Re: amd64 is already the 2nd most important arch (WasRe: Let's remove mips, mipsel, s390, ... (Was: [Fwd: Re: GTK+2.0 2.6.2-3 and buildds running out of space])

[Jacob S]

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 22:25:25 -0500
Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 03:08:11AM +, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> >   reports  percent
> > hurd-i386   1   0.0175
> > kfreebsd-i386   1   0.0175
> > ppc64   1   0.0175
> > arm 2   0.0351
> > mipsel  2   0.0351
> > m68k3   0.0526
> > s3904   0.0702
> > mips5   0.0877
> > ia649   0.1579
> > hppa   12   0.2106
> > alpha  33   0.5790
> > sparc  47   0.8247
> > powerpc87   1.5266
> > amd64 257   4.5096
> > i386 5235  91.8582
> > total5699 100.
> > 
> > 
> > Now this shows that *amd64 is already the second most important
> > arch*. We are so busy looking after the arches used by basically
> > nobody that we are not getting around to releasing with what is
> > becoming *the* main alternative to i386.  
> 
> Oops.  You jumped from "second most common" to "second most
> important", as if they're synonymous.  Maybe they are to some people,
> but that's not at all beyond debate: AMD64 will probably be supported
> by all serious distributions, while Debian is, from what I recall, the
> *only* way to get a sensible Unix installation on many of the less
> common systems.

Or you can debate whether something like a sparc and alpha will be used
for more "important" projects than the average amd64. In that case, one
sparc or alpha could carry more weight than one amd64. "Important" can
be a totally different twist that's very open to definition.

Jacob


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Popularity-contest http POST: call for testers

[Jacob S]

On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 00:48:21 +0100
Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hello developers,
> 
> We have plans to add support in popularity-contest to send the
> report through http POST. Both the server part an the client part have
> been developed.  The last issue is to actually use it in the cron job
> and see what issues 
> 
> For that purpose, I have made an experimental popularity-contest
> package that use both smtp and http. Please find it here:
> 
> 
> 
> This package report to the test popcon account so we can monitor it.
> 
> We would really like people to review or test this package in real
> situations, in particular when network connectivity is chaotic.
> We would like to make sure the popcon cron job will not cause problem
> to users with poor network.

I have not yet bothered to setup smtp on my machine to go through my
ISP's required gateway, so I could only send reports via the HTTP
method. Would my beta testing still be helpful, or are reports needed
via both methods for the test?

Thanks,
Jacob
 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Popularity-contest http POST: call for testers

[Jacob S]

On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 04:19:53 -0600
Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 09:17:22PM -0600, Jacob S wrote:
> > On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 00:48:21 +0100
> > Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> > > Hello developers,
> > > 
> > > We have plans to add support in popularity-contest to send the
> > > report through http POST. Both the server part an the client part
> > > have been developed.  The last issue is to actually use it in the
> > > cron job and see what issues 
> > > 
> > > For that purpose, I have made an experimental popularity-contest
> > > package that use both smtp and http. Please find it here:
> > > 
> > > <http://people.debian.org/~ballombe/popcon/debs>
> > > 
> > > This package report to the test popcon account so we can monitor
> > > it.
> > > 
> > > We would really like people to review or test this package in real
> > > situations, in particular when network connectivity is chaotic.
> > > We would like to make sure the popcon cron job will not cause
> > > problem to users with poor network.
> > 
> > I have not yet bothered to setup smtp on my machine to go through my
> > ISP's required gateway, so I could only send reports via the HTTP
> > method. Would my beta testing still be helpful, or are reports
> > needed via both methods for the test?
> 
> On the contrary, it would be very useful!

Thanks! It's installed now... with the sendmail section commented out in
the cron.weekly file (just to keep down the number of e-mails that cron
sends me).

HTH & HAND,
Jacob


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Serious kernel problems on new i386 hardware

[Jacob S]

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:48:55 +0100 (CET)
Andreas Tille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, Mike Hommey wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 03:10:12PM +0100, Andreas Tille
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>   ERROR: Removing 'trm290': Device or resource busy
> >>   ERROR: Removing 'vis82cxxx': Device or resource busy
> >>   pivot_root: No such file or directory
> >>   /sbin/init: 432: cannot open dev/console: No such file
> >>   Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempt to kill init!
> >
> > Let me guess... you are using devfs in 2.4, and /dev is empty if
> > devfs is not mounted.
> Sorry, I did nothing but installing Debian from scratch and installing
> several kernel-image-2.6.x packages afterwards.  I did no fiddling
> around with devfs whatever (to be honest I do not even have an idea
> why I should if everything would work fine).
> 
> The only hint Google was able to reveal was a broken initrd which is
> not able to handle SATA - but as I said, I tried to disable SATA for
> exactly this reason (perhaps I failed but this does not explain why
> 2.4.x works).

