id
int32 1
11.3k
| text
stringlengths 0
74.9k
| label
int64 0
19
| Generalization
stringclasses 1
value |
|---|---|---|---|
648 |
: In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Robert
: > Someone spank me if I'm wrong, but didn't Lord, Liar, or Lunatic
: > originate with C.S. Lewis? Who's this Campollo fellow anyway?
: I do think so, and isn't there a clear connection with the "I do
: believe, because it is absurd" notion by one of the original
: Christians (Origen?).
There is a similar statement attributed to Anselm, "I believe so that
I may understand". In both cases reason is somewhat less exalted than
anyone posting here could accept, which means that neither statement
can be properly analysed in this venue.
| 8 |
trimmed_train
|
6,696 |
o Subaru Service Manuals ................................... $10.00
This is not a complete set, but includes sections 4, 5
& 6 which cover MECHANICAL COMPONENTS (suspension, wheels
& axles, steering, brakes, pedals & control cables, heater
& ventilator, air conditioning), BODY (body & exterior,
doors & windows, seats, seat belts, interior, instrument
panel), and ELECTRICAL (engine electrical system, body
electrical system, wiring diagram, and trouble-shooting).
These are the genuine Subaru issue manuals. They are for
model year 1986, but have plenty of good information that
applies to other years as well.
And, as long as I'm posting (end of car stuff),
o Miscellaneous Darkroom Equipment ........................ $75.00
Solar enlarger (several objective lenses) with easel and
timer, negative carriers for 35mm and 2 1/4 x 3 1/4, misc.
printing masks. Developing tanks, thermometer, trays,
constant-temperature bath, ground glass, mirrors, darkroom
lamps, glassware, el-cheap-o tripods..... and (as they say)
MUCH MORE!
o Beautiful Antique Buffet ............................... $1500.00
Solid cherry (no veneer). Handmade, with very interesting
dovetail corners in the drawers. Built (we think) around
1880. Not gaudy or covered with gew-gaws; a simple, elegant
piece of furniture, but too big (60" long, 37" tall, 24"
deep) for our little Cape Cod house.
Will deliver pricier items (ie, over $10) anywhere in the Rochester
area. (And will consider delivering the others.) Will deliver any
of it on UofR Campus between now and graduation.
| 4 |
trimmed_train
|
1,759 |
MLB is perfectly willing to take players from Cuba. They just have to
defect first.
Sort of like the situation used to be with Russian/Czech/etc hockey
players, until the political situation in those countries changed.
| 17 |
trimmed_train
|
1,985 |
That would be a very expensive toxin indeed!
| 19 |
trimmed_train
|
8,659 |
NPR's Morning Edition aired a report this morning (4/19) on
Hispanic/Latin American players in MLB and how they have many of
the same problems faced by black/negro/African American players
when they first entered the league. However, although baseball
has adjusted to the presence of black players, many Hispanic
players still labor under the stereotype of being "fireballs,
hot blooded, flashy". The report also emphasised that despite
the rantings (my word) of Jessie Jackson about baseballs
discrimination against black players in its upper echelons,
baseball has actually done much better by black players than
Hispanic players.
Another interesting point was the language barrier problem. The
reporter elaborated on an interview with Ruben Sierra which he
gave in Spanish to a Spanish speaking newspaper reporter with
the fact that there are maybe 2 major baseball writers that
speak Spanish, despite the fact that Spanish is one of (if not
the) easiest languages to learn, so easy that the author Cormac
McCarthy learned Spanish at age 50 in order to research his
book, _All The Pretty Horses_. Yet, few MLB organizations
employ Spanish speaking personel, one of the exceptions being
the Oakland A's.
Another point:
Nearly 90% of Latin American players have some African blood.
Yet, most report that they'd never really felt black until
playing ball in the US.
Ironically enough, it is the early presence of Latin American
baseball players in the Major Leagues that support the idea that
baseball was integrated before the arrival of Jackie Robinson,
as many "light black" or "brown", Latin Americans were
incorporated into baseball.
/S
| 2 |
trimmed_train
|
7,564 |
What do you mean by "police band" - there is no such thing.
Anyway, radar detectors work in shared bands.
If you applied your test, all of those radar operated door
openers in malls would be illegal.
One of the great problems here is that there are too many
ill-educated (read illiterate) people making too many laws
about subjects on which they are incompetent - there may well
be laws refereing to "police bands", they are almost certainly
local in scope (state or county) - created by well-meaning,
but incompetent idiots.
Unfortunaltely, laws do not have to be sensible (or even enforceable).
Lawmakers exist to pass laws - and will continue to do so, until
the day where you are faced with death for not doing X, and
amputation of all your limbs for doing X ... the choice will be yours.
Note: no smiley.
| 11 |
trimmed_train
|
3,199 |
Hello all. We are doing a bible study (at my college) on Revelations. We
have been doing pretty good as far as getting some sort of reasonable
interpretation. We are now on chapters 17 and 18 which talk about the
woman on the beast and the fall of Babylon. I believe the beast is the
Antichrist (some may differ but it seems obvious) and the woman represents
Babylon which stands for Rome or the Roman Catholic Church. What are some
views on this interpretation? Is the falling Babylon in chapter 18 the same
Babylon in as in chapter 17? The Catholic church?
Hate to step on toes.
thanks
--------
Jimmy Buddenberg INTERNET: [email protected]
Muskingum College
| 0 |
trimmed_train
|
3,624 |
I'm starting an informal poll on goalie masks. I'd like to know
who's mask you think looks the best. I've always like Curtis Joseph's
of the Blues the best. Anyway, send your nominations to me, or post your
vote here on r.s.h. My e-mail adress is: [email protected]
Thanks for your time.
| 17 |
trimmed_train
|
4,763 |
one i saw had vented rears too...it was on a lot.
of course, the sales man was a fool..."titanium wheels"..yeah, right..
then later told me they were "magnesium"..more believable, but still
crap, since Al is so m uch cheaper, and just as good....
i tend to agree, tho that this still doesn't take the SHO up to "standard"
for running 130 on a regular basis. The brakes should be bigger, like
11" or so...take a look at the ones on the Corrados.(where they have
braking regulations).
| 4 |
trimmed_train
|
1,575 |
Digi-Key also sells Quad Line Receivers, parts DS1489AN (68cents) and DS1489N
(48cents). A Quad Line Driver, part DS1488 (48cents), is also sold. I guess
if you don't won't to supply +12V, the chips with the pump-up circuitry might
be worth the extra cost. But 1488's and 1489's are available at your friendly
neighborhood RS, parts MC1488 (276-2520) for $1.29 and MC1489 (276-2521) for
$1.29.
| 11 |
trimmed_train
|
1,273 |
[deletia- sig]
[deletia- formalities]
I probably should let this pass, it's not worth the time, and it's not
really intended for me. But I couldn't resist. A personal weakness of mine.
Jerkius Kneeus. Tragically incurable.
Not so; I can prove that the existance of God is disputable
by showing that people dispute it; This is easy: I dispute that
God exists. Simple.
I missed your "Traditional Proofs" treatise, but the proofs I remember
from the Summa Theologic (the 5 ways I think it was) were rather poor
stuff. The Ontological argument is about a billion times better, imho.
I would think you'd want non-traditional proofs, considering the general
failure of the traditional proofs: at least the ones I know of.
(I am thinking of the Ontological Argument, the Cosmological Argument and
the Teleological argument. Those are the ones traditional enough to
have funny names, anyway.)
This is the real question. So to discuss it, I'll assume God exists.
Otherwise, there is no heavenly authority to babble about.
Please show this is the case. I am familiar with the First Cause
argument, and I'll accept (for the sake of argument) that there
is a First Cause, even though I find some of its premices
questionable. The rest you'll have to show. This includes
that the First Cause is God.
Got it. I deny that God is all good. So there.
This isn't self-consistent: if humans must renew the relationship,
then God (incarnate or not) can't do it. Well, unless you think God is
human. Granted, God made himself 'human', but this is nonetheless cheating:
The intent of the statement is clearly that man has to fix the problem
he caused. God fixing it- even by indirect means- contradicts this.
Why?
Also, why assume said claim is true anyway?
If *I* claim to be Truth, are you bound by reason to follow me?
:)
Undoubtably. Do you mean to imply we should all obey the commands of the
Marines without question? You seem to imply this about God, and
that the Marines are similar in this respect.. If this is not what
you are trying to say, they please explain what it is you are saying,
as I have missed it.
Why? Why not question it? Even if it *is* truth, we cannot know this
certainly, so why is it so irrational to question? Perhaps we will
thus discover that we were wrong.
You assert that God is Truth and we can't question Truth. But
I assert that God is not Truth and anyway we can question Truth.
How is it my assertion is less good than yours?
Oh?
I hereby deny 1+1=2.
I hope you'll agree 1+1=2 is the truth.
Granted, I look pretty damn silly saying something like that,
but I needed something we'd both agree was clearly true.
Now, you'll notice no stormtroopers have marched in to drag
me off to the gulag. No heaven lighting bolts either. No mysterious
net outages. I seem to be permited to say such things, absurd or not.
They are certainly not true. At least, the ones Newton derived are
not true, and are indeed wildly inaccurate at high speeds or small
distances. We do not have a set of Laws of Physics that always
works in all cases. If we did, Physics would be over already.
Science is all about Questioning this sort of truth. If we didn't,
we'd still follow Aristotle. I'd generalize this a little more:
If you want to learn anything new, you MUST question the things
you Know (tm). Because you can always be wrong.
Even presupposing that Truth may not be Denied, and may
not be Questioned, and that God is Truth, it only follows
that God may not be Denied or Questioned. NOT that he must
be obeyed!
We could unquestioningly DISobey him. How annoying of us.
But you have not connected denial with disobedience.
---
- Dan "No Nickname" Johnson
And God said "Jeeze, this is dull"... and it *WAS* dull. Genesis 0:0
| 0 |
trimmed_train
|
1,229 |
Ford tried that also, back in 1983. My 1983 Ranger Pickup had the horn at
the end of the turn-signal stalk, instead of in the center of the wheel where
God intended it to be. :-) I drove two different cars then (the other an
1984 Camry), and never did get used to pushing the turn-signal stalk to
blow the horn. The only time I got it right was when I was getting the
annual state-required safety inspection!
Not one of Ford's better ideas.
| 4 |
trimmed_train
|
10,276 |
I have looked through the FAQ sections and have not
seen a answer for this.
I have an X/Motif application that I have written.
I have a couple of gif files (or pict) that I have
scanned in with a color scanner. Now I would like
to be able to convert the gif files into a format
that could be read into my application and displayed
on the background of its main window. Preferably with
pixmaps, or perhaps as an XImage.
I have found functions in the pbmplus program suite
to convert gif to xbm, but that is monochrome, and
I really do need color.
I have looked at xv, which reads in gif, and writes
out several formats, but have not found a way to write
out a file which can be read in as a pixmap.
Is there an easy way to do this?
email responses preferred.
thanks!
'mark
[email protected]
| 16 |
trimmed_train
|
6,317 |
Hi... can anybody give me book or reference title to give me a start at
fractal image compression technique. Helps will be appreciated... thanx
| 1 |
trimmed_train
|
4,467 |
What ways are there to hook up to an appletalk network to use an Apple
LaserWriter? Is there a way I can use an AppleShare File Server also? The
less memory used the better. Thanks. Any help greatly appreciated.
| 3 |
trimmed_train
|
3,049 |
While playing around with my Gateway 2000 local-bus machine last
night, it became apparent that Windows 3.1 didn't give the option
for 32-bit access for virtual memory.
I am using a permanent swap file, and the disk drive is on the local
bus interface.
Is this expected, or should I be investigating further why no 32-bit
option appears?
Thanks for any help.
--
| 3 |
trimmed_train
|
6,042 |
The ice princess next door makes a habit of flooring her cage out of the
driveway when she sees me coming. Probably only hits 25mph, or so. (I made
the mistake of waving to a neighbor. She has some sort of grudge, now.)
I was riding downhill at ~60mph on a local backroad when a brown dobie came
flashing through the brush at well over 30mph, on an intercept course with
my front wheel. The dog had started out at the top of the hill when it heard
me and still had a lead when it hit the road. The dog was approaching from
my left, and was running full tilt to get to my bike on the other side of
the road before I went by. Rover was looking back at me to calculate the
final trajectory. Too bad it didn't notice the car approaching at 50+mph
from the other direction.
I got a closeup view of the our poor canine friend's noggin careening off
the front bumper, smacking the asphalt, and getting runover by the front
tire. It managed a pretty good yelp, just before impact. (peripheral
imminent doom?) I guess the driver didn't see me or they probably would have
swerved into my lane. The squeegeed pup actually got up and headed back
home, but I haven't seen it since.
Sniff.
Sometimes Fate sees you and smiles.
| 12 |
trimmed_train
|
4,614 |
Archive-name: x-faq/part5
Last-modified: 1993/04/04
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 119) I'm writing a widget and can't use a float as a resource value.
Float resources are not portable; the size of the value may be larger than
the size of an XtPointer. Try using a pointer to a float instead; the Xaw
Scrollbar float resources are handled in this way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 120) Is this a memory leak in the X11R4 XtDestroyWidget()?!
Yes. This is the "unofficial" fix-19 for the X11R4 Destroy.c:
*** Destroy.c.1.37 Thu Jul 11 15:41:25 1991
--- lib/Xt/Destroy.c Thu Jul 11 15:42:23 1991
***************
*** 1,4 ****
--- 1,5 ----
/* $XConsortium: Destroy.c,v 1.37 90/09/28 10:21:32 swick Exp $ */
+ /* Plus unofficial patches in revisions 1.40 and 1.41 */
/***********************************************************
Copyright 1987, 1988 by Digital Equipment Corporation, Maynard, Massachusetts,
***************
*** 221,239 ****
*/
int i = 0;
! DestroyRec* dr = app->destroy_list;
while (i < app->destroy_count) {
if (dr->dispatch_level >= dispatch_level) {
Widget w = dr->widget;
if (--app->destroy_count)
bcopy( (char*)(dr+1), (char*)dr,
! app->destroy_count*sizeof(DestroyRec)
);
XtPhase2Destroy(w);
}
else {
i++;
- dr++;
}
}
}
--- 222,245 ----
*/
int i = 0;
! DestroyRec* dr;
while (i < app->destroy_count) {
+
+ /* XtPhase2Destroy can result in calls to XtDestroyWidget,
+ * and these could cause app->destroy_list to be reallocated.
+ */
+
+ dr = app->destroy_list + i;
if (dr->dispatch_level >= dispatch_level) {
Widget w = dr->widget;
if (--app->destroy_count)
bcopy( (char*)(dr+1), (char*)dr,
! (app->destroy_count - i) * sizeof(DestroyRec)
);
XtPhase2Destroy(w);
}
else {
i++;
}
}
}
[from Donna Converse, [email protected]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 121) Are callbacks guaranteed to be called in the order registered?
Although some books demonstrate that the current implementation of Xt
happens to call callback procedures in the order in which they are registered,
the specification does not guarantee such a sequence, and supplemental
authoritative documents (i.e. the Asente/Swick volume) do say that the order is
undefined. Because the callback list can be manipulated by both the widget and
the application, Xt cannot guarantee the order of execution.
In general, the callback procedures should be thought of as operating
independently of one another and should not depend on side-effects of other
callbacks operating; if a seqence is needed, then the single callback to be
registered can explicitly call other functions necessary.
[4/92; thanks to [email protected]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 122) Why doesn't XtDestroyWidget() actually destroy the widget?
XtDestroyWidget() operates in two passes, in order to avoid leaving
dangling data structures; the function-call marks the widget, which is not
actually destroyed until your program returns to its event-loop.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 123) How do I query the user synchronously using Xt?
It is possible to have code which looks like this trivial callback,
which has a clear flow of control. The calls to AskUser() block until answer
is set to one of the valid values. If it is not a "yes" answer, the code drops
out of the callback and back to an event-processing loop:
void quit(Widget w, XtPointer client, XtPointer call)
{
int answer;
answer = AskUser(w, "Really Quit?");
if (RET_YES == answer)
{
answer = AskUser(w, "Are You Really Positive?");
if (RET_YES == answer)
exit(0);
}
}
A more realistic example might ask whether to create a file or whether
to overwrite it.
This is accomplished by entering a second event-processing loop and
waiting until the user answers the question; the answer is returned to the
calling function. That function AskUser() looks something like this, where the
Motif can be replaced with widget-set-specific code to create some sort of
dialog-box displaying the question string and buttons for "OK", "Cancel" and
"Help" or equivalents:
int AskUser(w, string)
Widget w;
char *string;
{
int answer=RET_NONE; /* some not-used marker */
Widget dialog; /* could cache&carry, but ...*/
Arg args[3];
int n = 0;
XtAppContext context;
n=0;
XtSetArg(args[n], XmNmessageString, XmStringCreateLtoR(string,
XmSTRING_DEFAULT_CHARSET)); n++;
XtSetArg(args[n], XmNdialogStyle, XmDIALOG_APPLICATION_MODAL); n++;
dialog = XmCreateQuestionDialog(XtParent(w), string, args, n);
XtAddCallback(dialog, XmNokCallback, response, &answer);
XtAddCallback(dialog, XmNcancelCallback, response, &answer);
XtAddCallback(dialog, XmNhelpCallback, response, &answer);
XtManageChild(dialog);
context = XtWidgetToApplicationContext (w);
while (answer == RET_NONE || XtAppPending(context)) {
XtAppProcessEvent (context, XtIMAll);
}
XtDestroyWidget(dialog); /* blow away the dialog box and shell */
return answer;
}
The dialog supports three buttons, which are set to call the same
function when tickled by the user. The variable answer is set when the user
finally selects one of those choices:
void response(w, client, call)
Widget w;
XtPointer client;
XtPointer call;
{
int *answer = (int *) client;
XmAnyCallbackStruct *reason = (XmAnyCallbackStruct *) call;
switch (reason->reason) {
case XmCR_OK:
*answer = RET_YES; /* some #define value */
break;
case XmCR_CANCEL:
*answer = RET_NO;
break;
case XmCR_HELP:
*answer = RET_HELP;
break;
default:
return;
}
}
and the code unwraps back to the point at which an answer was needed and
continues from there.
[Thanks to Dan Heller ([email protected]); further code is in Dan's R3/contrib
WidgetWrap library. 2/91]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 124) How do I determine the name of an existing widget?
I have a widget ID and need to know what the name of that widget is.
Users of R4 and later are best off using the XtName() function, which
will work on both widgets and non-widget objects.
If you are still using R3, you can use this simple bit of code to do
what you want. Note that it depends on the widget's internal data structures
and is not necessarily portable to future versions of Xt, including R4.
#include <X11/CoreP.h>
#include <X11/Xresource.h>
String XtName (widget)
Widget widget; /* WILL work with non-widget objects */
{
return XrmNameToString(widget->core.xrm_name);
}
[7/90; modified with suggestion by Larry Rogers ([email protected]) 9/91]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 125) Why do I get a BadDrawable error drawing to XtWindow(widget)?
I'm doing this in order to get a window into which I can do Xlib graphics
within my Xt-based program:
The window associated with the widget is created as a part of the
realization of the widget. Using a window id of NULL ("no window") could
create the error that you describe. It is necessary to call XtRealizeWidget()
before attempting to use the window associated with a widget.
Note that the window will be created after the XtRealizeWidget() call,
but that the server may not have actually mapped it yet, so you should also
wait for an Expose event on the window before drawing into it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 126) Why do I get a BadMatch error when calling XGetImage?
The BadMatch error can occur if the specified rectangle goes off the edge of
the screen. If you don't want to catch the error and deal with it, you can take
the following steps to avoid the error:
1) Make a pixmap the same size as the rectangle you want to capture.
2) Clear the pixmap to background using XFillRectangle.
3) Use XCopyArea to copy the window to the pixmap.
4) If you get a NoExpose event, the copy was clean. Use XGetImage to grab the
image from the pixmap.
5) If you get one or more GraphicsExpose events, the copy wasn't clean, and
the x/y/width/height members of the GraphicsExpose event structures tell you
the parts of the pixmap which aren't good.
6) Get rid of the pixmap; it probably takes a lot of memory.
[10/92; thanks to Oliver Jones ([email protected])]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 127) How can my application tell if it is being run under X?
A number of programs offer X modes but otherwise run in a straight
character-only mode. The easiest way for an application to determine that it is
running on an X display is to attempt to open a connection to the X server:
display = XOpenDisplay(display_name);
if (display)
{ do X stuff }
else
{ do curses or something else }
where display_name is either the string specified on the command-line following
-display, by convention, or otherwise is (char*)NULL [in which case
XOpenDisplay uses the value of $DISPLAY, if set].
This is superior to simply checking for the existence a -display command-line
argument or checking for $DISPLAY set in the environment, neither of which is
adequate. [5/91]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 128) How do I make a "busy cursor" while my application is computing?
Is it necessary to call XDefineCursor() for every window in my application?
