped the environment a great deal. In fact he just reserved more area than all the other presidents combined off of Hawaii. His roll back of the idiot arsenic rule was badly needed. In fact I wouldn't have any water if that rule went into effect. The arsenic has be
Looks like all that time they took to map the human genome could be a waste of time. They may have to do it all over again.
So just what would they impeach him on? Do you even know what is required to impeach someone? You can't do it just because you feel like it you know. He (or she as the case may be - same standard applies to judges) must have comitted "high crimes and misdemeanors," -- that remains undefined. When Clinton was President the Democrats said it has to "rise to the level" of a great offense, a hiiiigh crime. Simply lying in federal court - a felony isn't good enough (actually it is, however not in that case). By that standard it excludes nearly everything from impeachment, including what Nixon did. If Bush does something that really is illegal (not what propaganda says is illegal), he will be impeached. If you know of something, tell Representative John Conyers (D-Michigan). He would LOVE to hear about it and he can do something about it. Don't waste his time, a real crime and not the imagined ones (i.e. whatever you have in mind I'm sure he is aware of). He is a very busy man and he is always looking into a way to impeach Bush.
Back to this case, if they did something, they most likely simply recorded who is calling whom. Not what was said. This is a age old time tested police technique. If I know who you are talking to, I can often figure out your conduct or if you are up to something even though I don't know what you actually said. Then go for a wiretap warrant and see if you really are up to something. If you are, bust you before you hurt other people or destroy property.
As for the "ills" of the country, what are you talking about? Unemployment is at 4.6%, the lowest average in over 40 years. Terrorists aren't bombing places near you. Given the rest of the world if you live in the US, you have it really good. In fact if you listen to others in the world, they often consider the US spoiled or cushy. Even amoung other industrialized nations. Maybe you are talking about some other ills?
You don't have standing to sue to find out if you were wiretapped unless you can prove that some harm came to you as a result of a possible wiretap. Were they arrested? Was some government action taken? No. The fact that you called someone else is not your property. You don't have a right to keep that secret and nothing in the Constitution says that you do. They went on a fishing expedition thinking they could bag a bunch of money (without switching to Geico), they lost. Now they have to go back to the old way of making money - their activist activities. Hey, it beats working like the rest of us.
BTW, I'm wondering if some of them now work for SUN. Seems to be getting harder to get stuff to compile there too! Listening SUN? Hello SUN??? Looks like SUN is setting.
Not a troll, stating it as it is.
Very good response, I have a thought though on the one point above. I think it is more like they are using a non subjective test to get rid of the bad applicants. That way the applicant can't say it is (age, race, gender, sexual orientation, or some other group that may or may not be legally protected) and sue for "discrimination." I used to work in HR when I was in college and just when I thought I had heard everything, someone came up with yet another way to try to sue. Worse, some juries buy this rather than look at how the applicant acts, even in court. Legalized theft of company funds and the lawyers laugh all the way to the bank. Not saying all lawyers are bad, however a few are clearly gold diggers and abuse the system.
This is not to say that discrimination doesn't happen, it does. Especially when it comes to age probably more than any other type. I'm talking actual discrimination, not imagined. My concern is that they may get the personality test to detect an older person and fail them for that reason. There is always the old "over qualified" excuse of the past.
IMHO This sounds like a silly question to me. RedHat is still THE linux distribution. Everyone still makes sure they run on it and more companies support it than any other distro. At least that is the case for servers. Financially I understand they are still the only ones that have actually made money. I still look and try other distros. The next best I think is Suse (Novell).
I welcome them coming back. There is such a thing as too many cooks in the kitchen. I can see that with FC-4 and more so with FC-5 that is happening.
Even with the wiki tool I recently joined. I'm not the admin and therefore I can't see everything even though I should. The "owner" doesn't think I should have total access. Other users retaliated by making their own versions of the wiki, now we have like 5 for the same project with people belonging to some and not others. I told them to contact me via e-mail. I don't have time to look at all the other ones and that is just one project.
I think the best collaberation tool that I use is Lotus Notes. For those that have used Notes, they know how bad even that sucks. Propriatary database, lots of steps, links... prone to errors. It is just marginally better than wiki, or perhaps wiki is better. Of course another problem is crap that is put in by the users. I wish there was a way to say for example anything (idiot) user X says, mod it down to zero. Whoever is running the project - mod them up. Top ideas get moved into a comprehensive list. People also have to learn how to ask the right question or ask questions so they are not biased. For example - "Should we buy Dell desktops." compared with "Which desktop systems should we buy." Then list potential desktop systems and the relevent data. Try to find lowest price, most features, best repair record. If that is Dell then good for them. Otherwise consider the best machine. Make decisions based on facts and not BS. Of course you may end up having to buy - Dell for example because the owner says so. Sometimes managers want people to think they have input into a decision even though they don't.
I think it is a good idea. However stick it back in, it isn't done yet. We need a better UI.
