text:
Here in the United States, and the global North in general, there is a lack of clarity regarding activism and revolutionary activity, in fact one is often confused for the other. This is part and parcel of our post-modern condition in which every action, no matter how small, has the intrinsic property of being in and of itself a revolutionary act simply by rejecting dominant cultural narratives or withdrawing from participation in politics, for example. Lifestyle choices like veganism, ethical consumerism, buying fair-trade, or a simple rejection of politics in general, have become substitutes for a political line in many circles on the Left. A negation is thus inverted into a positive affirmation in which the mere act of verbal rejection, or non-participation, or withdrawal/retreat is treated as a substantive revolutionary act. Furthermore, what matters is one's membership to a micro-community, one's inward beliefs and values, and one's outward appearance and individual actions. There is no emphasis on a political and individual transformation in connection to a larger collectivity struggling for general emancipation. That is not to neglect the importance of smaller communities that often do serve the important function of providing personal assistance, empowerment, and support networks to marginalized communities, but rather, that these variants of lifestylism or micro-communities, if self-isoloated and not linked up to a broad emancipatory struggle, are not revolutionary but separatist. And not only that, but as de-politicized and isolated phenomena they can never be revolutionary, only expressions of petty-bourgeois individualism thoroughly tinged with accommodationist leanings towards bourgeois society, or a general apathy or cynicism towards mass struggle and politics.
Of course this notion of a withdrawal, or separation, from political life and struggle, to a retreat into the confines of a self-isolated community mirrors the transformation of bourgeois democracy in the global North from traditional social democratic models of supposedly inclusivist participation to the "low intensity" democracy of neoliberalism. With the prevalence of micro-struggles and a general receding of participatory channels for democratic expression as the State is literally, and quite physically, deconstructed, the notion of activism itself has been transformed. Previously what it meant to be an activist was someone who had been transformed politically, either through a long struggle or through a "revelatory" event (think of the young people who were radicalized by seeing the mass killings in Vietnam on television), and then submerged themselves in the stream of the mass movements and participated in the class struggle for definite political ends. Now activism has become a rejection of political transformation, because it is a rejection of the politicization of things themselves, it is the anti-politics.
Anyone who has witnessed a picket, protest, or rally in recent decades has probably witnessed the following: people standing around holding signs with vague slogans devoid of political content, a few chants lazily cast skyward, and a few raised fists as people march, or even worse, attendees standing silently while listening to some half-dead academic speak on the issue of the day. Of course after all of this is said and done we can wash our hands of guilt, since we did something, we acted, (after all, doing something is better than nothing, right?), and that makes us better than those who did nothing or are ignorant of our cause. But that's the problem, activists have become so satisfied with doing something that they have forgotten to stop and ask the "whys" and the "whats" of that something. Asking that question, which was asked by the activists that came before us, leads straight towards a universalization of struggle, away from separatism and towards political transformation. It leads to class struggle. And why does it lead there? Because a collective conceptualization of your struggle necessitates you grappling with your struggle's relation to all other struggles. Its recognition is anathema to separatism, apathy, cynicism, and identity politics, it leads to a general theorization of a linking up of seemingly disparate micro-struggles, to the recognition of their role in the mass struggle, which in our capitalist world is the class struggle.
Counter to activism, revolutionary activity requires politicization, it requires the revolutionizing of an individual. To most students, thoroughly ingrained with petty-bourgeois ideology, the notion of the necessity of transformation and of incorporating one's own personal or community struggles into a larger struggle screams of an oppressive totalization and marginalization. However, disregarding the rejection in toto of all totalities as being a totalization itself, the notion that one's own struggles have to take a subordinate role, or backseat, to some other issue is missing the point, as well as implicitly privileging one's own struggle over other's. A revolutionary struggle, unlike an activist struggle, is totalizing in that it is the sum total of all oppressed people's struggles for liberation linked and forged through direct experience. This is not a negative as the post-modernist dread of totalization would have us believe, it is a positive. And it is a positive because mass revolutionary, not activist, struggles have led to the liberation of hundreds of millions of people historically (the revolutions in Russia and China freed over 600 million people, across both countries, from the yoke of capitalism, semi-feudalism, and imperialism). Yet, what has the activist line produced? Micro-struggles that lead to gradual reform measures to better the lot of a particular oppressed group while another oppressed group is ignored, until of course their own micro-struggle emerges to lessen their oppression (because it would be "oppressive" or "totalizing" if these two struggles were linked since one is not a direct member of the other's oppressed community or group).
In my own organization, as well as countless others, there is a contradiction between an activist line and a revolutionary line. Or, more specifically, between the line expressing a desire for a depoliticized and loose grouping that wishes to do nothing more than protest this or that, and the line of those who wish to politicize themselves and the masses and march forward towards organizing and building for collective liberation. This activist line must be struggled against, and those who uphold it must be won over to the revolutionary line and be convinced of the necessity of its application. While activism bills itself as the most revolutionary trend, in that it rejects politicization and mass struggle in favor of micro-struggles, inward looking personal development, and depoliticized spaces, it is thoroughly anti-revolutionary. Not only because it opposes the revolutionary line elaborated on here, but because it cannot lead towards a liberation from the oppression that it seeks to end by the methods it employs. While the activist Left in Western Europe and North America continues to naval gaze and search for anti-political solutions to political problems, revolutionaries in India, Turkey, Afghanistan, and the Philippines are seeking to storm heaven, to capture State power and free millions from the chains of capitalism, imperialism, patriarchal oppression, and semi-feudal conditions. They are revolutionaries, not activists.
We must grapple with the fact that our own approach has produced nothing more than a few isolated apparent victories that have done nothing more than ameliorate our existing conditions. We have rejected politics in favor of being cynical or apathetic, we have discarded parties and organization in favor of disunity and a deified decentralization, we have unspokenly privileged our own struggle over those of others, and we have done all of this as the State and capitalism continue their assault on us. We have voluntarily dismantled our own power, our own defense, in the face of the neoliberal offensive and called it liberation. We were wrong, activism was wrong, and it has proven to be a dead end. It may not be easy for many of today's activists to admit this, but it is a political necessity to self-criticize and transform oneself politically in the service of the masses. It's time to come out of the ivory towers, come out of the hermetically sealed safe spaces, come out of our own self-imposed ideological and political exile and step into the class struggle and serve the people. It's time to integrate ourselves with the masses and cast aside petty-bourgeois illusions of separatism, apathy, and cynicism and say that we won't settle for anything less than total emancipation and a destruction of the old society through our collective power. Most importantly, it's time to become a revolutionary in the service of the oppressed peoples, to become more than just the chanter or sign holder that is the activist, to transform oneself politically to fight for liberation. To this I say down with activism, and up with revolution.


text:
My family and I recently returned from a week at Walt Disney World. As Disney Vacation Club members, we have been there 13 times since 2002 and consider ourselves experts on the parks, hotels and restaurants. Being a self-proclaimed expert I love to share advice, reviews and tips to anyone that is planning a trip to WDW. This year, I want to share my review and tips for the newly launched Magic Bands. My Disney Experience with them was truly magical and will forever change the way I plan Disney vacations. If you want to experience the trip of a lifetime, read on.
For the entire length of our stay, our Magic Bands were our room key, park pass, meal reservations, character meet and greet reservation, charge card, Photo Pass and FastPass+.
We are planners. We like to know what we are doing and when. We book our villa at the Disney Beach Club Resort about 10 months in advance. We book our restaurant reservations 6 months out, but as for park passes and fast passes, we always had to wait until we were there. It used to be that you could only get one FastPass at a time then spend the rest of the day waiting on lines, sometimes up to 2 hours long. Not any more! Magic Bands have changed everything for the better.
I strongly recommend purchasing your tickets as far in advance as you can. We purchased a 5-day park hopper ticket online and chose the color of our magic bands two months prior to arrival. Then the real magic happened. The single greatest thing that getting your Magic Band in advance does is enable you to secure FastPass+ reservations. We were able to reserve 3 FastPasses, per park, per day right from my laptop. Either from my computer or from a downloadable smartphone app we could see each day's itinerary including the park we planned to attend, the times of our FastPasses, and any reservations we made. Having all of this information at our fingertips made it easy to plan additional rides, shows and more. Do your research. If you have never been to the parks buy a reputable Disney Guide Book such as Birnbaum's or Fodor's and get passes for all the recommended favorites. If you are a repeat visitor, be sure to schedule the most desirable rides first then add the one's you've never done before.
Every day, we knew exactly what ride we were going on and when. Even during the busiest week of the year (Spring Break) we managed to hit all of our favorite rides with NO LINES! By getting to the park right as it opened and using the Ride Wait Times feature on our mobile app, we were able to get on rides for which we did not have passes and even ride our favorites two or three times. The longest line we stood on was 40 minutes. Not bad. Who can say they went to Disney Easter week and road Soarin' twice, Everest twice, Splash Mountain twice, Test Track three times, Primeval Whirl 4 times in addition to getting on Pirates of the Caribbean, Jungle Cruise, Big Thunder Mountain Railroad, too many other rides to mention and seeing a bunch of shows? We can! And you can too!
Last week, they expanding the FastPass+ rule to as many as you are able to book. Yippy! You can pre-book the three, then get additional Fast-Passes at the park, one at a time. Ironically though, some of the longest lines at any of the parks were for the FastPass+ kiosks. Your best bet may be to do like I mentioned above and use the Wait Time app to find rides that currently have the shortest lines and go on them to fill in the spaces between passes.
Disney has spent over $1 Billion on their MyMagic+ technology and it the most ingenious marketing technique they have come up with yet. The micro chip inside the band enables you to use it for multiple purposes while Disney collects all of the data for marketing purposes. Everywhere you scan your band is a little snippet of info for them to analyze. Of course they will make a gazillion dollars from this but it really does improve the vacation experience for the user so its a win-win for everyone.
Additional conveniences are going to make this the wave of the future at Disney. For example, at the Be Our Guest Restaurant in the Magic Kingdom, you can order your meal and prepay before you even arrive. You simply scan your Magic Band when you arrive at the restaurant, take your seat and your meal is brought to you, already paid for, with almost no waiting.
As for shopping, they can't be beat. If you don't feel like carrying cash, you can purchase anything by scanning of your band and typing your PIN. We were able to grab one of the few remaining Frozen Anna and Elsa dolls, the hottest commodity in Disney this year, with yet another quick flash of the Magic Band.
This year we had the very best Disney vacation yet. We got more in; we had more fun and less aggravation. We spent more time in the parks, not because we had to but because we wanted to. We got to go on every ride we wanted and a few we never did before. It was a blast. We owe it to pre-planning and Magic Bands. Follow my advice. When it comes to Disney I know what I'm talking about.
If you had a good (or bad) experience with your Magic Bands, please leave a comment and let us know.
To find other Expert Disney Tips see the links below:
Kids Guide to Wearing Costumes At Disney