The easiest thing to do is to create a single InputOnly window that is
as large as the largest possible screen; make it a child of your toplevel
window and it will be clipped to that window, so it won't affect any other
application. (It needs to be as big as the largest possible screen in case the
user enlarges the window while it is busy or moves elsewhere within a virtual
desktop.) Substitute "toplevel" with your top-most widget here (similar code
should work for Xlib-only applications; just use your top Window):
unsigned long valuemask;
XSetWindowAttributes attributes;
/* Ignore device events while the busy cursor is displayed. */
valuemask = CWDontPropagate | CWCursor;
attributes.do_not_propagate_mask = (KeyPressMask | KeyReleaseMask |
ButtonPressMask | ButtonReleaseMask | PointerMotionMask);
attributes.cursor = XCreateFontCursor(XtDisplay(toplevel), XC_watch);
/* The window will be as big as the display screen, and clipped by
its own parent window, so we never have to worry about resizing */
XCreateWindow(XtDisplay(toplevel), XtWindow(toplevel), 0, 0,
65535, 65535, (unsigned int) 0, 0, InputOnly,
CopyFromParent, valuemask, &attributes);
where the maximum size above could be replaced by the real size of the screen,
particularly to avoid servers which have problems with windows larger than
32767.
When you want to use this busy cursor, map and raise this window; to go back to
normal, unmap it. This will automatically keep you from getting extra mouse
events; depending on precisely how the window manager works, it may or may not
have a similar effect on keystrokes as well.
In addition, note also that most of the Xaw widgets support an XtNcursor
resource which can be temporarily reset, should you merely wish to change the
cursor without blocking pointer events.
[thanks to Andrew Wason ([email protected]), Dan Heller
([email protected]), and [email protected]; 11/90,5/91]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 129) How do I fork without hanging my parent X program?
An X-based application which spawns off other Unix processes which
continue to run after it is closed typically does not vanish until all of its
children are terminated; the children inherit from the parent the open X
connection to the display.
What you need to do is fork; then, immediately, in the child process,
close (ConnectionNumber(XtDisplay(widget)));
to close the file-descriptor in the display information. After this do your
exec. You will then be able to exit the parent.
Alternatively, before exec'ing make this call, which causes the file
descriptor to be closed on exec.
(void) fcntl(ConnectionNumber(XDisplay), F_SETFD, 1);
[Thanks to Janet Anstett ([email protected]), Gordon Freedman
([email protected]); 2/91. Greg Holmberg ([email protected]), 3/93.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 130) Can I make Xt or Xlib calls from a signal handler?
No. Xlib and Xt have no mutual exclusion for protecting critical
sections. If your signal handler makes such a call at the wrong time (which
might be while the function you are calling is already executing), it can leave
the library in an inconsistent state. Note that the ANSI C standard points
out that behavior of a signal handler is undefined if the signal handler calls
any function other than signal() itself, so this is not a problem specific to
Xlib and Xt; the POSIX specification mentions other functions which may be
called safely but it may not be assumed that these functions are called by
Xlib or Xt functions.
You can work around the problem by setting a flag in the interrupt
handler and later checking it with a work procedure or a timer event which
has previously been added.
Note: the article in The X Journal 1:4 and the example in O'Reilly
Volume 6 are in error.
[Thanks to Pete Ware ([email protected]) and Donna Converse
([email protected]), 5/92]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 131) What are these "Xlib sequence lost" errors?
You may see these errors if you issue Xlib requests from an Xlib error
handler, or, more likely, if you make calls which generate X requests to Xt or
Xlib from a signal handler, which you shouldn't be doing in any case.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 132) How can my Xt program handle socket, pipe, or file input?
It's very common to need to write an Xt program that can accept input
both from a user via the X connection and from some other file descriptor, but
which operates efficiently and without blocking on either the X connection or
the other file descriptor.
A solution is use XtAppAddInput(). After you open your file descriptor,
use XtAppAddInput() to register an input handler. The input handler will be
called every time there is something on the file descriptor requiring your
program's attention. Write the input handler like you would any other Xt
callback, so it does its work quickly and returns. It is important to use only
non-blocking I/O system calls in your input handlers.
Most input handlers read the file descriptor, although you can have an
input handler write or handle exception conditions if you wish.
Be careful when you register an input handler to read from a disk file.
You will find that the function is called even when there isn't input pending.
XtAppAddInput() is actually working as it is supposed to. The input handler is
called whenever the file descriptor is READY to be read, not only when there is
new data to be read. A disk file (unlike a pipe or socket) is almost always
ready to be read, however, if only because you can spin back to the beginning
and read data you've read before. The result is that your function will almost
always be called every time around XtAppMainLoop(). There is a way to get the
type of interaction you are expecting; add this line to the beginning of your
function to test whether there is new data:
if (ioctl(fd, FIONREAD, &n) == -1 || n == 0) return;
But, because this is called frequently, your application is effectively in a
busy-wait; you may be better off not using XtAppAddInput() and instead setting
a timer and in the timer procedure checking the file for input.
[courtesy Dan Heller ([email protected]), 8/90; [email protected] 5/91;
Ollie Jones ([email protected]) 6/92]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 133) How do I simulate a button press/release event for a widget?
You can do this using XSendEvent(); it's likely that you're not setting
the window field in the event, which Xt needs in order to match to the widget
which should receive the event.
If you're sending events to your own application, then you can use
XtDispatchEvent() instead. This is more efficient than XSendEvent() in that you
avoid a round-trip to the server.
Depending on how well the widget was written, you may be able to call
its action procedures in order to get the effects you want.
[courtesy Mark A. Horstman ([email protected]), 11/90]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 134) Why doesn't anything appear when I run this simple program?
You are right to map the window before drawing into it. However, the
window is not ready to be drawn into until it actually appears on the screen --
until your application receives an Expose event. Drawing done before that will
generally not appear. You'll see code like this in many programs; this code
would appear after window was created and mapped:
while (!done)
{
XNextEvent(the_display,&the_event);
switch (the_event.type) {
case Expose: /* On expose events, redraw */
XDrawLine(the_display,the_window,the_GC,5,5,100,100);
break;
...
}
}
Note that there is a second problem: some Xlib implementations don't
set up the default graphics context to have correct foreground/background
colors, so this program could previously include this code:
...
the_GC_values.foreground=BlackPixel(the_display,the_screen); /* e.g. */
the_GC_values.background=WhitePixel(the_display,the_screen); /* e.g. */
the_GC = XCreateGC(the_display,the_window,
GCForeground|GCBackground,&the_GC_values);
...
Note: the code uses BlackPixel and WhitePixel to avoid assuming that 1 is
black and 0 is white or vice-versa. The relationship between pixels 0 and 1
and the colors black and white is implementation-dependent. They may be
reversed, or they may not even correspond to black and white at all.
Also note that actually using BlackPixel and WhitePixel is usually the wrong
thing to do in a finished program, as it ignores the user's preference for
foreground and background.
And also note that you can run into the same situation in an Xt-based program
if you draw into the XtWindow(w) right after it has been realized; it may
not yet have appeared.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 135) What is the difference between a Screen and a screen?
The 'Screen' is an Xlib structure which includes the information about
one of the monitors or virtual monitors which a single X display supports. A
server can support several independent screens. They are numbered unix:0.0,
unix:0.1, unix:0.2, etc; the 'screen' or 'screen_number' is the second digit --
the 0, 1, 2 which can be thought of as an index into the array of available
Screens on this particular Display connection.
The macros which you can use to obtain information about the particular
Screen on which your application is running typically have two forms -- one
which takes a Screen and one with takes both the Display and the screen_number.
In Xt-based programs, you typically use XtScreen(widget) to determine
the Screen on which your application is running, if it uses a single screen.
(Part of the confusion may arise from the fact that some of the macros
which return characteristics of the Screen have "Display" in the names --
XDisplayWidth, XDisplayHeight, etc.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 136) Can I use C++ with X11? Motif? XView?
The X11R4/5 header files are compatible with C++. The Motif 1.1 header
files are usable as is inside extern "C" {...}. However, the definition of
String in Intrinsic.h can conflict with the libg++ or other String class and
needs to be worked around.
Some other projects which can help:
WWL, a set of C++ classes by Jean-Daniel Fekete to wrap X Toolkit
widgets, available via anonymous FTP from export.lcs.mit.edu as
contrib/WWL-1.2.tar.Z [7/92] or lri.lri.fr (129.175.15.1) as pub/WWL-1.2.tar.Z.
It works by building a set of C++ classes in parallel to the class tree of the
widgets.
The C++ InterViews toolkit is obtainable via anonymous FTP from
interviews.stanford.edu. InterViews uses a box/glue model similar to that of
TeX for constructing user interfaces and supports multiple looks on the user
interfaces. Some of its sample applications include a WYSIWIG document editor
(doc), a MacDraw-like drawing program (idraw) and an interface builder
(ibuild).
THINGS, a class library written at the Rome Air Force Base by the
Strategic Air Command, available as freeware on archive sites.
Motif++ is a public-domain library that defines C++ class wrappers for
Motif 1.1; it adds an "application" class for, e.g., initializing X, and also
integrates WCL and the Xbae widget set. This work was developed by Ronald van
Loon <[email protected]> based on X++, a set of bindings done by the University
of Lowell Graphics Research Laboratory. The current sources are available from
decuac.dec.com (192.5.214.1) as /pub/X11/motif++.21.jul.92.tar.Z.
The source code examples for Doug Young's "Object-Oriented Programming
with C++ and OSF/Motif" [ISBN 0-13-630252-1] do not include "widget wrappers"
but do include a set of classes that encapsulates higher-level facilities
commonly needed by Motif- or other Xt-based applications; check export in
~ftp/contrib/young.c++.tar.Z.
Rogue Wave offers "View.h++" for C++ programmers using Motif; info:
1-800-487-3217 or +1 503 754 2311.
A product called "Commonview" by Glockenspiel Ltd, Ireland (??)
apparently is a C++-based toolkit for multiple window systems, including PM,
Windows, and X/Motif.
Xv++ is sold by Qualix (415-572-0200; fax -1300); it implements an
interface from the GIL files that Sun's OpenWindows Developers Guide 3.0
produces to Xview wrapper classes in C++.
UIT is a set of C++ classes embedding the XView toolkit; it is intended
for use with Sun's OpenWindows Developers Guide 3.0 builder tool. Sources are
on export.mit.edu.au as UIT.tar.Z. Version 2 was released 5/28/92.
Also of likely use is ObjectCenter (Saber-C++). And a reasonable
alternative to all of the above is ParcPlace's (formerly Solbourne's) Object
Interface.
[Thanks to Douglas S. Rand ([email protected]) and George Wu ([email protected]);2/91]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 137) Where can I obtain alternate language bindings to X?
Versions of the CLX Lisp bindings are part of the X11 core source
distributions. A version of CLX is on the R5 tape [10/91]; version 5.0.2 [9/92]
is on export.lcs.mit.edu in /contrib/CLX.R5.02.tar.Z.
The SAIC Ada-X11 bindings are through anonymous ftp in /pub from
stars.rosslyn.unisys.com (128.126.164.2).
There is an X/Ada study team sponsored by NASA JSC, which apparently is
working out bindings. Information: [email protected].
GNU SmallTalk has a beta native SmallTalk binding to X called STIX (by
[email protected]). It is still in its beginning stages, and
documentation is sparse outside the SmallTalk code itself. The sources are
available as /pub/gnu/smalltalk-1.1.1.tar.Z on prep.ai.mit.edu (18.71.0.38) or
ugle.unit.no (129.241.1.97).
Prolog bindings (called "XWIP") written by Ted Kim at UCLA while
supported in part by DARPA are available by anonymous FTP from
export.lcs.mit.edu:contrib/xwip.tar.Z or ftp.cs.ucla.edu:pub/xwip.tar.Z.
These prolog language bindings depend on having a Quintus-type foreign function
interface in your prolog. The developer has gotten it to work with Quintus and
SICStus prolog. Inquiries should go to [email protected]. [3/90]
Scheme bindings to Xlib, OSF/Motif, and Xaw are part of the Elk
distribution; version 1.5a on export obsoletes the version on the R5 contrib
tape.
x-scm, a bolt-on accessory for Aubrey Jaffer's "scm" Scheme interpreter
that provides an interface to Xlib, Motif, and OpenLook, is now available via
FTP from altdorf.ai.mit.edu:archive/scm/xscm1.05.tar.Z and
nexus.yorku.ca:pub/scheme/new/xscm1.05.tar.Z.
Ada bindings to Motif, explicitly, will eventually be made available by
the Jet Propulsion Laboratories, probably through the normal electronic
means. Advance information can be obtained from [email protected],
who may respond as time permits.
AdaMotif is a complete binding to X and Motif for the Ada language, for
many common systems; it is based in part upon the SAIC/Unisys bindings and also
includes a UIL to Ada translator. Info: Systems Engineering Research
Corporation, 1-800-Ada-SERC ([email protected]).
Also: the MIT Consortium, although not involved in producing Ada
bindings for X, maintains a partial listing of people involved in X and Ada;
information is available from Donna Converse, [email protected].
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 138) Can XGetWindowAttributes get a window's background pixel/pixmap?
No. Once set, the background pixel or pixmap of a window cannot be
re-read by clients. The reason for this is that a client can create a pixmap,
set it to be the background pixmap of a window, and then free the pixmap. The
window keeps this background, but the pixmap itself is destroyed. If you're
sure a window has a background pixel (not a pixmap), you can use XClearArea()
to clear a region to the background color and then use XGetImage() to read
back that pixel. However, this action alters the contents of the window, and
it suffers from race conditions with exposures. [courtesy Dave Lemke of NCD
and Stuart Marks of Sun]
Note that the same applies to the border pixel/pixmap. This is a
(mis)feature of the protocol which allows the server is free to manipulate the
pixel/pixmap however it wants. By not requiring the server to keep the
original pixel or pixmap, some (potentially a lot of) space can be saved.
[courtesy Jim Fulton, MIT X Consortium]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 139) How do I create a transparent window?
A completely transparent window is easy to get -- use an InputOnly
window. In order to create a window which is *mostly* transparent, you have
several choices:
- the SHAPE extension first released with X11R4 offers an easy way to
make non-rectangular windows, so you can set the shape of the window to fit the
areas where the window should be nontransparent; however, not all servers
support the extension.
- a machine-specific method of implementing transparent windows for
particular servers is to use an overlay plane supported by the hardware. Note
that there is no X notion of a "transparent color index".
- a generally portable solution is to use a large number of tiny
windows, but this makes operating on the application as a unit difficult.
- a final answer is to consider whether you really need a transparent
window or if you would be satisfied with being able to overlay your application
window with information; if so, you can draw into separate bitplanes in colors
that will appear properly.
[thanks to der Mouse, [email protected], 3/92; see also
The X Journal 1:4 for a more complete answer, including code samples for this
last option]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 140) Why doesn't GXxor produce mathematically-correct color values?
When using GXxor you may expect that drawing with a value of black on a
background of black, for example, should produce white. However, the drawing
operation does not work on RGB values but on colormap indices. The color that
the resulting colormap index actually points to is undefined and visually
random unless you have actually filled it in yourself. [On many X servers Black
and White often 0/1 or 1/0; programs taking advantage of this mathematical
coincidence will break.]
If you want to be combining colors with GXxor, then you should be
allocating a number of your own color cells and filling them with your chosen
pre-computed values.
If you want to use GXxor simply to switch between two colors, then you
can take the shortcut of setting the background color in the GC (graphics
context) to 0 and the foreground color to a value such that when it draws over
red, say, the result is blue, and when it draws over blue the result is red.
This foreground value is itself the XOR of the colormap indices of red and
blue.
[Thanks to Chris Flatters ([email protected]) and Ken Whaley
([email protected]), 2/91]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 141) Why does every color I allocate show up as black?
Make sure you're using 16 bits and not 8. The red, green, and blue
fields of an XColor structure are scaled so that 0 is nothing and 65535 is
full-blast. If you forget to scale (using, for example, 0-255 for each color)
the XAllocColor function will perform correctly but the resulting color is
usually black.
[Thanks to Paul Asente, [email protected], 7/91]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 142) Why can't my program get a standard colormap?
I have an image-processing program which uses XGetRGBColormap() to get the
standard colormap, but it doesn't work.
XGetRGBColormap() when used with the property XA_RGB_DEFAULT_MAP does
not create a standard colormap -- it just returns one if one already exists.
Use xstdcmap or do what it does in order to create the standard colormap first.
[1/91; from der Mouse ([email protected])]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 143) Why does the pixmap I copy to the screen show up as garbage?
The initial contents of pixmaps are undefined. This means that most
servers will allocate the memory and leave around whatever happens to be there
-- which is usually garbage. You probably want to clear the pixmap first using
XFillRectangle() with a function of GXcopy and a foreground pixel of whatever
color you want as your background (or 0L if you are using the pixmap as a
mask). [courtesy Dave Lemke of NCD and Stuart Marks of Sun]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 144) How do I check whether a window ID is valid?
My program has the ID of a window on a remote display. I want to check whether
the window exists before doing anything with it.
Because X is asynchronous, there isn't a guarantee that the window
would still exist between the time that you got the ID and the time you sent an
event to the window or otherwise manipulated it. What you should do is send the
event without checking, but install an error handler to catch any BadWindow
errors, which would indicate that the window no longer exists. This scheme will
work except on the [rare] occasion that the original window has been destroyed
and its ID reallocated to another window.
[courtesy Ken Lee ([email protected]), 4/90]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 145) Can I have two applications draw to the same window?
Yes. The X server assigns IDs to windows and other resources (actually,
the server assigns some bits, the client others), and any application that
knows the ID can manipulate the resource [almost any X server resource, except
for GCs and private color cells, can be shared].
The problem you face is how to disseminate the window ID to multiple
applications. A simple way to handle this (and which solves the problem of the
applications' running on different machines) is in the first application to
create a specially-named property on the root-window and put the window ID into
it. The second application then retrieves the property, whose name it also
knows, and then can draw whatever it wants into the window.
[Note: this scheme works iff there is only one instance of the first
application running, and the scheme is subject to the limitations mentioned
in the Question about using window IDs on remote displays.]
Note also that you will still need to coordinate any higher-level
cooperation among your applications.
Note also that two processes can share a window but should not try to
use the same server connection. If one process is a child of the other, it
should close down the connection to the server and open its own connection.
[mostly courtesy Phil Karlton ([email protected]) 6/90]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 146) Why can't my program work with tvtwm or swm?
A number of applications, including xwd, xwininfo, and xsetroot, do not
handle the virtual root window which tvtwm and swm use; they typically return
the wrong child of root. A general solution is to add this code or to use it in
your own application where you would normally use RootWindow(dpy,screen):
/* Function Name: GetVRoot
* Description: Gets the root window, even if it's a virtual root
* Arguments: the display and the screen
* Returns: the root window for the client
*/
#include <X11/Xatom.h>
Window GetVRoot(dpy, scr)
Display *dpy;
int scr;
{
Window rootReturn, parentReturn, *children;
unsigned int numChildren;
Window root = RootWindow(dpy, scr);
Atom __SWM_VROOT = None;
int i;
__SWM_VROOT = XInternAtom(dpy, "__SWM_VROOT", False);
XQueryTree(dpy, root, &rootReturn, &parentReturn, &children, &numChildren);
for (i = 0; i < numChildren; i++) {
Atom actual_type;
int actual_format;
long nitems, bytesafter;
Window *newRoot = NULL;
if (XGetWindowProperty(dpy, children[i], __SWM_VROOT, 0, 1,
False, XA_WINDOW, &actual_type, &actual_format, &nitems,
&bytesafter, (unsigned char **) &newRoot) == Success && newRoot) {
root = *newRoot;
break;
}
}
return root;
}
[courtesy David Elliott ([email protected]). Similar code is in ssetroot, a
version of xsetroot distributed with tvtwm. 2/91]
A header file by Andreas Stolcke of ICSI on export.lcs.mit.edu:contrib/vroot.h
functions similarly by providing macros for RootWindow and DefaultRootWindow;
code can include this header file first to run properly in the presence of a
virtual desktop.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 147) How do I keep a window from being resized by the user?
Resizing the window is done through the window manager; window managers
can pay attention to the size hints your application places on the window, but
there is no guarantee that the window manager will listen. You can try setting
the minimum and maximum size hints to your target size and hope for the best.
[1/91]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 148) How do I keep a window in the foreground at all times?
It's rather antisocial for an application to constantly raise itself
[e.g. by tracking VisibilityNotify events] so that it isn't overlapped --
imagine the conflict between two such programs running.
The only sure way to have your window appear on the top of the stack
is to make the window override-redirect; this means that you are temporarily
assuming window-management duties while the window is up, so you want to do
this infrequently and then only for short periods of time (e.g. for popup
menus or other short parameter-setting windows).
[thanks to der Mouse ([email protected]); 7/92]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 149) How do I make text and bitmaps blink in X?
There is no easy way. Unless you're willing to depend on some sort of
extension (as yet non-existent), you have to arrange for the blinking yourself,
either by redrawing the contents periodically or, if possible, by playing games
with the colormap and changing the color of the contents.
[Thanks to [email protected] (der Mouse), 7/91]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 150)+ How do I get a double-click in Xlib?
Users of Xt have the support of the translation manager to help
get notification of double-clicking.
There is no good way to get only a double-click in Xlib, because the
protocol does not provide enough support to do double-clicks. You have to do
client-side timeouts, unless the single-click action is such that you can defer
actually taking it until you next see an event from the server. Thus, you
have to do timeouts, which means system-dependent code. On most UNIXish
implementations, you can use XConnectionNumber to get the file descriptor of
the X connection and then use select() or something similar on that.