If you read what I wrote you would see I mentioned that it is the earlier version plus the socket, semphore and other stuff that we know as SYS V today. My original statement is still true and you don't dispute it, OpenBSD is NOT Unix.
with Linux you might have a bigger sandbox, but what good is it when it's full of shit and kids that are constantly pissing in it? Also, what good is it to have 100 different sandboxes especially when it contains the same shitty, pissed on sand. ;)
Like sounding like an idiot I see. Everyone knows there is only ONE linux, not 100. Controlled by one guy - Linus Torvolds. There are different distros however. The base is the same. You also confused BSD with Linux, BSD is the sand that is pissed on and shitty. Linux's sand has been cleaned and sifted through the efforts of people around the world. You know, once we got rid of the shitty pissed on BSD code. BSD's code is so bad that even Microsoft had to abandon it and re-write their TCP/IP stack that they ripped off. That was reported on /. years ago.
OpenBSD is well engineered.
Your the one on crack. As I mentioned, Linux exploits have been ported to BSD and work just fine. There is NOTHING superior to BSD. I find it comical that you even try to explain the security problems away as human error, then say it is superior engineering. Make up your mind first.
I loaded OpenBSD's latest version about 2 months ago just to see if it had come forward any. I had a tough time getting it in the first place and then I saw no reason to keep it. It still sucks. It is like your trying to say horse and buggy is better than a car. Go ahead, keep your horse and buggy.
You may not have much of a choice soon. Unless you want to be like the people still trying to keep BeOS going.
The linux sandbox is full of crap and has a crowd that is incompatible with OpenBSDs.
Why do you say this? What make you think it is full of crap? Linux runs the biggest machines in the world, some of the most important networks and business systems. I have coded for both and I can tell you OpenBSD is NOT that far from Linux. Indeed, look at the little differences between the BSD version of openssh and the portable version.
The ONLY reason I switched from BSD to Linux all of those years ago was that Linux was leaving BSD behind. That is true today.
I can think of a number of politicians that need this device. Just think of the time it could save us all. Stupid idiot in a meeting boaring us all ... vibrate. Wonder if they have a clue device - a device that can radio to the boared device and let it know your already boared. Of course with some people it may simply make them mad.
No, BSD is a Unix hybrid much like Linux is. BSD started life out as SYS V and then many people feel they messed it up. Some say they greatly improved it. The point is, it has moved far enough I don't consider it to be Unix anymore. Certainly Open BSD, that isn't Unix by definition. That is the FREE things Berkeley did and they rewrote all the stuff that USL owned. I remember it, 43 3.5" disks as I recall. Linux took SYSV standards, BSD, merged them intellegently. That is why it is very popular. I remember the 1980s when we had the SYS V - BSD wars. It was sort of like getting avid war demonstrators and avid anti-war demonstrators in the same room. The BSD project brought us a lot of good things - like Sockets, IPC and other things. It is just the base OS, where they put things were.... well different. People didn't want to look all over tim-buk-too to find a freaking config or binary file. Used to drive me crazy. People picked one - SYS V and called it a day. The unfortunate thing is I see this BS starting up all over again with Linux. Stuff in different places. Wars over distros - Suse/RedHat/(other).
My advice to the BSD crowd was to simply admit they are beating a dead horse and migrate to Linux like the rest of us did over a decade ago. There is no shame in it. We have a bigger sandbox, more toys and more people to play with. Their sandbox is old, has scat in it and nobody wants to play over there any more. Bring their toys over and enjoy. Otherwise they face having their sandbox taken away from them entirely. Bankruptcy.
The security issue is funny too. I remember them saying in 1999 that they were so secure, couldn't be broken into because of their code reviews and such. I said they were delusional. They said I was crazy. The next three months the exploits for Linux were ported to BSD. So much for code review and "security".
The unfortunate part is I think it will get ugly from here. Some very good researchers and coders may decide to simply stop coding all together.
Yea.. it was a hypothetical crackpot response to the hypothetical crackpot comment. I didn't mean you to take it seriously. With a screen name like dildo, I didn't think you took too much seriously.
Don't be silly. You have to flip it end over end to do that. Have to have a stable catastrophic converter too. Of course messing around with gravity is dangerous. Could lead to real life versions of bad Sci-Fi TV shows.
One theory held that the universe is a lot like a spider's web. If you mess with gravity, you can feel it thoughout the whole universe in a matter of seconds. Someone way out there can also tell where it came from. Others say it moves at the speed of light.
I wondered about that. I can think of cases where that would happen. However the solution is to make road B much larger and close A, or make A obnoxious to use for anyone but those that are residents to use. Otherwise give A more capacity even though that may be painful for a while.
Er... yes. That was my point. So why not build the new highway?
I have heard this argument here in the States. Don't build it or they will come. They didn't build, they came anyway making the bad situation impossible and wasting a lot more fuel. That is probably why they ignored the report. It isn't realistic. That is, you will have more traffic on the roads regardless. Over here they are building that highway now after admitting it was a big mistake not to.
If you upgrade from a previous version, it seems to do away with your Inbox. Simply pull up Folder-> Subscriptions and check Inbox on all of your servers. Someone with Evolution or Fedora should say 'Doh!