Free Kareem
ALERT!! A serious injustice was committed. Please take action now! Kareem Amer, an Egyptian blogger who was imprisoned for exercising his right to freedom of speech, is still in prison and needs YOUR help!
Find out more information by visiting FreeKareem.org or by networking with us.
Latest News from freekareem.org- 2 years ago..
- Another letter from Kareem
- Summary of Kareem’s latest letter from prison
- Practicing free speech continues to be a serious risk in the Egyptian blogosphere
- 808 days in prison
Kareem has been in prison for: 855 days.
Download this plugin!
S.C. Cops: Naked Couple Falls 50 Feet From Rooftop to Their Deaths
Police on Wednesday were investigating how a naked couple fell 50 feet from the roof of a downtown office building to their deaths.
The bodies were found on the road by a passing cabdriver around 5 a.m. Wednesday.
Clothing was discovered on the roof, leading authorities to suspect the man and woman, in their early 20s, may have been having sex. Their identities were not released.
“It’s too early to rule out anything,” Columbia police Sgt. Florence McCants said, but McCants said a preliminary investigation didn’t show any sign of foul play.
The Fastest Way to Collect Online Form Responses
The Fastest Way to Collect Online Form Responses
FormRouter is redefining the forms management process with exciting new solutions for routing and data collection. Through our unique technology, FormRouter facilitates the routing of PDF, InfoPath, Excel, HTML, Flash, Word, ASP and ASP.NET forms between individuals filling in forms and those wanting to process the captured data. FormRouter is an Application Service Provider (ASP) offering subscription services enabling form routing of hundreds to millions of forms, scaling to meet your needs.
Using FormRouter, non-technical users publish forms within hours – without engaging IT professionals. By eliminating manual re-keying, you reduce costs, increase accuracy and slash the time required to get results in house and online. Completed forms are encrypted and routed to the FormRouter server. Alerts can be predefined to monitor form submissions for “desirable data†(the needle in the haystack) with user notification via e-mail. Designated users (i.e. those with appropriate permissions) can download (24/7) the aggregated results into a wide variety of destinations including application programs, Lotus Notes/Domino Access, SQL Server, Text, Excel, XML and other ODBC compliant databases.
FormRouter customers can expect to realize significant ROI in the first year. The benefit is compounded based on the number of forms and the number of form submissions being processed.
Stalking 2.0: The Websites that Track Your Every Move (Voluntarily!)
Stalking 2.0: The Websites that Track Your Every Move (Voluntarily!)
So, you don’t mind being followed and tracked? You don’t care if your friends can see what websites you’ve been to lately, what software you’ve been running, or even what music you’ve been listening to? Then you’ll love the web’s trend towards extreme openness: sharing everything you do on your computer. Sometimes referred to as sharing your ‘attention’ data, this is a growing market. Below, we round up 12 services that want to track your every move - voluntarily.
Wakoopa is an excellent service which tracks what software you have been running. It keeps tabs of what software is running in the background, what software you have installed, and what software you actively use. Every so often the software uploads this data to the Wakoopa site where it then lists all programs you have been running. The interesting thing here is that you can add friends to track individually or join a team and combine the data. Thanks to Wakoopa, I have found several useful programs that I now use regularly.
Last.fm has been making news with the site being acquired by CBS for nearly $300 million. If you’re a tech-savvy music fan, you probably already use it. With Last.fm you download a small program which gathers information on the current song you are playing through your favorite mp3 software application. Through a process called “scrobbling,†the software determines what song you are listening to and then uploads this song’s data to the server and then keeps track of it. On the website itself there are many ways of viewing the data which is fun to play around with. To be honest though, I think the greatest part is learning exactly how much horrible music you listen to and what songs your friends listen to in comparison. (Our Last.fm review.)
Cluztr takes it to the web by tracking every site you visit online through your browser. Not only that, it also keeps a history log or “clickstream†of all those sites. One word of advice, avoid visiting sites that your mother would not think much of, as it’s all out there for your friends to view. Cluztr installs a plug-in to your FireFox or Flock browser (sorry IE and Safari users, Cluztr is hopeful for a mid to late 2007 release) where it then captures your entire web surfing history and compiles it into your “clickstream†which you are free to share or publish on the web for all your friends to see. There are also social functions built into the sidebar which allow for posting of messages for that specific site which other users can see when visiting that same site. (Our Cluztr review.)
AttentionTrust offers services similar to Cluztr. AttentionTrust installs as a browser plug-in and tracks the sites you visit. You can then take this data and share it with other applications or development projects that could make use of this data, or simply store it on your desktop. AttentionTrust’s idea is to let you share this data with in interested parties for a fee - in other words, a form of lead generation.
Atten.TV is another site that allows you to follow what you or your friends are clicking on around the web. You have the option to share this data or keep it private. It is completely up to you. Since you are reading this article, I think it is safe to assume you are leaning towards the former option. The downloadable application is only for Mac OS currently. (Our Atten.tv review.)
Me.dium can be considered a competitor to Cluztr. Me.dium takes the same basic approach, but doesn’t act as a personal log: instead, it lets you see which sites your friends are on, and join them there. It is simply personal preference on your decision to use Cluztr, Me.dium, Atten.TV or AttentionTrust. (Our Me.dium review.)