Note that many user-interface references suggest that a double-click
be used to extend the action indicated by a single-click; if this is the case
in your interface then you can execute the first action and as a compromise
check the timestamp on the second event to determine whether it, too, should
be the single-click action or the double-click action.
[Thanks to [email protected] (der Mouse), 4/93]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 151)! How do I render rotated text?
Xlib intentionally does not provide such sophisticated graphics
capabilities, leaving them up to server-extensions or clients-side graphics
libraries.
Your only choice, if you want to stay within the core X protocol, is to
render the text into a pixmap, read it back via XGetImage(), rotate it "by
hand" with whatever matrices you want, and put it back to the server via
XPutImage(); more specifically:
1) create a bitmap B and write your text to it.
2) create an XYBitmap image I from B (via XGetImage).
3) create an XYBitmap Image I2 big enough to handle the transformation.
4) for each x,y in I2, I2(x,y) = I(a,b) where
a = x * cos(theta) - y * sin(theta)
b = x * sin(theta) + y * cos(theta)
5) render I2
Note that you should be careful how you implement this not to lose
bits; an algorithm based on shear transformations may in fact be better.
The high-level server-extensions and graphics packages available for X
also permit rendering of rotated text: Display PostScript, PEX, PHiGS, and GKS,
although most are not capable of arbitrary rotation and probably do not use the
same fonts that would be found on a printer.
In addition, if you have enough access to the server to install a font
on it, you can create a font which consists of letters rotated at some
predefined angle. Your application can then itself figure out placement of each
glyph.
[courtesy der Mouse ([email protected]), Eric Taylor
([email protected]), and Ken Lee ([email protected]), 11/90;
Liam Quin ([email protected]), 12/90]
InterViews (C++ UI toolkit, in the X contrib software) has support for
rendering rotated fonts in X. It could be one source of example code.
[Brian R. Smith ([email protected]), 3/91]
Another possibility is to use the Hershey Fonts; they are
stroke-rendered and can be used by X by converting them into XDrawLine
requests. [[email protected], 10/91]
The xrotfont program by Alan Richardson ([email protected])
(posted to comp.sources.x July 14 1992) paints a rotated font by implementing
the method above and by using an outline (Hershey) font.
The xvertext package by Alan Richardson ([email protected]) is a
set of functions to facilitate the writing of text at any angle. Version 3.0
was recently released to alt.sources and comp.sources.misc [3/93]; it is also
on export as contrib/xvertext.3.0.shar.Z.
O'Reilly's X Resource Volume 3 includes information from HP about
modifications to the X fonts server which provide for rotated and scaled text.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: 152) What is the X Registry? (How do I reserve names?)
There are places in the X Toolkit, in applications, and in the X
protocol that define and use string names. The context is such that conflicts
are possible if different components use the same name for different things.
The MIT X Consortium maintains a registry of names in these domains:
orgainization names, selection names, selection targets, resource types,
application classes, and class extension record types; and several others.
The list as of 7/91 is in the directory mit/doc/Registry on the R5
tape; it is also available by sending "send docs registry" to the xstuff mail
server.
To register names (first come, first served) or to ask questions send
to [email protected]; be sure to include a postal address for
confirmation.
[11/90; condensed from Asente/Swick Appendix H]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
David B. Lewis faq%[email protected]
"Just the FAQs, ma'am." -- Joe Friday
| 16 |
trimmed_train
|
11,183 |
Bill, I have taken the time to explain that biblical scholars consider the
Josephus reference to be an early Christian insert. By biblical scholar I mean
an expert who, in the course of his or her research, is willing to let the
chips fall where they may. This excludes literalists, who may otherwise be
defined as biblical apologists. They find what they want to find. They are
not trustworthy by scholarly standards (and others).
Why an insert? Read it - I have, a number of times. The passage is glaringly
out of context, and Josephus, a superb writer, had no such problem elsewhere
in his work. The passage has *nothing* to do with the subject matter in which
it lies. It suddenly appears and then just as quickly disappears.
Until you can demonstrate how and why the scholarly community is wrong about
the Josephus insert, your "proof" is meaningless and it should not be repeated
here. What's more, even if Josephus happened to be legitimate, it would "prove"
nothing. Scholars speak of the "weight of evidence." Far more independent
evidence would be required to validate your claim. Until forthcoming, your
belief is based on faith. That's OK, but you exceed your rights when you pass
faith off as fact.
As for the gospels, there are parallels, but there are also glaring
inconsistencies and contradictions. Shouldn't a perfect canon be perfect?
Shouldn't there be absolutely no room for debate? I suggest you read _Gospel
Fictions_ by Randel Helms, and _The Unauthorized Version_ by Robin Fox (for
Herb Huston, no known kinship or familial relationship, but we do indeed share
an evolutionary ancestry).
The fact that there are inconsistencies, gaps and contradictions does not deny
your position. On the other hand, neither do the gospels "prove" your faith.
Independent evidence is necessary, and I know of none (which we have already
discussed, and so far you have not provided any). Until then, its faith.
Moreover, you have committed a fundamental error in logic. You have attempted
to "prove" your claim with that which you want to prove. Its no different than
saying "I am right because I say so."
Your logic is full of circles. It reminds me a bit of the 1910 Presbyterian
General Assembly. The assembly defined five fundamentals (this is where
"fundamentalist" came from) of orthodox Protestant Christianity, to wit: 1)
Jesus performed miracles, 2) Jesus was born of a virgin, 3) Jesus was bodily
resurrected, 4) Jesus' crucifixion atoned for human sin, and - here is the
clincher - 5) the bible is the inerrant word of God. Presbyterians construe
"inerrant" broadly as spritually inerrant. Fundamentalists take the
first four as literally true, and then validate them with a literally inerrant
bible, which contains the first four, and which is the only thing known to
contain the first four.
Smoke and mirrors and wands and hand waving if ever there was!
Its faith, Bill. You don't have any more or better truths than anyone else.
Whatever works for you. Just don't foist it on others.
Regards,
| 15 |
trimmed_train
|
2,855 |
I haven't been following the previous HR's. But there are two, that I saw
live that would have to be up there (up where? there!).
1) Rick Monday's HR to bury the Expos in the NL championship in 1981.
It was hit off Steve Rogers, who is a RHP and primarily a starter.
Why was he used as a reliever when the 'Spos had Reardon and BillLee
warming up in the bullpen. Considering Monday couldn't touch LHP,
Lee would have been a safe bet. He wasn't even doing any drugs at that
time (or so he told me and around 50 others on a recent venture into
Montreal. The blast wasn't the important aspect. It was the timing.
Seventh game, a tie game, and in the top of the 9th. The Expos almost
came back though...
2) Mike Schmidt hit one that killed the Expos in 1980. So close, yet, so
far.
and
3) Strawberry killed a pitch on the second day of the season a couple of
years ago. It went off the technical ring in the Big O. It almost left
the stadium! That was hit HARD!!!
CorelMARK!
| 2 |
trimmed_train
|
7,141 |
Actually, I'm still trying to understand the self-justifying rationale
behind the recent murder of Ian Feinberg (?) in Gaza.
| 6 |
trimmed_train
|
8,505 | 6 |
trimmed_train
|
|
5,164 |
I've heard that you can score on Belfour by shooting high
because he goes down a lot, and on Potvin by shooting high
on him and then getting the rebound in because he plays so
deep in the net. Any truth to these?
Brad
| 17 |
trimmed_train
|
9,263 |
Well, the tentative rules, anyway. And, of course, since the season is
not entirely over, tentative entry form. But who cares? The real hockey
season is starting!!!!!
Here's the deal: You email (preferably) or post your predictions, AND the
number of games you think each series will go. Each round will be
weighted, so that the Stanley Cup finals will be very important, but the
early rounds will still be important. Here is the scoring:
Pick 1st round winner, way off on games: 2 points
Pick 1st round winner, within one game: 3 points
Pick 1st round winner, pick # of games: 5 points
Pick 2nd round winner, way off on games: 3 points
Pick 2nd round winner, within one game: 4 points
Pick 2nd round winner, pick # of games: 6 points
Pick conference champ, way off on games: 5 points
Pick conference champ, within one game: 6 points
Pick conference champ, pick # of games: 9 points
Pick Stanley Cup champ, way off on games: 8 points
Pick Stanley Cup champ, within one game: 10 points
Pick Stanley Cup champ, pick # of games: 14 points
Pick loser in 7, series goes 7: 2 points
Pick loser in 7, series decided in Game 7, OT: 4 points
(these last two are sympathy points, probably won't happen anyway)
Obviously, picking the Stanley Cup champion is important. I will do some
tests to see if the format is fair, but probably I will be too lazy to
modify it, so the scoring will probably be like this. As for entry forms,
well, this post is getting too long, so see next post.
--
Keith Keller LET'S GO RANGERS!!!!!
LET'S GO QUAKERS!!!!!
[email protected] IVY LEAGUE CHAMPS!!!!
| 17 |
trimmed_train
|
7,755 |
From: [email protected] (Brad Templeton)
Let's assume, for the moment, that the system really is secure unless
you get both halves of the encryption key from the two independent
escrow houses. Let's say you even trust the escrow houses -- one is
the ACLU and the other is the EFF. (And I'm not entirely joking about
those two names)
I'm really not entirely sure I trust EFF any more to be honest.
Anyway, any organisation can be deeply infiltrated. Look at CND in Britain
a dozen years ago - one of their top members was an SIS spy who stole their
complete address list. How hard would it be to get one person to sneak in
and copy the escrow data to disk?
| 7 |
trimmed_train
|
10,374 |
on
choice
Nonononnononono....its "From the Nile to the Nile.....the Long way!" ;-)
| 6 |
trimmed_train
|
9,558 |
Since you asked, Article I Section 1. Article I Section 8. Article I
Section 10. Article II Section 2. Article VI. Sixteenth Amendment.
With this as a guide, try reading it yourself.
jsh
| 13 |
trimmed_train
|
10,360 |
Read Issue #2 of Wired Magazine. It has a long article on the "hype" of
3DO. I've noticed that every article talks with the designers and how
"great" it is, but never show any pictures of the output (or at least
pictures that one can understand)
| 1 |
trimmed_train
|
2,653 |
I'd love to know how "Jesus only" proponents would answer questions like:
-Who is this "Father" Jesus keeps referring to? Why does He call Himself "the
Son"?
-Why does He pray to the Father, and not to himself?
-Why does He emphasize that he does his Father's will, and not his own? If He
was doing his own will, what kind of example is that? Should we follow it?
-When He says he has to return to the Father, who is He going to?
-When He says he does this in order that the Comforter, the Holy Spirit might
come, who might that be?
-If He claims that the coming of the Holy Spirit is such a blessing that it's
worth His leaving us and returning to the Father, what can that mean if there
is no Holy Spirit?
-Why doesn't the best known Christian prayer begin "Our Saviour, who art in
heaven," rather than "Our Father?"
Do they have answers to these questions that are even plausible?
(Further entertaining queries are left as an exercise to the reader.)
-drt
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 |
trimmed_train
|
10,190 |
Not quite. 66MHz Pentium - 65 SPECint92, 57 SPECfp92 .
66MHz MC98601 - 50 SPECint92, 80 SPECfp92 .
Note that SPECint is more important for most real world applications.
As far as the 486DX2-66 goes - 32 SPECint92, 16 SPECfp92 .
Intel chips have traditionally been faster than their Motorola "equivalents"
although the significance of chip speed in real world application performance
is something that is highly debatable.
--
Ravikumar Venkateswar
[email protected]
| 14 |
trimmed_train
|
190 |
There is a shareware program called v-switch.zip. I don't remember if it
is on wuarchive.wustl.edu or on ftp.cica.indiana.edu.
It is easy to use and does the job with no problem.
-Eric
| 18 |
trimmed_train
|
9,599 |
[ a nearly perfect parody -- needed more random CAPS]
Thanks for the chuckle. (I loved the bit about relevance to people starving
in Somalia!)
To those who've taken this seriously, READ THE NAME! (aloud)
| 10 |
trimmed_train
|
10,244 |
[...Dr. England's story deleted, it was a nice read the first time
through...]]
It isn't so much a matter of 'interpretation' of Bible texts
that sets Mormonism apart from orthodoxy as it is a matter of
*fabrication*.
About 20 years ago, _National Lampoon_ had some comic strips
in them that were drawn by Neal Adams. They were called "Son o' God" comics.
It was a parody of the Jesus in the Bible. In the comic, there were a
group of thirteen Jewish kids from Brooklyn, and when one of them said
the magic word, he turned into "Son o' God." He went from a myopic,
curly headed, yarmulke wearing boy to a replica of the stylizied
portraits of Jesus --- with long flowing brown hair and gentile
features.
Now, if someone were to profess faith in this NatLamp Jesus,
and claim that they were a Christian because they believed in this
NatLamp Jesus, we would have to say that this was fallacious since
this Jesus was a fabrication, and did not really exist.
This is the exact same thing that the LDS do when they claim
that they are Christian. They profess faith in Jesus, but the Jesus
that they profess to have faith in is as much a fabrication as the
NatLamp Jesus was.
| 15 |
trimmed_train
|
9,961 |
Y'all lighten up on Harry, Skip'll be like that in a couple of years!!>
Harry's a great personality. He's the reason I like Cubs broadcasts.
(It's certainly not the quality of the team).
Chop Chop
Michael Mule'
| 2 |
trimmed_train
|
10,687 |
My comments about the Feingold Diet have no relevance to your
daughter's purported FrostedFlakes-related seizures. I can't imagine
why you included it.
| 19 |
trimmed_train
|
1,556 |
IMHO, encryption is (also) protected under the SECOND amendment of
the Constitution of the United States.
I am not surprised that this administration is doing this.
I could have told you so.
Privacy has ALWAYS been something that has the effect of restricting
out ability to prosecute criminals. We are supposed to have the
presumption of innocence.
I have the right to pull the curtains over my windows and close my
door, and the police may not come in. If I perform a crim in my home,
they will have to find out by means other than simply looking.
Encryption is to my data as the window curtains are to my home.
Simple enough?
And yet the people vote for these people because they come out a lie
to them about promising to fix things.
You mean they might have to go back to actually WORKING to do their job?
Oh heavens.
Perhaps the FIRST amendment. Definitely the SECOND and FIFTH.
Unfortunately, the vast segments of the population are misinformed.
They just haven't appended -SR to the name of out country, yet.
I seriously doubt that the NSA thinks that privacy and surveillance are
compatible. I doubt of any smart person in any other agency thinks
so, either. The PROBLEM is that they simply hold PRIVACY to be of no
value at all.
| 7 |
trimmed_train
|
7,859 |
Could someone please tell me what a
LaserWriter IINTX upgrade kit is.
Its a small box, which has a bag inn it , seemingly
containing 6 chips (look like ROMS) and a IINTX manual.
The installation instructions are most informative and say, in full,
"This product must be installed by an Apple ........."
SO what does this do ? At first I thought it might be a NT to NTX
upgrade, but I thought that required an entirely new board.
Any info appreciated.
| 14 |
trimmed_train
|
8,296 |
Not at all. I am not a member of the Religious Left, Right, or even
Center. In fact I don't consider myself very religious at all [ this will
probably result in flames now :) ]. In fact Phil, you should leave
religion out of it. It just clouds the issue.
How typical. So you think we shouldn't avoid these 'events' [ I shall
refrain from the word disaster since it seems to upset you so much. :( ]
when we can. In case you didn't realize it, the natural disasters [ oops,
sorry events ] you are refering to we have no control over. Man-made
ones we do.
I guess you missed the show on Ch 20 earlier this week about the disaster
[ oops there I go again... I meant to say event ] on the Exxon Valdez.
Just a natural every day occurance to spread oil on 300 Miles of beach. I
would like to know which natural event [ hey I remembered not to say disaster ]
that would be similar to this.
Hmm, I suppose you could be right. They are as natural as a tree, or a
sunrise. NOT !
So look, if you want to worship a oil slick ( or toxic waste dump or live
in a house that has a cesspool in the front yard ), fine, you have my
permission to do so [ yea right like you need MY permission... ], it just
won't be in the neighborhood where I live. But DON'T try to push your
shortsighted tunnelvision views off on the rest of us.
| 13 |
trimmed_train
|
845 |
Who says there is no mineral rights to be given? Who says? The UN or the US
Government?
Major question is if you decide to mine the moon or Mars, who will stop you?
The UN can't other than legal tom foolerie.. Can the truly inforce it?
If you go to the moon as declare that you are now a soverign nation, who will
stop you from doing it. Maybe not acknowledge you?
Why can't a small company or corp or organization go an explore the great
beyond of space? what right does earth have to say what is legal and what is
not.. Maybe I am a few years ahead on this.. It is liek the old Catholic Church
stating which was Portugals and what was Spains, and along came the Reformation
and made it all null and void..
What can happen is to find a nation which is acknowledged, and offer your
services as a space miner and then go mine the asteroids/mars/moon or what
ever.. As long as yur sponsor does not get in trouble..
Basically find a country who wants to go into space, but can't for soem reason
or another, but who will give you a "home".. Such as Saudia Arabia or
whatever..
There are nations in the World who are not part of the UN, got to them and
offer your services and such.. I know that sound crazy, but. is it..
Also once you have the means to mine the moon (or whatever) then just do it.
The UN if done right can be made to be so busy with something else, they will
not care..
If your worried about the US, do the same thing..
Why be limited by the short sighted people of earth.. After all they have many
other things to worry about that if someone is mining the Moon or MArs or what
ever..
Basically what I am saying is where is that drive of yeasteryears to go a
little bit farther out, to do jus ta little bit more, and to tell the crown to
piss off.. If my ancestors thought the way many today think, Id have been born
in Central Europe just north of the Black Sea..
I just read a good book, "Tower of the Gods" Interesting..
| 10 |
trimmed_train
|
2,461 |
recently-manufactured locomotives have wheel-slip detection systems
that use frequencies shared with police radar (i forget which band).
these will set off your radar detector if you get close enough, though
i believe the range is pretty short.
| 4 |
trimmed_train
|
9,392 |
Has David Wells landed with a team yet? I'd think the Tigers with their
anemic pitching would grab this guy pronto!
| 2 |
trimmed_train
|
9,420 |
The latest news I saw was that two of the eight known survivors (not NO
SURVIVORS!!! as you so rudely put in all caps) said they started the
fire.
I won't go on with the things the wacko of Waco did.
| 9 |
trimmed_train
|
4,693 |
After reading reports from Germany of success in accelerating a Quadra
or Centris simply by changing the clock oscillator, I decided to test the
claim. I pulled out my Variable Speed Overdrive and the motherboard's
50 mhz clock chip. I put a socket in the clock's place and inserted a
64 mhz TTL clock oscillator I had left over from working on some SI's.
I can't believe it. It actually works. I'm not getting SCSI timing errors
either. This is only after a short run time but I'll keep posting results.
Did I spend all that money on the VSO for nothing? If this keeps working,
the lack of a double boot in itself will be worth the effort.
| 14 |
trimmed_train
|
10,897 |
Try reading between the lines David - there are *strong* hints in there
that they're angling for NREN next, and the only conceivable meaning of
applying this particular technology to a computer network is that they
intend it to be used in exclusion to any other means of encryption.
Don't be lulled by the wedge because its end looks so thin.
| 7 |
trimmed_train
|
5,816 |
#There is a big difference between running one's business
#affairs, and actively ripping people off.
And charging homosexuals more becuase people think that AIDS is a "gay
disease" is actively ripping people off.
| 13 |
trimmed_train
|
7,156 |
:It occurs to me that if they get a wiretap order on you, and the escrow
:houses release your code to the cops, your code is now no longer secure.
A very good point!
:It's in the hands of cops, and while I am sure most of the time they are
:good, their security will not be as good as the escrow houses.
Why should we expect the cops to be honest! They're underpaid
for the risks they face every day. The media dumps on the all
the time and blames them for all sorts of discrimination,
brutality.... How can we expect them to be more than human?
Besides there are lots of cases of police abuses ranging from
protection scams to outright robbery (when I worked in D.C. there
was a breakin at a local Radio Shack and the alarm company heard the
cops responding to the call over the audio pickup in the store:-).
:What this effectively means is that if they perform a wiretap on you,
:at the end of the wiretap, they should be obligated to inform you that
:a tap was performed, and replace (for free) the clipper chip in your
:cellular phone so that it is once again a code known only to the
:escrow houses.
Then you would know that Big Brother had been listening. Does he
really want to let you know?
:Do the police normally reveal every tap they do even if no charges are
:laid? In many ways, it would be a positive step if they had to.
:Judges set time limits on warrants, I assume. At the end of the time
:limit they should have to renew or replace your chip.
:That's if we go with this scheme, which I am not sure I agree with.
I'm completely against anything that makes it easier for the
government to encroach on the rights of individuals. The
founders of this country spent a lot of effort limiting the power
of the government and specifying exactly what the governments
rights were (and this didn't include a gov't spy in every
bedroom). IMHO, there are entirely too many things going on
today designed to preserve the government organism at the expense
of individuals. Look around and reread 1984 and many early
Heinlein books. Aren't there many parallels between the thought
police (can you spell Waco Texas?), and Heinlein's ``Crazy Years''?