subset: commoncrawl


text:
I know I am, I cannot help it, it's just my charisma, my natural magic. But enough of me, even the word 'fascinating' is fascinating. It crops up all over the place, the 'fascinator' which started off as a light crocheted hood, evolved into a 'cocktail hat' which perches precariously on top of the hair, and now apparently we have the hatinator, which is the bastard offspring of the fascinator and the hat.
Now the origin of the term fascinator is reasonable, it derives from the Middle French fasciner, which means 'to enchant' or 'bewitch'. Thus a pretty girl wearing a fascinator can look enchanting or bewitching. Note that this is involves a modern definition of enchanting and bewitching but we'll let that one pass.
The French term goes back to the Latin, fascinare which also means bewitch or enchant, and derives from the Latin word fascinus which was a charm or enchantment.
Still following me?
But for the Romans, Fascinus was also the living embodiment of the divine phallus. In Rome the Vestal Virgins were the guardians of the cult of the fascinus populi Romani, or the giant phallus which was one underpinnings of the Roman Republic or Empire.
Augustine, in his seminal work, 'The City of God' comments about Roman religion
"Varro says that in Italy, at the places where roads crossed each other the rites of Liber were celebrated with such unrestrained turpitude, that the private parts of a man were worshipped in his honour. Nor was this abomination transacted in secret that some regard at least might be paid to modesty, but was openly and wantonly displayed. For during the festival of Liber this obscene member, placed on a car, was carried with great honour, first over the crossroads in the country, and then into the city. But in the town of Lavinium a whole month was devoted to Liber alone, during the days of which all the people gave themselves up to the must dissolute conversation, until that member had been carried through the forum and brought to rest in its own place; on which unseemly member it was necessary that the most honourable matron should place a wreath in the presence of all the people. Thus, forsooth, was the god Liber to be appeased in order to the growth of seeds. Thus was enchantment to be driven away from fields, even by a matron's being compelled to do in public what not even a harlot ought to be permitted to do in a theatre, if there were matrons among the spectators."
As the man said, "Thus was enchantment to be driven away from fields." So there we are, back with the very roots of the word, a charm or enchantment.
So what does this show? Well what struck me was it shows that we don't really understand our ancestors. What is perfectly normal to one generation can be regarded as utterly bizarre a few generations later. In fact I would go so far as to say that it WILL be regarded as utterly bizarre.
I suppose that this is a hint to us all that an element of humility in our attitudes would not be a bad thing. It doesn't really matter what you believe, how right-on and politically correct you are in your thinking, your great grandchildren will regard you as some sort of freak, a throw back to the dark ages. As they clean out the attic they'll look with horror at your 'Gay Whales Against Racism' T shirt, your author signed copy of 'The Female Eunuch' and your Open University course books on Existentialism, Phenomenology, Structuralism and Post-structuralism and frantically drop them into the shredder before the neighbours notice.
Actually I find this all really liberating. In reality, you don't have to read that stuff. There is no point in appearing cutting edge and cool, because history has already got you marked down as the barely sentient ancestor whose beliefs we have already advanced beyond.
So revel in your liberation, instead just sit back with a good book. Remember that the bawdy comedy 'Satyricon' of Gaius Petronius is read far more often than the worthy and learned letters of Sidonius Apollinaris. So abandon the worthy stuff and read literature that lasts!
May I humbly recommend the much acclaimed book 'Learning a Hard Trade' by that celebrated author Jim Webster. It's much acclaimed because I never shut up about it, and if you buy a copy I promise to celebrate
Tagged: Augustine, bewitch, city of god, dissolute conversation, enchant, Gay Whales Against Racism' T shirt, Learning a hard trade, unrestrained turpitude, Vestal Virgins


text:
phew! it's finally friday...already friday?
because i've been super busy -- both for fun & work -- i will make this really quick too ;)
because i've been super busy -- both for fun & work -- i will make this really quick too ;)
|finally! hello, book of mormon!
|back at pantages theater
|totally in love with jcrew's pixie pants
|at designers and agents show for work
|i went a little crazy with urban decay's sale ;)
|lunching at old vine cafe at the camp
|truffle beef panini
...i love truffle anything
|iced lavender latte from milk + honey is a must!
|my mom still packs me snacks ;)
|finally......................at kang-hodong-baekjeong
|my favorite! PORK NECK!!!
|yumm! make my belly happy!
|yayyyyyyy! fall (was) here for a bit in la
|housewarming for my friend & look what the wifey did!
|beautiful day with lovely friends
|every decoration counts!
|sooooooooo cute!
|there was so much food left over from housewarming
that we all got to take some food home ;)
that's it for today-
from "happilyfull-on-life" ♥


text:
09 June 2017
Nasau Bridge on Nasau Road and off the Nadi back road will be closed for maintenance on Sunday 11 June from 7:00am to 6:00pm. As a consequence, motorists are asked to travel via Nasau Meigunyah Link Road for the period of closure.
The temporary closure will allow for the bridge deck replacement work to take place and the Fiji Roads Authority has approval from the Fiji Sugar Corporation Nasau sector to allow public access via their cane access road as an alternative route during this time.
Motorists in Nadi are advised to take this notice into account if planning travel to the area and to contact Fiji Roads Authority on 5720 if they have any questions.
Read Full Report: NASAU BRIDGE NADI CLOSING FOR MAINTENANCE ON SUNDAY 11 JUNE


text:
Galliford Try house building expansion
Published: 16 September, 2010
Uxbridge: House building and construction group Galliford Try reported a rise in full year profit and fall in revenue as housing sales and prices showed an element of recovery.
Pre-tax pre exceptional profit rose to £26.1m for the year ended 31 June from £24.5m the year before. Group revenue fell to £1.2bn from £1.5bn the year before.
Galliford said its house building expansion plan was on track with 58% of the current land bank acquired at current market values.
The company said in a statement: "With housing sales and prices showing an element of recovery and mortgage lending increasing from a very low base, we also saw the early signs of a reviving land market with a number of attractive land acquisition opportunities developing."
Greg Fitzgerald, chief executive said, "We are on track to deliver the house building expansion plan we set out at the time of the rights issue in September 2009. We have been encouraged by the level of sales and prices achieved since the start of our new financial year when set against the backdrop of the effect on consumer confidence of the current economic uncertainty."


text:
Attend the Union County High School "Pink Out" tailgate event for Breast Cancer Awareness
Attend the Union County High School "Pink Out" tailgate event for Breast Cancer Awareness
Local businesses in Union County are coming together in support of breast cancer awareness with a "Cruise In" pre-game tailgate event promoting breast cancer awareness on Friday, October 20 from 5 to 7 p.m. at Union County High School. Methodist Health Union County Radiology and Surgical Services Departments are co-sponsoring the event along with the Union County Health Coalition.
Join in the fun and stay for the football game when Union County plays Trigg County!
Antique cars, trucks and tractors are welcome to be a part of the cruise-in and will be eligible to win trophies. Attendees will see everything from an antique pink tractor to one that's been designated a "cancer awareness" tractor especially dedicated to those battling childhood cancer. For more information on the cruise-in, contact Mike Moore at 270-997-0138.
Appointment times for mammograms at Methodist Health Union County can be set-up during the event.
Pink T-shirts, sweatshirts and hoodies for adults and children are available for purchase through Friday, September 29. Short-sleeved shirts are $12, sweatshirts are $15 and hoodies are $20. Extended sizes to 5XL are available for an additional $2. Order forms can be obtained Monday through Friday by contacting Ellen Clements, Methodist Health Union County Surgical Services, at 270-389-5177.
All donations and proceeds will benefit the American Cancer Society's Relay for Life event and the Union County Survivor Dinner Celebration.