Which version of the Debian-Installer did you use? We had similar
symptoms on a new Dell recently at work and had to grab the latest daily
build to get a working version. I can check on the exact date of the
daily build we used, if you want.

HTH,
Jacob


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Serious kernel problems on new i386 hardware

[Jacob S]

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:04:55 +0100 (CET)
Andreas Tille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, Jacob S wrote:
> 
> > Which version of the Debian-Installer did you use? We had similar
> > symptoms on a new Dell recently at work and had to grab the latest
> > daily build to get a working version. I can check on the exact date
> > of the daily build we used, if you want.
> On my desk I see only a CD with the hand written text "Sarge RC 2" and
> thus I'm relatively sure I took this one ...
> Are there any traces left in a logfile or something like that which
> contains the exact installer version?

I faintly remember hearing about an installer log, but I don't remember
where to find it. I just checked my docs and the installer we had
problems with was RC2. The daily build we used that worked for us was
from Feb. 23rd. I would assume that newer daily builds would work as
well.

HTH,
Jacob


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Slightly Off Topic: Laptops for Debian

[Jacob S]

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 12:58:58 +1100
Rob Weir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 03:58:55PM -0600, Jacob Schroeder said
> > On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 21:31:53 +
> > Ben Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> > > I'm looking for a new laptop, and wondered what DDs used. I might
> > > go for the Apple 15" powerbook, but I'm not sure.
> > > 
> > > My apologies for this slightly off-topic post...
> > 
> > I hear iBooks have a much better value for the money. Not just from
> > a
> 
> iBook's are quite solid little machines, but be aware that you cannot
> use their internal wireless under Linux. Same with the powerbooks, but
> you can at least use a pcmcia card there (on the 15" and 17" ones).

True. But if you like the fact that iBooks don't get beat up quite as
fast, and you're a geek/hacker you can always do something like this to
get wireless:

http://www3.telus.net/thewitt/BT/

Then you don't even have an antenna sticking out like you do with
pcmcia. For that matter though, I can't see that much difference in a
wireless usb stick and a pcmcia when the usb and iBook are both used
without modification.

Just my $0.02.

Jacob


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#304266: ITP: sdate -- never ending september date

[Jacob S]

On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 14:28:54 -0300
Humberto Massa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Ben Pfaff wrote:
> 
> >Ross Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >>Games serve a purpose: they entertain the user. What is the purpose
> >of >sdate?
> >
> >The same.  If you are not entertained by sdate, then you do not
> >need to install it.
> >
> >That said, the following script is probably just as amusing, and
> >undoubtedly simpler:
> >  
> Could you enlighten me as of the reason that September 93 never ended?

Did you read the urls in the original ITP? Here's one of them again for
you.

http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/S/September-that-never-ended.html

Jacob


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Little help about Intel865PERLL with ICH5

[Jacob S]

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 23:03:20 +0300
Ivan Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Can you explain what do you mean? Thanks allot

What motherboards call RAID is really a tricky way to make Windows see
and use software RAID. You will probably want to Google about "software
raid" in Linux for more info. I'm sure there's a couple tutorials about
it out there.

HTH,
Jacob


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Keysigning without physically meeting ... thoughts?