Plazes is a service that tracks where you are no matter where you are in the world. So now if you not only want your pals to know where you are online, you can have them know where you are in person. Just be sure not to get in to trouble with this service.
iStalkr doesn’t keep tabs on you directly, but rather, indirectly by utilizing RSS and ATOM feeds that most social web 2.0 sites are utilizing now. If you sign up for an iStalkr account and enter some social sites you are a member of, like Del.icio.us and Twitter, iStalkr will then grab the RSS/ATOM feed for that service and will be able to get your updates from the site. To put it simply, think of iStalkr like as a central hub for your social website information and updates. (Our iStalkr review.)
SlifeShare is an application built for the Mac OS primarily. If you are running Firefox you can install the extension regardless of what OS you run. SlifeShare is similar to iStalkr in that the application tracks data from multiple sources and acts as a central hub, but SlifeShare takes it a step further and collects this data directly. Music, videos, photos, websites, applications, and more are tracked and then the data is displayed on the SlifeShare website which you can share with friends. You are only allowed five friends, after which you must either become a premium user or just stick with the five friend limit. (Our SlifeShare review.)
YouTube Active Share simply allows you to share videos that you watch on YouTube with all your friends. Your profile will show what videos you have recently watched and when you are currently watching a video while others are viewing the same video, they will see your name appear on a list of people currently watching that video.
Particls is a downloadable application which doesn’t necessarily track what you do, but instead tracks what you are most interested in receiving information about. The concept is that you allow the Particls software to search your documents for keywords that will allow the program to determine what information you want to be fed to your computer via RSS and ATOM feeds. For example, if you type in Web 2.0, it’s almost a guarantee you will receive site updates from the Mashable website directly to the Particls software. Minor problems with the application is that it can be a resource hog at times, but it is very powerful, and Particls will have an ad supported version and a pay version in the future.
Google History has drawn much controversy over privacy issues. Google search history is another controversial tool Google released that tracks every search term you enter into Google’s various search tools. This feature is mainly for your benefit only.
Got any more sites that track you around the web? Add them in the comments.
by James Mowery
Thoof Invitations
We have 25 Thoof invitations to give out. Since we’ve received so many requests for them, we will have a contest. To win a Thoof invitation, register with EzineBlog.org, then write an original submission. These submissions will be then voted on, the top 25 authors will receive each one Thoof invite. As always, registered members will never receive any spam from us, nor will we ever divulge your registration information to anyone else.
Rules:
All submitted content must be original, no plagiarism.
Submitted entries can be your own musings or ramblings or write-ups of any issue.
Each registered user may submit as many entries as they like.
Only register ONCE. If you submit multiple registrations, and we find out, you will be disqualified and will not win a .
DOD blocking YouTube, Myspace from troops in Iraq and Afghanistan
To save bandwidth, officials say several sites to be off-limits at work
Starting Monday, the Defense Department will block access to MySpace, YouTube and a host of other sites on official department computers worldwide, in an effort to boost its network efficiency.
Troops and families living on U.S. bases will still be able to view the sites through private Internet networks, but the move leaves servicemembers in Iraq and Afghanistan who use the popular picture- and video-sharing sites with little or no access to them.
Defense officials said the move is solely a reaction to the heavy drain the streaming video and audio can put on the defense computer network.
“We’re not passing any judgment on these sites, we’re just saying you shouldn’t be accessing them at work,†said Julie Ziegenhorn, spokeswoman for U.S. Strategic Command. “This is a bandwidth and network management issue. We’ve got to have the networks open to do our mission. They have to be reliable, timely and secure.â€
In a message to troops from U.S. Forces Korea commander Gen. B.B. Bell on Friday, he acknowledged many of the sites being blocked are used by troops to keep in touch with family and friends.
This recreational traffic impacts our official DOD network and bandwidth availability, while posting a significant operational security challenge,†he wrote.
Ironically, the Defense Department this year had just begun expanding its own use of YouTube to reach a younger, broader audience and show clips of U.S. troops in action.
Multi-National Force — Iraq, U.S. Army Civil Affairs Command in Afghanistan, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the Gulf Region have all launched new channels on the Web site to highlight recent successes overseas.
Ziegenhorn said that wasn’t taken into consideration when the Joint Task Force Global Network Operations began reviewing and flagging sites that posed problems to the network.
“This is all about what is a drain on the system,†she said.
A review of the banned sites has been under way since February, she said. And the task force is still considering other problematic addresses to add to the list.
“This will be an ever-evolving discussion, because we need to constantly make sure those networks are available and secure,†she said.
The official policy blocking the sites will be released Monday, the same day they go into effect. But Ziegenhorn said most network administrators are already aware of the change.
The individual services have already blocked some sites for the same bandwidth issues. In addition, Defense Department policy prohibits troops or civilian workers from using government computers from accessing inappropriate sites because of inappropriate content, such as pornography.
source: Stars and Stripes
Ashley Alexandra Dupre
Ashley Alexandra Dupre is the prostitute or escort or whatever.