Bill
| 7 |
trimmed_train
|
8,144 |
Just look at the pbmplus package; it does everything you could ever ask
for in converting pbm to almost any format (gif, tga, pcx etc...)
| 16 |
trimmed_train
|
2,660 |
The father of a friend of mine is a police officer in West Virginia. Not
only is his word as a skilled observer good in court, but his skill as an
observer has been tested to be more accurate than the radar gun in some
cases . . .. No foolin! He can guess a car's speed to within 2-3mph just
by watching it blow by - whether he's standing still or moving too! (Yes,
I realize that calibrated guns are more accurate than this, but . . .).
His ability is not that uncommon among people who watch moving things for a
living, I have heard . . ..
So what good is a radar detector except to give you a split second warning
that the guy who just cut you off to pass the guy ahead and to your left
is about to panic stop from 85 on a crowded freeway???
| 11 |
trimmed_train
|
5,886 |
Well, I thought it must have been a joke, but I don't get the
joke in the name. Read it aloud? David MACaloon. David MacALLoon.
David macalOON. I don't geddit.
| 10 |
trimmed_train
|
6,685 |
[Lots of stuff about how the commerical moonbase=fantasyland]
Then what do you believe will finally motivate people to leave the
earth? I'm not trying to flame you. I just want to know where you
stand.
-Chuck
---
*******************************************************************
Chuck Chung (919) 660-2539 (O)
Duke University Dept. of Physics (919) 684-1517 (H)
Durham, N.C. 27706 [email protected]
"If pro is the opposite of con,
then what is the opposite of progress?"
| 10 |
trimmed_train
|
5,467 |
Or, how about the Clint Eastwood line in "Pink Cadillac" -
"I believe in gun control. If there's a gun around, I wanna be
the one controlling it."
| 9 |
trimmed_train
|
7,628 |
When your helmetted nogin hits an immoveabe object, there are only four things
to dissipate the energy: the immoveable object, the helmet shell, the helmet
liner, the rider's head, the rider's ego (ok, five). Assuming that the helmet/
head assembly takes the same impact, if the shell cracks in one case, then in
the other the liner must be dented, or the head gets jiggled. If it's the
the liner that's dented, the helmet is just as toast as if the shell were
cracked, it won't absorb energy form an impact in that area. If it's the head
that's getting jiggled, maybe the new gear isn't of as high quality after all?
| 12 |
trimmed_train
|
9,120 |
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
_____________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release April 15, 1993
PRESS BRIEFING
BY GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS
The Briefing Room
1:04 P.M. EDT
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Good afternoon.
Q Could we do this on the lawn?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: That would be nice. Let's go out
to the cherry blossoms. We'll do like the President.
Q Is the stimulus package dead?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Absolutely not.
Q Can you tell us more about the Dole talks? You
said it was a good visit, but no compromise.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes. The President had a good talk
with Senator Dole last night. I think that as we said before, there
were no specific compromises on either side, although it was a very
good discussion about the jobs package and about other issues as
well. As you know, the President first called Senator Dole I believe
Tuesday night to talk about the Russian aid package. They did not
speak -- Senator Dole called him back Wednesday morning -- when the
President was out. Instead he spoke with Tony Lake, and at the close
of that conversation, indicated that he wanted to speak to the
President about the jobs and stimulus package. They finally talked
about that yesterday afternoon.
At the close of that discussion they said that they
would have another talk last night, which they did, when the Senator
was up in New Hampshire. And although there were no specific
compromises made on either side, they did say that they would
continue to have some discussions. And that's where we are.
Q Well, who is giving in? Where is it standing --are
both making concessions?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know that it's at that
phase. No compromise has been made. As the President has said
consistently, he intends to come forward with an adjusted package.
He believes in the package, but he believes that if it's going to
take adjustments to get the minority to release it, he's willing to
make those adjustments.
Q On the subject of a VAT --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Oh, boy.
Q Can we stay on this for one more minute?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Sure.
Q We have a problem with the five minutes --
Q I know no decisions have been made, but what would
lead the health group to believe that a VAT might be necessary?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Sorry, Andrea, I'm not going to go
down that road. No decisions have been made. As the President said
this morning, a number of groups, a number of members of Congress, a
number of other organizations have recommended that this be looked
at. The working group is looking at it, but no decisions have been
made.
Q To follow, have they done that directly through
him? Have labor and business groups been in touch with the President
about it?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Not to my knowledge, although
there's a lot of people who have public decisions in support of the
VAT. But the President has not made a decision.
Q At the meetings that he's had with his own task
force advisers, have they discussed the funding issue and what the
possible options would be?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't think that that has been
presented for a decision, no.
Q Not for a decision, but has it been discussed as an
option?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Again, there are a lot of levels of
briefing. I do not believe that the VAT has been presented to the
President as, okay, this is something for you to decide on.
Q You're not saying he didn't know it was being
considered, though, are you?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: No, he said it's being considered.
Q He knew that.
Q But has he discussed that with his advisers?
That's what I'm asking.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The President has said it's being
considered. I do not know what level of discussion there has been
over the VAT. It is something the working groups are looking at. I
don't even know that it's --
Q But he didn't say he was considering, did he, at
this stage?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: No, he is not. I think we're
getting into something of a metaphysical debate right here. What is
considered --
Q Well, he is the one who said, I haven't reviewed
it.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: That is true. That is what I just
repeated.
Q George, is there any concern here that as a result
of the definite statement he made in February and the promise that if
it were to be considered he'd let us know, and having it trickle out
the way it did, that there may now be the development of a
credibility gap on this issue and others?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't think so. I mean, it is
now public knowledge that this is being considered.
Q Is he or you at all embarrassed about the absolute
statements that were made from this platform to the effect that it
was off the table and was not being considered, and then to have it
come out not from you people, but --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, wait a second. It came out
from the administration. What are you talking about?
Q What I'm saying is, though, that the President said
he would let us know.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Right.
Q You people then said -- you said, I believe, that
it's not going to be on the program.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: On March 25th.
Q On March 25th.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Circumstances change.
Q Well, I understand. But we have to find that out
by rooting around in the fine print of an interview
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Rooting around -- I know you did do
a very good job there to read the USA Today article. But this is --
(laughter) -- the Deputy Director of the OMB and the Secretary of
Health and Human Services. I mean, that is common anytime you guys
write a story that has an unattributed quote from somebody in the
Clinton administration, the headline is -- I'll look at it right
here, and AP story -- "Clinton wants more money for spying."
Q What about his remark that if it were being
considered, he'd tell us about it?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: And the administration's concerned,
and he'd let you know.
Q And did he?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes. Absolutely. What did he say
this morning?
Q It had to be dragged out of you here yesterday.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: It didn't have to be dragged out of
me. We had the Deputy Director of the OMB, we had the Secretary of
Health of Human Services say it was being considered. That is his
administration. That is his administration policy.
Q Were these authorized trial balloons, or were they
orchestrated leaks? I mean, what was the --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: They were asked questions, they
answered the questions.
Q You're saying here that it didn't have to be
dragged out, that you more or less made it clear yesterday you were
considering it.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Absolutely. I was very clear.
Painfully clear.
Q Was there a particular political strategy in making
it clear the administration is considering a new tax increase on tax
day?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: No, it was just this issue is being
considered. They were asked if it was being considered; they
answered that it was being considered.
Q George, The New York Times --
Q Why do it yesterday?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: They were asked.
Q The New York Times reports today that Secretary
Reich and the chief economist at the Labor Department used apples and
oranges numbers in order to portray last month's unemployment figures
in a way that was supportive of the President's job stimulus bill,
but which turned out to be totally false.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know if it was totally
false, but I think -- (laughter) -- the chief economist at the Labor
Department did grant that it was an inappropriate mixing, and they
say that.
Q The question is, is the President concerned about
behavior that amounts to corrupting government data? And what's he
doing about it, if so?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The chief economist has said that a
mistake was made, it won't happen again, and that's the end of the
matter.
Q Isn't that the same information that goes to the
President?
Q If I could go back to the stimulus package --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: There's two separate pieces of
information. I think that's where the confusion was.
Q When did you all first learn about this mistake
that was made?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I read the article this morning.
Q And as far as you know, is the President aware of
it?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think so.
Q And was he aware of it before he read about it in
The New York Times?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know. Not to my knowledge.
Q Did you ever hear about it before this morning?
Anything?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I didn't.
Q Wasn't the President given an erroneous spin on
this for his own purpose? For his speeches, for his arguments?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well again, I'm not sure. Both
statements are true. What the Labor Department has granted is that
mixing them in one sentence, essentially, was misleading. They said
it was a mistake. They said they wouldn't do it again.
Q Did they drop it -- is this something that you
choose to spin or make an issue of?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Whenever fewer people are out of
work, we're gratified. But that doesn't take away from the need to
get this jobs package going.
Q If I could go back to the stimulus package for a
minute. You said that the President plans to come forward with an
amendment. Is the timetable still what it was -- that the amendment
would be laid down on Monday and voted on on Tuesday, or did he, in
the conversation with Dole, talk about the possibility of putting
that off for a few more days to give more time for the discussion?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think at this point there's no
changes in the schedule at all. I don't know that they discussed the
timing like that.
Q Do you believe that you're closer or getting closer
this week than you were last week?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Again, I believe that we're going
to pass a jobs package. The President is prepared to make
adjustments in order to get that to happen. I don't know where the
votes are on cloture at this particular time. I don't know what's
going to happen until we have a vote. But the President believes
deeply in this jobs package and wants to get it done.
Q Has there been any indication that this situation
has changed?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: We're going to continue to work on
it. We'll know when the votes are taken.
Q George, last week you said that there are -- or
various people in the administration were saying that you couldn't go
through Dole, you were going to have to try and go around him because
he was immovable on this subject of a compromise, or at least the
compromise he wanted was not anything like the one that you could
accept. This week you're talking to him. Is that because you've
realized that the peeling off effort wasn't going to work?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: That's because Senator Dole wanted
to talk to the President about the stimulus package.
Q He initiated the conversation?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes.
Q Secretary Reich this morning said that, in fact,
the President is not willing to compromise on this bill at all. You
say he's making --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know that that's exactly
what he said. I think he said he didn't have any indication that
there was any compromises yet or that there would be a compromise,
and the President doesn't want to compromise. And the President
doesn't want to compromise. But if he has to make adjustments to get
it through, he will.
Q Officials here yesterday said that Panetta was
working on a series of adjustments that might be made public before
the actual vote.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: It's possible.
Q Today?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm not sure exactly when that will
happen, but I think that it's very possible that we'll come forward
with some sort of a different package, or Senate Democrats will come
forward with some sort of a different package in order to get it
passed.
Q As we understood his conversations with Dole, the
first one was some discussion of this and I'll get back to you
tonight with some details or some adjustments, or whatever the phrase
is. Did he offer him some details or some adjustments?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think it's a question of how
detailed. I mean, I think they had a general discussion about the
package last night, subsequent to their conversation yesterday
afternoon. I believe that there will be follow-up discussions today
in the Senate, not necessarily between the President and Senator
Dole. And let me just reiterate, neither side has made specific
compromises at this date. When we have something we'll let you know.
And I'm not suggesting that Senator Dole has accepted anything that
we've talked about or that we've offered anything in a hard way.
Q What are the follow-up discussions if not the
President and Dole?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think Senator Mitchell is going
to talk to Senator Dole.
Q Is that a threat? (Laughter.)
Q Did the President say to Senator Dole, all right,
how about this number as an overall size, or did Dole say to the
President, I can go as high as this? Did they talk numbers?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't think it was a negotiation
in that respect. It was more of a discussion about their positions.
Q Did they discuss actual numbers?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm just not sure. I know they
talked about the basic outlines of the packages. I think they talked
about the programs they cared about. I don't know if they got to the
level of this many x-billion dollars.
Q Does Dole have to sign off before there is a
package?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: No, of course not.
Q Did the White House have anything to do with the
protesters who showed up in New Hampshire today where Senator Dole
was speaking? Was that in any way organized by --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Not to my knowledge, no.
Q And has the President been in touch with Senators
Kohl or Feingold?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't think he's talked to them,
no.
Q George, is the President considering the more
palatable fact of having a national sales tax instead of having the
haves having to continuously pay for the have-nots? And is he going
to scrap his proposed tax on the privileged few, with the haves
having to pay for the have-nots?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The President believes deeply that
the tax rates on upper income Americans, as he presented in his
budget, should go up. And I think for the second half of your
question, I'll refer you to my briefing from yesterday.
Q George, on the subject of accuracy in information,
you suggested the other day that the stimulus package included money
that would solve the water problem in Milwaukee. Apparently that is
not true. It's actually waste water money.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: It's waste water money for
Wisconsin, and some could go to Milwaukee.
Q But it would not affect the drinking water problem
because it's waste water money, right?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: It would affect the water treatment
overall.
Q But the implication from your statement the other
day was that it would help fix this disease problem in Milwaukee now.
Would you agree that's not the case?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm not sure of the specifics. I
know that it goes to the overall water treatment in Wisconsin.
Q A leftover question from this morning, which was,
when did the President find out that the task force was deliberating
on a VAT?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm not sure exactly when. I just
don't know. I assume it came up over the last -- certainly between
the time that we had commented on in the past and two days ago.
Q So sometime since March 25th?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think that's right. I don't know
the exact date.
Q George, the President this morning mentioned that
some labor and business groups are for the VAT tax. Apparently, the
National Association of Manufacturers talks about perhaps the VAT tax
being okay if it replaces the BTU tax. So does the President feel
that perhaps this might be in place of some other tax he's proposed,
or is this totally in addition to the other taxes he's already
proposed?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think we've said all we have to
say about the VAT at this point. I mean, there's just no -- this is
being considered by the health care working groups, and that is all.
The President hasn't made any further decisions beyond that.
Q But it would be to finance health care, it wouldn't
be to replace some other tax that finances -- it wouldn't replace the
income tax, for instance?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: There have been no discussions on
that.
Q In terms of getting a VAT tax through Congress,
Senator Dole's press release today said VAT -- on tax day. Do you
think -- does it have a chance of getting through Congress? Would it
have a chance?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I have no idea.
Q Is that a consideration whether you all put it
forward?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: That would become a consideration
if the President were to decide to do it. It's not in consideration
now.
Q You said at the beginning of the briefing that
circumstances had changed and that had caused the VAT to now be under
consideration.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes, what the President referred to
this morning. These groups came forward and said this is something
that has to be considered.
Q Those are the circumstances that have changed?
That's the only difference between now and when he emphatically ruled
it out that groups have asked it to be considered?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: That's what he said.
Q Is that true?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes.
Q Was there, in fact, some understanding that sin
taxes would not produce enough money for the health care benefits?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm not going to get into the
deliberations.
Q But, George --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: No. What the consideration is, as
the President said, groups came forward and said this is something
you ought to consider. The working groups are looking at it.
Q Is that the only thing that's changed since his
prior statement and your prior statement on the VAT?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes.
Q Can you explain how those groups -- how that
information got to him that groups wanted it? Was it just reading
the newspaper or did groups make presentations?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think the groups -- as you know,
the health care task force has met with dozens of groups.
Q But this is the President's knowledge that these
groups had come forward.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think he was referring to what
was coming to the working groups. Obviously, there have also been
published positions in the newspapers.
Q Have certain groups briefed him on the group's
presentations to them?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know if they've briefed him
-- I mean, how detailed the briefings have been. I know that the
working groups decided to look into this after being pressed by these
groups.
Q What kind of arguments did the groups make that
were persuasive enough that the President would change the position
that he had enunciated previously?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know, it's just they've had
longstanding positions that this would be a good way to finance
health care.
Q The President wasn't aware of those longstanding
positions?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: He may have been at some level.
Obviously, he's been a governor for a long time and he knows the
basic arguments for and against a VAT tax.
Q What we're trying to figure out here -- you're
telling us that the only change, the only thing that affected this
change in the President's attitude toward the VAT between February
and now --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The President's attitude hasn't
necessarily changed. I mean, he has not made a decision.
Q I know, but the President said that it was off the
table. So did you. And you're saying that the only thing that's
changed is the positions of these groups, except you're also
describing them as longstanding positions. I don't see the change.
If these groups haven't had any change in their position that's been
made to the President --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, they've made the
presentations to the health care task force.
Q There's no relationship at all between the fact
that sin taxes that he had said -- suggested in February that he
favored will not produce enough revenue to finance --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't think he ever suggested
that they would produce all the revenue.
Q Well, he suggested that he thought that those were
appropriate ways to finance health care.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: He did say that. I don't know that
he said anything to refute that.
Q But, in fact, has the task force discovered that
there wouldn't be enough revenue from those taxes to finance the kind
of core benefits --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Again, I don't think that the task
force ever suggested that there would.
Q George, if he advocated a VAT tax, would that break
his promise not to raise taxes on the middle class to pay for his
programs?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I can't comment on a hypothetical
situation.
Q But does that promise -- would that promise not to
raise taxes on the middle class to pay for the programs prevent him
from seeking a VAT tax?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The President has made no decisions
on the VAT tax. When he does, we'll tell you and we'll explain the
implications then.
Q Which specific groups can you cite -- business,
labor or otherwise -- whose recommendations to the health care task
force has prompted this consideration?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't have the specific. I just
don't have that.
Q George, can you tell us to what extend these other
alternatives, for instance, the employer tax or the sin taxes or
other financing options are also still on the table and what these
options are?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: No, as members of the task force
and representatives of the working groups have said, they are looking
at a wide variety of options. I think that Ira Magaziner said that
there are 20 different options under consideration. But I'm not
going to comment --
Q What's the scope --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm just not going to comment on
them, no.
Q What's the scope of the need? How much are you
talking about that has to be produced by one or a combination of the
--
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: That's what the health care task
force is looking at.
Q Since there's not going to be any briefing on the
Miyazawa visit, two questions: One, generally what does the
President hope to use that meeting for, but more specifically, is his
task complicated by the Japanese anger over the Vancouver note and
the remark about market access at the press conference?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The Vancouver note?
Q Does no mean yes.
Q Yes and no.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, I don't know. I saw the
Prime Minister's press conference where he was asked the question
about that note and he gave a very gracious and complete answer when
he was asked the question. The questions of trade are something that
certainly will be discussed between the Prime Minister and the
President. There is obviously a trade imbalance between Japan and
the U.S. that we want to do something about.
Q Also in those comments the Prime Minister made he
suggested that the United States should come down heavy on him in
terms of trade. Are you going to oblige?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think the President will state
our views on trade very clearly and our views on the trade deficit
very clearly. I don't necessarily want to agree with your
characterization of the Prime Minister's comments.
Q that we need specific export targets, specific
numerical targets -- is that what he's going to discuss with
Miyazawa?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: They're going to have a broad
discussion of a wide range of trade issues. I don't want to get into
those specifics until after the meeting.
Q Why?
Q That's the crux of the issue, right? Whether or
not -- does the President believe that without specific numerical
targets, it is really, as he said in his press conference, sort of
hopeless that this is going to change very much?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The President believes that we must
have pressure on Japan to turn the trade imbalance around. I do not
want to get into the specifics of how that would be done.
Q But does the President believe that their stimulus
package announced yesterday will rectify the imbalance?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think, first, the President wants
to get a full briefing on the stimulus package from Prime Minister
Miyazawa himself, and then he'll make the comment on it.
Q How about the Russian aid package? There seems to
be some confusion about how the U.S. views that, Secretary
Christopher saying -- or Bentsen saying the Japanese may need to do
more, the Japanese saying that that's not what they heard?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Again, we're going to continue to
work with all our allies in the G-7, and we're going to continue to
press for help for Russian reform, Russian democratic reform. And I
think that, so far, we had a very good announcement out of Tokyo and
we're going to continue to work with our allies for bilateral
packages.
Q Do you think the Japanese need to do more?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: We're going to continue to work
with all our allies to do as much as we can.
Q Secretary Christopher was asked today on the Today
Show this morning what he thought of Margaret Thatcher's comments on
the Bosnia policy. And he said, "It's a rather emotional response."
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Over an emotional issue.
Q Right -- to an emotional problem. Does the White
House condone that kind of remark?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think that Secretary
Christopher's remarks speaks for itself. The President believes also
that this is a deeply troubling situation that we're trying to find
answers for.
Q But that specific -- "rather emotional response" --
specific term?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: No, it speaks for itself.
Q In connection with that, doesn't it seem that with
the numbers of people who are being killed at this very moment, is it
good American policy to put off some decisions that might be made now
to help Boris Yeltsin win a referendum?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: For example?
Q To take stronger action, to take military action --
air strikes, anything that can be done?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The President believes that what
must be done now is to push harder for sanctions. He is also -- as
you know, the administration has been discussing lifting the arms
embargo. He believes those are the appropriate ways to increase
pressure at this time.
Q What is your response to the critics who would say
that the U.S. is now stymied by trying to help Boris Yeltsin retain
the presidency?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: They're wrong. We're pressing hard
for the Serbs to come to the negotiating table. We're pressing hard
for increased sanctions, and we're talking to our allies about the
arms embargo.