[Jacob S]

On Tue, 31 May 2005 14:13:54 -0600
"Wesley J. Landaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Tuesday 31 May 2005 14:11, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 09:03:12AM -0600, Wesley J. Landaker wrote:
> > > I wrote this up to someone. I thought I'd share it, and get your
> > > thoughts. (e.g. anybody see any weaknesses in #1-#3 that *aren't*
> > > present in the typical meet, check ID, get GPG fingerprint,
> > > assuming #4 is always used afterwards?)
> >
> > Falsifying a government-issued ID is a criminal offence, regardless
> > of how often it happens (using it to buy alcohol is not important;
> > they simply raise the minimum age to compensate, so there's no need
> > to enforce it there). Falsifying a random photograph is not illegal
> > at all, and there is no reason why somebody wouldn't do it. Nothing
> > here has verified their identity with any strength to speak of. A
> > person who wants to generate an identity can do so with minimal
> > effort and no repercussions - so why wouldn't they?
> 
> Right, but they have to get it notarized (or forge a notary's seal,
> which is  a criminal offense, at least in the US) which requires
> government ID  (again, at least in the US). 
> 
> Regardless, how is this different from meeting someone in person? They
> can  just show me their fake ID--I won't know it's fake. (And, as you
> said,  forged ID happens a lot and is easily available. =)

So why bother with steps 1 & 2 when 3 is the only one that carries any
weight? Maybe there is a good reason that I do not know of, but I can
not think of any. I am genuinely curious, though.

Just my $0.02.

Jacob


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: co-maintainers sought

[Jacob S]

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 15:01:37 +0200
Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> >   - [RFA] bcm4400-source - module source for Broadcom's bcm4400
> >   ethernet driver
> > : http://packages.qa.debian.org/b/bcm4400-source.html
> 
> What problems do you see with the in-kernel b44 driver that you still
> need bcm4400?

Unfortunately there are some Dells at work that I maintain that need
bcm4400. They use some of the first bcm4400 chips I saw and will not
work with the b44 driver. The b44 driver can see them and will claim it
has them working with the assigned ip/netmask, etc. but they act dead.
Ifconfig down, rmmod b44, modprobe bcm4400 and they work perfectly.

Jacob


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Уникальн ые семинары!

[Jacob S]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 07:48:38 -0800
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Thursday 23 March 2006 02:41, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > Scripsit Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > On Wednesday 22 March 2006 09:45, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > >> Listmasters have been trying to
> > >> identify the responsible subscriber with no luck
> > >
> > > Why not just 500 all posts from sites known to use
> > > challenge-response?
> >
> > The challenges are send directly from the idiot site to the From
> > address in the list posting. They do not pass through Debian
> > machines.
> 
> However, in the future, people from that site would not be able to
> confirm their subscription in the first place if their site uses
> challenge-response.

Except that, as has been discussed many times before... 1) the C-Rs are
coming from uol.com.br 2) there are some legitimate users that post from
uol.com.br that do not have C-R on their accounts 3) the problem
address is not a uol.com.br account - the problem account has their
mail forwarded to a uol.com.br account, so the listmasters have not
been able to track down the problem account. 

So you would be blocking a lot of innocent users and the problem
account would still be on the list.

Jacob
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEIscmkpJ43hY3cTURAsAIAJwJjIAMOTLJwtT2KRa092aARICRjgCfU4P6
RbB4NiGot40moPv5o9SmhDU=
=zcAY
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: ???????????????????? ????????????????!

[Jacob S]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 11:52:12 -0800
Tony Godshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> According to Jacob S,
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> > 
> > On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 07:48:38 -0800
> > Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thursday 23 March 2006 02:41, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > > > Scripsit Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >
> > > > > On Wednesday 22 March 2006 09:45, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > > > >> Listmasters have been trying to
> > > > >> identify the responsible subscriber with no luck
> > > > >
> > > > > Why not just 500 all posts from sites known to use
> > > > > challenge-response?
> > > >
> > > > The challenges are send directly from the idiot site to the From
> > > > address in the list posting. They do not pass through Debian
> > > > machines.
> > > 
> > > However, in the future, people from that site would not be able to
> > > confirm their subscription in the first place if their site uses
> > > challenge-response.
> > 
> > Except that, as has been discussed many times before... 1) the C-Rs
> > are coming from uol.com.br 2) there are some legitimate users that
> > post from uol.com.br that do not have C-R on their accounts 3) the
> > problem address is not a uol.com.br account - the problem account
> > has their mail forwarded to a uol.com.br account, so the
> > listmasters have not been able to track down the problem account. 
> > 
> > So you would be blocking a lot of innocent users and the problem
> > account would still be on the list.
> 
> Do the people on uol.com.br have a choice?  Perhaps they
> could vote with their wallets?