text:
After hours of travel, you walk in the front door hoping to put your bag down. Instead, you're greeted by an extensive list of questions from your Aunt Gladys about all aspects of your life. This is beyond the third degree. It's the fourth degree. What are you doing with your life? Are you seeing anyone? What was the last meal you ate? Are you still living the same place? Who were your last three sexual partners? Apparently, there isn't a single question that's off limits. She seems to be getting all the exposition out of the way up top, and even though you're expecting it, you're never really prepared.
Now that she knows about your present, it's time to learn about your future. Armed with only the broad list of facts about your life that she got in the conversation before, Aunt Gladys proceeds to systematically destroy every facet of yourself that you thought to be true. She keeps pressing on until you finally lay out all of your hopes and dreams, then pinpoints all your insecurities and lists off a reason why your dreams probably won't come true. It probably comes from a good place, but it just leaves you feeling emotionally wrecked.
Oh god. OH GOD. There's an elephant in the room and everyone knows it. We all know the topics we're not supposed to bring up and for the most part, everyone behaves. That said, there are a lot of those topics and it's hard not to at least come into close proximity of one. You get politics adjacent and everyone tenses up. You're like the captain of the Titanic who's just spotted an iceberg. Thankfully, unlike the real Titanic, you manage to avoid catastrophe, but things could have gone very, VERY, badly.
After a couple of hours together it becomes quite apparent that you and Aunt Gladys don't have a lot in common, so she starts grasping at straws from the past. Remember that conversation you two had a year ago that went over okay? You don't? Oh, well she sure does and she's going to bring it up again. The topicality of the convo has long since past, but Aunt Gladys seems to think that this all you've thought about for the entire year. You nod your head and pretend like you're interested, but the truth is you don't have a lot to contribute.
You and Aunt Gladys may not know each other very well, but you DO share a lot of mutual acquaintances: Your family! Rather than trying to bond with each other, you instead turn to shitting on them. It may not be great for whatever cousin you're making fun of, but, hey, it's common ground. Besides, isn't getting dirt on your family what the holidays are all about?
Day turns to night and the wine starts flowing. Everyone starts loosening up a bit, and, holy shit, you're actually enjoying yourself! Now that you both have a little buzz in you, you remember that Aunt Gladys is actually really cool! For the first time since you got here, you're not struggling to make conversation. Words are coming easily to you and you start to feel really close to your aunt....At least until...
The double edge sword of the wine. All those topics you've been tiptoeing around all day? Well you guys just stepped right smack dab in the middle of a big one and now all hell's about to break loose. You'd like to let it go, you really would. Unfortunately, Aunt Gladys just said she was thankful for the guy who bombed that abortion clinic and you can't let that shit slide. The drunken screaming match that ensues is fueled with a rage that you didn't know you had in you. The fact that the two of you share the same DNA makes your anger that much more intense.
The morning after, everything's a little awkward, but you guys are family so you have to find a way to get on. You sit next to each other as the TV blares and silently enjoy each other's company. No words are exchanged but the love is there. It's the best conversation you have your entire visit.


text:
Making DART work for everyone is more than just using transit to get from A to B. D2 is a vital project to increase transportation capacity and flexibility in the downtown area as our region continues to grow. Both capacity and flexibility are key for economic growth, safety, and long-term sustainability.
Federal funding plays a critical role in allowing us to continue to improve our region's transit system, but federal funding will only cover a portion of the cost. Whatever isn't covered by federal dollars must be covered by local funding, and we all share that cost.
That's why, every step of the way, we're doing all we can to ensure that the D2 project brings the most benefit to the North Texas region at the lowest cost to taxpayers.
Here are the top six considerations when it comes to securing the federal funding we need for D2 and the transit system as a whole:
- Congress Dictates How Much Funding is Available. Three pieces of legislation — The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), and the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act) — place caps on how much of the total project budget the federal government will subsidize. Subsequent appropriations by Congress and allocations by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) further determine funding availability. To secure funding from the FTA, D2 must not only adhere to specific planning and budget requirements but must also represent one of the best investments for the federal government out of all the projects competing for federal funding.
- Grades Matter. When cities and regions ask for federal funding, the FTA gives each proposal a grade based on project strength and viability relative to other proposals under consideration. The lower the grade, regardless of the number of dollars requested, the less likely the project will receive a federal funding allocation.
- Time is Money. The D2 rail alignment should be built as cost-effectively and efficiently as possible, not to mention that downtown Dallas needs a solution sooner rather than later. The longer large infrastructure projects take to build, the more expensive they become. Working through the federal red tape is part of that equation. The more dollars DART asks for, the more the project will be bogged down by FTA scrutiny, regulatory requirements, and federal budget constraints — all of which will add to the full cost of the project.
- We're Not the Only Ones Asking for Funding. DART is competing with other areas across the nation for a finite pool of federal transit funding, and the federal government will be looking to stretch those funds as far as possible while still meeting the needs of communities across the nation. Places like Chicago, San Francisco, and New York are in the mix, and they have larger, more expensive projects that will require larger pieces of the federal funding pie. North Texas has to make its request for D2 as reasonable as possible while still finding the right solution for our region.
- North Texas Needs More than Just D2. Building out a truly interconnected, efficient multi-modal transportation system for North Texas involves a number of expansion projects over the next several years. The more we ask the government to spend on D2, the less funding we will have access to for other priorities, such as the streetcar project and the Cotton Belt. A cost-efficient light rail alignment offers more flexibility for North Texas' public transportation future.
- Looking at the Long-Term Costs. There's more to the cost of a project than just the dollars involved in getting it built. Long-term maintenance and operational costs are also key considerations when it comes to making decisions about which solution we pursue for D2.
Over the next few weeks, we'll dive deeper into the factors surrounding D2's budget, the complexities of securing federal funding, and making wise decisions for the long term. North Texas won't be able to build the solution we need without sufficient federal funding, so it's up to all of us to work together in defining a rail alignment that moves North Texas forward.
For more information about the D2 project, visit DART.org/d2.


text:
The Next Steps in Developing Clinical Practice Guidelines for Prevention
Author + information
- Published online October 8, 2013.
Author Information
- Gary H. Gibbons, MD∗,
- John Gordon Harold, MD, MACC, MACP†,‡,
- Mariell Jessup, MD, FAHA§,‖,
- Rose Marie Robertson, MD, FAHA‖ and
- William J. Oetgen, MD, MBA, MBA, FACC, FACP‡
- ∗Office of the Director of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland
- †Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
- ‡American College of Cardiology Foundation, Washington, DC
- §University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
- ‖American Heart Association, Dallas, Texas
From the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
On June 19, 2013, we published in the online version of the Journal an essay describing the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's (NHLBI's) change in approach to the development of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) (1). Over the intervening weeks, we moved forward according to the principles outlined in our essay. We have taken the critical next steps to enable a more comprehensive evidence-based review. This will lead to a process that will expeditiously finalize the guidelines relevant to cardiovascular disease prevention (hyperlipidemia, hypertension, cardiovascular risk assessment, cardiovascular lifestyle interventions, and obesity). Specifically, we have asked the American Heart Association (AHA) and the American College of Cardiology (ACC), jointly, to assume the governance and management of these prevention guidelines and to ensure their completion and dissemination to the public. We are pleased to announce that they have agreed to do so. We are especially pleased that they spontaneously voiced the desire to include and work with stakeholder organizations, including those in our National Program to Reduce Cardiovascular Risk, in alignment with the collaborative model discussed in our essay.
Our choice of the ACC and the AHA is based on a number of factors. We have had a solid relationship with both organizations for many years and admire their effectiveness in individual and joint CPG and performance measure development and quality improvement; we are confident that their long-standing work in these areas is motivated by and devoted to improving the health of patients and the public; we believe that their reputations and processes in the development of guidelines and measures are of the highest quality; and we have been impressed by their inclusiveness and collaborative nature. This last factor is especially important to us, because we believe that an inclusive process will be important to the broad endorsement, uptake, and adoption of these important guidelines. We are happy to continue as an active partner in the evidence review required for the development of these prevention guidelines, and believe that this new model will serve the public well.
From the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology
Speaking jointly, we are pleased and honored to be invited by the NHLBI to partner with them and to assume the responsibility for the 5 CPGs in cardiovascular prevention. Our AHA and ACC volunteers have participated in the development of NHLBI reports and guidelines for many years. Moreover, our organizations have formally acknowledged our respect for the NHLBI's proud legacy in the CPG development process by frequently synchronizing our guidelines with information from their reports. Thus, we are ready and willing to support the change in process announced by the NHLBI (1) on June 19, 2013, and to undertake this very important work going forward.
We are very pleased that these guidelines will have, as a critical base, the extensive work already done by the current writing panels under the leadership of Dr. Sidney Smith and the writing panel chairpersons. In addition, we have a strong desire to include other organizations in this effort, to ensure the optimal development as well as the broad uptake and utilization of these guidelines. We believe this will allow us all to take advantage of the extensive experience that the ACC and AHA have in guidelines development and to promote a transparent process that recognizes the value and expertise of other professional societies, as well as the highly valuable individual and group efforts that have been expended in the development of the current documents.
Recognizing the Institute of Medicine's recommendation that the CPG development process be bifurcated into the generation of systematic reviews of the evidence (2), the identification of clinical questions, and the proffering of clinical recommendations (3), we are utilizing these processes in our own joint CPGs. Thus, we feel it is entirely appropriate that the NHLBI has decided to focus its resources and expertise on evaluation of the available research evidence via the systematic review function, while entrusting us with the processes leading to CPG development. We believe that this will be an effective model for the future.
To address in more detail the current work in progress, the NHLBI has, over the past 5 years, been supporting a rigorous systematic review of the evidence relevant to a number of clinical questions in the areas cited in the previous text. To proceed as expeditiously as possible from this point to the development of the final CPGs, we have committed our joint ACC/AHA Task Force on Practice Guidelines to provide oversight and staff support, and the NHLBI has committed to support further systematic evidence review as needed. We are inviting all chairs and members of the current writing panels to continue to work together with us to finalize the guidelines. These individuals, who have produced the current draft documents, include experienced methodologists and expert clinicians and researchers from a broad group of organizations (including primary care providers, specialists, and patient advocates), and their participation will be invaluable. In addition, we welcome and will seek discussions with the stakeholder organizations whose members or volunteers have been part of the panels or who are part of the National Program to Reduce Cardiovascular Risk, so that we can be as inclusive as possible as these guidelines are developed.
The ACC and the AHA enthusiastically support the change in direction that the NHLBI is taking, and we are pleased to partner in this important venture in service to the health of the public. We are proud of our ability to generate CPGs that have been shown to improve the cardiovascular health of patients. We pledge to be objective, diligent, thorough, collaborative, and clinically relevant in this process. We furthermore pledge to devote all the resources necessary to complete this effort in a timeframe that is both efficient and sufficient for the production of quality products of superior utility for the benefit of our citizens.
- American College of Cardiology Foundation and American Heart Association Inc.
- ↵Gibbons GH, Shurin SB, Mensah GA, Lauer MS. Refocusing the agenda on cardiovascular guidelines: an announcement from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Available at: http://circ.ahajournals.org/lookup/doi/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.004587. Accessed June 19, 2013.
- ↵
- Eden J.,
- Levit L.,
- Berg A.,
- Morton S.
- ↵
- Graham R.,
- Mancher M.,
- Wolman D.M.,
- Greenfield S.,
- Steinberg E.