Q You were putting great store in Vance and Owen
getting people to agree to that. Now, Vance and Owen have both said
that military force to some extent would be acceptable. Does that
change your thinking?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Clearly, we're going to listen to
whatever people who have put so much time into a situation have to
say. But at this point, the President is moving forward on sanctions
and talking about the arms embargo.
Q A follow-up on a Dee Dee comment this morning. She
said she would be able to provide some administration officials who
could document the effect the sanctions are having in Bosnia. Are
you going to be able to do that, or do you have anything --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't think that's what she said.
Q That's exactly what she said.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't think that's true. But
what she said -- we would look into the situation of what kind of
evidence can be provided in Bosnia. Obviously, if there are
connections between the Bosnian Serbs and the Serbs in Belgrade and
we are tightening the screws on the Serbs in Belgrade, that will have
an effect over time. I do not know day by day, minute by minute,
what kind of help is being given between the two and what the exact
effect has been. But, clearly, we are slowing the shipment of goods
into Belgrade. We are having an effect on the Serbs there. What
kind of effect that will eventually have on the Bosnian Serbs I don't
know. But one thing I would say is if it were having no effect at
all, I don't know why they'd be fighting it so much.
Q Are the First Lady's tax returns going to be
released?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think there's a joint tax return.
And it will be probably later today.
Q Is the President considering signing an executive
order banning discrimination against homosexuals in the federal work
force as part of the gay rights march here next week?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't think there's any proposal
for that at this time, not that I know of.
Q It's something that the President promised during
the campaign that he would do.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I have not seen any -- I don't
think it's anything that's on his plate right now.
Q Is he meeting with gay rights leaders at any point
on this issue?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know about on this issue.
I assume that he'll meet with representatives of the gay and lesbian
community sometime soon, as he meets with representatives of lots of
different groups and communities.
Q Do you know if that's scheduled --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: It's probably going to be tomorrow.
Q Probably going to be tomorrow? (Laughter.)
Q It's a good thing you asked.
Q Who's probably going to be there? (Laughter.)
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know.
Q How long --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know. That's all I know.
Q Do you know if it's at 3:00 p.m. tomorrow?
(Laughter.)
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know what time it is. I
don't even know for sure if it's going to be tomorrow.
Q Environmental groups have asked him to make a major
speech next week of some kind. Is that going to happen, do you know?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know if they've asked, but
I think the President has always planned, as he did last year, to
give a speech on Earth Day and I expect that he will. If it's not
exactly on Earth Day, it might be a day before or something like
that.
Q Is he planning to sign or announce the signing of
the biodiversity treaty in connection with Earth Day?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Again, I don't know the specific
timing of something like that, but it's certainly something under
discussion and something we've been working on.
Q Campaign finance reform?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: We're working on it.
Q Do you think it will be next week?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm just not sure.
Q The biodiversity treaty is something you're working
on? I missed the question.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes, something we're working on.
He asked if it was ready to be signed, and I said I didn't know
anything about that but it's something we've certainly been working
on.
Q Do you know what organizations might be represented
in this meeting with the gay and lesbian groups?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't.
Q Do you know if he is going to reconsider being out
of town on the day of the march?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: He's got to be at the Senate
meeting in Jamestown, and I believe he's also going to be giving a
speech to the American Association of Newspaper Publishers in Boston
on Sunday, as he did last year.
Q Would you have told us if she had not pressed you
on the question?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: On what?
Q On the gays.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: When we went through the
President's schedule for the day, certainly.
Q? George, what day is the publisher's speech? Is
that Sunday?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think it's a Sunday.
Q And Saturday he'll be in Jamestown?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes.
Q So you're just going to be in Jamestown for one
day?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: No, I'm not sure. I don't know how
long the Senate thing goes. It might go overnight. I just don't
know.
Q You would have made the gay meeting public, right?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm certain if we had the meeting
-- I don't know about open to the press, but we would have told you
about it.
Q I mean, because it is, as far as I can tell, the
first time in history a President has met in the Oval Office with --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I didn't say it was going to be in
the Oval Office. (Laughter.) But I didn't -- I'm not say that it's
not, but I didn't say that it was. (Laughter.)
Q at the White House in the Bush administration
gay officials were invited to a bill signing ceremony and the White
House had to repudiate having done that. So I just wanted to make
sure --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, the President wouldn't do
anything like that.
Q Certainly not.
Q What marching orders did the President give to
General Vessey?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: They had a very good discussion for
about half an hour today. He wanted -- the most important thing was
he had a full accounting for American POWs and MIAs. He will
obviously look into the circumstances surrounding this new document.
The President stressed that he wanted the fullest possible accounting
and said that only when we have that can we even consider any changes
in our policy towards Vietnam. He'll be looking at Vietnam's
response to the questions raised by the document and he'll also look
into investigations on discrepancy cases, increased efforts on
remains, implementing trilateral investigations -- and access to
military archives.
And Ambassador Toon also briefed the President on the
activities of the joint commission and on the document.
Q Vietnam says it's a fake. What is the DOD analysis
at this stage?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: It's not completed yet, and it's
also the first thing that General Vessey will bring up with the
Vietnamese.
Q A number of Defense officials have been saying that
they think that the 600 or so prisoners referred to are, in fact,
non-Americans that the Vietnamese had captured who they referred to
as Americans from time to time. Do people --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: We don't have any final
determination. We're going to wait for the complete review; when we
have it, we'll make a judgment.
Q I know you don't have any final determination, but
given all of the intense public interest in this, do you think that
that's a likely possibility?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I just don't want to characterize
it in any way until the review is complete.
Q George, was there a topic scheduled for the speech
in Boston?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: No.
Q Is the President going to have a press conference
tomorrow with Miyazawa?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think so, but I'm not positive.
Yes, I expect, yes.
Q Was Toon in with Vessey?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes.
Q He was in on the meeting?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes.
Q What was the question?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Was Ambassador Toon in with Vessey,
and the answer is yes.
Q Do you have any response to The Wall Street Journal
report this morning the President's distressed about some of his
press clippings and that perhaps he's distressed with you about that?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: No. Well, I do have a response. I
think the article was highly misleading to the extent that it implied
that the President has had restricted access to the press. I would
point out that he's answered 358 questions on 77 occasions, more than
any of his predecessors. I would also point out it also --
Q How many questions?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Three hundred fifty-eight, on 77
occasions.
Q How many were while he was jogging?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, no, that's actually a very
good question, Andrea. And I would point out further that the
article also implied that these questions were only answered at
tightly controlled photo opportunities, which is just patently false.
He's had 13 press conferences in either the East Room, the Oval
Office or the Roosevelt Room or the Briefing Room, in addition to
questions taken at photo opportunities, and that is only the --
Q Oval Office press conference -- when was that?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: He's answered questions in the --
East Room. He's had five in the East Room, he's had one in the Oval
Office, he's had one in the Rose Garden, he's had one or two in the
Roosevelt Room. And this is just to the White House, Washington
Press Corps. In addition to that, he's had 17 interviews with local
television anchors. He's met with the editorial board of The
Portland Oregonian. He's had an hour-long interview with Dan Rather.
He's had interviews with local press from California, Florida and
Connecticut --
Q Can you address the question of the attitude? The
article implies that he doesn't --
Q Why doesn't he like us? (Laughter.)
Q Did you really get blamed for that Post story?
Q The story is that you -- are you held responsible
for it.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't think I'm going to comment
about this.
Q Are you denying that the President has shown
displeasure publicly?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I am not commenting on the
discussions between the President and myself.
Q Did the President write that letter to Chris
Webber?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: What?
Q The letter to the University of Michigan basketball
player?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Oh, yes.
Q That is an authentic letter?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes.
Q Since the President first talked about the VAT in
February, he said at the time that he thought there probably should
be exceptions made in basic necessities such as food and clothing.
Does he still hold that position given the impact it could have?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Again, I just can't comment on a
proposal he hasn't made.
Q George, does the President have some agenda for
this meeting with the gay leaders tomorrow?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, I think it will just a
general meeting on the wide range of issues that they care about
including AIDS and other issues -- civil rights.
Q The military issue?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm certain it will come up.
Q Is he using this event to name the AIDS --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't think so.
Q George, what specifically is the President doing to
prepare for tomorrow's meeting with the Prime Minister Miyazawa?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: He's had briefing memos. He's had
general discussions with members of the Treasury Department, the
Trade Representative and others.
Q report yet?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know if he has the report
referred to in The Times, but Ambassador Kantor was here to brief him
today.
Q He was?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes.
Q Does he intend to use any of these instances that
--
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Again, I don't know that the
report's been presented. But obviously, the President will press
hard in any case where he thinks that a violation has occurred.
Q In terms of the Wall Street Journal, the thrust was
that there's a real schism here -- a hostility. Do you think he
feels that way?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Not at all. As I said on the
record in the article, I think the President likes reporters. Again,
I think that the thrust of the article was still misleading. The
thrust of the article was that in some way, some attitude which the
President may or may not have is affecting access when, in fact, he
has the most open, accessible administration than have any in recent
history.
Q Can we come up to your office? (Laughter.)
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: If you're invited.
THE PRESS: Thank you.
END 1:34 P.M. EDT
| 13 |
trimmed_train
|
6,624 |
I used HP DeskJet with Orange Micros Grappler LS on System6.0.5.
But now I update system 6.0.5 to System7 with Kanji-Talk 7.1,
then I can not print by my DeskJet.
Is the Grappler LS old ?
Can I use DeskJet on System7 ?
Please tell me how to use DeskJet on System7.
Thank you
| 14 |
trimmed_train
|
3,709 |
I don't think speed has been determined, since it has never run on Intel chips.
But on the Amiga's Motorola Chips, it was one of the fastest true 'Ray Tracers'
I don't think Impulse would port it over and not take speed into consideration.
In terms of features, and learning curve... ALL that you stated for 3DS is also
true for Imagine, and lots more... But I'll have to admit that after 3 years of
use on the Amiga, the learning curve is very steep. This is due ONLY to the
manual. It is realy BAD. However, there is a lot of after market support for
this product, including regular 'Tips' articles in many magazines such as "AVID
and a great book by Steve Worley called "Understanding Imagine 2.0" This book i
is not just recommened, IT IS A MUST!
| 1 |
trimmed_train
|
5,709 |
The ONLY unity I've found which is true is when all parties involved are
disciples. I came out of a church in which even the different
congregations were always competing and arguing about which one was
better and who had the better messages (while none of them put anything
into practice from those messages). Since becoming a disciple, I've
found that when I travel to another church in the same movement, they
are just as accepting there as any other. We had a retreat back in
January when some of the congregation from Louisville, KY came up (this
retreat was for college students) and it was as though I had known even
the people from Louisville for years (and I had only become a disciple
the previous April and had never been to the church in Kentucky). One
of the keys to unity is unselfish love and self-sacrifice. That is only
one area in which disciples stand out from "Christians". Also, another
part of unity is a common depth of conviction. I've also been a part of
some "Christian" campus fellowships who were focused on unity between
churches and saw that those churches had one thing involved: a lack of
conviction about everything they believed. That was why they could be
unified, they didn't care about the truth but delighted in getting along
together.
Creeds? What need is there of creeds when the Bible stands firmly
better?
According to the Scriptures, splits and differences of opinion are going
to be there. As per a previous note, I mentioned that there are those
who teach falsely by many means. There are also differences of opinion
and belief. However, Scripture states:
In the following directives I have no praise for you, for your
meetings do more harm than good. In the first place, I hear that when
you come together as a church, there re divisions among you, and to some
extent I believe it. No doubt there have to be differences among you to
show which of you have God's approval (1 Corinthians 11:17-19).
How will God show his approval? By fruitfulness (see Acts 2:47), but
before that, there are these qualities:
devotion to the apostles teaching
fellowship
communion
filling with awe for God
all having everything in common.
glad and sincere hearts
praising God
enjoying the favor of the people
All these are mentioned in Acts 2:42-47. God also shows that those who
have these qualities are persecuted. Look at Stephen, "a man full of
faith and of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 6:5) who was later stoned (Acts
7:54-60).
One can say that a church is the true church only if that church is
perfect not only in the congregation but worldwide as a movement. I
have yet to find that, but the closest one I've found is the Boston
Church of Christ movement, which constantly strives to have errors
pointed out and corrected. It is also the only one I've seen which is
totally sold out to God.
As for cooperation, that can always occur. Unity, on the other hand may
never occur. As for those who think about only one church being the
"true one", I remind them that Mark 9:38-41 states that there are
disciples who are not a part of the main group to begin with, but they
will not lose their reward. As with the Boston movement, I've heard
numerous times this exact same thing, that there are disciples out there
that are not a part of the Boston movement but that does not make them
any less disciples. Of course, few people admit that they've ever run
into someone who has the qualities of a disciple outside the movement.
I know I haven't.
I must warn that this sounds cliquey to me. A clique is a group which
runs around together to some extent exclusively. This causes problems
in fellowship and causes divisions. I would not say at all that this is
something "correct" for a church/group to do for any reason. In one of
the churches I attended, for example, there was an internal clique of
people who were on the 14 different groups/committees/organizational
heads of the congregation. They rarely talked to anyone else outside of
the committees and seldom were voted out of office without another
office being "opened up" so that they would have to step right back in.
Their degree of exclusion was such that when the new pastor came, he
nearly had to wipe out everything and start from scratch (I wish he
would've since they still have no clue about what it means to be a
disciple). Anyway, this rigidity in the clique is beginning to be
broken down, but is still there. So, I must warn against such division
within. There's enough division without.
| 0 |
trimmed_train
|
5,131 |
Well, I don't recall assuming anything, except perhaps that the columnist
who reported the incident was telling the truth i.e. the sarcastic impression
came from _him_ (Steve Simmons?). Besides, to my knowledge Alex has a pretty
fair grasp of the English language...and his recent comment after the Detroit
game would indicate that this remark _is_ what I think it to be. Very low.
| 17 |
trimmed_train
|
1,756 |
Oh, you foolish person. I do know what the fuck I'm talking about
and will gladly demonstrate for such ignorants as yourself if you
wish.
The legalization of drugs will provide few if any of the benefits
so highly taunted by its proponents: safer, cheaper drugs along
with revenues from taxes on those drugs; reduced crime and reduced
organized crime specifically; etc, etc
If you would like to prove how clueless you are, we can get into
why - again a lot of wasted posts that I don't think this group
was intended for and something easily solved by you doing a little
research.
Making you look bad is too damn easy. The vast social and historical
differences between alcohol and other drugs make this comparison
worthless.
And so it shall be if the government (by the people) decides that
these vices are detrimental to the society as a whole.
| 13 |
trimmed_train
|
6,700 |
Can someone cite Biblical references to homosexuality being immoral, other
than Leviticus? So far, when I ask, around here, I get the verses from
Leviticus spouted at me, but the whole rest of that book tends to be
ignored by Christians (haven't seen any stonings in a _long_ time :-).
Later,
Max (Bob) Muir
[The list was posted not long ago, as I recall, aside from Lev, commonly
cited passages are:
the story of Sodom. Note however that this was a homosexual rape, and
there's no disagreement that that is wrong. I take an intermediate
position on this: note that Sodom is referred to elsewhere in the
Bible for its sinfulness. It doesn't seem to have been known
specifically for homosexuality. Rather, I think it was considered a
cesspool of all sins. However from what we know of Jewish attitudes,
homosexuality would have contributed to the horror of the action
described. (It almost seems to have been contrived to combine about
as many forms of evil in one act as possible: homosexual rape of
guests, who were actually angels.) But this story is not specifically
about homosexuality.
In the NT, the clear references are all from Paul's letters. In Rom
1, there is a passage that presupposes that homosexuality is an evil.
Note that the passage isn't about homosexuality -- it's about
idolatry. Homosexuality is visited on people as a punishment, or at
least result, of idolatry. There are a number of arguments over this
passage. It does not use the word "homosexuality", and it is referring
to people who are by nature heterosexual practicing homosexuality.
So it's not what I'd call an explicit teaching against all homosexuality.
But it does seem to support what would be a natural assumption anyway,
that Paul shares the general negative Jewish attitude towards
homosexuality.
The other passages occur in lists of sins, in I Cor 6:9, and I Tim
1:10. Unfortunately it's not entirely clear what the words used here
mean. There have been suggestions that one has a broader meaning,
such as "wanton", and that another may be specifically "male
prostitute". Again, we don't have here a precise teaching about
homosexuality, but it is at least weak supportive evidence that Paul
shared the OT's negative judgement on homosexuality.
Jude 1:7 is sometimes cited, however it's probably not relevant. The
context in Jude involves angels. Since those who were almost raped in
Sodom were angels, it seems likely that "strange flesh" refers to
intercourse with angels.
As you can see, the NT evidence is such that people's conclusion is
determined by their approach to the Bible. Conservatives note that
the passages from Paul's letters imply that he accepted the OT
prohibition. This is enough for them to regard it as having NT
endorsement. Liberals note that there's no specific teaching, and no
clear definition of what is being prohibited or why (is the concern in
Rom 1 the connection of homosexuality to pagan worship? what exactly
do the words in the lists of sins mean?). Thus some believe it is
legitimate to regard this as a attitude Paul took with him from his
background and not a specific teaching of the Gospel.
This is an explosive topic, which tends to result in long
dissertations on the exact meaning of various Greek words. But it's
clear to me that that's mostly irrelevant. What it really comes down
to is whether people are looking to the Bible for law or whether they
believe that such as approach is inconsistent with the Gospel. This
appears to depend upon one's reaction to the message of the Bible as a
whole, as well as one's perception of the needs of the church today.
This is a difference of approach at least as serious as the difference
between Protestant and Catholic in the 16th Cent, and one where both
sides believe that the Bible is so obviously on their side that they
keep thinking all they have to do is quote a few more passages and the
other side will finally come to their senses. That makes things
very frustrating for a moderator, who realizes that such an optimistic
outcome is not very likely...
| 0 |
trimmed_train
|
8,866 |
Jeff,
If you have time to type it in I'd love to have the reference for that
paper! thanks!
--
kathleen richards email: [email protected]
| 19 |
trimmed_train
|
10,723 |
How about a Geeky temporary tatoo? I mean, why should the
RUBs be exempt from a little razzing.
| 12 |
trimmed_train
|
207 |
I had the same problem in my '90 MX-6. Luckily I had it fixed
under warranty. I think they replaced a tail light gasket.
Check with a dealer, it's a known problem.
| 4 |
trimmed_train
|
11,293 |
The following is posted for a friend. You can send replies to this email
address or call him at 503-752-1499. (Glen)
I have a CITIZEN OVERTURE 110 Laser printer for sale. It is in
excellent condition. It has been used less than one year on this drum.
I am asking $500, but all offers will be considered. Below are some
specs on it.
Toner lifespan: 2500 pages
Drum lifespan: 15,000 pages
Resolution: 300 DPI
Memory: 512K
Emulation: Epson FX286
IBM ProPrinter
Diablo 635
Printing Capacity: Quad-density graphics
Tray capacity: 250 sheets
Reason for sale: Financial--I need to pay tuition.
Thanks,
-Glen Anderson
| 5 |
trimmed_train
|
283 |
Can anybody figure out why some box score abbreviations make
absolutely no sense? (At least in the local Gannett rag that finds its way
to my door.) I must have stared at "Cleman" in the Mets' box for a
good 30 seconds this morning wondering who the hell it was. Wouldn't
it make more sense to use "Colemn"?
| 2 |
trimmed_train
|
8,793 |
: >NEWSPAPER AD CENSORSHIP
: >
: >San Fran. Independent San Fran. Examiner San Jose Mercury News
: >1201 Evans Ave 110 5th St. 750 Ridder Park Dr.
: >San Fran., CA 94124 San Fran., CA 94103 San Jose, CA 95190
:
Hmmm, the SJ Merc. carries Targemasters West, National Shooting club,
Reeds sportshop, Sportsmens supply and Big 5 ads. They all sell guns.
No they don't have any adds like in Shotgun news. If they won't at least
run the current adds I swear I'll cancel my subscription and end to cash
to the CRPA.
| 9 |
trimmed_train
|
3,612 |
New in this version: challenge #5, plus an addendum summarizing
Charley's responses to-date..
-----------------------------------------
*** This is a posting made periodically in an attempt to encourage
*** Charley Wingate to address direct challenges to his evidently
*** specious claims. I'll continue to re-post periodically until
*** he answers them, publicly indicates that he won't answer them,
*** stops posting to alt.atheism, the alt.atheism community tells
*** me to stop, or I get totally bored. I apologize for the
*** somewhat juvenile nature of this approach, but I'm at a loss
*** to figure out another way to crack his intransigence and
*** seeming intellectual dishonesty.
***
*** This is re-post #3.
Charley,
I can't help but notice that you have still failed to provide answers
to substantive questions that have been raised in response to your
previous posts. I submit that you don't answer them because you
cannot answer them without running afoul of your own logic, and I once
again challenge you to prove me wrong. To make the task as easy for
you as possible, I'll present concise re-statements of some of the
questions that you have failed to answer, in the hope that you may
address them one at a time for all to see.
Should you fail to answer again within a reasonable time period, I
will re-post this article, with suitable additions and deletions, at
such time that I notice a post by you on another topic. I will repeat
this procedure until you either address the outstanding challenges or
you cease to post to this newsgroup.