Chemical Warfare
Chemical Warfare
-
Chemical warfare definition
-
warfare using the toxic properties of chemical substances to kill, injure or incapacitate an enemy.
-
Use of lethal or incapacitating chemical weapons in war, and the methods of combating such agents
-
-
Chemical warfare technology
-
Chemical weapon agents
-
Persistency
-
-
All chemical weapon agents are classified according to their persistency, a measure of the length of time that a chemical agent remains effective after dissemination. Chemical agents are classified as persistent or nonpersistent.
Agents classified as nonpersistent lose effectiveness after only a few minutes or hours. Purely gaseous agents such as chlorine are nonpersistent, as are highly volatile agents such as sarin and most other nerve agents. Tactically, nonpersistent agents are very useful against targets that are to be taken over and controlled very quickly. Generally speaking, nonpersistent agents present only an inhalation hazard.
By contrast, persistent agents tend to remain in the environment for as long as a week, complicating decontamination. Defense against persistent agents requires shielding for extended periods of time. Non-volatile liquid agents, such as blister agents and the oily VX nerve agent, do not easily evaporate into a gas, and therefore present primarily a contact hazard.
-
-
-
Classes of chemical weapon agents
-
-
Chemical weapon agents are organized into several categories according to the manner in which they affect the human body. The names and number of categories varies slightly from source to source,
-
-
-
Chemical weapon designations
-
-
Most chemical weapons are assigned a one- to three-letter “NATO weapon designation” in addition to, or in place of, a common name. Binary munitions, in which precursors for chemical weapon agents are automatically mixed in shell to produce the agent just prior to its use, are indicated by a “-2″ following the agent’s designation (for example, GB-2 and VX-2).
-
-
Chemical agent delivery
-
The most important factor in the effectiveness of chemical weapons is the efficiency of its delivery, or dissemination, to a target. The most common techniques include munitions (such as bombs, projectiles, warheads) that allow dissemination at a distance and spray tanks which disseminate from low-flying aircraft. Developments in the techniques of filling and storage of munitions have also been important.
Although there have been many advances in chemical weapon delivery since World War I, it is still difficult to achieve effective dispersion. The dissemination is highly dependent on atmospheric conditions because many chemical agents act in gaseous form. Thus, weather observations and forecasting are essential to optimize weapon delivery and reduce the risk of injuring friendly forces.
-
-
-
Dispersion
-
-
Dispersion is the simplest technique of delivering an agent to its target. It consists of placing the chemical agent upon or adjacent to a target immediately before dissemination, so that the material is most efficiently used.
World War I saw the earliest implementation of this technique, when German forces simply opened canisters of chlorine and allowed the wind to carry the gas across enemy lines. While simple and easy, this technique had numerous disadvantages. Delivery depended greatly on wind speed and direction.
non-explosive artillery
1950s and early 1960s, chemical artillery rockets
-
-
-
Thermal dissemination
-
-
Thermal dissemination is the use of explosives or pyrotechnics to deliver chemical agents.
-
-
-
Aerodynamic dissemination
-
-
Aerodynamic dissemination is the non-explosive delivery of a chemical agent from an aircraft, allowing aerodynamic stress to disseminate the agent.
-
History
-
Chemical warfare in ancient and classical times
-
Chemical weapons have been used for millennia in the form of poisoned arrows
during the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta. Spartan forces besieging an Athenian city placed a lighted mixture of wood, pitch, and sulfur under the walls hoping that the noxious smoke would incapacitate the Athenians, so that they would not be able to resist the assault that followed
-
-
The rediscovery of chemical warfare
-
During the Renaissance, people again considered using chemical warfare. One of the earliest such references is from Leonardo da Vinci, who proposed a powder of sulfide of arsenic
-
-
Chemical warfare in World War I
-
The French were the first to use chemical weapons during the First World War, using tear gas
Germans attacked French, Canadian and Algerian troops with chlorine gas.
-
-
Chemical warfare in the interwar years
-
After World War I, the United States and many of the European powers attempted to take advantage of the opportunities that the war created by attempting to establish and hold colonies. During this interwar period, chemical agents were occasionally used to subdue populations and suppress rebellion.
In 1935 Fascist Italy used mustard gas during the invasion of Ethiopia in the Second Italo-Abyssinian War. Ignoring the Geneva Protocol, which it signed seven years earlier, the Italian military dropped mustard gas in bombs, sprayed it from airplanes, and spread it in powdered form on the ground. 15,000 chemical casualties were reported, mostly from mustard gas.
The Soviet Union also employed poison gas on its own people during the interwar period. Soviet commander Mikhail Tukhachevsky used chemical weapons in the 1921 suppression of a massive peasant uprising around Tambov.
-
-
Chemical warfare in World War II
-
During World War II, chemical warfare was revolutionized by Nazi Germany’s accidental discovery of the nerve agents tabun, sarin and soman.
The Japanese used mustard gas
German–manufactured “fine white powder,” and instructions from the Mufti to dump chemicals into the Tel Aviv water system.