text:
Free fast shipping on all orders over R300 | Email us email@example.com
Regular price
In Stock!Order now and receive your order between and .
Brand: Unbreakable Man
Material: Tungsten Carbide
Width: 8mm
**This style has been discontinued**
2 year size replacement guarantee excluded
Do you have a question about Tungsten? Our FAQ page might have the answer you are looking for.
Please note the following regarding rings with a black coating:Tungsten as a metal is highly scratch resistant (4 x more than titanium) but this only applies to the original tungsten silver color, it DOES NOT apply for any color coated tungsten item.Please take good care of your jewelry and avoid any chemical lotion or perfume application on the surface, as it will affect the coating on the ring.


text:
Showfield, Coastal Delaware's newest luxury community, east of coastal highway, will host a Builders' Showcase Tour, Saturday, June 24, 2017, from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
The Carrie Lingo Team, of Jack Lingo, REALTOR, coordinated the event and will host the Builders' Showcase Tour. According to Carrie Lingo, REALTOR, "Showfield is an iconic 132 acre community along Gills Neck Road in Lewes, Delaware, which will feature 166 building lots for custom homes with no builder tie-in. Phase one is 90% SOLD out. While touring, our guests will be able to walk through selected model homes in the community while enjoying lite fare and music. Also open to tour are the community clubhouse, outdoor resort style pool and fitness center. Showfield also features walking trails and borders the Junction and Breakwater Trail and Whites Ponds, a beautiful 16 acre natural pond."
Admission is free and attendees are requested to check in at the Showfield Club House located at 16258 Gills Neck Road, Lewes, Delaware. Enjoy lite fare, music, prizes. Please R.S.V.P. to Merritt Cooch via email at firstname.lastname@example.com, or log onto www.ShowfieldDE.com for more information.


text:
Program Description
Course in Japan Studies
The JSP (Japan Studies Program) consists of the Japan Area Studies Program (JAS) and the Japanese Language Program (JLP). JAS courses are embedded within the liberal arts curriculum to ensure both that they have a strong academic base and that students are able to see Japan from a number of disciplinary perspectives. JAS is proud to host a large number of experiential workshops on Japanese culture taught by masters in Noh, Koto, Shakuhachi, Zen, Shinto, Shodo, Sado, Kado, and the martial arts: Aikido, Judo, Karate and Shugendo.
The JLP includes not only Japanese language courses ranging from beginning to advanced levels but also courses in professional Japanese writing, reading Japanese newspapers, and public speaking in Japanese. Our Language Acquisition Center (LAC) includes a Japanese Writing Desk to help Japanese and international students polish their composition skills.
Japanese Culture Classroom
Japanese Culture Classroom A
Wooden Floor
At iCLA we use a wood floor in Japanese Culture Classroom A and this is where we host our Noh, Shugendo and other workshops. Wooden flooring has always been a cornerstone of the traditional Japanese way of life. It is the oldest type of flooring in Japanese history, and in olden days entire houses had wooden flooring. Round tatami mats were used only in places where people sat and slept.
Japanese Culture Classroom B
Tatami Floor
Japanese Culture Classroom B's floor is made of tatami mats. We host our Sado workshops here and other activities that involve sitting on the floor. Tatami mats are traditionally made by weaving straw and have an exact 2:1 aspect ratio. This makes it possible to create perfectly square or rectangular spaces depending on the occasion. Determining the size of a room this way is also something that is quintessentially Japanese. Even now, office space is often measured "by the mat."
Central Garden
Bamboo Grove
Our beautiful bamboo garden can be seen from six different angles on both floors of the building—a perfect way to appreciate a plant with long connections to Japanese culture. Bamboo is endemic to the Japanese archipelago south of Aomori Prefecture and has long been used as a building material. Often considered to be something between a tree and a grass, it grows as quickly as grass but like a tree its stalks grow straight and woody. At iCLA we hope that the students will be like bamboo: flexible, and capable of growing rapidly.
12 Hands-On Workshops
Learn about Japan's Arts and Culture in 12 Hands-On Workshops
*More workshops to be announced.
About the School
Picturesquely located at the foot of Mt Fuji, in the heart of what was known in medieval times as Kai Country, the YGU Sakaori campus, home to the iCLA complex (Residential Halls and classroom buildin ... Read More