I would like to apologize in advance if you have answered any of these
questions previously and your answer missed my notice. If you can be
kind enough to re-post or e-mail such articles, I will be only too
pleased to publicly rescind the challenge in question, and remove it
from this list.
Now, to the questions...
1. After claiming that all atheists fit into neat psychological
patterns that you proposed, then semi-retracting that claim by stating
that you weren't referring to *all* atheists, I asked you to name some
atheists who you feel don't fit your patterns, to show that you indeed
were not referring to all atheists that you are aware of. You failed
to do so. Please do so now.
Question: Can you name any a.a posters who do not fit into your
stereotype?
Here is the context for the question:
2. You have taken umbrage to statements to the effect that "senses and
reason are all we have to go by", and when pressed, you have implied
that we have an alternative called revelation. I have repeatedly
asked you to explain what revelation is and how one can both
experience and interpret revelation without doing so via our senses
and reason. You failed to do so. Please do so now.
Question: Can you explain what is revelation and how one can
experience and interpret it without using senses and inherent
reasoning?
Here is the context for the question:
then later...
then later...
then later...
3. You have stated that all claims to dispassionate analysis made by
a.a posters are unverifiable and fantastical. I asked you to identify
one such claim that I have made. You have failed to do so. Please do
so now.
Question: Have I made any claims at all that are unverifiable and
fantastical? If so, please repeat them.
Here is the context for the question:
then later...
4. First you dismissed claims by atheists that they became atheists as
a result of reason, then later you stated that if one accepted the
"axioms" of reason that one couldn't help but become atheist. I asked
you to explain the contradiction. Your only response was a statement
that the question was incoherent, an opinion not shared by others that
I have asked, be they atheist or theist. You have failed to answer
the question. Please do so now.
Question: Do you retract your claim that a.a posters have not become
atheists as a result of reason, despite their testimony to that
effect? If you don't retract that claim, do you retract the
subsequent claim that acceptance of the axioms of reason inevitably
result in atheism?
Here is the context for the question:
[First quote]
[Second quote]
5. First, you claimed that you would (probably) not answer these
Challenges because they contained too much in the way of "included
text" from previous posts. Later, you implied that you wouldn't
respond because I was putting words in your mouth. Please clarify
this seeming contradiction.
Question: Do you prefer to respond to Challenges that include context
from your own posts, or that I paraphrase your positions in order to
avoid "included text"?
Here is the context for the question:
then later...
As usual, your responses are awaited with anticipation.
--Dave Wood
p.s., For the record, below is a compilation of Charley's responses to
these challenges to date.
3/18/93
3/31/93 (#1)
3/31/93 (#2)
| 8 |
trimmed_train
|
2,379 |
I don't want to sell this car, but I need money for college.
1972 Chevelle Super Sport
Rebuilt 402, four speed, 12 Bolt positrac
Numbers match
110,000 original miles
no rust
Looks and runs excellent
$5995 or best offer.
Call Dennis at (503)343-3759
or email [email protected]
| 4 |
trimmed_train
|
880 |
I've also found that the electronic starters on these "instant-on"
compact fluourescent lamp fixtures kick out interference that nukes
my cordless phone. (I can hear it in my guitar amplifier, too...)
| 11 |
trimmed_train
|
7 |
ALL this shows is that YOU don't know much about SCSI.
SCSI-1 {with a SCSI-1 controler chip} range is indeed 0-5MB/s
and that is ALL you have right about SCSI
SCSI-1 {With a SCSI-2 controller chip}: 4-6MB/s with 10MB/s burst {8-bit}
Note the INCREASE in SPEED, the Mac Quadra uses this version of SCSI-1
so it DOES exist. Some PC use this set up too.
SCSI-2 {8-bit/SCSI-1 mode}: 4-6MB/s with 10MB/s burst
SCSI-2 {16-bit/wide or fast mode}: 8-12MB/s with 20MB/s burst
SCSI-2 {32-bit/wide AND fast}: 15-20MB/s with 40MB/s burst
By your OWN data the "Although SCSI is twice as fast as ESDI" is correct
With a SCSI-2 controller chip SCSI-1 can reach 10MB/s which is indeed
"20% faster than IDE" {120% of 8.3 is 9.96}. ALL these SCSI facts have been
posted to this newsgroup in my Mac & IBM info sheet {available by FTP on
sumex-aim.stanford.edu (36.44.0.6) in the info-mac/report as
mac-ibm-compare[version #].txt (It should be 173 but 161 may still be there)}
Part of this problem is both Mac and IBM PC are inconsiant about what SCSI
is which. Though it is WELL documented that the Quadra has a SCSI-2 chip
an Apple salesperson said "it uses a fast SCSI-1 chip" {Not at a 6MB/s,
10MB/s burst it does not. SCSI-1 is 5MB/s maximum synchronous and Quadra
uses ANsynchronous SCSI which is SLOWER} It seems that Mac and IBM see
SCSI-1 interface and think 'SCSI-1' when it maybe a SCSI-1 interface driven
in the machine by a SCSi-2 controller chip in 8-bit mode {Which is MUCH
FASTER then true SCSI-1 can go}.
| 3 |
trimmed_train
|
9,910 |
OK, I don't use CView anymore, but I saw that no one had explaind this
"bug" in the thread, so here goes:
It is NOT the fault of CView. It is DOS! If you leave a file open on a
floppy drive, then change the disk and do something which updates or closes
that file, you have a good chance of getting part of the directory and FAT
from the other disk written to the new disk. This has always been true,
and has destroyed data under other programs, not just CView.
The only thing CView can do to improve the situation is to try not to leave
files open unless it's actively using them (ie, reading and decoding).
| 1 |
trimmed_train
|
1,182 |
April 16, 1993
INITIAL EFF ANALYSIS OF CLINTON PRIVACY AND SECURITY PROPOSAL
The Clinton Administration today made a major announcement on
cryptography policy which will effect the privacy and security of
millions of Americans. The first part of the plan is to begin a
comprehensive inquiry into major communications privacy issues such as
export controls which have effectively denied most people easy access to
robust encryption, and law enforcement issues posed by new technology.
However, EFF is very concerned that the Administration has already
reached a conclusion on one critical part of the inquiry, before any
public comment or discussion has been allowed. Apparently, the
Administration is going to use its leverage to get all telephone
equipment vendors to adopt a voice encryption standard developed by the
National Security Agency. The so-called "Clipper Chip" is an 80-bit,
split key escrowed encryption scheme which will be built into chips
manufactured by a military contractor. Two separate escrow agents would
store users' keys, and be required to turn them over law enforcement upon
presentation of a valid warrant. The encryption scheme used is to be
classified, but the chips will be available to any manufacturer for
incorporation into its communications products.
This proposal raises a number of serious concerns .
First, the Administration has adopted a solution before conducting an
inquiry. The NSA-developed Clipper Chip may not be the most secure
product. Other vendors or developers may have better schemes.
Furthermore, we should not rely on the government as the sole source for
the Clipper or any other chips. Rather, independent chip manufacturers
should be able to produce chipsets based on open standards.
Second, an algorithm cannot be trusted unless it can be tested. Yet, the
Administration proposes to keep the chip algorithm classified. EFF
believes that any standard adopted ought to be public and open. The
public will only have confidence in the security of a standard that is
open to independent, expert scrutiny.
Third, while the use of the use of a split-key, dual escrowed system may
prove to be a reasonable balance between privacy and law enforcement
needs, the details of this scheme must be explored publicly before it is
adopted. What will give people confidence in the safety of their keys?
Does disclosure of keys to a third party waive an individual's Fifth
Amendment rights in subsequent criminal inquiries? These are but a few
of the many questions the Administrations proposal raised but fails to
answer.
In sum, the Administration has shown great sensitivity to the importance
of these issues by planning a comprehensive inquiry into digital privacy
and security. However, the "Clipper Chip" solution ought to be
considered as part of the inquiry, and not be adopted before the
discussion even begins.
DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL:
ESCROW
The 80-bit key will be divided between two escrow agents, each of whom
hold 40-bits of each key. The manufacturer of the communications device
would be required to register all keys with the two independent escrow
agents. A key is tied to the device, however, not the person using it.
Upon presentation of a valid court order, the two escrow agents would
have to turn the key parts over to law enforcement agents. According to
the Presidential Directive just issued, the Attorney General will be
asked to identify appropriate escrow agents. Some in the Administration
have suggested that one non-law enforcement federal agency (perhaps the
Federal Reserve), and one non-governmental organization could be chosen,
but there is no agreement on the identity of the agents yet.
CLASSIFIED ALGORITHM AND THE POSSIBILITY OF BACK DOORS
The Administration claims that there are no back doors -- means by which
the government or others could break the code without securing keys from
the escrow agents -- and that the President will be told there are no
back doors to this classified algorithm. In order to prove this,
Administration sources are interested in arranging for an all-star crypto
cracker team to come in, under a security arrangement, and examine the
algorithm for trap doors. The results of the investigation would then be
made public.
The Clipper Chipset was designed and is being produced and a sole-source,
secret contract between the National Security Agency and two private
firms: VLSI and Mycotronx. NSA work on this plan has been underway for
about four years. The manufacturing contract was let 14 months ago.
GOVERNMENT AS MARKET DRIVER
In order to get a market moving, and to show that the government believes
in the security of this system, the feds will be the first big customers
for this product. Users will include the FBI, Secret Service, VP Al
Gore, and maybe even the President. At today's Commerce Department press
briefing, a number of people asked this question, though: why would any
private organization or individual adopt a classified standard that had
no independent guaranty of security or freedom from trap doors?
COMPREHENSIVE POLICY INQUIRY
The Administration has also announced that it is about to commence an
inquiry into all policy issues related to privacy protection, encryption,
and law enforcement. The items to be considered include: export
controls on encryption technology and the FBI's Digital Telephony
Proposal. It appears that the this inquiry will be conducted by the
National Security Council. Unfortunately, however, the Presidential
Directive describing the inquiry is classified. Some public involvement
in the process has been promised, but they terms have yet to be specified.
FROM MORE INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jerry Berman, Executive Director ([email protected])
Daniel J. Weitzner, Senior Staff Counsel ([email protected])
Full text of the Press releases and Fact Sheets issued by the
Administration will be available on EFF's ftp site.
| 7 |
trimmed_train
|
6,831 |
[email protected] (Lazer) writes ...
Specs for the 68040 can fill a 500 page book. Some highlights are...
32-bit address space w/ 32-bit data width. 18 32-bit integer registers
& 8 80-bit floating point registers. 8K copyback capable caches,
4-way set associative. Typical 1.2 clocks/integer instruction. 5
clocks for a floating point multiply.
(interesting aside: the 68040 can multiply two 80-bit floating point
numbers in less time than it can multiply two 32-bit integers)
More of the same but with multiple instruction dispatching. Figure
about 0.8 clocks per instruction typical (my guess). But the Motorola
guys are pretty bright, it may be less.
Call Motorola. I'm not typing it all in.
I'm predicting that both the 680x0 and x86 lines are reaching their
ends. New experimental processors have 64-bit data pathways and can
schedule up to 8 out of 32 instructions each clock cycle. That sort
of trick can't really be done with CISC architectures.
I finally saw some details on the 586/Pentium and was not greatly
impressed. They've finally done some work on the FPU to get it up to
speed, but otherwise it's only going to be a 2x speedup. And to get
that they're using two integer units, larger caches, and a branch
target buffer. Yes, I know they're talking about 100MHz processors.
Big whoop. Designing a 100MHz board is difficult and really
expensive. Priced 15ns memory chips lately?
| 14 |
trimmed_train
|
4,065 |
Such a measure would also have another benefit. It would relieve the
various states of the thorny problem of what to do with the hundreds
of millions of dollars hunters pour into the economy annually. I'm
sure that, to attain sure a lofty, humane, liberal and ecologically
(not to mention politically) correct goal, the environmental and animal
rights groups/individuals supporting such a measure would be more than
willing to add their names to a list of supporters seeking increased
taxation to replace these lost revenues. I am equally confident that
these same entities, given their noteworthy record in the area of social
responsibility and respect for private property, would feel morally
and ethically bound to raise the necessary funds to acquire the
hundreds of thousands of acres of land now held in private hands
solely for use as private hunting preserves by the landowner(s). To
do less than this would place these same groups/individuals in
the ethically untenable (to say nothing of environmentally and
politically incorrect) position of sanctioning the logging and
subsequent development and urbanization of these former private
hunting lands, which would no longer be useable by, or of any
benefit to, the landowner(s) in such a capacity.
| 9 |
trimmed_train
|
6,204 |
Squirrel Hill Studio/Efficiency available in mid May. My lease is expiring on
7/31/93. Perfect for someone looking for temporary housing or someone
who wants
to stay beyond July.
- Nice short walk to CMU
- $325/month
- Plenty of parking space on street
- Quiet neighborhood
- nearly new carpet
| 5 |
trimmed_train
|
2,517 |
Depends on what you mean by classy. From what I've heard about
him, he was about as classy as Harold Ballard. Only difference was
that back then almost all the owners were like that, so he seemed okay
by comparison. Read the book "Net Worth" for one view of what Smythe
(and Norris and Adams and Campbell) were like.
Even more specifically, I think what Roger was saying (and I said
it previously too) is that these are NOT the people who made the
league great, so why should divisions, conferences etc. be named after
them instead of Morenz, Vezina, Howe, Orr etc., the people who DID
make it great. Instead, the NHL has chosen to immortalize the men who
got rich off of the men who made the game great.
| 17 |
trimmed_train
|
9,127 |
When did Bill start doing endorsements?
Will he do the "Remington Shaver" ad?
| 13 |
trimmed_train
|
3,881 |
Generally, an organization has influence in proportion to:
The narrowness of its objectives
The number of members
The strength of belief of its members
This is why the pro- and anti-abortion groups are so strong: narrow objectives,
lots of interested members who are real passionate.
For this reason, mixing with the NRA is probably a bad idea. It diffuses
the interests of both groups. It may well diminish the Passion Index
of the combined organization. It is not clear it would greatly enlarge
the NRA.
So, I believe a new organization, which may cooperate with NRA where the
two organization's interest coincide, is the optimum strategy.
lew
| 7 |
trimmed_train
|
2,447 |
From the benchmarks I've seen (was that in MacUser or MacWeek?) the FPU-less
Centris 610 is _faster_ at floating-point operations (the kind of calculations
that get routed to an FPU) than a Mac IIfx!
And a Mac IIfx (68030 @ 40MHz + FPU) is _the_ fastest 030-based Mac.
Take note, of course, that benchmarks never tell the whole story... Get your
favorite program(s) and run them on both machines at the store. They should
let you do that before you plunk down a hefty amount...
Virtually,
Philippe
| 14 |
trimmed_train
|
452 |
One consideration to remember is that if you don't turn it off now,
you may not be able to later. This isn't a case of reaching over and
flipping a switch; much of the spacecraft has to be working correctly
to execute a "turn off" command successfully. Spacecraft do malfunction
in their old age. The big concern is not radio clutter from idle
spacecraft, but radio clutter from malfunctioning spacecraft that can
no longer be turned off.
| 10 |
trimmed_train
|
9,516 |
:
: Seriously, though, Griffen didn't save the lives of children, and he did
: destroy the life of a man, so on the most superficial of levels, he's scum.
:
I almost agree, but Griffen is not scum. Scum has no guilt or freedom to
choose anything. Griffen does. God did not make scum when he made Griffen.
He made a precious person and this person chose to do wrong. The same goes
for Dr. Gunn.
: But if you are to examine it more closely, Griffen would have preferred that
: these children were born -- yet AFTER their birth, did Griffen have any
: assistance to offer them? Did Griffen intend to support them, educate them,
: raise them up to be useful citizens? Did he have any intent whatsoever
: to help these children after birth?
:
Here's the real problem. Americans have become so insensitive to the needs
of others and so completely wrapped up in themselves that they cannot see
straight or think clearly enough to make even the slightest and most obvious
moral decisions based on reality.
If a man abandons a woman to care for their child on her own, he is not
considered to be a very respectable or decent man by anyone. This man has
fled his responsibility, has behaved like a lazy coward, and has turned
away from his responsibility to his wife and child.
However, if a woman decides to kill her unborn child to release her burden,
she is not thought of in the same way. When the man abandons, the woman
suffers but the child is free to grow up and live a happy and normal life.
When the woman abandons, the child is diced or killed with saline or vacuumed
out, and the man has no choice, and the man sometimes suffers so badly that
he wishes he could trade places with his child.
Ths root of this whole problem is selfishness--the arrogance that says, "My
feelings and desires are supreme and your well being is not worth dung."
And when you come down to it, this is the substance of what hell is made of.
It's the reason a loving God can throw selfish people to the devil and his
demons for all of eternity. Let any one of us unrepentant into heaven, and
we'll ruin it the first chance we get.
: Now, I don't really know the answer to these questions, but I've got a real
: good guess.
:
And, it's probably right.
: And I wouldn't call *that* 'benevolent', either.
:
It is a move in the right direction. As it is now, we don't see our
responsibility because we kill it and get it out of sight. The media
backs us completely. Real responsibility does not sell. The only
"responsibility" that sells in the marketplace is that which is just
enough to make us "feel responsible" without showing anything that
might show us our own true irresponsibility. We want to "feel" like
good people, but we want nothing with *being* good people. Just give
me the freedom to say "I'm good", and the rest of the world can burn.
Rape and kill my children and throw my parents to the places where
poor old folks rot until they're dead. I'll hate my brother and sister
if I wish and I'll cheat on my wife or husband. Screw the government,
because it screws me, and don't talk to me about giving to the church
because church people are all a bunch of money grubbing hypocrites.
But, I'm a good person. At least I admit what I do. At least I love
myself and we all know that is the greatest love in the world--not that
a man lay down his life for his brother...That sounds too "christian".
At the root, this is the substance of what hell is made of.
We've become a self indulgant, backslidden society no longer responsible
to our children, to our parents, to our families, to our government, or
to our God. This is the root behind justification of every evil, of every
corruption in government, of every slanderous remark, of every lie, and
of every murder. Society cannot continue to live like this long. it will
have to destroy itsself soon, and perhaps in the end, that will be the
biggest blessing this world can hope to see.
Why do people see so much evil in trying to turn this situation around?
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I deplore the horrible crime of child murder...
We want prevention, not merely punishment.
We must reach the root of the evil...
It is practiced by those whose inmost souls revolt
from the dreadful deed...
No mater what the motive, love of ease,
or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent,
the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed...
but oh! thrice guilty is he who drove her
to the desperation which impelled her to the crime."
| 15 |
trimmed_train
|
4,539 |
=8^/ Nothing like giving newbies a land rocket to practice on.
Yup. Accelerate right into the back of an 18-wheel truck.
Um. How's the easiest way to get newbies of the road? :)
Regards, Ted.
| 12 |
trimmed_train
|
6,729 |
:
: Does anyone know what the vfintd.386 device is used for in windows 3.1?
: It's under the [386enh] section as
: device=c:\dos\vfintd.386
:
I know Norton Desktop for Windows includes this file and its help file
mentioned something about floppy-disk access.
Jeroen
| 18 |
trimmed_train
|
4,377 |
I consider TWM-style Squeezed Titles indispensable in a window
manager. I like to have two tall xterm windows visible at the same
time, with no overlap; and since two windows aren't enough, I have
other xterm windows underneath them, with exactly the same positioning.
In case you're not familiar with Squeezed Titles, here's a crude
picture:
====================== Figure 1 ====================================
|
| +---------+ +---------+ +=========+
| + title A + + title B + + title C +
| +------------------------+ +------------------------------+
| + this is the + + window B hides window C, but +
| + body of the + + you can still see C's title +
| + window, window A + + which is squeezed right. +
| +------------------------+ +------------------------------+
|
====================== Figure 1 ====================================
Squeezed titles allow me to have about 5 such windows in each stack,
with easy access; and 3 per stack is usually more than I really
need, since I also insist on having a virtual WM.
The only problem is that the title location is static, that is, it
is configured in .twmrc, and in order to change it you have to edit
that file and restart the window manager. Doing so is cumbersome and
time-consuming.
Therefore, I have implemented f.squeeze{ left, center, right }
functions in my own copy of vtwm; the idea being that with one click
of a button, you can change this:
+---------+
+ title A +
+------------------------+
+ this is the +
+ body of the +
+ window, window A +
+------------------------+
to this:
+---------+
+ title A +
+------------------------+
+ this is the +
+ body of the +
+ window, window A +
+------------------------+
===============
Okay. So far, so good. Now, how the heck do I get them to put this
into the next "official" twm, and the next tvtwm, and the next vtwm,
and the next ctwm? And the next xyztwm that I never heard of?
One way would be to post, in comp.windows.x, a description of this
enhancement, together with an explanation of why I think it is a
Very Good Thing, and hope that someone reads it. :-)
In case it isn't already clear why I think it's a Very Good Thing,
look back up at Figure 1, and picture window A moved over on top of
windows B and C; now window A's title hides Window B's title;
but when you hit f.squeezecenter, the result is:
+=========+ +---------+ +=========+
+ title B + + title A + + title C +
+-------------------------------------+
+ this is the body of the window, +
+ window A, which is on top. +
+-------------------------------------+
===================
The rest of this posting explains how to implement it, based on my
X11R4 copy of vtvwm.shar; it's just a sketch because posting the
full diffs would be too long.