The Nazis used the insecticide Zyklon B, which contains hydrogen cyanide, to kill large numbers of victims in concentration camps
-
-
Chemical warfare during the Cold War
-
Developments by the Western governments
-
-
After World War II, the Allies recovered German artillery shells containing the three German nerve agents of the day (tabun, sarin, and soman), prompting further research into nerve agents by all of the former Allies. Although the threat of global thermonuclear annihilation was foremost in the minds of most during the Cold War, both the Soviet and Western governments put enormous resources into developing chemical and biological weapons.
-
-
-
United States Senate Report
-
-
A 1994 United States Senate Report, entitled “Is military research hazardous to veterans health? Lessons spanning a half century,”[4] detailed the United States’ Department of Defense practice of experimenting on animal and human subjects, often without a latter’s knowledge or consent. [5] This included:
-
-
-
Developments by the Soviet government
-
-
Due to the secrecy of the Soviet Union’s government, very little information was available about the direction and progress of the Soviet chemical weapons until relatively recently. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Russian chemist Vil Mirzayanov published articles revealing illegal chemical weapons experimentation in Russia.
-
-
-
Chemical warfare in the Iran-Iraq War
-
-
The Iran-Iraq War began in 1980 when Iraq attacked Iran. Early in the conflict, Iraq began to employ mustard gas and tabun delivered by bombs dropped from airplanes; approximately 5% of all Iranian casualties are directly attributable to the use of these agents. Iraq and the U.S. government alleged that Iran was also using chemical weapons, but independent sources were unable to confirm these allegations.
About 100,000 Iranian soldiers were victims of Iraq’s chemical attacks. Many were hit by mustard gas.
-
-
Chemical weapons and terrorism
-
In 2001, after carrying out the attacks in New York City on September 11, the organization Al Qaeda announced that they were attempting to acquire radiological, biological and chemical weapons. This threat was lent a great deal of credibility when a large archive of videotapes was obtained by the cable television network CNN in August of 2002 showing, among other things, the killing of three dogs by an apparent nerve agent.
-
Example: VX Gas
methylphosphonothioic acid, S-[2-[bis(1-methylethyl)amino]ethyl]- O-ethyl ester
-
-
In the film “The Rock”, it was that “green” that the terrorists threatened San Francisco Bay area
-
In a combat situation, VX Gas would be deployed by detonating a container (e.g. a missile) of gas over the target area.
-
VX Gas has an LD50 (dose toxic to 50% of victims) is the lowest of any known compound at only 10mg (a raindrop weighs about 50mg).
-
VX Gas is easily absorbed into the body, and inhalation at concentrations as low as 30mg per cubic meter kills within fifteen minutes.
-
VX Gas disrupts the passage of messages between nerves, and from nerves to muscles.
-
It operates by cutting off the nervous system
-
VX Gas causes many symptoms, and usually kills.
-
VX Gas has effective antidotes if treated promptly.
-
The International Chemical Weapons Convention bans the use of nerve agents (including VX Gas), and requires all stockpiles to be destroyed by 2007.
-
UN weapons inspectors have found EMPTA, a VX precursor, in Iraqi factories, and at the site of the 1998 US bombardment of factories in The Sudan
-
|
Agent Identification and Common Name(s) |
Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) Name |
Chemical Structure |
Brian Chontosh: Modern American Hero
Meet Brian Chontosh.
Churchville-Chili Central School class of 1991. Proud graduate of the Rochester Institute of Technology. Husband and about-to-be father. First Lieutenant in the United States Marine Corps.
And a genuine hero.
The Secretary of the Navy said so yesterday.
At 29 Palms in California Brian Chontosh was presented with the Navy Cross, the second highest award for combat bravery the United States can bestow.
That’s a big deal.
But you won’t see it on the network news tonight, and all you read in Brian’s hometown newspaper was two paragraphs of nothing. Instead, it was more blather about some mental defective MPs who acted like animals.
The odd fact about the American media in this war is that it’s not covering the American military. The most plugged-in nation in the world is receiving virtually no true information about what its warriors are doing.
Oh, sure, there’s a body count. We know how many Americans have fallen. And we see those same casket pictures day in and day out. And we’re almost on a first-name basis with the pukes who abused the Iraqi prisoners. And we know all about improvised explosive devices and how we lost Fallujah and what Arab public-opinion polls say about us and how the world hates us.
We get a non-stop feed of gloom and doom.
But we don’t hear about the heroes.
The incredibly brave GIs who honorably do their duty. The ones our grandparents would have carried on their shoulders down Fifth Avenue.
The ones we completely ignore.
Like Brian Chontosh.
It was a year ago on the march into Baghdad. Brian Chontosh was a platoon leader rolling up Highway 1 in a humvee.
When all hell broke loose.
Ambush city.
The young Marines were being cut to ribbons. Mortars, machine guns, rocket propelled grenades. And the kid out of Churchville was in charge. It was do or die and it was up to him.
So he moved to the side of his column, looking for a way to lead his men to safety. As he tried to poke a hole through the Iraqi line his humvee came under direct enemy machine gun fire.
It was fish in a barrel and the Marines were the fish.