text:
so-called "phishing" scams, where users are duped into going to a supposedly legitimate website and tricked into revealing sensitive information, are on the rise. late in 2003, a spate of phishing scams all came out at roughly the same time, creating security havoc.
many of the scams took advantage of the rfc standard method of embedding a username and password combination into an url (i.e., http://username:firstname.lastname@example.com). although this method has existed since the dawn of the internet, it presents a serious security flaw when it comes to duping users.
that's why it's all the more surprising that microsoft, a firm not known for sacrificing functionality for security, plans to actually remove this functionality from its internet explorer browser. it's even being nice enough to warn everyone months in advance so preparations can be made. this is a significant departure from past tendencies to just spring changes on unsuspecting i.t. folk, and could signal a sea change for the redmond software giant.
starting with internet explorer 6 service pack 1 (sp1), url-embedding of credentials will no longer work at all. microsoft presents a variety of workarounds on its support website that will allow this functionality to remain, albeit in a more secure format.
although this implementation will cause ie to deviate from the standard url specification, security experts are applauding the change. states russ cooper, maintainer of the ntbugtraq mailing list, "this action is a clear demonstration of the tci promise, security over functionality." cooper goes on to say "no doubt some who will cry foul … because needed functionality is now gone or websites have to be recoded," but notes that "the average user, the victim of phishing scams, isn't going to miss the functionality but will happily miss the scams."
competing browsers netscape, mozilla, opera, and others are expected to implement similar modifications if microsoft's experiment proves useful.
you can read microsoft's support page that announces the forthcoming change for more info. russ cooper's excellent ntbugtraq has more commentary as well.
thanks goes out to aceyman for bringing this to our attention.
eric's opinion
i had two different reactions to this news. the first was something akin to "microsoft deviating from rfc specs? say it isn't so!" microsoft obviously has a long history of playing fast and loose with standards when it pleases the company to do so. using "embrace and extend," microsoft has claimed standards compliance with things like active directory's basis in ldap, but careful scrutiny reveals that microsoft usually uses the standard as merely a starting point, adding nonstandard extensions even when they're not needed. witness the company's xml office format shenanigans–i need not say any more. you get the point.
however, i can honestly say that this is perhaps the first time, if not the only time, where i support a deviation from the rfc standard url format. phishing scams may not mean much to seasoned i.t. gurus, but to the non-technical masses it's a serious threat. the loss of this functionality will undoubtedly annoy some, but it's a good thing, something that should've been tossed out a long time ago.
it also shows that, despite many missteps prior to now, microsoft can sometimes make a very good security decision when it wants to. let's hope this is the first in a growing trend of such decisions.
microsoft's in a position of immense power when it comes to making and breaking standards. i'd love to see it use this position to make everyone's i.t. experience better, not just as a method to lock buyers into a proprietary software model.
user comments 65 comment(s)
|first post (12:27pm est fri jan 30 2004)
hey, i got here first!, na,na,nana, na… – by thepostman
|but (12:28pm est fri jan 30 2004)
what about the programmers who needs this fonctinnality to work, and would not have been scammed in the first place. they will miss this functionnality. why do the dumb users always go first ?
anywayz i use mozilla/firebird … keep on not following the standars microsoft, you are getting closer to the pit ! – by daspecialist
|looks like (12:42pm est fri jan 30 2004)
once microsoft fixes all the security problems, the system will no longer be user friendly..
– by rax
|i guess it will be rfc that will change. (12:50pm est fri jan 30 2004)
"many of the scams took advantage of the rfc standard method of embedding a username and password combination into an url (i.e., )."
i guess a new rfc will be written to superceed the old rfc for security reasons. remember rfc means "request for comments" – by rfc reader
|rax (12:52pm est fri jan 30 2004)
i agree with rax and daspecialist.
i understand the need to idiot proof things, but this may negatively affect workplace production for those who use this method.
of course, maybe we should all just slow down and take an easy-peazyier life-stance. we rush around too much. not entirely our fault, considering the work overlords demand it.
i altered mozilla code to deviate from standards, daspecialist. i have it show both title and alt tags. title tags over-ride though.
hmmmmm. balance is somewhere. – by dude in ugly hat
|i'd also point out (1:06pm est fri jan 30 2004)
that are not something that was used en-mase. i don't think i've ever read a reccomendation on using that command to access any password protected sites or domains, so the change will be almost insignificant on the surface, yet very significant below it where it should be. in an age of *security* frenzy, microsoft cannot miss the boat, therefore a few sacrifices (if you can even call this one that) are more than welcome. in fact if *useless* functionality is replaced by *needed* security, i am sure every windows user (99% of computer users +-1% error margin) will welcome it. people tend to forget (especially the 99% of this board which is made of ms-haters) that when security became an issue with ms products, in less than 24 months microsoft has accomplished more than unix in it's 40 years of existence. in fact a windows 2003 secure box, will rival any monolithic unix system in security anytime. talking about a system which was built *with security in mind* from the ground up. with longhorn, people will see the best in blending security and functionality together. most of you will be amazed. people think that just because of viruses, microsoft will turn windows into a dull os (sorta like linux), but that's easy to do, and they are not doing that. instead they are seamlessly changing the underlying infrastructure for security yet keeping the functionality the same. i've said it all along, unless you people are completely stupid and do not get it that ultimately the future of operating systems, office software, crm….and most productivity software and developement software belongs to microsoft. period. – by wd
|noooooooooo! wait!!! (1:13pm est fri jan 30 2004)
i don't understand how this can be used as a scam! it makes no sence. last time i checked the "phishing" scams told the dumb user to enter there user name and password then thanked them for the update. how was the use of – by roach_d
|oops (1:15pm est fri jan 30 2004)
messed it up… click here..
– by roach_d
|re: rax (1:32pm est fri jan 30 2004)
"once microsoft fixes all the security problems, the system will no longer be user friendly.."
hey, maybe it'll be about as user friendly as linux by then!
or, the converse could be, when linux becomes as user friendly as windows, it'll be just as bloated, buggy, and insecure as windows. – by j. eric smith
|rant part 2 (1:33pm est fri jan 30 2004)
hey wtf!!!
if you connect to an ftp server or web server that is not secure you are sending clear text username and password. so why the f*#k would you remove a functionality that clearly shows you that your password and user name are there for everyone to see!!!
in fact i think they should remove the opisite the only way to f'en get to a unsecured server is with your username and password displayed for everyone to see!!! that way admins or even a digbat user would say hold on there my password is exposed.
get it!
it's just not fair that small people with small minds make this kind of big decisions.
ah well i guess i will live. – by roach_d
|re: roach_d (1:35pm est fri jan 30 2004)
roach, here's an example of the problem, albeit a benign one. click on the link below.
didn't take you where you expected, did it? this example isn't totally complete because it doesn't make use of the username:email@example.com setup, but i don't have one of those to direct you to at the moment. the point is, it's easy to make a link *look* like it sends you somewhere when, in fact, it's sending you somewhere else. it's also pretty easy to figure out *where* you linked from, and that information might contain the username:password combo. not a pretty picture. – by j. eric smith
|re: wd (1:48pm est fri jan 30 2004)
"microsoft has accomplished more than unix in it's 40 years…"
ummm nope.
windows still lacks:
1. compartmented mode operation
it still has problems just separating applications from the kernel…
sorry eric… couldn't resist the flame bait…. :-) – by old sampler
|re: eric (1:54pm est fri jan 30 2004)
i know of the problem.
as a developer i also know that it is not caused by the ability to log in with the @ sign. it is caused by microsoft not removing none text characters that exist below character #32 in the text stream before the @ sign. this is clearly illegal in the rfc standard as user names and passwords should not legitimately contain ascii text codes below #32. with that said it would be easy to add a function to clean urls of invalid characters before passing them along to be interpreted by the application. the developer is covering his assets by blaming the standard and he/she has gotten away with it.
i would have done the same thing�
– by roach_d
|wd (1:58pm est fri jan 30 2004)
this functionnality is crital for software that already uses it.
milions of lines of codes are going to be re-written, and some software will need a complete core engine modifications just because m$ won't follow standars …. again …
some people like programmers depends on that functionnality and they won't get caugh by the glitch in the first place, but dumb users always go first. – by daspecialist
|old sampler (2:00pm est fri jan 30 2004)
wd dosen't know what mtbf means :) – by daspecialist
|re: old sampler (2:13pm est fri jan 30 2004)
"sorry eric… couldn't resist the flame bait…. :-) "
and i shall be just as tongue-in-cheek when i say unix has had 40+ years to take over the computing world, and instead it's been marginalized by an os that, according to you, just can't do much of anything at all.
kind of makes you wonder what kind of fools have been pushing unix all these years since they've obviously done such a hideous job.
or could it be that, despite all the technical objections the purists have, windows is actually a very good (but not perfect) product that apparently performs well enough to meet 90%+ of the world's computing needs?
i tend to believe it's a bit of both. unix (and linux) has been marketed very poorly up until now. unix has a lot of respect but no marketing. linux has a lot of marketing but no respect (note i'm speaking from a management, not technical, perspective).
windows has marketing and at least some respect. it's also got baggage, which newcomer linux does not have. but give it time and it will. already, linux distributions have gone from one cd to two, to four or more. the kernel itself has similarly bloated up compared to previous kernels. bloat, bugs, and security problems are inevitable as it becomes more and more complex. – by j. eric smith
|re: daspecialist (2:19pm est fri jan 30 2004)
most likely. also doesn't understand "multi-user", 24×7 uptime, or… either.
i still don't understand why ms claims scailability– they don't handle 2048 processors either… or anything more than maybe 16… tops.
much less the ability to run on almost any 32 bit cpu made (even some dsps can run linux).
|re: old sampler (2:29pm est fri jan 30 2004)
"i still don't understand why ms claims scailability– they don't handle 2048 processors either… or anything more than maybe 16… tops."
first off, there aren't many makers of 2,048 cpu machines out there, so i think this is kind of ridiculous to hold as some "standard" microsoft must live up to. second, windows datacenter 2003 supports up to 32 cpu's. you're going to have a very, very hard time finding 32-cpu machines outside of some very specialized machines as well. microsoft has (quite wisely) decided to not pursue this ultra-niche market.