The key to this enhancement is to add the following lines in the
ExecuteFunction() routine in menus.c:
#ifdef SHAPE
case F_SQUEEZELEFT:
{ static SqueezeInfo left_squeeze = { J_LEFT, 0, 0 };
if (DeferExecution (context, func, Scr->SelectCursor))
return TRUE;
tmp_win->squeeze_info = &left_squeeze;
SetFrameShape( tmp_win );
break;
}
.... and similarly for squeezeright ( J_RIGHT ) and
squeezecenter ( J_CENTER ) ...
#endif
( Of course, you also have to define F_SQUEEZELEFT in parse.h
and add
{ "f.squeezeleft", FKEYWORD, F_SQUEEZELEFT },
... and so forth ...
to parse.c
In order to use these functions, add something like the
following to your .twmrc file:
Button2 = m | s : w|v|d|r|i|t|door : f.squeezecenter
=================
About a year ago, I posted this, but our news was broken and I
*think* it didn't get out.
Since then, "blast" has appeared in comp.sources.x, Volume 19,
Issue 41; you could use blast to achieve a similar effect, by
chiseling away at an mwm-style wide title. Better to have a
twm-style window manager, I think.
--
Ralph Betza (FM),
uunet!ssiny!gnohmon [email protected]
| 16 |
trimmed_train
|
7,056 |
Much of the OT prophecies have a double application: to the Jewish
captivity, and to the end of time. But if Rev. is dated at AD96 its
prophecies could not apply to the AD70 destructioin of Jerusalem.
| 0 |
trimmed_train
|
8,695 |
Does anyone know the particulars on the Senate File 303?
Does this bill allow or deny off-duty police from carrying concealed?
| 9 |
trimmed_train
|
584 |
Sorry, Bryan, this is not quite correct. Remember the VGALIB package that comes
with Linux/SLS? It will switch to VGA 320x200x256 mode *without* Xwindows.
So at least it is *possible* to write a GIF viewer under Linux. However I don't
think that there exists a similar SVGA package, and viewing GIFs in 320x200 is
not very nice.
Best Regards,
Arno
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arno Schaefer ENSIMAG, 2e Annee
Email: [email protected]
Tel.: (33) 76 51 79 95 :-)
| 1 |
trimmed_train
|
5,612 |
Note: This file will also be available via anonymous file
transfer from csrc.ncsl.nist.gov in directory /pub/nistnews and
via the NIST Computer Security BBS at 301-948-5717.
---------------------------------------------------
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
_________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release April 16, 1993
STATEMENT BY THE PRESS SECRETARY
The President today announced a new initiative that will bring
the Federal Government together with industry in a voluntary
program to improve the security and privacy of telephone
communications while meeting the legitimate needs of law
enforcement.
The initiative will involve the creation of new products to
accelerate the development and use of advanced and secure
telecommunications networks and wireless communications links.
For too long there has been little or no dialogue between our
private sector and the law enforcement community to resolve the
tension between economic vitality and the real challenges of
protecting Americans. Rather than use technology to accommodate
the sometimes competing interests of economic growth, privacy and
law enforcement, previous policies have pitted government against
industry and the rights of privacy against law enforcement.
Sophisticated encryption technology has been used for years to
protect electronic funds transfer. It is now being used to
protect electronic mail and computer files. While encryption
technology can help Americans protect business secrets and the
unauthorized release of personal information, it also can be used
by terrorists, drug dealers, and other criminals.
A state-of-the-art microcircuit called the "Clipper Chip" has
been developed by government engineers. The chip represents a
new approach to encryption technology. It can be used in new,
relatively inexpensive encryption devices that can be attached to
an ordinary telephone. It scrambles telephone communications
using an encryption algorithm that is more powerful than many in
commercial use today.
This new technology will help companies protect proprietary
information, protect the privacy of personal phone conversations
and prevent unauthorized release of data transmitted
electronically. At the same time this technology preserves the
ability of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies to
intercept lawfully the phone conversations of criminals.
A "key-escrow" system will be established to ensure that the
"Clipper Chip" is used to protect the privacy of law-abiding
Americans. Each device containing the chip will have two unique
2
"keys," numbers that will be needed by authorized government
agencies to decode messages encoded by the device. When the
device is manufactured, the two keys will be deposited separately
in two "key-escrow" data bases that will be established by the
Attorney General. Access to these keys will be limited to
government officials with legal authorization to conduct a
wiretap.
The "Clipper Chip" technology provides law enforcement with no
new authorities to access the content of the private
conversations of Americans.
To demonstrate the effectiveness of this new technology, the
Attorney General will soon purchase several thousand of the new
devices. In addition, respected experts from outside the
government will be offered access to the confidential details of
the algorithm to assess its capabilities and publicly report
their findings.
The chip is an important step in addressing the problem of
encryption's dual-edge sword: encryption helps to protect the
privacy of individuals and industry, but it also can shield
criminals and terrorists. We need the "Clipper Chip" and other
approaches that can both provide law-abiding citizens with access
to the encryption they need and prevent criminals from using it
to hide their illegal activities. In order to assess technology
trends and explore new approaches (like the key-escrow system),
the President has directed government agencies to develop a
comprehensive policy on encryption that accommodates:
-- the privacy of our citizens, including the need to
employ voice or data encryption for business purposes;
-- the ability of authorized officials to access telephone
calls and data, under proper court or other legal
order, when necessary to protect our citizens;
-- the effective and timely use of the most modern
technology to build the National Information
Infrastructure needed to promote economic growth and
the competitiveness of American industry in the global
marketplace; and
-- the need of U.S. companies to manufacture and export
high technology products.
The President has directed early and frequent consultations with
affected industries, the Congress and groups that advocate the
privacy rights of individuals as policy options are developed.
3
The Administration is committed to working with the private
sector to spur the development of a National Information
Infrastructure which will use new telecommunications and computer
technologies to give Americans unprecedented access to
information. This infrastructure of high-speed networks
("information superhighways") will transmit video, images, HDTV
programming, and huge data files as easily as today's telephone
system transmits voice.
Since encryption technology will play an increasingly important
role in that infrastructure, the Federal Government must act
quickly to develop consistent, comprehensive policies regarding
its use. The Administration is committed to policies that
protect all Americans' right to privacy while also protecting
them from those who break the law.
Further information is provided in an accompanying fact sheet.
The provisions of the President's directive to acquire the new
encryption technology are also available.
For additional details, call Mat Heyman, National Institute of
Standards and Technology, (301) 975-2758.
---------------------------------
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION'S
TELECOMMUNICATIONS INITIATIVE
Q: Does this approach expand the authority of government
agencies to listen in on phone conversations?
A: No. "Clipper Chip" technology provides law enforcement with
no new authorities to access the content of the private
conversations of Americans.
Q: Suppose a law enforcement agency is conducting a wiretap on
a drug smuggling ring and intercepts a conversation
encrypted using the device. What would they have to do to
decipher the message?
A: They would have to obtain legal authorization, normally a
court order, to do the wiretap in the first place. They
would then present documentation of this authorization to
the two entities responsible for safeguarding the keys and
obtain the keys for the device being used by the drug
smugglers. The key is split into two parts, which are
stored separately in order to ensure the security of the key
escrow system.
Q: Who will run the key-escrow data banks?
A: The two key-escrow data banks will be run by two independent
entities. At this point, the Department of Justice and the
Administration have yet to determine which agencies will
oversee the key-escrow data banks.
Q: How strong is the security in the device? How can I be sure
how strong the security is?
A: This system is more secure than many other voice encryption
systems readily available today. While the algorithm will
remain classified to protect the security of the key escrow
system, we are willing to invite an independent panel of
cryptography experts to evaluate the algorithm to assure all
potential users that there are no unrecognized
vulnerabilities.
Q: Whose decision was it to propose this product?
A: The National Security Council, the Justice Department, the
Commerce Department, and other key agencies were involved in
this decision. This approach has been endorsed by the
President, the Vice President, and appropriate Cabinet
officials.
Q: Who was consulted? The Congress? Industry?
A: We have on-going discussions with Congress and industry on
encryption issues, and expect those discussions to intensify
as we carry out our review of encryption policy. We have
briefed members of Congress and industry leaders on the
decisions related to this initiative.
Q: Will the government provide the hardware to manufacturers?
A: The government designed and developed the key access
encryption microcircuits, but it is not providing the
microcircuits to product manufacturers. Product
manufacturers can acquire the microcircuits from the chip
manufacturer that produces them.
Q: Who provides the "Clipper Chip"?
A: Mykotronx programs it at their facility in Torrance,
California, and will sell the chip to encryption device
manufacturers. The programming function could be licensed
to other vendors in the future.
Q: How do I buy one of these encryption devices?
A: We expect several manufacturers to consider incorporating
the "Clipper Chip" into their devices.
Q: If the Administration were unable to find a technological
solution like the one proposed, would the Administration be
willing to use legal remedies to restrict access to more
powerful encryption devices?
A: This is a fundamental policy question which will be
considered during the broad policy review. The key escrow
mechanism will provide Americans with an encryption product
that is more secure, more convenient, and less expensive
than others readily available today, but it is just one
piece of what must be the comprehensive approach to
encryption technology, which the Administration is
developing.
The Administration is not saying, "since encryption
threatens the public safety and effective law enforcement,
we will prohibit it outright" (as some countries have
effectively done); nor is the U.S. saying that "every
American, as a matter of right, is entitled to an
unbreakable commercial encryption product." There is a
false "tension" created in the assessment that this issue is
an "either-or" proposition. Rather, both concerns can be,
and in fact are, harmoniously balanced through a reasoned,
balanced approach such as is proposed with the "Clipper
Chip" and similar encryption techniques.
Q: What does this decision indicate about how the Clinton
Administration's policy toward encryption will differ from
that of the Bush Administration?
A: It indicates that we understand the importance of encryption
technology in telecommunications and computing and are
committed to working with industry and public-interest
groups to find innovative ways to protect Americans'
privacy, help businesses to compete, and ensure that law
enforcement agencies have the tools they need to fight crime
and terrorism.
Q: Will the devices be exportable? Will other devices that use
the government hardware?
| 7 |
trimmed_train
|
4,725 |
Neither did he!
Overall? How do you figure?
So far my radio hasn't exploded from not being tuned to 660...
| 2 |
trimmed_train
|
9,659 |
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
_____________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release April 14, 1993
PRESS BRIEFING
BY GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS
The Briefing Room
12:40 P.M. EDT
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I guess I'm just prepared to take
questions today.
Q George, Bob Dole says that the Clinton
administration's policy on Bosnia is a failure and that he wants the
United States to take the lead in lifting the arms embargo so that
the Bosnian Muslims can defend themselves.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: As you know, President Clinton has
said that that suggestion is under active consideration. Obviously,
this is a tragic situation in Bosnia. And if the Bosnian Serbs don't
come to the negotiating table in a constructive way, we'll look
seriously at pressing for lifting the arms embargo. In the meantime,
we're going to continue to press for a tough sanctions resolution in
the U.N. We're going to continue to work on the Serbs to come to the
negotiating table. But the prospect of an arms embargo is something
the President certainly will consider if the Serbs don't come to the
table.
Q How much longer are you going to give them to come
to the table, George?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: We're working on that right now.
Q It's been a long time.
Q On February 19th, the President mentioned the value
added tax in Ohio. And when he was asked about it later by
reporters, he said -- quote -- "That is a radical change in the tax
system of the United States. It's something I think we may have to
look at in the years ahead." Questioned again about it later he
says, "It is not something that is now under consideration. If we
start considering it, I'll tell you." It wasn't a trial balloon or
anything, he said. I was just discussing the tax response to a
question. Donna Shalala, quoted in USA Today this morning -- quote -
- "Certainly we're looking at a VAT." What's gone on?
Q The same with Alice Rivlin this morning.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The health care task force is
reviewing a number of options. They haven't made any decisions yet.
And as I have said from this podium time and time again, we're not
going to comment on decisions that haven't been made.
Q But you have also said from this podium time and
time again --
Q Wait a minute. Whoa, Nelly. Whoa.
Q that that was not under consideration.
Q Yes. Clinton says, "It is not something that is
now under consideration." Is that no longer true?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I believe the working group, as Ms.
Shalala says, has looked at this prospect, but no decisions have been
made of any kind.
Q Well, I know. But he said he'd tell us about it if
it was ever under consideration. I take it that now he is and he
didn't tell us about it or --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Did he say if it was under
consideration or if it was something to be proposed?
Q "If we start considering I'll tell you."
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: If it's something to be proposed?
Q "If we start considering it, I'll tell you."
That's a direct quote.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The task force has looked at a
number of different options. They have not made any decisions yet.
The President has not made any decisions yet. This is -- one of the
proposals under consideration by the task force was to go out and
cast as wide a net as possible for different ideas on how to reform
the health care system. They have cast a very wide net. They have
looked at hundreds of different proposals -- probably thousands of
different proposals. But the President has not made any decisions.
Q Well, is the President aware of their consideration
of this option?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know if he's been briefed
on any preliminary conclusions or anything like that from the task
force on this specific proposal of any kind. I don't know that
that's gotten to his level. He started yesterday to go through with
the task force a very wide range of decisions and I don't believe
that that's been presented to him, no.
Q Well, he's not relying on the USA Today to tell him
what his task force is considering in the way of taxes.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: No, he's going through it in a very
deliberate fashion. There are a number of decisions that have to be
made. I don't know that this proposal has reached that decision-
making point.
Q If this is still under consideration, that's a
change, at least from what we've been told by Dee Dee, I think about
three weeks ago or so. She said, that is not an option, talking
about the -- had a big argument with somebody over this, so I
remember it specifically -- and said it not once, but twice. Is that
not the case?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Again, I don't know if this has
been presented to the President as something that is being looked at
at some level in the task force.
Q It was ruled it out, though. I mean, unlike other
options that you've kept in the mix, this one specifically was ruled
out.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Again, this is something that is
being looked at, but no decision has been made of any kind. I mean,
it doesn't -- it's not necessarily material until you get to the
decision-making phase. The working groups are looking at hundreds of
different options.
Q If it was ruled out before and it's not ruled out
now, then something has changed, George. Yes, no?
Q When a guy says in February --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, the working groups are
looking at the widest possible range of options.
Q So something's changed. They weren't looking at it
before; they're looking at it now.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, I don't know if the working
groups have gotten to that point yet. They are casting a very wide
net.
Q How was it possible that you and Dee Dee were able
to sell -- definitively rule it out as an option previously and now
are saying that, in fact, it is being considered?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Again, the working groups are
looking at a wide range of options. They have not --
Q Do you deny that you and Dee Dee ruled it -- flatly
ruled it out on several occasions in the past month?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't deny that -- I mean, those
are the President's words. Those are very clear.
Q Subsequent to the President's words, do you deny
that within the last month you and Dee Dee have both publicly ruled
it out?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know about the timing. I
think what we did was refer back to the President's words and say
they stand.
Q So don't they stand any longer?
Q March 25th, Clinton said for the next four to five
years it was ruled out.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, those words -- the President
did say that in February. The working groups are on a separate
track, and as I said, I don't believe --
Q Separate from the President?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't believe this has been
presented to the President.
Q Are they considering something that the President
--
Q Has ruled out?
Q has ruled out? I mean, will the President
consider a VAT tax?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Again, the working groups have not
presented this to the President. They have looked at a wide range of
options. I suppose that if an argument is made, he will clearly
listen to it. That does not mean he has decided to do it.
Q Can we put this another way? In his answer in
Ohio, he looked at the VAT in terms of restructuring the whole tax
system. Under those -- that was the circumstance that he said it
might be considered at some future point. Is that no longer the
case, or is that the only way that he can see a VAT emerging?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I guess I'm not sure exactly what
you're asking.
Q He talked about the VAT in the context of a
restructured tax system, not as a specific way to finance health
care, for example.
Q Or anything else.
Q Or anything else.
Q It was always in the context of substituting for
other taxes at a time of a dramatic overhaul of the whole tax system.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Right.
Q Has that change, too?
Q Is that still his view?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I haven't spoken about those
specific comments. I think -- I can just go back to it -- are the
working groups -- have they examined the possibility of a VAT? Yes,
they have.
Q Certainly we're looking at a VAT, she said.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: They have examined the possibility
of a VAT. Has it been presented to the President? Has he made a
decision? No, he has not.
Q What kind of a deal do you have when you've got the
President's appointed task force, obviously not oblivious to his
ruling something out except in the context of some huge down the line
reform, goes ahead on its own and considers a tax which he has
specifically ruled out in any context other than much later, and then
goes ahead and announces that that's what they're looking at? Is the
President concerned about that sort of thing?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think that the President's
concern is to make sure he gets the best health care proposal
possible. He's concerned with making sure that they have the most
thorough process for examining all the possible alternatives, all the
different alternatives. If a decision is made to go forward with
something like that it's certainly something the President will
explain and justify. But no decision has been made along those
lines.
Q What does it mean exactly, though, when the
President rules something out? Does it mean it can get back on the
table later if a more persuasive argument is made?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: That's just -- that's indisputably
true. If you -- but, at the same time, he has not ruled it in. He
has not made a proposal.
Q What makes him open to it now when he wasn't open
to it before?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: He's certainly willing to listen to
the argument.
Q Was he willing to listen to the argument for a
short-term tax this year, and he wasn't willing to listen to it in
Chilicothe? He's now open to it --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The context of his comments was
that it was not something -- he wanted to be clear that this is not
something he was proposing, not something he was floating.
Q Not something he was considering. Those are his
words -- "It's not something that's now under consideration. If we
start considering it, I'll tell you." You're now acknowledging, are
you not, that it is under consideration and --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm acknowledging that the task
force has studied this proposal. I am also stating that the
President has not made a decision on it.
Q But the door is open for the President to
reconsider including this as part of --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Obviously, the working groups are
looking at it. Again, but the President has not made a decision.
Q Do you know if they will make a presentation on
behalf of the VAT to him?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know that. I assume that
if -- I don't know what stage they are it in proposing. I don't know
that they're going to make the conclusion that this is something they
should present to him. I know this is something the working groups
are looking at.
Q Do you understand, George, that none of us are
asking these questions in context of a decision that the President
has made, only about what the President is considering?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I understand that, and I am
acknowledging that the working groups have examined the issue of a
VAT.
Q And the President will consider it?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I assume that he will consider the
argument if it is presented to him.
Q Does that mean the President -- that working groups
think that when the President says no, he means maybe? (Laughter.)
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think that means that the working
groups are trying to do the most thorough job possible.
Q George, can I ask you another question about
Bosnia?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Sure. (Laughter.)
Q No, he wants us to stay on this.
Q Let's do gays in the military. (Laughter.)
Q No, he got out of that swamp.
Q I think we've gotten the bottom line on that VAT.
Reggie Bartholomew, your Special Ambassador in Belgrade, today said
that if the Serbs do not accept the agreement that has been worked
out -- quote -- "We will do our part to pursue the lifting of the
arms embargo together with our allies." That seems to go a bit
further than what you've just said --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Sounds almost exactly what I just
said.
Q Well, do you accept -- in other words, you accept
what Reggie --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, the President has said that
this is something that's under consideration. It is something he
will consider if the current actions don't bring the Serbs to the
table.
Q Isn't there some kind of timetable here?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes, there is a timetable. There's
going to be a vote on the U.N. resolution in about 10 days.
Q That's on sanctions, that's on tightening the
sanctions.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: That's right, that's sanctions.
And we believe that that will ratchet up the pressure, and we hope
that that will bring the Serbs to the table. As you know, Mr.
Bartholomew also met with Mr. Churkin of Russia, and they are also
working on ways to bring the Serbs to the table. We will continue to
pressure them in many different ways and this is one possible option
as well.
Q The question is whether there's a timetable for
consideration or a vote on a decision on lifting the arms embargo,
not the sanctions.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The next vote in the U.N. is on
sanctions. As far as I know, there are no votes scheduled on lifting
the arms embargo. But it is something that we have discussed both
internally and with our allies.
Q Why did Reggie Bartholomew tell the Serbs that the
U.S. would do that? What was the point of his telling them that?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, clearly, I mean, this is
something that's under consideration, and this is something that we
take quite seriously if they do not come to the table. They should
know the consequences of failing to come to the table.
Q Have they been given a deadline?
Q Warren Christopher has been saying the same thing
and it hasn't seemed to change the Serbs' behavior in the least. Why
should the Serbs take any heed of a threat to lift the arms embargo
when so far everything that's been done has had no effect on the
fighting in Bosnia?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I just don't accept the premise of
your question. It has had an effect; the embargo is having an
effect.
Q What effect?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: If the Serbians choose not to heed
our warnings, then they will face the consequences.
Q What effect has it had in Bosnia?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, the effect that it has had on
the Serbians, it has tightened up -- they are not getting their
shipments through. We can brief more fully --
Q In Bosnia, George. In Bosnia what effect has it
had?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, it's hard to say if it's
stopped the aggression to date. That is why we're continuing to
press for the Serbians to stop. But we believe that over time we
will continue to weaken the Serbs and that will have an effect.
I'm not saying it's going to happen overnight; it clearly hasn't
happened overnight. But we believe that over time the sanctions can
weaken the Serbs. If it fails to work and if the Serbs fail to come
to the negotiating table, we'll move forward with the embargo.