And Brian Chontosh gave the order to attack. He told his driver to floor the humvee directly at the machine gun emplacement that was firing at them. And he had the guy on top with the .50 cal unload on them.
Within moments there were Iraqis slumped across the machine gun and Chontosh was still advancing, ordering his driver now to take the humvee directly into the Iraqi trench that was attacking his Marines. Over into the battlement the humvee went and out the door Brian Chontosh bailed, carrying an M16 and a Beretta and 228 years of Marine Corps pride.
And he ran down the trench.
With its mortars and riflemen, machineguns and grenadiers.
And he killed them all.
He fought with the M16 until it was out of ammo. Then he fought with the Beretta until it was out of ammo. Then he picked up a dead man’s AK47 and fought with that until it was out of ammo. Then he picked up another dead man’s AK47 and fought with that until it was out of ammo.
At one point he even fired a discarded Iraqi RPG into an enemy cluster, sending attackers flying with its grenade explosion.
When he was done Brian Chontosh had cleared 200 yards of entrenched Iraqis from his platoon’s flank. He had killed more than 20 and wounded at least as many more.
But that’s probably not how he would tell it.
He would probably merely say that his Marines were in trouble, and he got them out of trouble. Hoo-ah, and drive on.
“By his outstanding display of decisive leadership, unlimited courage in the face of heavy enemy fire, and utmost devotion to duty, 1st Lt. Chontosh reflected great credit upon himself and upheld the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and the United States Naval Service.”
That’s what the citation says.
And that’s what nobody will hear.
That’s what doesn’t seem to be making the evening news. Accounts of American valor are dismissed by the press as propaganda, yet accounts of American difficulties are heralded as objectivity. It makes you wonder if the role of the media is to inform, or to depress ? to report or to deride. To tell the truth, or to feed us lies.
But I guess it doesn’t matter.
We’re going to turn out all right.
As long as men like Brian Chontosh wear our uniform.
Is Ubuntu an Operating System?
Is Ubuntu an Operating System?
Is Ubuntu an operating system? Last week at EuroOSCON, Mark Shuttleworth gave the closing keynote outlining what he believes are the major struggles faced by the open-source/free-software community. During his talk, it became clear that Ubuntu is trying to achieve a radical shift in the software world. Ubuntu isn’t trying to be a platform for mass-market application software: it is trying to be the primary provider of both the operating system and all the application software that a typical user would want to run on his machine. Most Linux distributions are like this, and I think it is a dangerous trend that will stifle innovation and usability, or even worse make the desktop irrelevant.
Mr. Shuttleworth’s initial point was one that few people disagree with: that software installers are bad for users and usability. Indeed, the typical method of installing Windows software (downloading a setup.exe file from a website or running it from a CD) manages the software very poorly. Each vendor must construct its own scheme for where to install, how to update, and most of all how to manage dependencies between pieces of software. Of course, Windows has guidelines about installing to C:\Program Files\Vendor\Application Name, but even Microsoft does not consistantly follow the rules. Everyone recognizes that installers are not good for users, even Microsoft, who in an effort to fix the mess invented the (complicated and poorly-tooled) MSI installer format. Apple uses disk images, application bundles, and relocatable software to avoid the problem. It is good to see a major Linux distribution thinking through the problems that installers present.
Mr. Shuttleworth’s statements, however, go much deeper than the technical deficiencies of Windows installers. He talked about how Ubuntu was leading a paradigm shift away from “users installing software†towards a system where all the software a user needs is provided by the operating system. Ubuntu should provide all the software a users needs or wants in the packages. Does that mean that users should not be installing software directly? According to Mr. Shuttleworth, the way to provide a good user experience is for users’ software should be provided by the central Ubuntu repository and managed through the Ubuntu update system.
Granted, Ubuntu has done a good job of making the Linux desktop usable1. A properly managed centralized software repository can make it a lot easier for users to confidently choose software that is tested and compatible with their system. By releasing an entire set of software that has been tested together, Ubuntu can provide the necessary support to guarantee the suite will work together more seamlessly and provide a better user experience.
Users must be able to make their own software installation decisions.
People use Windows because the software they want uses Windows2. People have an amazing variety of wants. There are those who cannot install Linux because a particular piece of software they need is not available, be it InDesign or a specialized accounting program, or any number of new products that have yet to be conceived.
Free-software fundamentalists and practicalists often loudly disagree whether encouraging proprietary software on Linux is irresponsible or essential. It is either misguided or arrogant, however, to think that all users’ needs can be met by a central software repository, even if all software were open-source and free. Some of the best software available today started out small, was distributed on the internet, and made popular by word of mouth. The impetus of “Download Now†is strong, and promotes healthy competition and diversity. Whether a video player by a startup company or a newly-released version of Firefox that hasn’t yet made it to the central repository, stumbling blocks in the software distribution process caused by this centralization will reduce the ability for small projects to promote new software through viral marketing.
This is not an absolute restriction. Authors could provide the download as a .tar.bz2 archive or even .deb package, but those types of packages require the user to perform complicated actions such as opening a terminal and knowing the magic incantation. Ubuntu cannot prevent users from installing software, but it does intentionally make installation difficult. If Ubuntu achieves mainstream status, an alternative packaging format that allows users an easy way to install software will inevitably emerge (e.g. AutoPackage). Instead of fighting this tendency, Ubuntu should embrace the world of “external†software, and provide a simple and standard way for users to install these packages.