while we're on the subject of scalability, just how does linux do on a 2,048 cpu machine? pretty poorly, actually. sure, it may run, but benchmarks of the 2.4 kernels showed the os to reach a scalability wall of around 4-8 cpu's due to scheduler inefficiencies. while this has been somewhat addressed in the 2.6 kernel, it still doesn't scale well beyond 16-32 cpu's…which puts it in the same boat as windows datacenter 2003.
now if you want to talk solaris…
"much less the ability to run on almost any 32 bit cpu made (even some dsps can run linux)."
quite nice, but again, what does it prove? x86 cpu's represent the bulk of all cpu's shipped worldwide. there are more x86 linux machines out there than any other kind by at least a ten-to-one margin. unlike linux, microsoft has to make a profit on its software. therefore, if it's not profitable for microsoft to code for, sell, and support a cpu architecture that's likely to comprise 0.2% of overall sales, they won't do it. this isn't a technological limitation of windows, it's a business decision. it's a wise one, too, given that windows used to support alpha, powerpc, x86, and mips. x86 windows outsold all the others by huge margins, and support for the others was causing a loss at microsoft. ia64 windows is in a similar state right now. – by j. eric smith
|re:wd (2:44pm est fri jan 30 2004)
we would all like to thank you for keeping your drable under 300 words.
"when security became an issue with ms products, in less than 24 months microsoft has accomplished more than unix in it's 40 years of existence."
do you read the stupid stuff you write.
– by dinobot
|re:eric (2:47pm est fri jan 30 2004)
"or, the converse could be, when linux becomes as user friendly as windows, it'll be just as bloated, buggy, and insecure as windows"
i hope that is not the case.
– by rax
|re: old sampler (3:03pm est fri jan 30 2004)
well, what can i say, i keep asking you not to reply to my posts, but you keep doing it. i can't imagine then expecing you to say anything even remotely nice about windows.
1. compartmented mode operation
2. multi-user environment (not the fake one, a real one)
3. support for supercomputing
4. 24×7 uptime (even 2003 still requires defragging now and then)
5. mtbf of one year, under standard use, with multiple users, 300+ processes of over 4 gb each,…
6. batch support (though i understand some people are trying…)
7. life critical certification… (as in nuclear plant control, air traffic control, medical monitoring… hell – even telecommunications won't certify windows for use…)
"[san francisco | reuters news service, 30 october 2002] – microsoft said yesterday that windows 2000 has received the highest level of security evaluation of any commercial operating system, an important benchmark for government and other contracts" — it's called cc, you fukhead.
it still has problems just separating applications from the kernel…
— well as usual you tried to put a spin on my sentence, but as usual it didn't work. i didn't say unix was not secure, not singled out a specific area of either os (which they might specialize on), i said that what ms has accomplished only in the last 4 years, the unix world hasn't been able to do in 40. now they are almost dead (if it wasn't for the billions it costs to replace the mainframe dinosaurs). in short fu. – by wd
|mtbf (3:10pm est fri jan 30 2004)
wd is close but still he dosen't fully understand…..
– by daspecialist
|re: eric (3:12pm est fri jan 30 2004)
"and i shall be just as tongue-in-cheek when i say unix has had 40+ years to take over the computing world, and instead it's been marginalized by an os that, according to you, just can't do much of anything at all."
yep – no problem.
i put it down originally as just very good marketing. later on i put it down to predatory marketing – since ms contracts prevent hardware from being sold without an os… and for a while, they couldn't sell one without windows.
"kind of makes you wonder what kind of fools"
really poor salesmen. actually, i suspect they were trying to imitate ibm of the previous decade, and failing at it since they really didn't provide the background support that ibm could. and that made the unix systems of the day overpriced (i know – i bought one the first motorola microsystems vme-1000 system in a private purchase (number 24 i believe).
"…90%+ of the world's computing needs?"
"… linux has a lot of marketing but no respect …"
one thing i have noticed is that the time it takes to get certification (posix took a year or two) is shortening (eal3 took 6-8 months). it took windows over 10 years to get c2 (and then dropped the product the following year), about 2 years to get eal3… ms products just don't last long enough in the market to make such standards really apply though. i think the certification standards groups assume that the product will be on the market for about 5 years (at least 3 after certification).
"already, linux distributions have gone from one cd to two, to four or more."
ah yes. the base windows does seem to come with 1 cd…. another cd for office, another for sql, another for a compiler, and more for development environment,… each, (unsurprisingly) costing between $200-600 (though the sql server thing was listed for 7-10 thousand). there is also the fact that some of the linux distributions include install cds for disparate cpus (rh used to send out 3, 1 for intel, 1 sparc, 1 alpha, the remainder were sources)
yet the single cd from the distributions (at least the ones i've been using: slackware and rh (i don't have rh enterprise, so i don't know whats on that)) includes all this…
and you can't do much with the base windows install. i believe you are limited to maybe use mail, and browse the internet.
the other linux cds contain the sources, extra utilities, limited use promo utilities ("try it, if you like it call us for a license…" type of thing).
in two cases i remember (rh and slackware) one of the alternate cds was a "live" system – you boot and run the distribution from the cd. can't change anything, but you could try out things (used a ramdisk for testing, or you could mount a real disk/floppy if you wanted to keep what you changed). i think it was also provided as a "rescue" disk, since you could use it to fix a broken boot, bad misconfiguration, or damaged filesystem, or restore the system from backups. (anybody seen a backup utility for windows recently? or is that a third party utility now… since the eula prevents more than one backup.. and your install/recover cd is a copy, and you have one on a hard disk does that use up your "one backup", and hence, no need for a backup utility?)
even the propriatary unix distributions (solaris, irix..) are doing the same thing. the base os comes on 1 cd… to get the rest of the extended utilities and freebies, use the second/third/.. install cds.
as for a real minimum configuration.. i know unix/linux systems can be pared down to around 20-50 mb, though this is really only usefull for turnkey operation. to do that with windows appears to require a custom distribution…
yes – some bloat is expected… though not in the same areas. kernel bloat has already been alleged. though the last kernel i built (haven't done the latest yet) was still less than 2mb after boot. i would have said "less than 1mb" but i'm not sure exactly how much the extra loadable modules added.
|you forgot… (3:25pm est fri jan 30 2004)
"and you can't do much with the base windows install. i believe you are limited to maybe use mail, and browse the internet."
you forgot solitare and mine sweeper…those two corporate apps *rock*… :d – by frosty
|re: wd (3:31pm est fri jan 30 2004)
"…specific purpose…"
nope.. it was created for the military yes, but it was also sold to industry to allow controled sharing of restricted information. think how much safer ms would have been if they had been using compartmented labels on their data and networks. noone would have been browsing their net… you think oil companies like that? think again.
"all the supercomputing…"
"– windows 2000 i have 24 x 7 x 365 uptime. imagine i had a high end cluster of windows advanced server"
why would you need such a cluster if a single server stayed up…
"define some people" wellll ms for one.
".. level of security evaluation .."
yep – common criteria. eal3. took them about two years didn't it. and where is windows 2000 now? dead (welll, actually just dying, where is certification for 2003… pending evaluation i think). linux got it in about 6 months.
"ms has accomplished only in the last 4…"
|ah god dam (3:33pm est fri jan 30 2004)
i run a few adult xxx password websites, surprisingly – we give out passwords to adult sites! this change is really going to mess up how we list the passwords on our website.
oh dear.. will have to recode everything – by pking
|re: rax (3:34pm est fri jan 30 2004)
"i hope that is not the case."
you and me both, but i think it's inevitable. linux is a software project, just like any other software project ever undertaken by man. as it becomes older and broader, it becomes less efficient (somewhat like us humans, wouldn't you say?), more complex, and more trouble prone. eventually, a clean-sheet rewrite is needed. microsoft is in the unenviable position of having to maintain total backwards compatibility, thus the clean-sheet idea is somewhat limited. linux has the advantage here in having no pre-existing software base. however, when that changes, linux is going to have similar problems. it might even be worse, if for no other reason than the lack of any single, guiding force in the linux community. linus looks after the kernel to a certain extent, but the whole thing has grown beyond him in complexity, unfortunately. – by j. eric smith
|how did… (3:50pm est fri jan 30 2004)
unix vs windows = ie bug?
we are talking about removing a standard way of doing things. how did the topic change to unix/linux vs windows flame? – by roach_d
|re: old sampler (4:06pm est fri jan 30 2004)
"yes – some bloat is expected… though not in the same areas. kernel bloat has already been alleged. though the last kernel i built (haven't done the latest yet) was still less than 2mb after boot. i would have said "less than 1mb" but i'm not sure exactly how much the extra loadable modules added."
the kernel you rolled is obviously so tiny because you're using modules. windows does the same thing, so comparing apples to apples is possible. guess what? the two kernels offer similar sizes. the single largest factor that allows you to trim down a linux kernel is that you can do without the gui if you want to. this isn't an option for windows, which is unfortunate in the server market. however, in the desktop market, linux's lack of a standard desktop has hampered software development. it's a double-edged sword.
as for the number of cd's in a standard linux install, yes, there are distros that have the os on one cd and everything else on the rest of the cd's. and dos used to come on a single 5.25″ floppy disk. linux has grown and grown and grown to the point where it's far larger than it used to. although i don't have direct data available at this very second, i'd be willing to be that linux's growth has been well above linear and has coincided quite nicely with it's growing market appeal. in short, as linux attempts to appeal to more people, it will become less focused, larger, and more prone to software bugs — *exactly* the same things that have created havoc with microsoft. unless linux has developed some new programming model that defies the conventional wisdom of software bugs, this is inevitable. but as far as i know, linux programming is handled in a *less* regimeted, *less* organized fashion than is the norm in commercial software, so the propensity for bugs is actually increased. linux's saving grace is millions of eyeballs doing free beta and alpha testing, but it doesn't change the fact that linux *is* software and *is* subject to the same rules and probabilities of software bugs as microsoft and the rest. – by j. eric smith
|we all need to read more… (4:11pm est fri jan 30 2004)
to many times i would get upset about something but if i just took the time to read my time of fustration would have been cut short.
what i mean is that this new "bug fix" can be disabled so what i am going to do is write a vb script that will enable it once a computer is infected by the microsoft bug. also provide a activex object that will tell the user they are going to a fake website. but also turn off the ms "fix" if you can call it that.
– by roach_d