Q Isn't there a working deadline, George, of the 24th
-- the same date as the U.N. -- the scheduled U.N. vote? Hasn't the
United States said, along with many of the other NATO allies, that if
the Serbs aren't willing to sign on to the peace accord by then, that
we'll seek -- haven't we said that we will seek --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: We've said continually we're going
to --
Q But on that deadline?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't have a specific date, but
we're going to move forward with the resolution, the U.N. resolution,
by around that time. And if that fails to take effect, if that fails
to bring the Serbs to the table, we will clearly consider other
actions.
Q Isn't this awfully incremental?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: We're taking a step-by-step
approach. We're ratcheting up the pressure and we're going to
continue to do that.
Q Is there a possibility, George, that by the time
all these incremental steps are taken the Serbs will have achieved
their goals and then what's the purpose?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think the purpose is to get the
Serbs to stop the aggression. We are pursuing that goal on many
different fronts. We are pursuing it through the U.N.; we're
pursuing it through direct talks; we are pursuing it through
tightening the sanctions. And we will consider lifting the arms
embargo. We are turning the screws up on the Serbs and we will
continue to do that.
Q But if the efforts have been unsuccessful in
getting the Serbs to stop the aggression how effective will any
campaign be to have the Serbs give back what they've gained? I mean,
once they're entrenched --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I can't speculate on that. We're
going to continue to press for them to come to the table now. We're
going to continue to find ways to stop the aggression. But I can't
see into the future.
Q George, on the stimulus package, House Republicans
say they're going to hold a series of town meetings on Saturday to
try and explain the details of your package. They cite polls which
show that the more people learn about it, the less they like it.
What's your strategy to counter that?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The strategy we have is the one
we're going to continue. As you saw, the President today pointed up
the very real benefits of the summer jobs program that this package
will provide: 700,000 new summer jobs this summer for kids in inner
cities and suburbs to do productive work. We are also going to point
out the benefits of the highway money, the investments in highways.
We're going to point up the benefits of immunization. We're going to
point up the benefits of Head Start. We are going to say that the
Republicans have a choice: they can take action to create jobs or
they can perpetuate the gridlock of the last four years.
Q Does it concern you, though, that the House now,
the House Republicans are after you as well as the Senate?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The House Republicans voted against
it before. They made a mistake then; they're making a mistake now.
Q George, does it strike anybody in the
administration that it's a bit strong to describe, as the President
did this morning, the summer jobs program as -- quote -- "a
reaffirmation of a promise of America"?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Not at all. I think it's the
promise of America to give kids a chance to reach their full
potential.
Q Government-funded jobs?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: To give people a chance to work?
Absolutely. That is the promise of America.
Q I want to follow up on something I asked yesterday
-- where does 700,000 summer jobs, where does that figure come from?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: That is on top of. I did look at
it. There are currently 600,000 summer jobs in the pipeline. This
will be on top of the 600,000, so it will be a total of 1.3 million.
Q The 700,000 would be created by the stimulus
package?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes.
Q Where does that number come from? Because we've
been told all along that the stimulus package would create 500,000
new jobs. And according to Panetta, that breaks down to something
like 200,000 full-time jobs and 150,000 summer jobs.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes, but the summer -- that's when
you do their full-time equivalence. I mean, 700,000 individuals will
receive jobs this summer. When you calculate it for the full-time
job effect, you have to do -- I don't know what the exact formula is.
Q Seven hundred thousand part-time jobs --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: -- 150,000 or --
Q One to four because it's three months.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Thank you.
Q Can I follow up on that? Did the President
misspeak this morning when he said that some of the government money
for these summer jobs will pay for private -- for kids to work in the
private sector?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Not necessarily. I mean, I think
that there will be grants available. That's one of the ways that you
pay for the jobs. At the same time, he's also issued a challenge to
the private sector to hire kids on their own as well.
Q Tax dollars, for instance, would pay for kids to
work at Time-Warner?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think the Time-Warner is actually
somebody coming forward and actually doing a grant. That's going to
be the bulk of it. There could be isolated instances, though, where
there would be grants to businesses.
Q Has the President spoken with any Senate
Republicans this week?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS:
No, but there's been a lot of contact with Senate Republicans in the
White House.
Q At a lower level. But the President hasn't?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The President has not, no.
Q Getting any closer to get the votes?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: We're continuing to work on it.
Q Anybody leaning your way?
Q On Haiti, The New York Times seems to be reporting
something of a breakthrough in Aristide's attitude towards the coup
leaders. Can you confirm that there has been this change, and what
impact will it have on the process? And what did Pezzullo have to
say yesterday in his report?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Pezzullo did brief the principals.
I can't confirm what's actually happening in the talks. I would
leave that to the negotiators themselves. But Mr. Caputo has
returned to Haiti. We have received a briefing here at the White
House from Ambassador Pezzullo. And as we have said time and time
again, we believe that assurances of security are important to a
final resolution to a broader political settlement.
Q George, yesterday you offered some selective
breakdowns of how the stimulus would impact some states and cities.
Can we get a complete breakdown by state of how these jobs would be
impacted?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think we have it for most states,
yes. And I think we can get it out.
Q Could you make that generally available?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I believe we can.
Q And could you do it by the component of the
stimulus? In other words --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know if we can do -- I know
that we can do it by summer jobs and other jobs. I don't know how
deeply it can be broken down. But clearly, we can break it down into
summer jobs and other jobs.
Q And can I follow up? Is this the information that
Jeff Eller and the rest of the White House is using in the ads in the
states?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know if they're ads, but
they're press releases.
Q Can you describe what those press releases contain?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: All we're doing is pointing out the
benefits of this package to various states. For instance, I know
that today Senator Dole is heading up to Vermont and New Hampshire.
And I would point out that the stimulus package, the jobs package
creates 1,000 jobs in Vermont. It creates 2,000 jobs in New
Hampshire. And the people of those states should remind him that
this is important.
Q Where are the releases going?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: They go to the states.
Q To whom?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: We can get them. It's no problem.
Q Can we get it?
Q Why don't you put them out here as well?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think we can.
Q This afternoon? Would that be possible?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'll have to check. I don't know.
But as soon as we can.
Q Are you focusing these press releases on states
where there are moderate or pragmatic Republican senators?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think we're trying to get as many
as we can. It's actually quite difficult to pull this together and
we're doing our best. We're putting them out as we get them.
Q Why are you so closely tracking Senator Dole's
schedule?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I was just following it.
Q Are press releases going along to states where he's
visiting?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm not sure. I think that
probably there are press releases going to Vermont. (Laughter.)
Q Will there be a man in a chicken suit waiting?
(Laughter.)
Q George, as the President goes about the business of
defending what's in his stimulus package, he doesn't address what
seems to be the Republicans' main point, that you're funding it with
deficit spending rather than "if it's so important, why not come up
with the funding for it" seems to be the Republican argument. And
how do you answer that?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: What was answer is, we are paying
for it over time. And if you look at our budget, we pay for this
package over time. We believe right now the economy needs a jump-
start for jobs.
Q You're not claiming, are you, that that doesn't add
to the deficit this year?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm saying we're paying for it over
time. I didn't say that.
Q I know that, George. But I mean, from the
beginning, the question -- we do have annual budgets and things --
deficit spending will pay for that this year, will it not?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: This year they clearly will. But
over time our budget fully pays for this program.
Q What you're saying is that there are savings that
would cover this if it were this year in future years?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Absolutely. That's exactly what I
said.
Q I know that, but there is going to be outstanding
debt, it will add to the national debt from this year --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: No, we're reducing the deficit by
$500 billion -- $514 billion over the next four years.
Q You mean you're reducing it below what it would
have been?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Exactly.
Q In fact, you're adding a very large amount to the
national debt over the period of --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: But we're reducing it far more from
what it would have been. That's true.
Q Washington-type reduction. (Laughter.)
Q You're getting to be a grumpy old man.
Q George, has any decision been made about the White
House or the President's participation in the gay rights march coming
up in a week and a half?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: We're working on the President's
schedule now. I believe he's going to be at the Senate Democratic
retreat in Jamestown that weekend.
Q Will he address it by phone?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know about that. It's a
little far out, but I believe he's going to be in the Senate retreat.
Q So will he have the leaders in a day or two before
the speech?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know. I would expect that
at some point he would meet with the leaders of some of these groups.
I don't know the schedule on it, though.
Q Will there be an AIDS czar appointed prior to or in
conjunction with the event?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm just not sure.
Q April 22nd is Earth Day. What is the President
going to do to mark that, and is it the case that he is going to sign
the biodiversity treaty that day?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I know there's been some work on
the biodiversity treaty. I don't know about signing it that day, but
I would expect he'll have a statement on Earth Day or right around
then.
Q Where is the work on the biodiversity treaty?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'd have to check with Katie
McGinty. I just know that there's been some work done, but I don't
know exactly what.
Q When is Earth Day?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The 22nd, I think.
Q Why is it you know that he is going to have a
statement on Earth Day but you don't know if he's going to have a
statement on the gay rights march?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I said I don't know if he's going
to meet or when he's going to meet.
Q Do you have a statement on the gay rights march?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't, actually, no. I wouldn't
be surprised if he did, though.
Q Do you have some details on the Miyazawa visit?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: It's a working visit on Friday and
the President is looking forward to that in discussing a number of
issues including Russian aid and the Japanese stimulus package and
the trade issues between the two countries.
Q There was some expectations that a second aid
package to Russia was going to be unveiled at the G-7 meeting and, if
I understand, it hasn't happened. Why is that or what's the status
on that?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The G-7 meeting is still going on
and, as you know, Secretaries Bentsen and Christopher have talked
about the outlines of a possible package. But we're going to
continue to consult with Congress and our G-7 allies on that.
Q? We will not then make any kind of announcement
during the two-day meeting?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The meeting's not over yet.
Q Is that when you're going to make one?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm not ruling out the possibility.
Q the President's going to announce it tomorrow.
Q Bentsen said that.
Q Yes, Bentsen said it would be tomorrow.
Q So did Christopher.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'd have to look at that, but I
believe it is more likely that the announcement will come out of
Tokyo.
Q George, has there been further consideration here
about going to -- sending the President out to Los Angeles?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know that there's -- it's
not something we've ruled out. We don't have a date set for it.
Q George, you all have a position or do you support
Immigration's plan to settle 4,000 Iraqi prisoners in the United
States?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: It's the first I've heard of it.
Q George, there was a report today about the --
Q Fortunately. (Laughter.)
Q about the pace of appointments and says that
President Clinton is behind President Bush in the number of positions
that people have been nominated for. Are you going to speed up the
pace of nominations or where do you stand with it?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: We filled 814 of the President's
appointments. And it's broken down -- we have 384 Schedule C; 147
noncareer SES; 213 PAS full-time. I'm not sure what that means --
(laughter) -- 70 PA full-time. And this is about the same -- it's
about the same pace of President Bush. Obviously, as you move along
farther, once you -- each level of appointment actually has a
multiplier effect and frees up far more appointments. So we expect
the process to speed up. But we're at the pace of Bush. Obviously
we'd like to get these done as quickly as possible.
I would point out that the FBI background checks and the
background check is far more comprehensive and it takes more time
than our predecessors, and that is part of the holdup. But we're
working on it.
Q Is that because of Nannygate?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think that's an awful big part of
it, yes.
Q In the story this morning, you were at
approximately the same pace as Bush in making appointments, but way
behind in winning confirmations.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: That's where the background checks
comes into play. That's the problem.
Q That's the background checks problem? Because I
mean, you have a Democratic Senate --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: No, that's not the -- you make the
appointments, and then it takes quite a bit of time to fill out all
the forms and have the background checks done. That's exactly where
the problem is.
Q What's the President doing this afternoon, and
what's on the plan for tomorrow?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: He's got some meetings -- just
office meetings this afternoon for the most part, on a variety of
issues that -- probably a half-dozen different issues. And then
he'll be -- tomorrow we'll have an event, probably again focused on
the stimulus and jobs package out of here at the White House. And
Friday is the Miyazawa meeting.
Q Will you be releasing his tax return tomorrow,
George?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Either tomorrow or Friday.
Q Is there going to be a pre-briefing regarding the
Japanese Prime Minister's visit tomorrow?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know about tomorrow, but
we'll probably get something done, as we usually do, for these
visits.
Q Was Reverend Jackson here this morning and do you
know what that was about?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: He was here. He met with a group
of us here at the White House, including Mack McLarty.
Q Who?
Q Reverend Jackson.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Reverend Jackson. Mack McLarty,
me, Gene Sperling, Bruce Reed, Jeff Watson, Mark Gearan.
Q Talking about Haiti?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: We talked about general urban
policy. He is about to go to Los Angeles. He was just back from
Mississippi, where we had a good victory last night; and he's going
on to Los Angeles.
Q Did he request the meeting?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Actually, no. He's in continual
contact with the President. He had written a letter on a variety of
issues, and so we asked him to come in and talk about it.
Q George, Dole is having a fundraiser for Jeffords
tonight in Vermont. Have you guys been in contact with Jeffords at
all on this?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I think there's been some contact,
sure.
Q Can you tell us about the contacts?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I'm not sure --
Q Do you know who contacted him or what was said?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I know that Howard Paster talked to
him and they just has a general talk about the package.
Q And did he express his support for it now, or is he
--
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I can't divulge the details of the
conversation, but there have been conversations.
Q The L.A. Times is reporting that abortion --
elective abortions is likely to be included in the basic health care
package. Is this something the President is considering?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Again --
Q Along with the VAT? (Laughter.)
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: It's certainly something that's
been looked at, but no decisions have been made.
Q What was the question?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: The L.A. Times story on whether
abortions will be covered by the President's health plan.
Q Did the President in his meeting -- did you in your
meeting with Reverend Jackson ask his advice, solicit his advice
about what kind of stance the White House should take in the wake of
the verdict in L.A.?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, we certainly talked about the
situation in Los Angeles and the long-term prospects for economic
development and other issues.
Q For instance, did you discuss whether it would be
helpful for the President to go there or not?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, we discussed a wide range of
issues related to Los Angeles. That was certainly one of them.
Q Letting you perhaps go out on the way you came in,
I need to go back to Bosnia just for a second and ask --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Oh, good.
Q your reaction to Margaret Thatcher's comments
that you're just sitting by and watching a massacre.
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, we've been pushing very hard
on a number of fronts for more aggressive action. We will continue
to do that.
Q Can you tell us if you've made any progress in your
talks on the stimulus package getting a compromise? I mean, we don't
have any feel except talks are ongoing. Have you talked to like 20
people or --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I don't know the numbers. We've
talked to several people and we've had wide-ranging sessions.
Q Anyone leaning your way?
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: I can't get into that. We're just
going to keep working through Tuesday.
THE PRESS: Thank you.
END 1:10 P.M. EDT
| 13 |
trimmed_train
|
8,159 |
Perhaps you're using the wrong brand! (Sorry all HP fans, but I have
a hard time being convinced that their scopes match the rest of their
(excellent) gear).
One of the principal functions I look for when considering a DSO is
whether you can turn interpolation off. The other important feature
is to disable repetitive waveform acquisition i.e. being able to lock
the instrument into real time capture mode.
I agree with you here. The only consolation is that manufacturers are
_beginning_ to pay attention to ergonomics when designing the menus.
However, to be fair, it seems that first time scope users (our students)
seem to adjust to menus easier than navigating around the twenty or
more knobs required of a "real" scope :-)
This is one area that newer DSOs are addressing. I recently evaluated
the latest box from Tek - their TDS320 - which seems to be a worthy
alternative to a standard 100MHz analogue CRO. This instrument has
a 100MHz, 500Ms/s spec, meaning that it is _always_ in real time
capture mode. The pricing also matches equivalent analogue scopes in
the range. The downer is that the instrument uses menus again, but at
least they appear to be logically laid out.
One more thing about the new, "simpler", front panels. These instruments
tend to use digital rotary encoders as knobs now. This is a vast improvement
over the old oak switch. The single most common cause of failure in our
scopes (other than students blowing up inputs!) is mechanical wear on these
switches. I look at the new panels as a great step toward increasing the
longevity of the instruments.
JohnH
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| _ |_ _ |_| _ _| _| Electronics Department
|_| (_) | | | | | | (_| (_| (_| \/ School of MPCE
---------------------------------/- Macquarie University
Sydney, AUSTRALIA 2109
Email: [email protected], Ph: +61 2 805 8959, Fax: +61 2 805 8983
| 11 |
trimmed_train
|
3,185 |
Undoubtedly it does, to maintain such a weight. And it does so
primarily by overeating. If it didn't, the weight would drop
back to normal.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks N3JXP | "Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect, and
[email protected] | it is shameful to surrender it too soon."
| 19 |
trimmed_train
|
1,698 |
Help, I'm bored with the current Windows backgrounds we have here and am
looking for some nifty pictures to use instead. I've seen from previous posts
that many sites exist that store pictures - available through anonymous ftp.
Except that I can't ftp to remote sites from my machine, what I CAN do is use
'ftpmail' - mail a list of commands to a server and receive a mail of files,
and/or data back.
Does anyone know of sites, with Windows compatible pictures, that can be
accessed in such a way???
If you do would you please post them.
TIA
Mark.
PS. Maybe this would make a useful FAQ
| 18 |
trimmed_train
|
7,459 |
It does give privacy, just not absolute privacy. The announcement was very
up front about this, and about allowing wiretaps. How is this "fooling"
anyone?
Sure. The two don't interoperate. You couldn't talk to, say, a Cylink phone
from a Clipper phone. I would expect even multiprotocal phones to come with
indicators saying which kind of link encryption is in use...
So start a company and build them. This is still mostly a capitalist
economy...
I agree. Go for it.
| 7 |
trimmed_train
|
6,237 |
Hello fellow netlanders.
I have a Genius Mouse model GM-6, but no driver for it.
It's a 3 button mouse. If anyone that;s got one of theese
could mail me a driver (config.sys or autoexec.bat) I would
be very happy.
| 3 |
trimmed_train
|
7,236 |
Source: Hassan Arfa, "The Kurds," (London, 1968), pp. 25-26.
"When the Russian armies invaded Turkey after the Sarikamish disaster
of 1914, their columns were preceded by battalions of irregular
Armenian volunteers, both from the Caucasus and from Turkey. One of
these was commanded by a certain Andranik, a blood-thirsty adventurer.
These Armenian volunteers committed all kinds of excesses, more
than six hundred thousand Kurds being killed between 1915 and 1916 in
the eastern vilayets of Turkey."
Serdar Argic
| 6 |
trimmed_train
|
8,873 |
Well, I never wrote that I would act as you described. I stated that I
would not block a would-be passer. I would not block a would-be passer
"for their own good" or for any reason other than I was prevented from
doing so due to the traffic circumstance. I fail to see how deterring a
passer under these circumstance would IN ANY WAY decrease YOUR chances
of being involved in an accident, fatal or otherwise. In fact, I could
imagine how blocking a would-be passer would actually INCREASE your
chances of being "offed" or involved in an accident, especially if
this "passer" is riding your bumper. Intentionally blocking a person
riding your bumper is certainly NOT a "wise driving practice", it
only causes the jam to become more congested.
I don't mess with trucks and I actually watch the road ahead AND the
road behind! If I perceive that I am rapidly closing on a "pack"
of vehicles, I try to avoid getting caught up in situation such as you
decribe. Usually either traffic is just building and I have to deal
with this fact of life, or I wait to a slow passer to complete their
pass and make way for the pack to clear. If someone decides then to
pull up on my bumper, I signal my intention to move to the right, and
do so at the first opportunity (& hope they will open the jam). I
feel this is not only courteous driving, but ALOT safer than the
actions you advocate!!! There are actually many courteous drivers
on the road who do not intentionally impede others.
| 4 |
trimmed_train
|
8,888 |
OK...I've heard rumors about this...I might have even seen it in a few places.
And I'd like some info...Is it possible to embed fonts in a document (Like
Write, Word, or Ami Pro?) so the file can be printed on another machine that
doesn't have the font? If possible, how is it done?
I'm sorry if this is a faq...I couldn't find a faq list...I would also
apreciate knowing where that is...if a windows faq exsists.
Thanks in advance
| 18 |
trimmed_train
|
3,161 |
In myopia the cornea is too curved. There is too much of a bulge in the
center.
In PRK the laser removes a small amount of material from the center.
In RK the surgeon cuts incisions near the edge. They heal, and the scarring
reshapes the cornea.
Entirely different mechanisms, and the action is in a different place.
| 19 |
trimmed_train
|
7,005 |
Unfortunately, things have been boding ill (is that a legitimate conjugation?)
for a while. While the Office of Exploration had some great ideas, they never
got much money. I've heard good things about Griffin, but it's hard to want
him back in a job where he couldn't do anything.
The group examining the Freedom-based space station redesign proposals is
headed by Michael Griffin, "NASA's cheif engineer" in the words of Space News.
I believe this is him.
| 10 |
trimmed_train
|
7,838 |
Can somebody elaborate on "Area Ruling". I gather it's something to
do with aerodynamics of trans-sonic planes, and can be summarised as
"Coke bottle good, Coke can bad". Anyone provide more details,
derivation etc?
| 10 |
trimmed_train
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.