If application developers can’t attract users to the desktop, the only alternative is for new applications to be deployed entirely on the web. Although some people believe that the trend of applications moving onto the web is irreversable, I’m more optimistic. There is value, power, and security in the desktop. But without cooperation, I certainly wouldn’t plan to deploy my next application on Linux.
Allowing users to install their own software does have some consequences. Unfortunately, the discussion of how the software should be packaged and distributed quickly devolves into flamewars over the relative merits of RPMs, dpkg, or <insert technology here>. This is counterproductive, ignoring the fundamental issue: Linux software is typically not a self-contained package that could be placed in a single directory. A collection of files that are variously placed in /usr/bin, /usr/share/man, and perhaps many other locations, making it very difficult to relocate binary software because library dependencies are resolved to a fixed set of paths, and never relative to the binary location.
I do not pretend to have a solution in hand for installing software on Linux. I think that Mac-style application bundles could be made to work, but supporting them would require additional features in the dynamic linker, along with something like mac Launch Services to provide good cross-application integration. In addition, since regular software updates are an essential part of modern system security, it is important to have a good and simple way to update software. If distributing software in relocatable packages is completely impractical for technical or social reasons, the same problem could perhaps be solved by allowing users to easily install packages from non-default software repositories.
The final (and perhaps most pernicious) problem when thinking about redistributable software is the ongoing binary incompatibility between various Linux distributions and between versions of the same Linux distribution. While it is important not to hold back development of new features, it is a problem that every major operating system has had to face, and has faced (more or less) successfully. This is a problem that needs to be faced at all levels of the software stack, from the compiler to final packaging. Perhaps, if Linux in general and Ubuntu in particular continue to disclaim responsibility for ABI changes, software will use managed runtimes or scripting languages out of necessity to isolate itself from the shenanigans of the underlying OS. As it is, creating software that is compatible with multiple Linux distributions in multiple flavors is a nightmare.
This attitude is not unique to Ubuntu. Although this essay is inspired by an Ubuntu keynote, it applies to all the Linux distributions. Ubuntu should not be marked for special criticism, except that I hoped their focus on users and usability would lead to better appreciation of and support for user-installed software. Since Linux vendors are typically in the support business, they can define a set of software that they package and support; they have little financial incentive to do serious work on binary compatibility or software installation.
Free-software zealots may be also to blame: “users have the software source code, they are free to compile and install it themselves!â€, mixing a philosophy and a technical decision which are not inherently related. Human nature wants software that works, and this includes software which can be installed and tried without the technical prowess needed to unpack software and run “configure && make && make install†and interpret the resulting console spew to figure out whether it succeeded or not and then figure out that you really needed make 3.80, and your gnome headers are too old, or too new, etc.. The issues of licensing software freely should be divorced from the ability of users to install and use the software.
In the process of creating a usable and supportable Linux, Ubuntu has created a software cathedral with “more than 16,000 pieces of softwareâ€3. I do not wish to disparage this effort; this cathedral has produced a usable Linux desktop. But the Linux desktop must also provide a method for users to install software from the bazaar. Unless Linux provides a software installation mechanism, the central Ubuntu software repository will stifle the development of the software it is designed to distribute and protect.
Notes:
- # Why did Ubuntu choose the obnoxiously self-gratifying motto “linux for human beings� Of course it’s for human beings; the question is whether those humans can use it.
- # For the purposes of this essay, it’s not important why developers write software for Windows, or whether the application/OS cycle is vicious or virtuous.
- # http://www.ubuntu.com/, 2-Oct-2006
source: BSBLOG
Oscar De La Hoya
Oscar De La Hoya (IPA pronunciation: [ˈɑs.kɛɹ dÉ›.lÉ‘.ˈhɔɪ.jÉ‘][1]) (born February 4, 1973) — nicknamed the Golden Boy — is a Mexican American boxer who won a gold medal for the United States Boxing Team at the Barcelona Olympic Games and is considered one of boxing’s all time greats. Oscar De La Hoya became Ring Magazine’s “Fighter of the Year” in 1995 and Ring Magazine’s best “Pound for Pound” fighter in the world in 1997. His fights throughout his entire career have generated a total of almost half a billion dollars in sales alone. During his amateur career, De La Hoya’s record was 223-5 with 163 knockouts. He was the United States’ top Olympic boxing hope when his mother was diagnosed with breast cancer. She died at age 35. On her death bed, he promised her that he would win an Olympic gold medal.
|
Contents[hide]
|
Childhood
De La Hoya was born in East Los Angeles, California. At the age of eight he was the youngest fighter to win first place in Freewill games. He never lost a fight for 4 years and 5 months until he met Marco Rudolph, who was the best fighter from Germany at the time. He avenged the loss by winning the gold medal in the Olympics. He had an impressive record in the amateurs with 223 wins, 5 losses and an impressive 163 knockouts, a record matched by only a handful of other boxers in history.