Probably. Except, I have a feeling we'd end up blocking all isps and
large businesses and only allow traffic from personally owned domains.
Not that that's an entirely bad thing, though... :-)

Jacob
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEIwPLkpJ43hY3cTURAtJ/AKC3eU2jgoCHjZUNGdDIKQ3fJziJpQCfd6fk
xqSLiw4bUGT1cq3gLsVbCzM=
=pPC8
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: sending debian-private postings to gmail

[Jacob S]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 25 May 2006 16:21:35 -0500
Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Kevin B. McCarty writes ("Re: sending debian-private postings to
> > gmail"):
> >> Ian Jackson wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >>> distributed to computers whose owners and operators cannot be
> >>> expected to refrain from processing the content in other ways.
> >>   ^
> >>
> >> [...]  If you are sufficiently paranoid, [...]
> [snip]
> > 
> > However, it is _not_ silly to observe that Google are counting up
> > how many times certain keywords appear and providing reports to
> > their advertisers.  We don't know exactly what those reports look
> > like but it might be quite easy to find out what topics are being
> > discussed on debian-private.
> > 
> > It's clear that Google think they have the legal right (given to
> > them by the developer-user) to facilitate that and it's also clear
> > that they have no particular reason to spend effort thinking about
> > how to make it difficult for their advertiser customers to do that
> > kind of thing.
> 
> ROT13?  Such "encryption" would not hinder the NSA, but would bollox
> Google's keyword counting.
> 
> Do any modern GUI MUAs do ROT13 anymore?

It's pretty trivial to write an 'action' for Sylpheed/Sylpheed-Claws to
do this for both encoding and decoding an e-mail. 

UNAQ,
Wnpbo :-)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEd1MFkpJ43hY3cTURAplnAJwOmRaSJdZkJyheGhK6XZ9E5wg8qQCfXAWa
7Mcwe3N4M3e+Z0mutwvNz58=
=hdCL
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Please revoke your signatures from Martin Kraff's keys

[Jacob S]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, 26 May 2006 08:06:40 -0700
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Thursday 25 May 2006 08:30, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > Given time, one can pay more attention to each document (I require
> > at least two photo ID's issued by the government).
> 
> WTF?  In Oregon, if you have a driver's license, you cannot get an ID
> card. If you have an ID card, you have to surrender it to get a
> driver's license. You're only legally allowed one ID.

As has already been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, a passport is a
valid form of ID issued by the government. That's two forms of ID right
there. I have also seen some other forms of government ID that would
work, though admittedly they're not as common as a DL or passport. 

HAND,
Jacob
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD4DBQFEd3CakpJ43hY3cTURAnY5AJoDsoAqDWFCvruVdBAi836/KNr5/QCVFdaf
aoYNh00KFGi/ChXGfevCIg==
=B4uC
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [Debconf-discuss] Re: Please revoke your signatures from Martin Kraff's keys

[Jacob S]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, 26 May 2006 16:24:27 -0700
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Friday 26 May 2006 15:20, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 05:45:42PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > >> On Thursday 25 May 2006 15:26, Mike Hommey wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > [0] As long as he doesn't go and vote too, since the people in
> > > the voting table would notice that he has voted twice and
> > > probably would have to reject the whole voting box of that table
> > > (as they would be unable to find and remove the previous voters'
> > > vote).
> >
> > Well that's an interesting way to cook an election...
> 
> Method not viable in all jurisdictions.  If you've ever wondered why
> Oregon takes almost as long as Florida to certify national election
> results, it's not because we can't count or we've had a blatant
> attempt at voter's fraud, it's because elections is busy checking
> signatures on ballot envelopes.  
> 
> Oregon abolished the voting booth in 2000:  "Election Day" is
> actually the last election day of six consecutive weeks we can vote
> (beat that and your wussy six hours, America!), and we vote at home.
> You have your option of mailing or handing in your ballot to county
> elections.  Oregon residents that will be outside the state of Oregon
> on the last day of the election are the only people eligible to
> register absentee because of this (this is a good thing, since it
> improves voter turnout and more votes count initially, whereas
> absentee ballots in all 50 states never get opened unless there's a
> tie).

Oh, so they get better counts and less fraud by doing away with ballot
secrecy. How wonderful.