|re: eric. (4:46pm est fri jan 30 2004)
"… same rules and probabilities of software bugs …"
welll the multiple eyes is true.
i think the major difference is that there is no "minimum time to market" deadline. as such, each project (from the kernel on down through applications) the sub-projects are not pressured as much about coming together for a release date.
the other difference, is that since each project is independant, each proceeds at its own pace (i know this sounds like what i just said but..)
the tie-in with distribution vendors is that the vendor gets to decide what should be included/omitted. this provides an independant qc step that a single vendor doesn't have.
the other difference is that linux (the kernel) has been around for 12 years… and has undergone at least 4 major rewrites:
1. the original release
each of these required a significant rewrite, and usually also signaled a major version change (1 to 2 was really big), 2.2 to 2.4 was not quite a major rewrite but was preparing for a major one. with the device driver models, and smp+numa+ and security modules.. changes between 2.4 and 2.6 should be counted as a major rewrite.
the advantage of the "less" regimented programming model is that a lot of things can be tried out without having to justify them to management. since the primary maintainers (and including linus) are the "idea" filter, if it works, is coded by their idea of good practice, and a lot of other people like it (similar to voting for your favorite improvement), then it tends to get added.
they are also not above deleting things that just don't work or have proven to be bad things.
the contrast with ms has been their attemps to prevent experimentation, block third party applications, forced bundling via co-mingling of applications and kernel (ie and the gui) and undocumented interfaces.
this, added to a forced release deadline, has cause more bugs, more incompatability, and more general failures in delivery (how long is longhorn going to be delayed? hell – they delayed nt 5 for so long they decided to call it windows 2000… longhorn may end up being windows 2010 :-).
as far as ms doing a re-write… they said they did a complete rewrite for 2000… and again for 2003… (more hot air.. i would have accepted the possibility except for the bugs that go all the way back to windows 98 or earlier). the other problem i have with their announcements is the blurring of the difference between applications, operating system, and kernel. i suspect this introduces some internal problems too – their own programmers may not fully recognize when they are working on a kernel, an application, or other. this, in turn, causes an effect on tired programmers… "its only the xxxx, it isn't like its in the kernel where i have to be really carefull… and the deadline is next week", though i don't believe they think quite like that.
been there done that… i'm now in a research environment – by old sampler
|hmmm… (5:51pm est fri jan 30 2004)
allow me to demonstrate how a typical discussion between some of the finest technical minds in the world and wd tends to go on these message boards. i will be brief, at the sake of not being repetitive.
informed geek:"blah blah blah, (insert technospeak and critical points here), blah."
(pause while wd gathers his thoughts)
2 hours later…
wd:"blah blah, fuk you motherfukers, suck $hit while microsoft slowly breaks it off in yer a$$hole$. all you linux freaks are stupid because i said so. i am obviously the only person of intelligence here because i like microsoft and only microsoft. oh, and intel. fuk fuk fuk fuk (insert complete lack of coherency or logic, and more senseless cursing). your all a bunch of fukked up liars and i'm right all the time."
there, now that this dialogue has been established, geek.com editors please feel free to insert a link to this post in place of any future postings by wd in any other articles here at geek.com. it will save us all a lot of time… – by noob saibot
|re: old sampler (6:16pm est fri jan 30 2004)
although this is definitely straying from the topic, i'm enjoying a reasoned debate on this subject (as opposed to the unreasoned drivel that usually takes place here.) thus, i'll indulge you.
"i think the major difference is that there is no "minimum time to market" deadline."
this can also be a disadvantage, because things that might be useful to end customers can be delayed "while we get it right." lack of deadlines *can* conspire to make things *never* appear. think duke nukem forever, falcon 4.0, team fortress, etc…
"the tie-in with distribution vendors is that the vendor gets to decide what should be included/omitted. this provides an independant qc step that a single vendor doesn't have."
i would argue that this could potentially allow any such vendor to have far too much sway over what *they* want as opposed to what an end user might want. this has yet to take place in any major way in the linux world, but as things become more commercial, you can bet that it will. count on it.
"the other difference is that linux (the kernel) has been around for 12 years… and has undergone at least 4 major rewrites:"
you could argue that windows has been around for around twenty years (windows 386, anyone?) and has undergone similar rewrite cycles, going from a dos shell to a dos/windows hybrid, to a 16-bit/32-bit hybrid, to a full 32-bit rewrite, to the latest 2003 kernel. the features you ascribe to linux are great for linux, but it is far from advancing any state-of-the-art. it merely brought linux up to the standards of those it wished to compete with, namely sun and microsoft. this is not meant to diminish the effort shown by the linux community, but i don't want their efforts being blown out of proportion, either.
"the advantage of the "less" regimented programming model is that a lot of things can be tried out without having to justify them to management."
and there is a huge advantage to this, no doubt about it. it can also be a recipe for wasting time and code forks, both of which have already taken place in the linux kernel (remember the memory management disagreements in the 2.4 kernel?) i think it's fair to say this *can* be an advantage if linux decides to try something that no one else has ever tried, but they've yet to do that. other than the fact that linux is more or less free, it has broken no new ground whatsoever. it has instead merely followed where solaris, bsd, windows, and mac have already trodden. it's done a darn good job of it, but it has not advanced much into state of the art.
"this, added to a forced release deadline, has cause more bugs, more incompatability, and more general failures in delivery"
i've frequently spoken out against forced release deadlines for the very reasons you describe above. however, that does *not* mean i'm not in favor of hard deadlines. it means i *am* in favor of hard, *realistic* deadlines.
by the way, you really ought to consider exactly *why* microsoft is delaying longhorn for so long. many people, yourself obviously included, have griped extensively about microsoft's lack of attention to security. given that microsoft has to figure out some way to (a) maintain compatiblity but at the same time (b) improve security without breaking everything, their job is perhaps the most difficult software job ever attempted in the history of computing. if it takes them until 2005 to get it right, i'm willing to give them that time — assuming, of course, that linux doesn't make a more appealing case to me in the meantime.
"as far as ms doing a re-write… they said they did a complete rewrite for 2000… and again for 2003…"
no, they didn't claim that at all. bill gates *did* announce the trusted computing initiative back around that time, but it has never, *ever* been said that 2000 and 2003 are complete rewrites, nor that they would be. a cursory look at the contents of the c:windows directory will show that if you compare dll's. you should be more careful where you get your information, as this is obviously and provably not correct.
"the other problem i have with their announcements is the blurring of the difference between applications, operating system, and kernel."
in this we have no disagreement. if microsoft wants to integrate various office components and such, i have no problem with it. tying this same functionality into the kernel is a mistake, in my opinion. whatever functionality improvements gained by this move have been more than offset by the security issues raised by it. – by j. eric smith
|just wanted to say… (7:37pm est fri jan 30 2004)
i've read most (but not all) of this thread………..
just wanted to say that wd and j. eric smith are right on. very good points, very well said.
– by mrman
|fyi (8:00pm est fri jan 30 2004)
when your post are over 200 words i just skip them.
most time the writers starts to blather about nothing.
most everyone feels the same way i think.
what is more wasteful is when you need to have a part 2 to the post to get your point across.
i am glad geeks has a 2000 character limit.
– by rax
|re: rax (8:28pm est fri jan 30 2004)
if you haven't been reading j. eric smith's posts due to their length, you're missing out, and you're wrong in his case. he makes excellent points, well reasoned, and very balanced. wd, while he is passionate and sometimes makes good points, is not quite so tactful in doing so. foul language and insults will never gain you the respect needed to convince someone of your side of the argument.
but you should take the time to at least read jes's posts, rax. really. – by edge
|just like viruses (9:04pm est fri jan 30 2004)
phishing is just like computer viruses: the victims deserve it. – by unix daemon
|wow man. (10:04pm est fri jan 30 2004)
i was reading some of the posts there. and old sampler goes on about ms not coming with enough stuff out of the box. then, if you looked at any of those ms anti trust posts, a guy like old sampler would be going on about how ms includes too much stuff with thier o/s. *nix guys are hippocrites. period. – by hippy the hippocrite
|re: edge, mrman (10:55pm est fri jan 30 2004)
gentlemen, i thank you. rax, it seems, isn't interested in arguments, only sound bites. pity, because as you can see, i enjoy a good debate or discussion. – by j. eric smith
|opera (11:55pm est fri jan 30 2004)
why would opera deviate from the standard just because ms says so? it already has a perfectly good warning system. not only does it display the real address when the mouse is held over the link, it displays a warning message asking if the user really wants to visit the page. i don't see why it would need anything more. – by i love opera
|re: edge and jes (1:26am est sat jan 31 2004)
i do like a good argument it just look like you and old sampler are about to write a new version of "war and peace".
your answer is:
unix has a lot of respect but no marketing. linux has a lot of marketing but no respect. ???????
linux has the advantage here in having no pre-existing software base.????????
and dos used to come on a single 5.25″ floppy disk.???????
i am not saying that i alway stay on topic but eric did make threat to people that went off topic in other postings.
it is also funny that i never mentioned linux in my post and eric was quick to make a snap about linux.
my comment::::
eric's snap:::::
or, the converse could be, when linux becomes as user friendly as windows, it'll be just as bloated, buggy, and insecure as windows. – by j. eric smith
i did not mention linux or imply that linux was better that windows in my post. this is why people say your basised.
i tryed to let it slide.
my comment::::
eric's retort
two words would have done the job.
me too – by j. eric smith
– by rax
|question for anyone? (8:16am est sat jan 31 2004)
i use a mac with icab as my browser.
when i move my cursor,over a link,i get a preview of the correct link,in the lower left corner of my browser.
i used netscape,opera, and ie, at one time or another,and have been with icab for 5 years,so i don't remember too much about them.
my question is,don't the other browsers have a similar feature,and if not, why?
|re: curious (9:04am est sat jan 31 2004)
well, opera does that, and then it also warns you when you click a link to go to a site with a password in it.
ie doesn't do anything whatsoever.
netscape? why use netscape when there's mozilla? i don't think netscape does, but i could be wrong. but mozilla does. and netscape is just an aol-ized and outdated mozilla. – by opera lover
|re: rax (1:15pm est sat jan 31 2004)