Career
On November 23, 1992, De La Hoya made his pro debut. He went on to win titles in 4 different weight divisions including lightweight, super lightweight, welterweight, and junior middleweight. He also beat former and current world champions Troy Dorsey (TKO 1), Jorge Paez (KO 2), Genaro Hernandez (TKO 6), John John Molina (W 12), Rafael Ruelas (TKO 2), Julio César Chávez (TKO 4, TKO 8), Miguel Angel Gonzalez (W 12), Jesse James Leija (TKO 2), Pernell Whitaker, Hector “Macho” Camacho (W 12), Ike Quartey (W 12), Arturo Gatti (TKO 5), Javier Castillejo (W 12), and Fernando Vargas (TKO 11). His losses include a controversial majority-decision loss to Félix Trinidad and two decision losses to Shane Mosley, a split-decision, and a controversial unanimous decision. He has been stopped once in his career by Bernard Hopkins (KO 9). The fight with Félix Trinidad was the highest selling non-heavyweight pay per view of all-time, selling over 1.2 million buys. [1]
On September 14, 2002, De La Hoya fought his nemesis “Ferocious” Fernando Vargas. Their feud had began when De La Hoya allegedly laughed at Vargas years earlier when Vargas fell into a snowbank. [2]. After fiercely competitive early rounds, De La Hoya seized control of the latter half of the fight. In round 11, De La Hoya dropped Vargas with a left hook. Vargas got up at the count of nine, but de la Hoya finished him with a barrage of punches forcing the referee to stop the fight at 1:48 of round 11 (TKO 11). It was later revealed that Vargas had tested positive for steroids in his post-fight drug test.
On May 3, 2003, as part of the Cinco de Mayo festivities, he retained his WBC and WBA world junior middleweight championships when the corner of former world champion Yory Boy Campas threw in the towel, and officially gave De La Hoya a seventh round technical-knockout win. On September 13, he and former rival Mosley met once again, in Las Vegas, and Mosley took away De La Hoya’s world title belts via controversial unanimous decision. De La Hoya would later demand an investigation into the scorecards. [3]
De La Hoya next challenged Felix Sturm for the WBO world middleweight title on June 5, 2004. He was awarded a controversial unanimous decision, to become the first boxer in history to win world titles in six different weight divisions. All three judges scored the bout 115-113 in favor of De La Hoya. Compubox statistics counted Sturm as landing 234 of 541 punches, while counting De La Hoya as landing 188 of 792. [4]
Middleweight Challenge against Hopkins
After that, he hoped to unify that title with the three other world middleweight championships, held by Bernard Hopkins, on September 18. He lost to Hopkins by a ninth round knockout. A left hand to the body sent him to the canvas, knocking De La Hoya out for the first time in his career. Hopkins was ahead on two scorecards by the scores of 79-73 and 78-74, while a third judge had De La Hoya winning 77-75.[5] De La Hoya made $30 million for the fight and Hopkins, who made only $300,000 in a fight just nine months before fighting De La Hoya, got a minimum of $10 million. It was the biggest payday of Hopkins’s career. Hopkins would later join de la Hoya’s own boxing promotion firm; he owns twelve percent of univision Golden Boy Promotions.
Comeback Against Mayorga
De La Hoya faced WBC world junior middleweight Ricardo Mayorga on May 6, 2006 at the MGM Grand Garden Arena in Las Vegas, Nevada.
In the opening round, he dropped Mayorga with a right hand followed by a huge left hook. Mayorga rose but walked into another hail of shots and was about to go down for a second time when De La Hoya ripped him with another right hand, but Mayorga grabbed on to De La Hoya to stay up. Mayorga’s only positive moment came in the third, when an uppercut stunned De La Hoya, but Oscar had done more than enough to win the round. In the 6th round, firing punch after punch, De La Hoya dropped Mayorga to his knees, and although Mayorga got up, he was in bad shape. De La Hoya pounced on Mayorga immediately and never stopped firing as Mayorga wilted along the ropes. De La Hoya fired 21 punches, landing the majority of them, forcing referee Nady to step in at 1:25.
Many have thought it would be a close fight because de la Hoya was coming off a long layoff. However, he fought much better than expected and won the bout by a TKO in round 6.
Mayweather Fight
- See also: De La Hoya-Mayweather
|
|
The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. |
De La Hoya did not fight again in 2006, but recently lost his scheduled May 5, 2007 bout with Floyd Mayweather Jr., who is the recognized welterweight champion and pound-for-pound number one in the world. The fight took place at the MGM Grand Garden Arena. De La Hoya lost his WBC super welterweight title to Mayweather by a split decision. Early Las Vegas odds had Oscar as a 2-to-1 underdog to the younger Mayweather.
Mayweather showed more speed than his opponent but frustrated De La Hoya and the crowd with his continued covering-up and clinching whenever the champion pressed him against the ropes.
The fight was close throughout, with neither man showing dominance. De La Hoya, constantly pursuing a foe that was clearly wary of standing toe-to-toe with the bigger, more powerful champion, tried to back the challenger against the ropes as often as possible in hopes of landing effective power punches.