Jacob
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEeFF5kpJ43hY3cTURAtLcAKCy0mljUzNYIkBTs7ApfzcnSfZGQwCfWww6
+28CMNtPy3/W4CCtr4hue1g=
=WAY5
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [Debconf-discuss] Re: Please revoke your signatures from Martin Kraff's keys

[Jacob S]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Sat, 27 May 2006 16:21:22 -0700
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Saturday 27 May 2006 16:12, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > Paul Johnson wrote:
> > > On Saturday 27 May 2006 14:12, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> > >> On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 01:54:03PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > > Oregon abolished the voting booth in 2000
> > 
> >  Oh, so they get better counts and less fraud by doing away
> >  with ballot secrecy. How wonderful.
> > >>>
> > >>> No, that's not how it works, your ballot is still secret.
> > >>> Think about it for a minute.  You sign the mailing envelope,
> > >>> your ballot goes in a secrecy envelope.  Elections compares
> > >>> signatures, opens the mailing envelope and saves it for the
> > >>> voter rolls, sends the secrecy envelope down the line off to
> > >>> the counting machines to be opened separately in some other
> > >>> room.
> > >>
> > >> That is secrecy only to the government; not in general. For
> > >> instance, someone can easily pressure you into voting for party
> > >> or candidate X, _since they can verify it_ (just watch as you
> > >> put the ballot in the envelope, and make sure you post it). With
> > >> a voting booth, nobody can effectively pressure you, as your
> > >> vote is secret from everybody.
> > >
> > > Nobody can effectively pressure you, except everyone else in line,
> > > campaigners trolling the polling place, and the inability to get
> > > the day off to vote because polling places are only open 4-6
> > > hours on election day.  If you want to ignore that vote by mail
> > > is more secure than the voting booth, that's fine.  Don't move to
> > > Oregon.
> >
> > With vote-by-mail from the privacy (and seclusion) of your home,
> > who's to stop a political operative or angry husband from saying
> > "vote Democrat, or else!"?
> 
> The fact you can go to the police, and you can vote wherever you
> please.  If you're really that concerned about it, you can go down to
> county elections, say your ballot got lost in the mail or tell them
> that someone else coerced you (which voids the original ballot's
> mailing envelope, and if that mailing envelope gets cast, they void
> the ballot it contains) and they'll give you a fresh ballot and
> envelopes.  You're welcome to vote at the elections office, but if
> you want privacy you're going to have to lock yourself in a restroom.
> 
> Penalties for screwing with other people's votes here are severe.

That sounds like the same reason there's no more cases of battered and
abused women. For some reason I'm not convinced.

Jacob
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEew/akpJ43hY3cTURAmXRAKCBQgiP7tIPNhZT9rRD8zgs75jQIgCguEW+
R5t3Hq2eiQs3YKTQH3HEcP0=
=ZBlX
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Red team attacks vs. cracking

[Jacob S]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 30 May 2006 15:09:25 -0700
Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Tuesday 30 May 2006 14:15, Linas Žvirblis wrote:
> > Paul Johnson wrote:
> > >> See, if you visit a bazaar, I bet a helpful guy with a Russian
> > >> accent can sell you a perfectly valid passport for less than
> > >> $50.  Several years ago, a friend of mine actually asked someone
> > >> at the Stadion 10-lecia in Warsaw, and was led to a guy with a
> > >> number of blank Polish IDs for ~$25 each...
> > >>
> > >> That's about what checking government-issued IDs is worth.
> > >
> > > Perhaps in that part of the world, yes.
> >
> > Oh, THAT part of the world. Wait a minute, what part of the world?
> > Can you name any country in which you cannot buy fake IDs?
> >
> > I might have misunderstood you, but you comment sounded like an
> > insult towards Eastern Europe.
> 
> No, I'm saying that the availability and penalties for a fake ID vary
> enough by international jurisdiction that what may be true for
> eastern Europe is not necessarily true for the rest of the world.  If
> you want to construe an observation about variations in availability
> of certain goods and services as an insult, so be it, but that was
> not the intent.

We have to remember, after all, that severe fines and penalties are
enough to deter people from doing bad things on the black market. This
is why there are no illegal drugs in the United States.

Jacob
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEfOHgkpJ43hY3cTURAtDDAKCEXnPZ7UQqM4s0pYaqvStc4huZfwCgjynU
HNxQg1SXgAQ7+Y/iHqAZWFo=
=a9NF
-END PGP SIGNATURE-