rax, the difference between the two of us is i take the time to explain my reasoning. you just think people are supposed to believe you at face value, and any that disagree are automatically wrong.
how's that for short, sweet, and to the point?
and as far as dealing with off-topic discussions, i'm flexible in what i allow. if it's a constructive discussion, i have no problem with it veering off topic. if it's degenerated into one of your frequent anti-microsoft, flaming, fiction-filled rants, that's a different story.
you should read my discussions with old sampler. although the two of us have disagreed in the past, he's obviously mature enough to hold a civil discussion with someone who holds a differing point of view. you, however, just denounce anyone disagreeing with you as a heretic, and have generally shown yourself incapable of making a rational argument about much of anything. you try, sometimes pretty well, but you almost always fall back into dogma, irrationality, ad hominem attacks, and out and out lying. your history precedes you. – by j. eric smith
|re:j eric smith (2:33pm est sat jan 31 2004)
if you read my post you will see that i do not slam people for their opinions. you however are a bully and anyone that does not agree with you is attacked.
the funny thing is that i don't think i have said much about linux over the last month and i did not bring it into this topic.
you seem to be a anti-linux zealot who whats to bash it at every turn.
now dummy there is no bloat in linux. you can use as much of it as you want or scale it down to 1 or 3mb. it will still be usable.
"the other difference is that linux (the kernel) has been around for 12 years… and has undergone at least 4 major rewrites:"
and yet the os runs much the same for linux. if you worked on the 2.2 kernel you can admin a 2.6 kernel without having to relearn where things are and how they work.
not so with windows, if you know nt you would be lost setting up a 2003 system. the way you set up a direct connect to a network printer in nt is nothing like how you do it in win2000.
this is why tco for linux system is low once your using linux. tco for windows is higher because you have to do things like change to active directory or the next great thing they plan to replace it with. it seem to be a new skill set with every release.
and os that changes that radicaly from version to version is not well thought out.
with linux the guts might change but most all the same commands are still there that were there 10 years ago.
windows in it's current form is a poor contender to help computers get to the appliance level.
– by rax
|j.eric smith and old sampler (2:52pm est sat jan 31 2004)
i enjoy a good discussion, as i think many here do. j.eric and old sampler do a good job in staying rational and relevant to the topic. they don't resort to the type of personal attacks constantly seen from others on this site. i think generally people are much more open to entertaining views that don't mirror thier own when the poster stays to the topic has respect for other opinions doesn't use profanity. thanks gentlemen. you make the user comments section worth reading. – by jw
|re: rax (3:04pm est sat jan 31 2004)
i see you've degenerated into one of your frequent anti-microsoft, flaming, fiction-filled rants again. suffice to say, every single point you enumerate is one that you've brought up prior to now, and every single one of them has been exposed as lies, exaggerations, distortions, blatantly biased opinions, and half-truths. i'm not going to dignify you with another logic whoopin'. at some point, i have to say you're just wrong and leave it at that. – by j. eric smith
|uh-oh…… (4:03am est sun feb 01 2004)
here come the trolls!!!
come on, little macheads!! troll! make up stories like your master jobs has taught you!!
troll, troll! flame! flame! – by troll brigade!!
|troll brigade!! (8:18am est sun feb 01 2004)
my mac is pretty. – by 3%
|gates's firm supplied technology used to trap chinese dissidents, (11:32am est sun feb 01 2004)
says amnesty. the human rights group has slated bill gates's company for an 'inadequate response' to escalating abuses in china. amnesty has recorded dozens of cases of political opponents jailed for circulating material offensive to the chinese government.
microsoft told the observer: 'we are focused on delivering the best technology to people throughout the world. however, how that technology is used is with the individual and ultimately not in the company's control.'
sound like the excuse of cigarette, gun, drug dealers everywhere: "just because we made the asbestos, anthrax, tires, tanks… it's not our fault how the individual uses them. we make the best asbestos, anthrax, tires, tanks… in the world."
– by bill gates
|bill gates (3:08pm est sun feb 01 2004)
software can be used for good or bad.
guns- primary outcome: killing/wounding
software: primary outcome: virtually anything.
hey, terrorists may use ms software to locate jets — so i guess ms is responsable for the terrorists too, since its their software, right??
lol….. good try and attempting to make sense though!!
– by gates fails again
|lol@bg (4:44pm est sun feb 01 2004)
hey "bill gates" ..yer an idiot.
how about we blame/sue/lock up the people at smith & wesson, becuase their guns have killed poeople?
how about we sue mercedez-benz becuase clara harris drove over and killed her husband in one?
how about we slate cutco, becuase one of their knives was used to stab someone in new york city?
(keep in mind, this case with ms doesn't even have as much credibility, becuase amnesty is blaming them for 'inadequate response' ..whatever the hell that is. lol, amnesty is mad becuase microsoft didn't say "we're sorry someone used our software successfuly for purposes which they intended"??? lol sounds like a case of "we're mad at ms becuase they have a lotta money and we're jealous").
man, the real bill gates is much smarter than you.
– by harris mcgallic
|then please tell that to the doj (11:16pm est sun feb 01 2004)
many companies are in bankruptcy because they made asbestos. states need to give back the money taken from the tobacco companies. and anyone who used a gun in a crime needs to be let out of prison.
you guys are so smart. – by bill gates
|useless (8:34am est mon feb 02 2004)
1.2 billion chinese a government attempting to keep civil order with a small gdp with diverse social groups seeking autonimy . average wage far less then ours. disidents yes. it is a small wonder that they are not far more oppressive. the fact that they used ms for monitoring there people is just a small part of it, you have not blamed cisco for suppying routers capable of packet sniffing and delivering snmp traps to there monitoring servers( most likly linux or unix boxes). – by p.s.r
|why (8:47am est mon feb 02 2004)
why are mozilla and opera able to handle
the url in question properly and correctly?
or is this a different issue entirely?
|j. eric smith (9:35am est mon feb 02 2004)
thank you for keeping it short(for a change)
i guess i kicked your but on this one. lol
i want you to remember i started out trying to be nice here and tone it down.
i will never try that again.
per marketing dollar linux kicks windows butt. a fact you can not fix.
– by rax
|leave it to, (10:16am est mon feb 02 2004)
the retards that don't know what in the world they are doing, to screw things up for people that do.
i for one, rely quite heavily on the user:pass procedure, and i am most certainly annoyed at its removal.
instead, i propose a different suggestion… similar to breeding licenses (which probably wouldnt be a bad idea either), we need licenses to actually operate a computer in any form over the internet. keep the internet away from children and people that havent passed their license exam, and encourage education in computer use. anyone caught using the internet without a license should be fined…heavily. that and renewal for the license, must be completed in written form, with instructors practically sitting on your head to discourage cheating. (don't take this the wrong way. i am not saying that i believe that the internet should be taxed…only that you should be knowledgable enough to use the internet without causing those that know what in the hell they are doing to be forced to suffer because of those that dont) – by thermonuclear
|yup, the real bg is smarter (11:00am est mon feb 02 2004)
again, "bill gates" is an idiot.
"and anyone who used a gun in a crime needs to be let out of prison."
no, not the people. its the companies that he was talking about. sheesh! lol
you're digging yourself even farther into a hole, ain't ya? – by oh well
|re: eric (11:16am est mon feb 02 2004)
tuesday 5th february 2002 4:00pm
(god what an awful url…)
"to prove nt's readiness for the enterprise, microsoft held, in december 1997, a "scalability day" event to demonstrate its advanced capabilities for large installations. so pathetically obvious were the smoke and mirrors that one commentator described the event as "scamabilty day". since even microsoft's mighty marketing machine has limits, the "soon to be released" windows nt 5.0 will be an almost complete rewrite…."
"nt 5.0 fixes over 30,000 bugs in nt 4.0″ – bill gates. deficiencies of version 4.0 have forced an almost complete rewrite, so 5.0 will be over 85% new code. over 40 million lines of new code (compare to 12 million lines and 30,000 bugs for 4.0)."
this was the nt 5/2000 rewrite…
but you are right – i didn't find the 2003 rewrite (only references to rewriting bad code).
as they say… memory is the first to go… thanks to google and the wayback machine for saving this.
i do keep forgetting the "40 million" lines of code… – by old sampler
|daspecialist (11:30am est mon feb 02 2004)
mozilla is a peice of dog crap! – by tl
|bill gates (12:09pm est mon feb 02 2004)
oh well is right. you seem to be mixing up the different parties here.
ms is defending that they can't be responsable for how their products are used, in the end. just like a knife company can't be blamed if someone is stabbed, or just like a car company can't be blamed if someone uses their cars to run people over.
now, the person who commits the crime is the one who should be (and most often is) held accountable. in your last post, you said sarcastically "anyone who used a gun in a crime needs to be let out of prison." this is completely out of nowhere, and really, you are agreeing with ms on this one.
so through your own circular logic, you have come out on the side of ms. no, of course the man with the gun should not be let out of prison. he should stay there, but the company is not the the one who goes. same with ms. whoever used their products illegaly/immorally goes, but ms (the company) cannot. they cant monitor how people use their products.
thanks for sticking up for ms.
|rax (2:12pm est mon feb 02 2004)
sure linux is okay. however,i hate having ti recompile it for every damn thing and spend hours tweaking it only to find that when i am done, gnome runs much slower than windows. linux is not ready to be on joe averages desktop.
i don't feel like making sure that i have the right compile enviornment, just to get my video card to work like it should have in the first place.
then there needs to be a much easier way to install all this .gz .tar and rpm crap that doesn't work sucks.
you'd also think that the gui wouldn't lock up, but it did on one machine with the 2.4 and on and s3 trio based ibm it wouldn't go to gui.
that's why linux is not on my xp box now.
konquerer is cool, but buggy as h#$%. mozilla sucks!!!! can't even run java right when i followed the directions!! – by tl
|rax (7:45am est tue feb 03 2004)
re: linux is not ready to be on joe averages desktop.
it could be soon.
– by macbill
|right on (8:09am est tue feb 03 2004)
i think bill gates should be held responsible for the crimes committed by microsoft and criminally convicted. it's just his fault, not the entire microsoft company. thanks for clearing that up. – by bill gates
|woops, you've dug your hole deeper (8:04pm est tue feb 03 2004)
"i think bill gates should be held responsible for the crimes committed by microsoft and criminally convicted. it's just his fault, not the entire microsoft company."
nope, amnesty wasn't saying bill gates was guilty either.


text:
Most images are available in three sizes as canvas prints ready to hang. Some images are in series of limited edition prints and only available in one size. Some series have sold out and are no longer available.
36″x 54 " $800
28″ x 42″ $650
24″ x 36″ $400
Please contact me with the 'image name' and I can confirm what sizes are available.