Oscar, being the aggressor from the beginning to the end, had trouble landing his powerful left hook. He did catch Mayweather with some solid, straight right hands, but diminished the use of his highly effective jab as the fight wore on, and started to give the challenger more and more room to score from the outside.
Mayweather’s elusiveness, accurate power shots, and activity in the later rounds made a big enough impression on two of the three judges in Las Vegas that night to get the win. Mayweather Jr. won the bout by a split decision, winning the title and improving his record to 38-0. The final scores were 115-113 De La Hoya, 116-112 Mayweather and 115-113 for Mayweather.
It has been reported that Oscar will earn at least $25 million for the fight, and Floyd will earn at least $10 million.[citation needed]
De La Hoya became embroiled in controversy when Freddie Roach, who is training him for the Mayweather fight, admitted in a deposition that De La Hoya brought $250,000 in cash in a suitcase and gave it to super featherweight boxing star Manny Pacquiao as an inducement to try to sign him to a promotional contract. The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported the story on March 1, 2007, and the Los Angeles Times followed with a report on March 2, 2007.
Amateur Highlights
| Olympic medal record |
- 1990 Gold Medalist U.S. Olympic Cup
- 1990 Gold Medalist Goodwill Games
- 1990 Gold U.S. National Championships
- 1991 Gold Medalist USA vs. Olympic Festival
- 1992 Gold Medalist USA vs. Boxing National Championships
- 1992 Gold Medalist USA vs. Bulgaria
- 1992 Gold Medalist World Challenge
Amateur record: 224-5 with 164 knockouts
Professional Record
| Record to Date | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Won 38 (KOs 30) | Lost 5 | Drawn 0 | Total 43 |
| Date | Opponent | W-L-D | Location | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WBC Super Welterweight Title |
Pay-Per-View History
Rafael Ruelas( 5/95) 330,000 buys = $9.9 million
Genaro Hernandez(9/95) 220,000 buys = $6.6 million
M.A. Gonzalez(1/97) 345,000 buys = $12.1 million
Pernell Whitaker(4/97) 720,000 buys = $28.8 million
Hector Camacho(9/97) 560,000 buys = $22.4 million
Wilfredo Rivera(12/97) 240,000 buys = $9.6 million
J.C Chavez II( 9/98) 525,000 buys = $23.6 million
Ike Quartey( 2/99) 570,000 buys =$25.7 million
Felix Trinidad(9/99) 1.4 million buys = $71.4 million
Shane Mosley(6/00) 590,000 buys = $29.5 million
Javier Castillejo(6/01) 400,000 buys = $16.0 million
Fernando Vargas(9/02) 935,000 buys = $47.8 million
Yory Boy Campas(5/03) 350,000 buys = $17.5 million
Shane Mosley II( 9/03) 950,000 buys = $48.4 million
Felix Sturm(6/04) 380,000 buys = $19.0 million
Bernard Hopkins(9/04) 1 million buys = $56.0 million
Totals: 9,515,000 buys, generating $444.3 million.[2]
Life Outside the Ring
Cover to Oscar de la Hoya’s self titled CD from EMI International. Released October 10, 2000
De la Hoya is one of the favorite boxers of American cable channel HBO, where he formerly produced a popular Spanish-language boxing show called Boxeo de Oro. De la Hoya’s interests outside the ring include architecture, acting, fashion designing, and singing. He designed his own house in Big Bear Lake, California, has one clothing line through Mervyns department stores, and released a Grammy-nominated CD, entitled Oscar de la Hoya. Released through EMI International on October 10, 2000, the self-titled CD is a Latin Pop album with thirteen tracks in both English and Spanish. His singing career was ridiculed in MTV, with the hosts telling him to stick to boxing instead.
He married Puerto Rican singer Millie Corretjer on October 5, 2001, and lives in Los Angeles and Puerto Rico. Their first child, Oscar Gabriel, was born on December 29, 2005, in Puerto Rico. An hour after his loss on May 5, 2007, to Floyd Mayweather, Millie told Oscar that she was pregnant again. This will be Millie’s second child, Oscar’s fifth. De la Hoya has three other children: Jacob (b. February 18, 1998) by a woman whose identity is unknown; Devon de la Hoya (b. November 30, 1998) by former Las Vegas showgirl, Angelicque McQueen, (a great niece of film star Steve McQueen) and Atiana Cecilia (b. March 29, 1999) by actress Shanna Moakler. A Santa Barbara woman brought civil charges against De La Hoya for allegedly raping her at his condo in Cabo San Lucas, Mexico, in 1996 when she was 15. De La Hoya denies the rape but says he settled with the woman “for a very low amount of money.”
In the summer of 2004, de la Hoya starred in and hosted a boxing reality television series on Fox and Fox Sports Net titled The Next Great Champ.
In April 2005, de la Hoya and a Southern California real estate developer, Highridge Partners, formed a real estate investment partnership, named Golden Boy Partners, to invest in Latino neighborhoods.
In September 2005, de la Hoya’s wallet was stolen by a pickpocket. The wallet contained a $1 food stamp coupon, a reminder of his poverty-stricken childhood in East Los Angeles which was very important to him.
